14 LOTSY AND KUIPER, A PRELIM. STATEMENT OF THE RESULTS OF MR. 
The bill is dark brown, sometimes reddish toward the base in full- 
coloured males, and paler at the tip of the lower mandible. The legs and 
feet are lead-coloured or slaty, sometimes rather brown, purplish or tin- 
ged with greenish, while again they may be pale slatygrey, irrespective 
of age, sex or locality. ris light to rather deep orange-red. The bare 
skin of the sides of the head, throat and upper part of the neck in front, 
smooth and of varying shades of red. The large erect comb, thin and 
deeply notched above, and the two gular wattles vary from deep dull 
red to bright crimson. When a large series of birds with definite locality 
labels is examined it is evident that the earlappets tend to be whitish 
or pinkish-white in Indian birds, and red, like the wattles and comb in 
birds from Burma and the Malay Peninsula. The proportion is about 
forty percent of each, leaving twenty percent which are neutral or ac- 
tually negative. I have seen many Junglefowl from Pahang, Johore 
and Java, which had the ear-lappets nearly white, and, on the other 
hand, I have shot birds in southern Garhwal with the lappets showing 
no trace of light color being indistinguishable in hue from the comb and 
wattles, even when these were very bright in color. In Northern Bur- 
ma, I have secured two adult Junglecocks feeding together with seve- 
ral hens in a part of the jungle far distant from any native fowl which 
respectively showed the two extremes in color of lappets. Where white 
is present, it is like enamelor polished ivory and changes to violet or blue 
where it merges into the red of the face or upper part of the lappet. It is 
true that Indian birds, especially those from the dryer, semi-arid re- 
gions, are noticeably pale, while the Junglefowl from the terai and the 
Malay states are richer, with the red more brilliant. I do not, under the 
circumstances, however, consider it right to give these subspecific de- 
signation. There is a small area in Pahang where the Junglefowl are 
paler than any Indian birds, probably due to the infusion of some pale 
domestic strain. (This , propability” of course is a mere assumption). 
In ,,Ibis” of 1882 KELHAM says: Whether or not the Malay species, 
Temminck’s G. bankiva is really distinct from the Indian, it is hard to 
say; but if it is distinct, both kinds are certainly found in the Malay 
countries; for while stationed in Perak I shot, out of the same tract of 
Jungle, unmistakable specimens of G. ferrugineus, with the rich gol- 
den hackles and white earpatches, also birds of far darker, in one case 
almost black, plumage. But the wild Junglefowl interbreed so much HE 
with domestic roosters from the villages, that I cannot help thinking 
