Birds of Celebes: Anatidae. 
877 
in Australia”. These individuals did not breed in 1880 and 1881, though six 
pairs were established in various parts of the Gardens; but in 1882 a pah- 
nested at the end of March and hatched four young ones. Dr. Sclater adds: 
“There is no longer any doubt therefore that we have here to deal with a species 
which, however much it may resemble the female of Anas castanea, is quite 
distinct, and of which the sexes, as may be proved by the examination of our 
breeding birds, are very nearly alike, the female being merely slightly smaller 
in size and duller in plumage”. 
The supposed female of A. castanea discussed by Prof. Newton was “in all 
probability a male of Anas ffibberifrons” . 
Count Salvador! recently examined specimens — one in the plumage of 
the male N. castaneum, the other in that of the supposed female of the same, 
and both on being dissected proved to be males. The bulla ossea was present 
in both. Nevertheless, he remarks of N. gibberifrons that it is “absolutely similar 
to the supposed female of N. castaneum , both in colour and dimensions, so that 
I am utterly unable to distinguish it”, and he holds the two species as distinct, 
evidently not without misgivings. 
Our own conclusion in the matter is 1) that N. gibberifrons is a species per- 
fectly distinct from N. castaneum, as is proved by Dr. Sclater, 2) that there is 
no sound evidence to show that N. castaneum has ever occurred outside of Australia 
and Tasmania. 
Besides Australia, N. castaneum has indeed been recorded from New Guinea, 
New Caledonia, New Zealand, Sumba, Java, and Celebes. 
For the indication New Guinea Dr. Ramsay is the authority (Pr. L. Soc. 
N. S. W. 1879, III, 115, 301; ibid. 1880, IV, 102). The locality was questioned by 
Salvador! in his “Ornitologia della Papuasia” (1882), and afterwards Dr. Ramsay 
evidently altered his decision, as in his “Tabulated List of Australian Birds” 
1888, 22, he does not include New Guinea in the range of Anas castanea, but 
with a in that of A. gibberifrons. New Guinea therefore should be struck 
out of the range of N. castaneum for the present. 
New Caledonia was put down as the habitat of an undescribed “Anas 
‘punctata var.” by Gray (P. Z. S. 1859, 166) and by Verreaux and des Murs (Rev. 
Zool. 1860, 422). Schlegel received one ofVerreaux’s specimens and deter- 
mined it as A. gibberifrons-, and some descriptions of a duck by Jouan (Mem. 
Soc. Cherb. 1863, IX, 100, 242) included by Salvador! in the synonymy of 
N, castaneum certainly do not releite to the adult male of N. castaneum, though 
they might possibly have been made from the female, or from N. gibberifrons. 
We anticipate therefore that N. gibberifrons rather than N. castaneum belongs to 
New Caledonia. 
From New Zealand Salvador! records a female oi N. castaneum, but as he 
confesses to an inability to disting-uish the female of this species from Nettion 
gibberifrons we are justified in considering it an error, since Sir W. Buller makes 
