DIAPHORILLAS . 
is necessary. If the Grass- Wrens are split into two or three genera, careful 
examination of each species and almost every specimen is imperative to 
determine their exact position. When such is undertaken it may later become 
useful to re-unite some that have been split, but still, good has been done by the 
facts elicited. 
I later separated under the generic name Mytisa the “ striata ” group 
noting “ Differs from Diaphorillas in having a larger and more slender bill.” 
This may read as slender grounds, but as a matter of fact it is very 
probably of great phylogenetic significance, and as the definite facts are not 
at present determinable I am here not using Mytisa generically, but will point 
out the extraordinary facts I have found through my genus-splitting methods 
and later anticipate the recognition of my group. In the last twenty years, 
in connection with Palaearctic forms, through the fallacy of genus lumping, 
we have not had any observations of any importance whatever with regard 
to the phylogeny of bird forms. I have indicated many important items 
throughout this work through genus splitting and vdiile these have been 
more or less ignored by genus lumpers, I am intensely gratified to fin d my 
observations amply confirmed by quite independant osteological studies. 
Therefore I remark with confidence that two divergent series of Grass-Wrens 
are represented by Diaphorillas and Mytisa, the latter developing into the 
magnificent Magnamytis, while the former has provided the bizarre Eyramytis. 
The most extraordinary feature of these groups is the persistence of a minor 
colour feature, which would be quite overlooked as of any significance by a 
genus lumper, the coloration of the bill. In Diaphorillas this is horn, while 
in the Mytisa series it is blackish, and in the former the bill becomes deeper 
without much lengthening, while in the latter it becomes longer with little 
increase in depth. The Diaphorillas group has a pale tendency, while the 
Mytisa series tends to black, the wonderful Magnamytis housei Milligan being 
wholly black, while Eyramytis goyderi Gould has mostly a white under-surface. 
The extraordinary confusion of species in this group makes a collation 
of synonymic references difficult, so that many of the descriptions are doubtful 
and cannot be rectified without absolute examination of all the specimens 
recorded. As this is at present impossible, I am leaving many of the quotations 
under the name used by the authority, but will here give an account of the 
vicissitudes of the species as succinctly as possible with the hope that some 
Australian ornithologist will take up this group and study it thoroughly for 
some time. 
F. E. Howe has shown how this might be done in connection with 
Acanthiza and Climacteris, and when more knowledge is applied to better 
material, still more valuable results will be obtained. From examination 
167 
