Page:The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma (Birds Vol 1).djvu/173

Rh sufficiently differentiated by the plumage of the young. As regards the name for the family, we cannot use Crateropodidæ for Crateropus, the name used by Gates tor a genus of Babblers, is preoccupied, and we must therefore discard this also for the family. Timaliidæ from the genus Timalia of Horstield 1821 may therefore be taken as the family name.

Since the first volume of the 'Avifauna of British India' was published, our knowledge of the Timaliine birds has advanced considerably, and many alterations and eliminations, with a few additions, are imperative.

In the first place, the subfamily Brachypteryginæ must be removed to a place near the Thrushes, the spotted plumage in the young birds making it impossible to retain them in the present group. The genus Zosterops, again, appears to have no close connection with the Babblers and just form a family of its own, more properly placed near the Dicæidæ. The Bulbuls differ from the true Babblers in their shorter tarsi and longer wings, and would seem also to form a fairly well-marked family already frequently differentiated as the Pyenotidæ. Other genera and species which must be removed are Melanochlora to the Titmouses, 'Paridæ, Leptopæcile and Cephalopyrus to the Regididæ and Psaraglossa to the Starlings.

There are, however, other birds of which the position is still very doubtful. Thus the genera Tirdanulus and Rimator are Wren-like in many respects though they possess very small rictal bristles. uEgithina and Aethorhi/nchi(s have a summer and winter plumage, differing in this respect from all other Babblers; ChJoropsis is perhaps nearer the Pycnonotidce than the Timaliidce, whilst Chalcoparia is undoubtedly a Sun-bird, though an aberrant one. So also the long-winged, thrush-like Irena can have no connection with this family and Oberholser seems right in placing it in a family by itself. When we come to dividing the Timaliidce into subfamilies in order to facilitate stvidents' work, we are met with many dirticulties. The differences relied on by Gates and Harington are often purely individual, varying greatly in degree in different genera. It cannot be either useful or scientific to depend on noisiness and similar characteristics as guides to classification and, though the coloration of birds' eggs may help greatly in giving us hints as to their position in the Avifauna, we cannot rely on this exclusively as a sufficient ground for differentiation. The only three subfamilies I now retain may be diagnosed as follows; —

Key to Subfamilies. A. Sexes alike. a. Legs and feet very powerful; wings short and rounded; habits mainly terrestrial. . Timaliince, p. 136. h. Legs and feet less powerful; wiugs short and rounded; habits principally arboreal .... Sibiinee, p. 294. B. Sexes dissimilar Liotrichince, p. 320. (T/ ]