Pig 1. GE 0 CICHLA ANDAMANENSIS.
2. " ■ RUBECULA. I
GEOCICHLA ANDAMANENSIS, Walden.
ANDAMAN GROUND-THRUSH.
Geocichla allogularis (nee Blyth), Walden, Ibis, 1874, p. 138. B B B B I ,
Geocichla andamanensis, Walden, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. (4) xiv. p. ( ) ’ ’
Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. y. p. 175 (1881).
0 . pileo bnumescenti-castaneo: gu lt et pectore aurantiaeis: tectricibus alarum clare schistaceis, mmime albb
terminatis: alis brevioribus.
T he present species was first sent from the Andaman Islands in 1857 by Dr. von Liebig; and,.
on account of the absence of white tips,to the median wing-coverts, was considered by Blyth to e
the same as the Malayan G. innotata (J. A. S. Beng. xxvii. p. 270), an opinion still maintained by
him in 1863 (App. to Mouat’s Andaman Islands, p. 360). Beavan in 1867 regarded the two species
as identical (Ibis, 1867, p. 325), as did also Valentine Ball in 1873 (Stray Feathers, l. p. 69).
In the following year the validity of the species was the subject of much eontroversy. Iwb
distinguished ornithologists independently arrived at the conclusion that the Andaman lr was
distinct from the Malay species, but they both failed to separate it from the Nicobar bird and recorded
it as Geocichla aUogularis (Walden, Ibis, .1874, p. 138; and Hume, Stray Feathprs, 1874 p. 221).
When Lord Walden wrote his paper for the ‘ Ibis,’ he had not seen examples o t e ico ar it
but before the year was out'he obtained a series of skins from these islands and at once recognize
their distinctness from the Andaman species, which he named Geocichla andamanensis.
The status of the species was farther challenged by Hume, who certainly had a large series upon
which to form an opinion. He stated that some Andaman examples had as much white on the
throat as some of the Nicobar examples (Stray Feathers, 1876, p. 289); and when I ventured to
point out that in the series in the British Museum and in the Tweeddale Collection the two species
were easily distinguishable (Stray Feathers, 1880, p. 99), the assertion was made that m twenty per
cent, of the examples tom these two groups of islands it was impossible to tell by the colour of the
throat from which group they came (Hume, Stray Feathers, 1880, p. 103). Thanks to the splendi
generosity of Mr. Hume, his magnificent collection of birds has been added to the treasures in the
British Museum, and I am confirmed in my opinion that there is no evidence that the two forms
intergrade, an opinion in which I am supported by the latest authprity on Indian birds (Oates, Fauna
of British India, Birds, ii. p. 142):
The Andaman Ground-Thrush differs from all the other species of its sub-generic group, except
Geocichla innotata, in combining the two characters—throat orange-chestnut and median wing-
coverts uniform slaty grey (without white tips). It differs from Geocichla innotata in being smaller
(wing 3-8 to 4-2 inches, instead of 4-5 to 4-8 inches), in having a little white on the chin, in being of
a slightly darker chestnut on the flanks, while the orange-chestnut on the crown is slightly suffused
with olive. The two species are very closely allied, but, until more evidence is produced that they
intergrade, they must be regarded as specifically distinct. There is an example m the British
Museum which is somewhat intermediate between the two, having little or no olive , on, the cr.o.wn
e 2