LAZULENA. 
and Sauropatis^ which I believe to be its nearest ally, the Syma-colouied 
species for which I have proposed the genera Hyposyma and Antisyma. 
The succeeding species and subspecies Nos. 33 to 48, pp. 262-282, 
I class in Sauropatis, while Halcyon funebris (Bonaparte) constitutes my 
genus Melanalcyon. 
Actenoides would include Sharpe’s Halcyon homhroniy lindsayi and 
moseleyi, while Garidagrus would be available for Temminck’s concretus. 
Todiramphus is divisible into two genera, Todiramphus and Todalcyon, 
and must come into consideration with the preceding forms. 
A natural grouping of the species would differ in arrangement from 
the preceding, and it is possible that genera not treated of here would 
become involved were a thorough systematic study made of the Order. 
This sketeh is a preliminary outline of the analysis necessary before 
reconstitution can be prepared. Thus, were genus-lumping to be indulged 
in, many obstacles occur. The colour-groups Lazulena and Actenoides 
show discord with the rest, while the ‘‘ /Sj/ma-coloured ” species form a 
striking item. Half a dozen times structure is seen to be younger than 
coloration, and in each case in a different direction. Thus Todiramphus 
is separated from Sauropatis by its short, flattened bill. Syma has stood 
unchallenged on account of its serrated bill edges. Monachalcyon has 
been admitted apparently because of its longer legs. In Todiramphus 
two different styles of wing occur. In Halcyon the same thing occurs 
repeatedly in differently coloured groups, while we have three structural 
groups with the same coloration in Syma^ Antisyma and Hyposyma ; the 
latter from structural characters should be classed with Todiramphus, the 
bill formation as well as the wing-formula approaching this group. 
In whatever manner the species comprising the genus Halcyon in the 
Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum, Vol. XVII., be approached 
it cannot be regarded as anytliing save heterogeneous, and five distinct 
groups are distinguishable after the elimination of Entomothera. These 
would be Halcyon, Lazulena, Cyanalcyon, Actenoides and Antisyma. With 
Cyanalcyon would be associated Todiramphus and Antisyma would be 
classed near Syma. 
The above would be absolutely necessary were m}?^ other groups 
degraded as subgenera. 
Without much more study, including anatomical research, the 
phylogenetic relationships must remain more or less obscure. I suggest 
Chelicutia as the nearest the ancestral form from which sprang Chelicutona, 
Halcyon, Halcyonopa and perhaps Plesialcyon. 
From a similar stock independently evolved Cyanalcyon, Sauropatis, 
VOL, VII. 
161 
