[73]Myiarchus stolidus,var.stolidus(Gosse),Cabanis.Myiobius stolidus,Gosse.B. Jam.p.168.Myiarchus s.Cabanis,J. für Orn.1855, 479.—Coues,P. A. N. S.1872, 77. (Stolidusvar.dominicensis,Bryant.)[74]Myiarchus tristis(Gosse),Coues.Myiobius tristis,Gosse,B. Jam. 167 pl. xli.Myiarchust.Coues,P. A. N. S.July, 1872, 80.[75]Myiarchus tristis,var.lawrencei(Giraud),Baird.Tyrannula lawrencei,Giraud, 16sp. Tex. B. pl. ii.Myiarchus l.Baird,Birds N. Am.1858, 181,pl. xlvii, f.3.—Coues,P. A. N. S.July, 1872, 74.Obs.—The most typical specimens are from Mazatlan and northward, across the northern portion of Mexico. On the eastern coast, specimens from Mirador and Orizaba already strongly incline towardvar.nigricapillus.[76]Myiarchus tristis,var.nigricapillus,Cabanis. “Myiarchus nigricapillus,Caban.”Scl.Cat. Am. B.1862, 233,et Auct.M. lawrencei,Coues,P. A. N. S.1872, 74 (in part).Obs.—A very strongly differentiated form, but unquestionably grading intovar.lawrenceion the one hand, andvar.nigricepson the other.[77]Myiarchus tristis,var.nigriceps,Sclater.Myiarchus nigriceps,Scl.P. Z. S.1860, 68, 295.—Coues,P. A. N. S.July, 1872, 75.Obs.—The last three races appear to be all reducible to one species, as, taking the large series of specimens before us (over 30 skins), we find it impossible to draw the line between them. Specimens from Southern Mexico are referrible, with equal propriety, tolawrenceior tonigricapillus, while skins from Panama ofnigricepsare less typical than those from Ecuador. This case of gradually increasing melanistic tendency as we proceed southward affords an exact parallel to that ofVireosylvia gilvusandV. josephæ,Sayornis nigricansandS. aquaticus, and many other cases.[78]Myiarchus mexicanus,var.pertinax,Baird,Pr. Phil. Acad.1859, 303.[79]Sayornis nigricans,var.aquaticus.Sayornis aquaticus,Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1859,p.119 (Guatemala).[80]Sayornis nigricans,var.cineracens.Sayornis cineracea,Lafr.Rev. Zoöl.1848,p.8.—Scl.Catal. Am. Birds, 1862, 200. The above races are clearly shown to be merely modifications, with latitude, of one type, by the series of specimens before us. Thus, specimens ofS. nigricansfrom Orizaba show more or less dusky on the lower tail-coverts, while in more northern specimens (i. e. typicalvar.nigricans) there is not a trace of it. Typical specimens ofaquaticus, from Guatemala, show merely a more advanced melanism, the lighter markings on the wings becoming greatly restricted; there is still, however, a decided presence of white on the lower tail-coverts. Specimens from Costa Rica (typicalaquaticus) exhibit the maximum degree of melanism, the white beneath being confined to a central spot on the abdomen. Incineraceus(from New Granada) the white beneath is similarly restricted, but on the wings is very conspicuous, showing a reversion back to the character ofnigricans, though surpassing the latter in the amount of white on the coverts and secondaries.TheS. latirostris(Aulanax l.Cab. & Hein.Mus. Hein. ii,p.68;Sayornis l.Scl.Cat. Am. B.1862, 200), from Ecuador, we have not seen. It is probably also referrible to the same type.[81]Contopus lugubris,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. VIII, 1865, 134 (Costa Rica, Baranca).[82]Contopus brachytarsus,Sclater,Cat. Am. B.1862, 231. (Empidonax brachyt.Scl.Ibis, 1859,p.441.) A strongly marked race, but distinguishable fromschottionly by just appreciable differences in color (being paler beneath), and shorter wing and bill, the latter broader at the tip.[83]Contopus(brachytarsusvar.?),var.schotti,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. IX, 1869, 202 (Yucatan). Very nearly related toC. richardsoni, but easily distinguished by the very different proportions.[84]Contopus caribæus(D’Orb.)Muscipeta caribæa,D’Orb.(R. de la Sagra),Hist.Cuba, 1839, 77.[85]Contopus caribæus,var.hispaniolensis,Bryant.Tyrannula caribæa,var.hispaniolensis,Bryant,Pr. Bost. Soc. XI, 1866, 91.[86]Contopus caribæus,var.pallidus(Gosse).Myiobius pallidus,Gosse, BirdsJam.166.Blacicus pallidus,Scl.P. Z. S.1861, 77.Contopus p.Scl.Catal. Am. B.1862, 231.—March,Pr. Ph. A. N. Sc.1863, 290.[87]Contopus(caribæusvar.?)bahamensis,Bryant.Empidonax bahamensis,Bryant, List of Birds of the Bahamas, 1859,p.7. Young with the colors more ashy above, and less yellowish beneath; the upper parts with feathers faintly tipped with paler, causing an obsolete transverse mottling; two distinct bands on wing of pale ochraceous.Of the above,caribæus,hispaniolensis, andpallidusare clearly to be referred to one species; theC. bahamensisalso has many characters in common with them, and no violence would be done by referring it, also, to the same type; it is, however, more modified from the standard than any of the others, though the modifications are not of importance.[88]These measurements are not only those of United States and Mexican examples, but also of Middle American examples (“sordidulus,”Sclater, and “plebeius,”Cabanis), and of a series from Ecuador and New Granada (= “bogotensis,”Sclater). In comparing a quite large number of such Middle American and Equatorial specimens with the large series of Northern examples, we have been utterly unable to appreciate even the slightest difference between them.TheC. punensis(Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. IX, 1869, 237; Puna Island, Guayaquil) is founded upon an immature specimen, so the characters of the species cannot be given with exactness. The relationship appears very close to theC. caribæus, there being the same large, very depressed bill, with the long bristles reaching nearly to its tip, and the tail about as long as the wing; while the upper plumage has the light faint transverse mottling seen in the youngcaribæus,var.bahamensis, and the lining of the wing ochraceous. In colors, however, the two are very different, the young ofpunensisbeing ashy-green, instead of pure ash, on the back, the crown very much darker, instead of not appreciably so; the wing-bands are white instead of ochraceous, while the breast and sides are dull sulphur-yellowish, instead of ashy, without any yellow tinge. The measurements are as follows: Wing, 2.60; tail, 2.60; culmen, .72; tarsus, .56.TheC. ochraceus,Sclater & Salvin(P. Z. S.1869, 419;Salv.Ibis, 1870, 115), of Costa Rica, we have not seen. From the description, however, it seems to be scarcely different fromC. lugubris, and it is probably the same. The size (wing, 3.30) appears to be a little smaller, and the belly more deeply yellowish.[89]Empidonax brunneus,Ridgway. A very distinct species, not needing comparison with any other.[90]Empidonax axillaris,Ridgway.[91]Empidonax flavescens,Lawr.May be the southern form ofbairdi, but differ in some apparently essential features.[92]Empidonax bairdi,Sclater,P. Z. S.1858, 301; Ibis, 1859, 442;Catal. Am. B.1862, 230.—Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1860, 36. (Hab.Cordova, Coban, Mazatlan, Mirador, etc.)[93]Empidonax fulvipectus,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. Feb.1871, 11. (Type examined.) A very distinct species, most nearly related toobscurus, from which it differs totally in color and in much shorter tarsus.[94]Empidonax minimus,var.pectoralis.Empidonax pectoralis,Lawr.It seems but reasonable to consider this bird as the southern race ofminimus, as the differences—i. e. smaller size and whiter wing-bands—are just what we find in several other species of the same region, compared with allied and probably co-specific northern types,—asgriseigularisandacadicus, southern specimens oftraillivar.pusillusin which the wing-bands are much whiter than in northern specimens of the same bird.[95]Empidonax griseipectus,Lawr.May possibly be another seasonal plumage of the same species aspectoralis, but differs in some seemingly important respects.[96]Empidonax acadicus,var.griseigularis.Empidonax griseigularis,Lawr.Differing fromacadicusonly in smaller size and whiter wing-bands.The remaining described American species ofEmpidonax, which we have not seen, are the following:—Empidonax magnirostris,Gould,Voy.Beagle,pl.8.—Gray, Hand List.Empidonax albigularis,Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1859,p.122 (Orizaba).—Sclater,Catal. Am. B.1862, 229. This may possibly be the species described above asE. axillaris.[97]Mitrephorus fulvifrons.Muscicapa fulvifrons,Giraud, 16 species Texas birds, 1841,pl. ii(Mexico?).Empidonax fulvifrons,Sclater,P. Z. S.1858, 301.Mitrephorus fulvifrons,Sclater,P. Z. S.1859, 45.Empidonax rubicundus,Cabanis,Mus. Hein. ii, 1859, 70 (Mexico).Hab.Northern Mexico.[98]Pyrocephalus obscurus,Gould,Zoöl. Voy. Beag. iii, 45.—Sclater,P. Z. S.1859, 46;Catal. Am. B.1862, 228 (Peru).[99]Pyrocephalus rubineus, (Bodd.)Cab.Muscicapa rubinea,Bodd.(exBuff. pl. enl. cclxv, f.1).Pyrocephalus r.CabanisetHein.Mus. Hein. ii,p.67.—Sclater,Catal. Am. B.1862, 227.[100]Pyrocephalus rubineus,var.nanus,Gould,Zoöl. Beag. iii, 45,pl. vii.—Sclater,P. Z. S.1859, 46, 144; 1860, 282, 295;Catal. Am. B.1862,p.228. The last is hardly separable by the characters given, as, although they are never seen in southern specimens, they are not constant in the northern ones. Specimens ofnanusare as large as any ofrubineus, there being in every region a great range of variation in dimensions.[101]This confounding of the two sexes has probably resulted from guess-work of the collector, who, noticing the marked difference between the male and female, and naturally supposing the former to be the more brightly colored, marked the rufous-breasted specimens accordingly; while the few marked correctly may have been thus labelled after careful dissection.[102]Nyctidromus albicollis.Caprimulgus albicollisandguianensis,Gmelin,S. N. I, 1788, 1030.Nyctidromus americanus,Cassin,Pr. A. N. S.1851, 179.Nyctidromus guianensis,derbyanus,grallarius,—affinisof authors.Nyctidromus albicollis,Sclater,P. Z. S.1866, 145.Hab.From Northern Mexico southward to Ecuador and Brazil.[103]Chordeiles popetue,var.minor,Cabanis.Chordeiles minor,Cab.Journ. f. Orn.1856,p.5.—Sclater,Catal. Am. B.1862, 279.Ch.gundlachi,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. VI, 165.[104]Chordeiles acutipennis, (Bodd.)Cass.Caprimulgus acutipennis,Boddært,Tab. Pl. Enl. p.46 (1783).Chordeiles a.Cassin,P. A. N. S.1851 (Catalogue ofCaprimulgidæ, inMus. Philad. Acad.).Caprimulgus acutus,Gmel.C. pruinosus,Tschudi.C. exilis,Lesson.Chordeiles labeculatus,Jardine. “Caprimulgus semitorquatus,L.,Gm.,Pr. Max.”Tschudi.Chordeiles peruvianus,Peale.Hab.South America.[105]The females differ simply in having the light tail-space much reduced in size, and dull ochraceous, instead of whitish; in that ofcarolinensisit is wanting altogether.[106]Antrostomus macromystax(Wagl.?)Sclater,P. Z. S.1866, 137 (La Parada,Mex..).? Caprimulgus macromystax,Wagl.Isis, 1831,p.533.[107]Antrostomus macromystax,var.cubanensis(Lawr.)Antrostomus cubanensis,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. VII, May, 1860,p.260.[108]Panyptila cayanensis(Gmel.),Cab.Hirundo cay.Gmelin,Syst. Nat. I, 1024.Panyptila cay.Caban.Wiegm.Archiv,XIII, 345 (1847).—Scl.P. Z. S.1866, 606.[109]Panyptila sancti-hieronymi,Salvin(P. Z. S.1863, 190,pl. xxii;Scl.P. Z. S.1866, 607). May be the northern form ofcayanensis, which, however, we have not seen.[110]Chætura poliura, (Temm.)Scl.Cat. Am. B.1862, 101;P. Z. S.1866, 611. (Cypselus polivurus,Temm.Tab. Méth. p.78.)[111]Chætura cinereiventris,Scl.Cat. Am. B.1862,p.283;P. Z. S.1863,p.101,pl. xiv, f.1;P. Z.1866, 612.C. sclateri,Pelz.Orn. Braz. I, 1868,pp.16, 56, is also referrible to it as perhaps a race.[112]Chætura spinicauda,Scl.Cypselus spinicaudus,Tem.Tabl. Méth. p.78 (exBuff. Pl. Enl.726,f.1).Acanthylis s.Boie, Isis, 1826,p.971;Bonap.Consp.p.64.Chætura s.Scl.Catal. Am. Birds, 1862, 283.Hirundo pelasgia,var.,Lath.Ind. Orn. II, 581.Hab.Cayenne and Brazil.[113]GenusLampornis,Swains.Char.Size large (wing, 2.50); tail large, more than half the wing, the feathers very broad; usually a little rounded, sometimes slightly emarginated (as inL. mango,L. virginalis, andL. aurulentus). Bill cylindrical, considerably curved, its vertical thickness least at about the middle. Nasal opercula nearly covered by the frontal feathers; tarsi naked. Wing very long, reaching to or beyond the tip of the tail; first primary longest, only slightly bowed, and not attenuated at tip; inner primaries normal.The species of this genus belong chiefly to the West India Islands and to Tropical America,—principally on the Atlantic coast. They are all of more than the average size, and distinguished by broad tail-feathers, and rather dull, though handsome colors. InL. porphyrurusthe sexes are alike in color. The following species has been accredited to North America, but probably upon erroneous data, since it belongs to northern South America, not even being an inhabitant of any of the West India Islands, except Trinidad. Still it is possible that, as alleged forThaumatias linnæi(see page 1064), it may have wandered far from its usual habitat, and have reached Florida, as stated by Mr. Audubon.Lampornis mango, (L.)Swains.—The Mango Hummer.Trochilus mango,L. S. N. I, 191.—Gmel.S. N. I.491.—Aud.Orn. Biog. II, 1834, 486;pl.184.—Ib.Birds Am. IV, 1842, 186,pl. ccli.Lampornis mango,Sw.Zoöl. Journ. III, 358.—Baird,Birds N. Am.1858, 130.Sp. Char.—Male: Above deep golden green; beneath opaque velvety-black medially, from the bill to the anal region, separated from the lateral and superior green by a tint of metallic greenish-blue. Tail richly metallic rufous-purple, the feathers bordered terminally with blue-black; intermediæ plain dark bronzy-green. Primaries plain dull dusky.Female.Similar, but white beneath, except laterally, and with a medial stripe of black, from the bill to the anus. Wing, 2.60-2.70; tail, 1.50-1.70; bill, .90.Hab.Northern South America (Brazil, Guiana, Venezuela, New Granada, Panama, and Trinidad); accidental in Florida???[114]Calypte helenæ, (Lemb.)Gould,Monog. Troch. III, pl. cxxxvi.Orthorhynchus helenæ,Lemb.Aves de l’Isle de Cuba,p.70,pl. x, fig.2.O. boothi,Gundl.MSS.(Gould,Monog.).[115]Calypte floresi, (Lodd.)Trochilus floresi,Lodd.MSS.Selasphorus floresi,Gould,Monog. Troch. III, pl. cxxxix. There are certainly few reasons for considering this bird as aSelasphorus, while there are many for referring it toCalypte. The only feature that it shares with the former is the peculiar coloration, and to some extent the shape, of the tail. However, inSelasphorusthe outer primary is always (in the male) attenuated and acute at the tip, and the crown is never metallic, while inCalyptethe outer primary is never attenuated nor acute, and the crown of the male is always metallic. The form and coloration of the tail are nothing more than a specific character, since no two species, of either genus, agree in this respect. In view, then, of these considerations, we findfloresito be strictly congeneric with the other species ofCalypte.[116]Selasphorus(platycercus,var.?)flammula(Salv.).Selasphorus flammula,Salvin,P. Z. S.1864 (Costa Rica). (Described above from specimen in Mr. Lawrence’s collection.)[117]Selasphorus(rufusvar.?)scintilla(Gould).Selasphorus scintilla,Gould,P. Z. S.1850, 162,Monog. Troch. III,pl. cxxxviii. The foregoing species are so similar in all essential respects to the northernS. platycercusandS. rufus, that it is exceedingly probable that they are merely the southern forms of those species. Both differ in exactly the same respects from their northern representatives, namely, in smaller size and less burnished throat, and to a very slight degree only in form. The only specimen of theS. flammulathat we have examined is a badly shot male in Mr. Lawrence’s collection; what appears to be the outer primary in this specimen is not attenuated at the tip, which is curved inward, instead of acutely attenuated and turned outward as inplatycercus; the wings are badly cut with shot, however, and the first primary may be wanting.[118]Heliopædica melanotis, (Swains.)Gould,Monog. Troch. II, pl. lxiv.Trochilus melanotus,Swains.Phil. Mag.1827, 441.Trochilus leucotis,Vieill.Ornismyia arsenni,Less.Hab.Mexico and Guatemala.[119]Am.Naturalist, 1869-70.[120]Geococcyx affinis,Hartlaub,Rev. Zoöl.1844, 215.—Bonap.97.—Scl.P. Z. S.1858, 305.—Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1859, 134.—Sclater,Catal.1862, 325.Geococcyx velox,Karw.Bonap.97.[121]Coccygus melanocoryphus,Vieillot,Nouv. Dict. VIII, 271.—Sclater,Catal.1862, 323.—Ib.P. Z. S.1864, 122.[122]Crotophaga major,Linn.Syst. Nat. I, 363.—Max.Beitr.IV, 319.—Scl.Cat.1862, 320.C. ani,Vieill.Gal. Ois.II, 35,pl. xliii.[123]Crotophaga sulcirostris,Swainson,Phil. Mag.1827,I, 440.—Bonap.Consp.89.—Scl.P. Z. S.1856, 309, 1859,pp.59, 368, 388, et 1860,pp.285, 297.—Ib.Catal.1862, 320.C. casasi,Less.Voy. Coq. Zoöl. I,pl. ii, 619,etCent. Zoöl.pl. ix.[124]Conspectus avium picinarum.Stockholm, 1866.[125]A character common to all the members of the genus, and distinguishing them from the species of every other; this peculiar form of the middle tail-feathers is caused principally by a folding of the webs downward, almost against each other. The under surfaces of the shafts have a very deep groove their whole length, which is seen in no other genus.[126]Campephilus bairdi,Cassin,Pr. A. N. Sc.1863, 322 (Cuba).—Gundlach, Repertorium,I, 1866, 293.—Ib.Cab. Jour.1866, 352.Hab.Cuba.[127]Picoides tridactylus,var.tridactylus.Picus tridactylus,Linn.S. N. 12th ed. I, 177 (1766).—Degland,Orn. Eur. I, 161 (1849).Apternus tridactylus,Bonap.Birds (1838),p.9.—Gould, Birds of Europepl. ccxxxii.Picoides tridactylus,Gray.Picoides europæus,Less.Orn. p.217 (1831).[128]Picoides tridactylus,var.crissoleucus.Picus crissoleucus,Brandt,Mus. Petrop.Apternus crissoleucus,Bonap.Consp.—Reich.Syn.p.362,No.836;pl. dcxxxi, f.4197, 4198.Picoides crissoleucus,Malh.Monog. Pic. I, 180. “Apternus kamtchatkensis,Bonap.”—Malh.Monog. Pic. I, 180 (in synonomy).Apternus tridactylus,Mus.de Mayence.—Pallas,Zoogr. Ros. As. I, 415.[129]Centurus carolinus,var.tricolor.Picus tricolor,Wagl.Isis, 1829, 512.Centurus tri.Scl.Catal. Am. B.1862, 343.C. subelegans,Scl.P. Z. S.1855, 162; 1856, 143.[130]Centurus aurifrons,var.hoffmanni.Centurus hoffmanni,Cabanis,Journ. Sept.1862, 322 (Costa Rica).[131]Melanerpes formicivorus,var.striatipectus,Ridgway. In view of the very appreciable difference from the other races named, it appears necessary to name this one, in order that it may rank equally with the rest. The almost entirely streaked breast is only an approach to what we see, in its extreme phase, in thevar.flavigula. The black vertex of the female appears broader than in specimens ofvar.formicivorus.[132]Melanerpes formicivorus,var.flavigula,Natt.Melampicus flavigula(Natt.),Malh.Rev. Zoöl.1849, 542,Monog. Pic. II, 202,pl. xcix, f.5, 6.Melanerpes flavigularis,Scl.P. Z. S.1856, 161. This can only be considered the melanistic extreme of a species of which thevar.formicivorusis the rubescent one, the transition being gradual through thevar.striatipectusof the intermediate region.[133]Colaptes mexicanoides,Lafr.Rev. Zoöl.1844, 42.—Scl. & Salv.Ibis, 1859, 137.—Scl.Catal. Am. B.1862, 344.Colaptes rubricatus,Gray,Gen. B. pl. cxi.Geopicus rub.Malh.Monog. Pic. II, 265,pl. cx, figs. 1, 2.Picus submexicanus,Sund.Consp. Pic.1866, 72.[134]A series of hybrids betweenmexicanusandauratusis in the Smithsonian collection, these specimens exhibiting every possible combination of the characters of the two.[135]Colaptes auratus,var.chrysocaulosus.Colaptes chrysocaulosus,Gundlach, Boston Journal.—Ib.Repert. I, 1866, 294.[136]Die Papageien. Monographisch bearbeitet von Otto Finsch.2vols.Leiden, 1867, 1868.[137]A.Tail longer than the wings; lores and cheeks naked; the latter with narrow lines of small feathers.S. militaris.Green; forehead red; posterior portion of back, upper and under tail-coverts with quills and tip of tail, sky-blue; under side of tail dirty orange-yellow. Wing, 14.00; middle tail-feathers, 15.00; tarsus, 1.08.Hab.Northwestern Mexico to Bolivia.Synonymy:Psittacus militaris,Linn.S. N.1767, 139.Sittace militaris,Finsch, Die Papageien,I, 1867, 396.B.Tail about equal to the wings; lores and cheeks feathered.S. pachyrhyncha.Green; the forehead, edge of wings, and the tibiæ red; greater under wing-coverts yellow. Wing, 8.00 to 10.00; middle tail-feather, 6.50.Hab.Southern Mexico (Jalapa and Angangueo), given probably erroneously from the Rio Grande of Texas. Synonymy:Macrocercus pachyrhynchus,Sw.Syn. Birds Mex.inPhilos. Mag. I, 1827, 439,No.79.Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha,Bon.Tableau des Perroquets,Rev. et Mag. de Zoöl.1854, 149.Sittace pachyrhyncha,Finsch, Die Papageien,I, 1867, 428.Psittacus pascha,Wagler, Isis, 1831, 524.Psittacus strenuus,Licht.Preis-Verzeichiss, 1830.
[73]Myiarchus stolidus,var.stolidus(Gosse),Cabanis.Myiobius stolidus,Gosse.B. Jam.p.168.Myiarchus s.Cabanis,J. für Orn.1855, 479.—Coues,P. A. N. S.1872, 77. (Stolidusvar.dominicensis,Bryant.)
[74]Myiarchus tristis(Gosse),Coues.Myiobius tristis,Gosse,B. Jam. 167 pl. xli.Myiarchust.Coues,P. A. N. S.July, 1872, 80.
[75]Myiarchus tristis,var.lawrencei(Giraud),Baird.Tyrannula lawrencei,Giraud, 16sp. Tex. B. pl. ii.Myiarchus l.Baird,Birds N. Am.1858, 181,pl. xlvii, f.3.—Coues,P. A. N. S.July, 1872, 74.
Obs.—The most typical specimens are from Mazatlan and northward, across the northern portion of Mexico. On the eastern coast, specimens from Mirador and Orizaba already strongly incline towardvar.nigricapillus.
[76]Myiarchus tristis,var.nigricapillus,Cabanis. “Myiarchus nigricapillus,Caban.”Scl.Cat. Am. B.1862, 233,et Auct.M. lawrencei,Coues,P. A. N. S.1872, 74 (in part).
Obs.—A very strongly differentiated form, but unquestionably grading intovar.lawrenceion the one hand, andvar.nigricepson the other.
[77]Myiarchus tristis,var.nigriceps,Sclater.Myiarchus nigriceps,Scl.P. Z. S.1860, 68, 295.—Coues,P. A. N. S.July, 1872, 75.
Obs.—The last three races appear to be all reducible to one species, as, taking the large series of specimens before us (over 30 skins), we find it impossible to draw the line between them. Specimens from Southern Mexico are referrible, with equal propriety, tolawrenceior tonigricapillus, while skins from Panama ofnigricepsare less typical than those from Ecuador. This case of gradually increasing melanistic tendency as we proceed southward affords an exact parallel to that ofVireosylvia gilvusandV. josephæ,Sayornis nigricansandS. aquaticus, and many other cases.
[78]Myiarchus mexicanus,var.pertinax,Baird,Pr. Phil. Acad.1859, 303.
[79]Sayornis nigricans,var.aquaticus.Sayornis aquaticus,Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1859,p.119 (Guatemala).
[80]Sayornis nigricans,var.cineracens.Sayornis cineracea,Lafr.Rev. Zoöl.1848,p.8.—Scl.Catal. Am. Birds, 1862, 200. The above races are clearly shown to be merely modifications, with latitude, of one type, by the series of specimens before us. Thus, specimens ofS. nigricansfrom Orizaba show more or less dusky on the lower tail-coverts, while in more northern specimens (i. e. typicalvar.nigricans) there is not a trace of it. Typical specimens ofaquaticus, from Guatemala, show merely a more advanced melanism, the lighter markings on the wings becoming greatly restricted; there is still, however, a decided presence of white on the lower tail-coverts. Specimens from Costa Rica (typicalaquaticus) exhibit the maximum degree of melanism, the white beneath being confined to a central spot on the abdomen. Incineraceus(from New Granada) the white beneath is similarly restricted, but on the wings is very conspicuous, showing a reversion back to the character ofnigricans, though surpassing the latter in the amount of white on the coverts and secondaries.
TheS. latirostris(Aulanax l.Cab. & Hein.Mus. Hein. ii,p.68;Sayornis l.Scl.Cat. Am. B.1862, 200), from Ecuador, we have not seen. It is probably also referrible to the same type.
[81]Contopus lugubris,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. VIII, 1865, 134 (Costa Rica, Baranca).
[82]Contopus brachytarsus,Sclater,Cat. Am. B.1862, 231. (Empidonax brachyt.Scl.Ibis, 1859,p.441.) A strongly marked race, but distinguishable fromschottionly by just appreciable differences in color (being paler beneath), and shorter wing and bill, the latter broader at the tip.
[83]Contopus(brachytarsusvar.?),var.schotti,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. IX, 1869, 202 (Yucatan). Very nearly related toC. richardsoni, but easily distinguished by the very different proportions.
[84]Contopus caribæus(D’Orb.)Muscipeta caribæa,D’Orb.(R. de la Sagra),Hist.Cuba, 1839, 77.
[85]Contopus caribæus,var.hispaniolensis,Bryant.Tyrannula caribæa,var.hispaniolensis,Bryant,Pr. Bost. Soc. XI, 1866, 91.
[86]Contopus caribæus,var.pallidus(Gosse).Myiobius pallidus,Gosse, BirdsJam.166.Blacicus pallidus,Scl.P. Z. S.1861, 77.Contopus p.Scl.Catal. Am. B.1862, 231.—March,Pr. Ph. A. N. Sc.1863, 290.
[87]Contopus(caribæusvar.?)bahamensis,Bryant.Empidonax bahamensis,Bryant, List of Birds of the Bahamas, 1859,p.7. Young with the colors more ashy above, and less yellowish beneath; the upper parts with feathers faintly tipped with paler, causing an obsolete transverse mottling; two distinct bands on wing of pale ochraceous.
Of the above,caribæus,hispaniolensis, andpallidusare clearly to be referred to one species; theC. bahamensisalso has many characters in common with them, and no violence would be done by referring it, also, to the same type; it is, however, more modified from the standard than any of the others, though the modifications are not of importance.
[88]These measurements are not only those of United States and Mexican examples, but also of Middle American examples (“sordidulus,”Sclater, and “plebeius,”Cabanis), and of a series from Ecuador and New Granada (= “bogotensis,”Sclater). In comparing a quite large number of such Middle American and Equatorial specimens with the large series of Northern examples, we have been utterly unable to appreciate even the slightest difference between them.
TheC. punensis(Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. IX, 1869, 237; Puna Island, Guayaquil) is founded upon an immature specimen, so the characters of the species cannot be given with exactness. The relationship appears very close to theC. caribæus, there being the same large, very depressed bill, with the long bristles reaching nearly to its tip, and the tail about as long as the wing; while the upper plumage has the light faint transverse mottling seen in the youngcaribæus,var.bahamensis, and the lining of the wing ochraceous. In colors, however, the two are very different, the young ofpunensisbeing ashy-green, instead of pure ash, on the back, the crown very much darker, instead of not appreciably so; the wing-bands are white instead of ochraceous, while the breast and sides are dull sulphur-yellowish, instead of ashy, without any yellow tinge. The measurements are as follows: Wing, 2.60; tail, 2.60; culmen, .72; tarsus, .56.
TheC. ochraceus,Sclater & Salvin(P. Z. S.1869, 419;Salv.Ibis, 1870, 115), of Costa Rica, we have not seen. From the description, however, it seems to be scarcely different fromC. lugubris, and it is probably the same. The size (wing, 3.30) appears to be a little smaller, and the belly more deeply yellowish.
[89]Empidonax brunneus,Ridgway. A very distinct species, not needing comparison with any other.
[90]Empidonax axillaris,Ridgway.
[91]Empidonax flavescens,Lawr.May be the southern form ofbairdi, but differ in some apparently essential features.
[92]Empidonax bairdi,Sclater,P. Z. S.1858, 301; Ibis, 1859, 442;Catal. Am. B.1862, 230.—Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1860, 36. (Hab.Cordova, Coban, Mazatlan, Mirador, etc.)
[93]Empidonax fulvipectus,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. Feb.1871, 11. (Type examined.) A very distinct species, most nearly related toobscurus, from which it differs totally in color and in much shorter tarsus.
[94]Empidonax minimus,var.pectoralis.Empidonax pectoralis,Lawr.It seems but reasonable to consider this bird as the southern race ofminimus, as the differences—i. e. smaller size and whiter wing-bands—are just what we find in several other species of the same region, compared with allied and probably co-specific northern types,—asgriseigularisandacadicus, southern specimens oftraillivar.pusillusin which the wing-bands are much whiter than in northern specimens of the same bird.
[95]Empidonax griseipectus,Lawr.May possibly be another seasonal plumage of the same species aspectoralis, but differs in some seemingly important respects.
[96]Empidonax acadicus,var.griseigularis.Empidonax griseigularis,Lawr.Differing fromacadicusonly in smaller size and whiter wing-bands.
The remaining described American species ofEmpidonax, which we have not seen, are the following:—
Empidonax magnirostris,Gould,Voy.Beagle,pl.8.—Gray, Hand List.
Empidonax albigularis,Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1859,p.122 (Orizaba).—Sclater,Catal. Am. B.1862, 229. This may possibly be the species described above asE. axillaris.
[97]Mitrephorus fulvifrons.Muscicapa fulvifrons,Giraud, 16 species Texas birds, 1841,pl. ii(Mexico?).Empidonax fulvifrons,Sclater,P. Z. S.1858, 301.Mitrephorus fulvifrons,Sclater,P. Z. S.1859, 45.Empidonax rubicundus,Cabanis,Mus. Hein. ii, 1859, 70 (Mexico).Hab.Northern Mexico.
[98]Pyrocephalus obscurus,Gould,Zoöl. Voy. Beag. iii, 45.—Sclater,P. Z. S.1859, 46;Catal. Am. B.1862, 228 (Peru).
[99]Pyrocephalus rubineus, (Bodd.)Cab.Muscicapa rubinea,Bodd.(exBuff. pl. enl. cclxv, f.1).Pyrocephalus r.CabanisetHein.Mus. Hein. ii,p.67.—Sclater,Catal. Am. B.1862, 227.
[100]Pyrocephalus rubineus,var.nanus,Gould,Zoöl. Beag. iii, 45,pl. vii.—Sclater,P. Z. S.1859, 46, 144; 1860, 282, 295;Catal. Am. B.1862,p.228. The last is hardly separable by the characters given, as, although they are never seen in southern specimens, they are not constant in the northern ones. Specimens ofnanusare as large as any ofrubineus, there being in every region a great range of variation in dimensions.
[101]This confounding of the two sexes has probably resulted from guess-work of the collector, who, noticing the marked difference between the male and female, and naturally supposing the former to be the more brightly colored, marked the rufous-breasted specimens accordingly; while the few marked correctly may have been thus labelled after careful dissection.
[102]Nyctidromus albicollis.Caprimulgus albicollisandguianensis,Gmelin,S. N. I, 1788, 1030.Nyctidromus americanus,Cassin,Pr. A. N. S.1851, 179.Nyctidromus guianensis,derbyanus,grallarius,—affinisof authors.Nyctidromus albicollis,Sclater,P. Z. S.1866, 145.Hab.From Northern Mexico southward to Ecuador and Brazil.
[103]Chordeiles popetue,var.minor,Cabanis.Chordeiles minor,Cab.Journ. f. Orn.1856,p.5.—Sclater,Catal. Am. B.1862, 279.Ch.gundlachi,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. VI, 165.
[104]Chordeiles acutipennis, (Bodd.)Cass.Caprimulgus acutipennis,Boddært,Tab. Pl. Enl. p.46 (1783).Chordeiles a.Cassin,P. A. N. S.1851 (Catalogue ofCaprimulgidæ, inMus. Philad. Acad.).Caprimulgus acutus,Gmel.C. pruinosus,Tschudi.C. exilis,Lesson.Chordeiles labeculatus,Jardine. “Caprimulgus semitorquatus,L.,Gm.,Pr. Max.”Tschudi.Chordeiles peruvianus,Peale.Hab.South America.
[105]The females differ simply in having the light tail-space much reduced in size, and dull ochraceous, instead of whitish; in that ofcarolinensisit is wanting altogether.
[106]Antrostomus macromystax(Wagl.?)Sclater,P. Z. S.1866, 137 (La Parada,Mex..).? Caprimulgus macromystax,Wagl.Isis, 1831,p.533.
[107]Antrostomus macromystax,var.cubanensis(Lawr.)Antrostomus cubanensis,Lawr.Ann. N. Y. Lyc. VII, May, 1860,p.260.
[108]Panyptila cayanensis(Gmel.),Cab.Hirundo cay.Gmelin,Syst. Nat. I, 1024.Panyptila cay.Caban.Wiegm.Archiv,XIII, 345 (1847).—Scl.P. Z. S.1866, 606.
[109]Panyptila sancti-hieronymi,Salvin(P. Z. S.1863, 190,pl. xxii;Scl.P. Z. S.1866, 607). May be the northern form ofcayanensis, which, however, we have not seen.
[110]Chætura poliura, (Temm.)Scl.Cat. Am. B.1862, 101;P. Z. S.1866, 611. (Cypselus polivurus,Temm.Tab. Méth. p.78.)
[111]Chætura cinereiventris,Scl.Cat. Am. B.1862,p.283;P. Z. S.1863,p.101,pl. xiv, f.1;P. Z.1866, 612.C. sclateri,Pelz.Orn. Braz. I, 1868,pp.16, 56, is also referrible to it as perhaps a race.
[112]Chætura spinicauda,Scl.Cypselus spinicaudus,Tem.Tabl. Méth. p.78 (exBuff. Pl. Enl.726,f.1).Acanthylis s.Boie, Isis, 1826,p.971;Bonap.Consp.p.64.Chætura s.Scl.Catal. Am. Birds, 1862, 283.Hirundo pelasgia,var.,Lath.Ind. Orn. II, 581.Hab.Cayenne and Brazil.
[113]GenusLampornis,Swains.Char.Size large (wing, 2.50); tail large, more than half the wing, the feathers very broad; usually a little rounded, sometimes slightly emarginated (as inL. mango,L. virginalis, andL. aurulentus). Bill cylindrical, considerably curved, its vertical thickness least at about the middle. Nasal opercula nearly covered by the frontal feathers; tarsi naked. Wing very long, reaching to or beyond the tip of the tail; first primary longest, only slightly bowed, and not attenuated at tip; inner primaries normal.
The species of this genus belong chiefly to the West India Islands and to Tropical America,—principally on the Atlantic coast. They are all of more than the average size, and distinguished by broad tail-feathers, and rather dull, though handsome colors. InL. porphyrurusthe sexes are alike in color. The following species has been accredited to North America, but probably upon erroneous data, since it belongs to northern South America, not even being an inhabitant of any of the West India Islands, except Trinidad. Still it is possible that, as alleged forThaumatias linnæi(see page 1064), it may have wandered far from its usual habitat, and have reached Florida, as stated by Mr. Audubon.
Lampornis mango, (L.)Swains.—The Mango Hummer.Trochilus mango,L. S. N. I, 191.—Gmel.S. N. I.491.—Aud.Orn. Biog. II, 1834, 486;pl.184.—Ib.Birds Am. IV, 1842, 186,pl. ccli.Lampornis mango,Sw.Zoöl. Journ. III, 358.—Baird,Birds N. Am.1858, 130.Sp. Char.—Male: Above deep golden green; beneath opaque velvety-black medially, from the bill to the anal region, separated from the lateral and superior green by a tint of metallic greenish-blue. Tail richly metallic rufous-purple, the feathers bordered terminally with blue-black; intermediæ plain dark bronzy-green. Primaries plain dull dusky.Female.Similar, but white beneath, except laterally, and with a medial stripe of black, from the bill to the anus. Wing, 2.60-2.70; tail, 1.50-1.70; bill, .90.Hab.Northern South America (Brazil, Guiana, Venezuela, New Granada, Panama, and Trinidad); accidental in Florida???
[114]Calypte helenæ, (Lemb.)Gould,Monog. Troch. III, pl. cxxxvi.Orthorhynchus helenæ,Lemb.Aves de l’Isle de Cuba,p.70,pl. x, fig.2.O. boothi,Gundl.MSS.(Gould,Monog.).
[115]Calypte floresi, (Lodd.)Trochilus floresi,Lodd.MSS.Selasphorus floresi,Gould,Monog. Troch. III, pl. cxxxix. There are certainly few reasons for considering this bird as aSelasphorus, while there are many for referring it toCalypte. The only feature that it shares with the former is the peculiar coloration, and to some extent the shape, of the tail. However, inSelasphorusthe outer primary is always (in the male) attenuated and acute at the tip, and the crown is never metallic, while inCalyptethe outer primary is never attenuated nor acute, and the crown of the male is always metallic. The form and coloration of the tail are nothing more than a specific character, since no two species, of either genus, agree in this respect. In view, then, of these considerations, we findfloresito be strictly congeneric with the other species ofCalypte.
[116]Selasphorus(platycercus,var.?)flammula(Salv.).Selasphorus flammula,Salvin,P. Z. S.1864 (Costa Rica). (Described above from specimen in Mr. Lawrence’s collection.)
[117]Selasphorus(rufusvar.?)scintilla(Gould).Selasphorus scintilla,Gould,P. Z. S.1850, 162,Monog. Troch. III,pl. cxxxviii. The foregoing species are so similar in all essential respects to the northernS. platycercusandS. rufus, that it is exceedingly probable that they are merely the southern forms of those species. Both differ in exactly the same respects from their northern representatives, namely, in smaller size and less burnished throat, and to a very slight degree only in form. The only specimen of theS. flammulathat we have examined is a badly shot male in Mr. Lawrence’s collection; what appears to be the outer primary in this specimen is not attenuated at the tip, which is curved inward, instead of acutely attenuated and turned outward as inplatycercus; the wings are badly cut with shot, however, and the first primary may be wanting.
[118]Heliopædica melanotis, (Swains.)Gould,Monog. Troch. II, pl. lxiv.Trochilus melanotus,Swains.Phil. Mag.1827, 441.Trochilus leucotis,Vieill.Ornismyia arsenni,Less.Hab.Mexico and Guatemala.
[119]Am.Naturalist, 1869-70.
[120]Geococcyx affinis,Hartlaub,Rev. Zoöl.1844, 215.—Bonap.97.—Scl.P. Z. S.1858, 305.—Sclater & Salvin, Ibis, 1859, 134.—Sclater,Catal.1862, 325.Geococcyx velox,Karw.Bonap.97.
[121]Coccygus melanocoryphus,Vieillot,Nouv. Dict. VIII, 271.—Sclater,Catal.1862, 323.—Ib.P. Z. S.1864, 122.
[122]Crotophaga major,Linn.Syst. Nat. I, 363.—Max.Beitr.IV, 319.—Scl.Cat.1862, 320.C. ani,Vieill.Gal. Ois.II, 35,pl. xliii.
[123]Crotophaga sulcirostris,Swainson,Phil. Mag.1827,I, 440.—Bonap.Consp.89.—Scl.P. Z. S.1856, 309, 1859,pp.59, 368, 388, et 1860,pp.285, 297.—Ib.Catal.1862, 320.C. casasi,Less.Voy. Coq. Zoöl. I,pl. ii, 619,etCent. Zoöl.pl. ix.
[124]Conspectus avium picinarum.Stockholm, 1866.
[125]A character common to all the members of the genus, and distinguishing them from the species of every other; this peculiar form of the middle tail-feathers is caused principally by a folding of the webs downward, almost against each other. The under surfaces of the shafts have a very deep groove their whole length, which is seen in no other genus.
[126]Campephilus bairdi,Cassin,Pr. A. N. Sc.1863, 322 (Cuba).—Gundlach, Repertorium,I, 1866, 293.—Ib.Cab. Jour.1866, 352.Hab.Cuba.
[127]Picoides tridactylus,var.tridactylus.Picus tridactylus,Linn.S. N. 12th ed. I, 177 (1766).—Degland,Orn. Eur. I, 161 (1849).Apternus tridactylus,Bonap.Birds (1838),p.9.—Gould, Birds of Europepl. ccxxxii.Picoides tridactylus,Gray.Picoides europæus,Less.Orn. p.217 (1831).
[128]Picoides tridactylus,var.crissoleucus.Picus crissoleucus,Brandt,Mus. Petrop.Apternus crissoleucus,Bonap.Consp.—Reich.Syn.p.362,No.836;pl. dcxxxi, f.4197, 4198.Picoides crissoleucus,Malh.Monog. Pic. I, 180. “Apternus kamtchatkensis,Bonap.”—Malh.Monog. Pic. I, 180 (in synonomy).Apternus tridactylus,Mus.de Mayence.—Pallas,Zoogr. Ros. As. I, 415.
[129]Centurus carolinus,var.tricolor.Picus tricolor,Wagl.Isis, 1829, 512.Centurus tri.Scl.Catal. Am. B.1862, 343.C. subelegans,Scl.P. Z. S.1855, 162; 1856, 143.
[130]Centurus aurifrons,var.hoffmanni.Centurus hoffmanni,Cabanis,Journ. Sept.1862, 322 (Costa Rica).
[131]Melanerpes formicivorus,var.striatipectus,Ridgway. In view of the very appreciable difference from the other races named, it appears necessary to name this one, in order that it may rank equally with the rest. The almost entirely streaked breast is only an approach to what we see, in its extreme phase, in thevar.flavigula. The black vertex of the female appears broader than in specimens ofvar.formicivorus.
[132]Melanerpes formicivorus,var.flavigula,Natt.Melampicus flavigula(Natt.),Malh.Rev. Zoöl.1849, 542,Monog. Pic. II, 202,pl. xcix, f.5, 6.Melanerpes flavigularis,Scl.P. Z. S.1856, 161. This can only be considered the melanistic extreme of a species of which thevar.formicivorusis the rubescent one, the transition being gradual through thevar.striatipectusof the intermediate region.
[133]Colaptes mexicanoides,Lafr.Rev. Zoöl.1844, 42.—Scl. & Salv.Ibis, 1859, 137.—Scl.Catal. Am. B.1862, 344.Colaptes rubricatus,Gray,Gen. B. pl. cxi.Geopicus rub.Malh.Monog. Pic. II, 265,pl. cx, figs. 1, 2.Picus submexicanus,Sund.Consp. Pic.1866, 72.
[134]A series of hybrids betweenmexicanusandauratusis in the Smithsonian collection, these specimens exhibiting every possible combination of the characters of the two.
[135]Colaptes auratus,var.chrysocaulosus.Colaptes chrysocaulosus,Gundlach, Boston Journal.—Ib.Repert. I, 1866, 294.
[136]Die Papageien. Monographisch bearbeitet von Otto Finsch.2vols.Leiden, 1867, 1868.
[137]A.Tail longer than the wings; lores and cheeks naked; the latter with narrow lines of small feathers.
S. militaris.Green; forehead red; posterior portion of back, upper and under tail-coverts with quills and tip of tail, sky-blue; under side of tail dirty orange-yellow. Wing, 14.00; middle tail-feathers, 15.00; tarsus, 1.08.Hab.Northwestern Mexico to Bolivia.
Synonymy:Psittacus militaris,Linn.S. N.1767, 139.Sittace militaris,Finsch, Die Papageien,I, 1867, 396.
B.Tail about equal to the wings; lores and cheeks feathered.
S. pachyrhyncha.Green; the forehead, edge of wings, and the tibiæ red; greater under wing-coverts yellow. Wing, 8.00 to 10.00; middle tail-feather, 6.50.Hab.Southern Mexico (Jalapa and Angangueo), given probably erroneously from the Rio Grande of Texas. Synonymy:Macrocercus pachyrhynchus,Sw.Syn. Birds Mex.inPhilos. Mag. I, 1827, 439,No.79.Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha,Bon.Tableau des Perroquets,Rev. et Mag. de Zoöl.1854, 149.Sittace pachyrhyncha,Finsch, Die Papageien,I, 1867, 428.Psittacus pascha,Wagler, Isis, 1831, 524.Psittacus strenuus,Licht.Preis-Verzeichiss, 1830.