68 
VOCAL ORGANS OR THE AMERICAN BITTERN. 
neck; for example, the constrictor colli of Owen, seen in the Apteryx, 
may be something similar. 
2. The scapular prolongation of the oesophagul muscle has an anal- 
ogy to the muscle that assists to empty the crop in Pigeons and in some 
other birds, but they have a different attachment; viz. to the inside of 
the coracoid bones. 
3. The occipital vocal. I have never seen described anything just 
like this muscle, neither have I found it in other birds- A Cochin- 
china fowl had a flat muscle starting below the ear and just in front of 
it, and extending back some two inches, to be inserted on the skin of 
the neck, its use evidently being to raise the feathers of the neck. 
4. The maxillary vocal; I have never seen anything like this 
muscle. 
5. The thoracic is a most peculiar muscle at this time, being sur- 
charged with blood and evidently temporarily greatly enlarged. 
G. The mandibular vocal are also singular muscles, surcharged 
with blood and evidently enlarged for the occasion. I am under the 
impression that I have seen these muscles either in this species before 
or in some other Heron, but I do not appear to have made a note of it. 
7. The retractor to the superior larynx is not present in the Least 
Bittern, nor in most birds; I found it, however in a Cochinchina fowl, 
but in this case it extended to the body, and was attached to the lower 
portion of the termination of the furcula. 
The inferior laryngeal modifications and the bubbles in the tissue 
to prevent undue pressure, the one on the neck and the other on the bron- 
chials, together with the crop-supporting tendons of the neck, appear 
to be common modifications, arising with requisite circumstances. 
MONOGRAPH OF THE GENUS STROPHIA. 
( CONTINUED FROM PAGE 29. ) 
Since writing the first part of this monograph I have seen addi- 
tional collections, and must say, that 1 am more than ever impressed 
with the fact that the genus Strophia needs a thorough revision. I am 
impelled to form this opinion after noting the doubtful manner in which 
some collections are labelled. Not only are the most obviously differ- 
ent species, from widely different localities, labelled with the same name, 
but many names are supplemented with a “ ? ”, or with “ var. ? ” ! 
