Mi
i
P l a t e LXV. (P ig . 2.)
PYRGISOMA KIENERI ,
(KIENEES GEOUND-FINCH).
Pyrg isoma hieneri B p . Consp. i. p. 486.
Sclat. e t S a k . P . Z. S. 1868, p. 325.
F u s cum , pileo e t c ap itis la te rib u s ru fis : plum is auricu la rib u a dorso concoloribus, b a rum au tem apicibus castaucis,
lo ris albesc en tib u s, f ro n te ) e t genis fusce sceu ti-n ig ris ; su b tu s album, hypochondriis dorso concoloribus, maculâ pectorali
in d is tin c ta n ig r â ; c risso ru fe sce n te | ro s tro nig ric an ti-co rn eo , podibus p a llide co rylinis ; long, to ta 7 '3 , alæ 3-3, caudæ
2 '9 . ta rs i I'O .
H a b . iu Mexico Occident. (?)
The figure wc now give o f the Pyrgisoma kieneri o f Bonaparte, wliich hy the kind
permission o f the authorities o f the Jardin des Plantes o f Paris has heen taken from the type-
speciraen belonging to that institution, t\dU, we think, convince Ornithologists that this bird
is perfectly distinct from P . cahanisi with which, as already stated, it has been frequently
confounded. In general plumage, in fact, it is mucb more like P . ruhricatum, figured on the
preceding plate, but is distinguishable from tbat species by its larger size, stouter bill, and much
stronger feet and tarsi. P . rubricatum also differs in possessing a white eye-ring, whicli is
wanting in the present species, and in having the summit o f the head brown lilce the back
instead o f bright rufous. It was no doubt the much stronger conformation o f this species that
induced Prince Bonaparte subsequently to remove it from Pyrgisoma and to associate it with
the Brown Pipilos (P. fuscus, &c.) as a separate genus KieneriaA It is, in fact, rather difficult
to decide whether to anrange Pyrgisoma kieneri with the other Pyrgisomas or wdth these Pipilos.
Upon the whole, we prefer to adopt the former com-se, as it would be unnatural to dissociate it
from P . ruhricatum, witb which it so closely agrees in plumage. But P. rubricatum is certainly
a typical species of Pyrgisoma, as is allowed b y all writers upon tbe gi'oup.
It is unfortunate that we are unable to give the exact habitat o f P. kieneri. The tiqie-
specimen, which as far as we know is unique, is marked as having heen procured in 5Iay
1843, dindng the expedition o f the “ Danaide” by M. Jaurès, but no locality is attached
to the label. It was, however, in all probability obtained on some part o f the w-estern coast
o f Mexico.
The five species o f Pyrgisoma known to us may be arranged as follows :—
Sect. a. Species pileo castaneo, g u ttu r e albo.
a', pectore immaculato.
1. P yROISOMA BlAECCATOr.
Pf/ro!to ¿iaw!íí7ía. Prev. Voy. Ténus, 0 Í3. t. 6. „ __ _
Pyrgisoma liarcuatum. Bp. Consp. p. 48 6 j Scl. & S a k . Ib is, 1859, pp. 5, 18 ; P. Z, S. 1868, y. 3 ,5 .
H a b . Guatemala.
y . p la g à pectorali nigrâ.
2. P r n o is o i iA c.vbanisi, no b is, ( t. Isv. fig. 1.)
H a b . C o sta Rica.
3. P t EGISOIIA Et-BEICATUM. ( t. Ixiv, fig 1.)
Ha b . Mexico, Plain s o f Colima {Xanthus)-, A tlis co {Boucard).
4. P yEQISOMA KIENEEI. (t, Ixv. fig. 2.)
H a b . W e s te rn Mexico (?).
Sect. b. P ile o medio cinereo, lateraliter nigro : g u ttu r e toto mgro.
5. PrEGISOilA LEUCOTE. ( t. Isiv. fig. 2.)
H a b . Co sta R ic a {Hoffmann, Carmiol) ; G u atem a la (SaZoi«).
* Compt. Ren d . xl. p. 356. (1855).