413 
Mr. D. G. Elliot on Phasianus ignitus. 
about these parts which would entitle the Chinese'^ indi¬ 
vidual to put forward a claim to a distinct rank. If we turn 
to the back, it is observed that the colouring of the lower part 
in the Chinese example is lighter than that of P. nobilis, 
and more like the bird called by me P. ignitus (P. vieilloti^ 
Sclater) ; but I find that the two specimens of P. nobilis 
differ in this respect^ one being much darker than the other; 
so there is evidently a variation in the hues of the rump, and 
it is not impossible that specimens may be found of P. nobilis 
as lightly coloured on the back as is this Chinese one. 
Another feature in this unsatisfactory bird is the colour of 
the median rectrices. This is white, and therefore does not 
answer to Latham^s description of P. ignitus, as he uses the 
term subfulvus to describe the hue of these feathers. The 
median rectrices of P. nobilis, so far as I am aware, although 
they vary from a dark to a light buff, never become white, 
which, however, is the colour of those in the birds called P. 
vieilloti by Sclater. The points therefore of difference between 
this Chinese example and the two well-known species are 
these:—From P. nobilis it differs chiefly in the white central 
rectrices; and from P. ignitus, or vieilloti, as this form has 
been called by naturalists, it difiers in the chestnut flanks. 
The bird may be said to represent exactly an intermediate 
stage between the two species just named, with indications 
strongly suggestive of hybridism; and as its origin is open to 
serious doubt, and as it is without any name certainly ap¬ 
plicable to it (Latham’s description of P. ignitus not agreeing, 
as already shown), its status can only be satisfactorily deter¬ 
mined when the exact locality from which the bird comes is 
first authentically ascertained. The habitat China ” at¬ 
tached to the specimen cannot be considered as the true one; 
for no such form as Euplocamus is found in China; and as the 
specimen undoubtedly came from that land, the bird has pro¬ 
bably been bred by the Chinese, possibly by mating together 
the two species already recognized. In support of the view 
that the specimen has been in captivity, I would add that 
nearly half the primaries have been cut away, evidently to 
prevent its escaping, which would certainly not have been 
