\ Mr - v - L - Sc]ater on Wallace*s Standard-icing. 27 
Gpuld, however, iu the c Supplement to the Birds of Australia/ 
states his opinion that it is “ not a Bird of Paradise, if we regard 
Paradisea apoda and P . papuana as typical examples of that 
group, But very closely allied to Ptilorhis ,—so nearly so, indeed, 
as scarcely to he separable from that form." Now, I am not so 
fortunate as to be able to agree entirely with either of these 
authorities, considering, as I do, that the present bird is some¬ 
what intermediate in its characters between Cicinnurus and 
Ptilorhis , and th^t it is more nearly allied to both of these forms 
than to the true Paradisea , though I think it probable that all 
three genera really belong to the same natural family. In the 
narrow and elongated form of the nostrils, and their conceal¬ 
ment by short, stiff, upstanding frontal plumes which advance 
far beyond the openings, Semioptera agrees more closely with 
Cicinnurus . In Ptilorhis the nostrils are barely covered by the 
frontal feathers. In Paradisea the nasal opening is rounded, and 
quite uncovered in front. Again, the acrotarsia of Semioptera , 
which consist of one smooth undivided scute, are very different 
from those of Ptilorhis , which are divided into five or six scutes; 
and they more nearly resemble those of Cicinnurus . The legs 
are also much stronger, thicker, and longer than in Ptilorhis , 
and in this respect are more like those of Paradisea . The 
wing-feathers of the new form are not so much broadened as in 
Ptilorhis , nor are the secondaries so much elongated; but in 
these respects it is equally unlike Cicinnurus . The general con¬ 
formation of the wings of the three species is not essentially 
different. It may not be out of place to give comparative 
measurements of these three birds. 
Long. tota. 
Alse. 
Caudse. 
Tarsi. 
Rostri 
a rictu. 
10-5 
5*8 
2-7 
1*6 
1*7 
12-0 
6 1 
3-8 
1*3 
2*1 
6-5 
4*5 
1-6 
1-1 
1*2 
Semioptera wallacii 
Ptilorhis paradisea 
Cicinnurus regius . 
On the whole, therefore, it will be 
Semioptera as a very distinct genus; 
express some surprise that Mr. Gould should have spoken of it as 
“scarcely separable” from Ptilorhis. The two very singularly 
'elongated feathers which spring from the base of the upper 
reasonable to consider 
and I must be allowed to 
