The skull of the male, in linear measurements, is approximately 13 (12-16) per cent smaller and 40 per cent lighter than inM. e. richardsonii. In relation to the basilar length, the skull averages slightly narrower, slightly shallower as measured in the vertical plane touching the posterior borders of the last upper molars, and the preorbital part is slightly longer. In skulls of females ofcicognanii, linear measurements average 3 (0-6) per cent less, the weight is 16 per cent less and the teeth are 5 per cent shorter. In relation to the basilar length, measurements of the skull are approximately the same or slightly less incicognanii.
In comparison withbangsi, the male sex in linear measurements of the skull and teeth averages 11 per cent less than inbangsifrom Aitkin, Minn., and 6 per cent less than inbangsifrom Elk River, but in relation to the basilar length the preorbital region is larger. The weight is approximately a fourth less. In females the measurements average less, some being the same, and in relation to the basilar length, the bullae are shorter and the skull is shallower. The weight is about the same.
Remarks.—In January, 1838, in Charlesworth's Magazine of Natural History, C. L. Bonaparte proposed for three kinds of American weasels the namesMustela cicognanii,Mustela richardsoniiandMustela longicauda.
In this paper Bonaparte indicates that he previously had written (for his Iconografia della Fauna Italica ...) an account ofMustela cicognaniiusing this same name. Fasciola XXII of the Iconogr. d. Fauna Italica, presenting his account ofMustela, like the English paper was published in the year 1838. In his article in Charlesworth's Magazine, Bonaparte refers to his book published [used the past tense] in Rome but whether it actually appeared first I am unable to determine and hence am uncertain which of the two constitutes the original description.
Reference to the Italian account suggests as basis for the nameM. cicognanii, (1) specimens possibly seen in the United States by Bonaparte, or (2) Godman's published account of the animal.
In the English publication, however, Bonaparte actually says that (1) he saw the small species in the Union [= United States]. Also, he (2) mentions his earlier written Italian account, (3) mentions that "all the [American?] naturalists" used the nameM. vulgarisfor this animal, (4) incidentally mentions Godman's account, and (5) in naming two other American species cites accounts of them by Richardson. Also, Bonaparte in this English article makes clear that when he wrote [not necessarily published] his Italian paper he did not know of the existence of two of the three American species.
In the register of mammals at the British Museum of Natural History, there appears:
43.3.3.3Mustela longicauda BonapN Amer. presented by Dr. J. Richardson4Mustela Richardsonii Bonap"5 "Cicognanii Bonap"
To the right of these entries there appears, in three lines, the notation: "The three specimens examined by Prince Canino on which he established the three species."
Every part of each of the above entries is in the hand writing of J. E. Gray, in charge of the collections from 1824 to 1840 and associated with them as Keeper until 1875. The three specimens are in good condition considering their age. The catalogue or register number shows, among other things, that they were entered in the register on March 3, 1843.
Questions which might occur to anyone are:
(1) Was there a type specimen ofMustela CicognaniiBonaparte? If so is it no. 43.3.3.5?
(2) If there was no type specimen was there a type locality? If so what is it?
Among other things that may have bearing on these questions, are these: Bonaparte in Charlesworth's Magazine appears to base the two namesMustela RichardsoniiandMustela longicaudaon Richardson's published account ofMustela erminea. At any rate immediately following each of the two names, Bonaparte writes "Nob. (M. ermineaRich. F. Bor. Amer.)." Bonaparte's other, first newly proposed name,Mustela Cicognanii, in Charlesworth's Magazine has following it only "Nob. North America," although in a paragraph above he did point out that this was the animal which all naturalists, at the time he was in America, considered asM. vulgaris.
Turning to Richardson's account (Fauna Boreali Americana, ... Quadrupeds, pp. 45-47. 1829) one finds that he recognized two species,M. vulgarisandM. erminea. Of the first he gives measurements "of an old female killed at Carlton House." Of the second species he distinguishes two varieties, the first represented by a specimen, of which he gives measurements, "killed at Fort Franklin, Great Bear Lake" and, the second variety "of a larger size, having a longer tail and longer fore-claws" he indicates the size of by giving measurements of a specimen taken "in the neighborhood of Carlton House."
The last variety is clearly the basis of Bonaparte'sM. longicauda. The specimen from which Richardson took his measurements I have been unable to locate [no. 43.3.3.3 in the British Museum, appears to be another specimen, although of the same subspecies and provided by Richardson].
The first variety of Richardson'sMustela erminea, clearly is the basis of Bonaparte'sM. Richardsonii. The specimen from which Richardson took his measurements may well be no. 43.3.3.4 now preserved in the British Museum of Natural History, but I could not be certain about this.
Richardson'sM. vulgarisis accompanied by measurements of a female which I have ascertained to my full satisfaction is the identical specimen now bearing catalogue number 43.3.3.5 said by Gray to be the specimen on which Bonaparte based his nameMustela cicognanii.
Gray probably saw his guest, Bonaparte, at work on these weasels and Gray's own written indication perhaps should be accepted at its face value. I found only 4 Richardson specimens of North American weasel in the British Museum in 1937 and it is conceivable that Bonaparte, 100 years before, actually had at hand only one specimen each of two kinds and 2 specimens of the third. This I think is not an important consideration, though, for Gray says just which specimens did serve as basis for Bonaparte's names and there is only one specimen for each name according to Gray.
But I wonder if a type specimen can bemadein this way? That is to say, after a name is published in a manner which makes it available, and if two or more specimens of the kind of animal involved, were, or may have been, available to the describer, can a person, even the author, himself,makea type specimen by saying that one particular specimen is beyond doubt the specimen on which a given name was established even though no particular specimen was designated in the original description? I incline to the view that a specimen so designated would at most be only a lectotype, unless it were a cotype.
However, if a holotype can bemadeby action such as Gray took, then (1) is no. 43.3.3.3 the type specimen ofMustela longicaudaBonaparte and, (2) is no. 43.3.3.4 the type specimen ofMustela RichardsoniiBonaparte?
Incidentally,Mustela longicaudaBonaparte whether based on no. 43.3.3.3 or on Richardson's account will continue in its present application. The same is true ofMustela richardsonii. If the basis ofMustela cicognaniiBonaparte [the diagnosis in the Iconografia d. Fauna Italica ... makes it clear that the name applies to theshort-tailedspecies] was a weasel from the eastern United States or a description of a weasel or weasels from there, the name will continue in its present application. If, instead, the name is based on no. 43.3.3.3 (from Carlton House, Saskatchewan) or on Richardson's account ofM. vulgaris, the name will apply to a different subspecies (now calledrichardsoniiandrichardsoniiwill fall as a synonym ofcicognanii) and the ermine of the eastern United States will take the next available name. Bonaparte probably named (in manuscript at least)cicognaniibefore he ever saw the specimen in the British Museum. This is indicated by his statement in Charlesworth's Magazine (1838:37) that "I havenow[Italics mine] found two [other] American species. . . ." Whereas the namesrichardsoniiandlongicaudaare based on Richardson, the namecicognanii, even if it dates from the account in Charlesworth's Magazine, appears to have a composite basis composed at the very least of (1) animals seen by Bonaparte in the United States, and (2) those calledvulgarisby some other authors. Conceivably the specimen no. 43.3.3.3 in the British Museum, was part of the basis. From the nature of the case it can be argued that there could be no type and that if someone should bring to light a specimen in, say, Philadelphia, bearing the notation "this is the specimen seen in the United States by Bonaparte" it would immediately become as important as the one in London. Any American weasel or weasels (then alive or preserved in a zoölogical collection) that Bonaparte saw in the United States probably were of the eastern United States. Bangs (1896:18-21), for one, previous to the present consideration of the namecicognanii, restricted it to the ermine of the eastern United States. Consequently, the namecicognanii, in the present account is applied to the ermine of the eastern United States. In my opinion there was and is no type. Almost certainly there was no type if the Fauna Italica appeared before the account in Charlesworth's Magazine did.
Specimens examined.—Total number, 172, arranged alphabetically by provinces and states, then (except where indication is given to the contrary) by counties from north to south within each state or province. Unless otherwise indicated, specimens are in the U. S. National Museum.Connecticut.Windham County: S. Woodstock, Woodstock Lake, 1[2].Hartford County: Windsor, 1[5].New London County: Liberty Hill, 3[75].Maine.Aroostook County: Quimby, 1[75]; Ashland 2[75].Piscataquis County: tableland on top of Mt. Katahdin, 1; Chimney Pond, 3; T. 5, R. 13, 3[5]; "vicinity of Chesnucook," 1[5]; T. 4, R. 13, 1[5]; Moosehead Lake, 7[75]; Grenville, 10[75]; Barnard, 3 (1[86]).Penobscot County: South Twin Lake, 1[2]; Lincoln, 11 (7[1], 2[14], 2[50]).Franklin County: Seven Pond Township, 7[75].Oxford County: Umbago Lake, 1[75]; Upton, 4[86]; Bethel, 1[75].Hancock County: Bucksport, 17[75]; Naskeag, 1.Lincoln County: Booth Bay, 1[5].Massachusetts.Middlesex County: Wilmington, 2; Burlington, 6 (1[75]);Worcester County: Cambridge, 5 (1[5], 3[75]); Sterling, 1[5].Plymouth County: Middleboro, 7 (1[75]).New Hampshire.Carroll County: Ossipee, 5.Rockingham County: Greenland, 1[76].Cheshire County: Dublin, 1.New York.St. Lawrence County: Ogdensburg, 1[74].Franklin County: Malone, 1[58].Lewis County: Locust Grove, 1.Warren County: Lake George, 1.Montgomery County: Amsterdam, 1.Albany County: Albany, 1[80].Rensselaer County: Berlin, 2[2]; Schoharie, 1[2].Thompkins County: Cascadilla Creek, Ithaca, 1[58].Allegany County: Ford Brook, Wellsville, 1[58].Ontario County: Phelps, 1[50].Cattaraugus County: Cattaraugus, 1[5].Ontario(localities locally north to south, then west to east).Thunder Bay Dist.: Grand Bay, Lake Nipigon, 5[86]; Macdiarmid, 2[86]; Oscar, 2[14]; 20 mi. SW Fort Williams, 1[76]; Michipicoten Island, 3[102].Algoma Dist.: Michipicoten, 1; Franz, 1[74]; Pancake Bay, 2[77].Parry Sound Dist.: French River, Georgia Bay, 1[2]; Seguin Falls, Twp. Montieth, 1[86].Sudbury Dist.: Casselman, Rathbun Twp., 1[86].Nipissing Dist.: Smoky Falls, near Kapuskasing, 4[86]; Franks Bay, Lake Nipissing, 1[86].Haliburton County: Gooderham, 1[60].Simcoe County: Orillia, 1[2]; no locality more definite than county, 1[60].Carleton County: Britannia, 5 mi. W Ottawa, 1[77]; Ottawa, 1[77]; Constant Bay, NE? of Ottawa, 1[77].Wellington County: Mt. Forest, 2[75]; Guelph, 1[31].Addington County: Buckshot Lake, Abinger Twp., 1[86].Fontenac County: Clear Lake, Arden, 1[77].Pennsylvania(by counties from west to east).Crawford County: North Shenango Township, Pymatuning Swamp, 2[9]; Linesville (3 mi. NW, 1; 3-1/2 mi. W, 2; 3 mi. W, 1; 2 mi. SW, 1; 7-1/2 mi. SW, 1) 6[9].Potter County: Cherry Springs Farm, Abbott Township, 1; 3 mi. S Inez, South Fork Sinnamahoning Creek, 1[9].Sullivan County: Lopez, 1[74].Lackawanna County: Scranton, 1[1].Wayne County: Waymart, 1.Quebec(west to east).Labelle County: Kamika [= Kiamika] Lake, 2[77]; Lacoste, 2[77]; Trout Lake, probably in this county, 2[77].Megantic County: Black Lake, 1[77].Rhode Island.Newport County: Middletown, 2[5].Vermont.Lamoille County: Mt. Mansfield, 1.Windsor County: Barnard, 1[5].
Specimens examined.—Total number, 172, arranged alphabetically by provinces and states, then (except where indication is given to the contrary) by counties from north to south within each state or province. Unless otherwise indicated, specimens are in the U. S. National Museum.
Connecticut.Windham County: S. Woodstock, Woodstock Lake, 1[2].Hartford County: Windsor, 1[5].New London County: Liberty Hill, 3[75].
Maine.Aroostook County: Quimby, 1[75]; Ashland 2[75].Piscataquis County: tableland on top of Mt. Katahdin, 1; Chimney Pond, 3; T. 5, R. 13, 3[5]; "vicinity of Chesnucook," 1[5]; T. 4, R. 13, 1[5]; Moosehead Lake, 7[75]; Grenville, 10[75]; Barnard, 3 (1[86]).Penobscot County: South Twin Lake, 1[2]; Lincoln, 11 (7[1], 2[14], 2[50]).Franklin County: Seven Pond Township, 7[75].Oxford County: Umbago Lake, 1[75]; Upton, 4[86]; Bethel, 1[75].Hancock County: Bucksport, 17[75]; Naskeag, 1.Lincoln County: Booth Bay, 1[5].
Massachusetts.Middlesex County: Wilmington, 2; Burlington, 6 (1[75]);Worcester County: Cambridge, 5 (1[5], 3[75]); Sterling, 1[5].Plymouth County: Middleboro, 7 (1[75]).
New Hampshire.Carroll County: Ossipee, 5.Rockingham County: Greenland, 1[76].Cheshire County: Dublin, 1.
New York.St. Lawrence County: Ogdensburg, 1[74].Franklin County: Malone, 1[58].Lewis County: Locust Grove, 1.Warren County: Lake George, 1.Montgomery County: Amsterdam, 1.Albany County: Albany, 1[80].Rensselaer County: Berlin, 2[2]; Schoharie, 1[2].Thompkins County: Cascadilla Creek, Ithaca, 1[58].Allegany County: Ford Brook, Wellsville, 1[58].Ontario County: Phelps, 1[50].Cattaraugus County: Cattaraugus, 1[5].
Ontario(localities locally north to south, then west to east).Thunder Bay Dist.: Grand Bay, Lake Nipigon, 5[86]; Macdiarmid, 2[86]; Oscar, 2[14]; 20 mi. SW Fort Williams, 1[76]; Michipicoten Island, 3[102].Algoma Dist.: Michipicoten, 1; Franz, 1[74]; Pancake Bay, 2[77].Parry Sound Dist.: French River, Georgia Bay, 1[2]; Seguin Falls, Twp. Montieth, 1[86].Sudbury Dist.: Casselman, Rathbun Twp., 1[86].Nipissing Dist.: Smoky Falls, near Kapuskasing, 4[86]; Franks Bay, Lake Nipissing, 1[86].Haliburton County: Gooderham, 1[60].Simcoe County: Orillia, 1[2]; no locality more definite than county, 1[60].Carleton County: Britannia, 5 mi. W Ottawa, 1[77]; Ottawa, 1[77]; Constant Bay, NE? of Ottawa, 1[77].Wellington County: Mt. Forest, 2[75]; Guelph, 1[31].Addington County: Buckshot Lake, Abinger Twp., 1[86].Fontenac County: Clear Lake, Arden, 1[77].
Pennsylvania(by counties from west to east).Crawford County: North Shenango Township, Pymatuning Swamp, 2[9]; Linesville (3 mi. NW, 1; 3-1/2 mi. W, 2; 3 mi. W, 1; 2 mi. SW, 1; 7-1/2 mi. SW, 1) 6[9].Potter County: Cherry Springs Farm, Abbott Township, 1; 3 mi. S Inez, South Fork Sinnamahoning Creek, 1[9].Sullivan County: Lopez, 1[74].Lackawanna County: Scranton, 1[1].Wayne County: Waymart, 1.
Quebec(west to east).Labelle County: Kamika [= Kiamika] Lake, 2[77]; Lacoste, 2[77]; Trout Lake, probably in this county, 2[77].Megantic County: Black Lake, 1[77].
Rhode Island.Newport County: Middletown, 2[5].
Vermont.Lamoille County: Mt. Mansfield, 1.Windsor County: Barnard, 1[5].
Ermine
Plates2,3,4,9,10and11
Mustela erminea bangsiHall, Journ. Mamm., 26:176, July 19, 1945.[Putorius]cicognani, Mearns, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 3:235, June 5, 1891.Putorius richardsoni cicognani, Bangs, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 10:18, February 25, 1896 (part).Putorius cicognanii, Cory, Mamm. Illinois and Wisconsin, p. 375, 1912.Mustela cicognanii, Aldous and Manweiler, Journ. Mamm., 23:250, August 13, 1942.Mustela cicognanii cicognanii, Bailey, N. Amer. Fauna, 49:169, January 8, 1927; Leraas, Journ. Mamm., 23:344, August 13, 1942.
Mustela erminea bangsiHall, Journ. Mamm., 26:176, July 19, 1945.
[Putorius]cicognani, Mearns, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 3:235, June 5, 1891.
Putorius richardsoni cicognani, Bangs, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 10:18, February 25, 1896 (part).
Putorius cicognanii, Cory, Mamm. Illinois and Wisconsin, p. 375, 1912.
Mustela cicognanii, Aldous and Manweiler, Journ. Mamm., 23:250, August 13, 1942.
Mustela cicognanii cicognanii, Bailey, N. Amer. Fauna, 49:169, January 8, 1927; Leraas, Journ. Mamm., 23:344, August 13, 1942.
Type.—Male, subadult, skull and skin; no. 11541, D. R. Dickey Coll.; Elk River, Sherburne County, Minnesota; November 1, 1925; obtained by Bernard Bailey, original no. A 606.The skull is complete and the teeth all are present and entire. The skin is well made and in a good state of preservation.Range.—Southern Manitoba, northeastern North Dakota, the whole of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan and northern Iowa. See figure 25 on page95.Characters for ready recognition.—Differs fromM. e. richardsonii, in that, in both sexes, least width of color of underparts averages about a third, instead of two-fifths, of greatest width of color of upper parts, and in that skulls of males are a fifth or more lighter, basilar length averaging less than 40; fromM. e. cicognanii, in that hind foot more than 40 in males, averaging 32 versus 30 in females, and in larger skull, depth of skull at plane of molars being 11.4 versus 10.0 in males and 9.1 versus 8.6 in females.Description.—Size.—Male: Twelve adult and subadult males from Aitkin, Minnesota, yield average and extreme measurements as follows: Total length, 316 (291-341); length of tail, 87 (70-101); length of hind foot, 43 (40-44). Two adults from Aitkin each weigh 170 grams.Four adult and subadult females from Elk River and Fort Snelling, Minnesota, yield average and extreme measurements as follows: Total length, 249 (240-260); length of tail, 61 (55-65); length of hind foot, 32 (30-33).Color.—As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that, least width of color of underparts averaging, in males from Minnesota, 32 (19-51) per cent of greatest width of color of upper parts. Black tip of tail in 12 male topotypes in white winter pelage averaging 52 (45-58) mm. which is 60 (53-66) per cent of length of tail-vertebrae.Skull.—Male (based on adults from Aitkin): See measurements and plates2-4. As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that: Weight of 2 adults from Aitkin, 2.2, 2.3 grams (9 subadults from T. 61 N, R. 26 W, average 1.95 grams); basilar length, 39.7 (38.5-40.7); length of tooth-rows rarely more (usually less) than length of tympanic bulla.Female (based on adults from Minnesota as listed in table of cranial measurements, which see): See plates9-11. As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that: Weight, of a subadult from T. 61 N, R. 26 W, 0.91 grams; basilar length, 32.8 (31.8-33.6); breadth of rostrum rarely equal to as much as 30 per cent of basilar length.
Type.—Male, subadult, skull and skin; no. 11541, D. R. Dickey Coll.; Elk River, Sherburne County, Minnesota; November 1, 1925; obtained by Bernard Bailey, original no. A 606.
The skull is complete and the teeth all are present and entire. The skin is well made and in a good state of preservation.
Range.—Southern Manitoba, northeastern North Dakota, the whole of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan and northern Iowa. See figure 25 on page95.
Characters for ready recognition.—Differs fromM. e. richardsonii, in that, in both sexes, least width of color of underparts averages about a third, instead of two-fifths, of greatest width of color of upper parts, and in that skulls of males are a fifth or more lighter, basilar length averaging less than 40; fromM. e. cicognanii, in that hind foot more than 40 in males, averaging 32 versus 30 in females, and in larger skull, depth of skull at plane of molars being 11.4 versus 10.0 in males and 9.1 versus 8.6 in females.
Description.—Size.—Male: Twelve adult and subadult males from Aitkin, Minnesota, yield average and extreme measurements as follows: Total length, 316 (291-341); length of tail, 87 (70-101); length of hind foot, 43 (40-44). Two adults from Aitkin each weigh 170 grams.
Four adult and subadult females from Elk River and Fort Snelling, Minnesota, yield average and extreme measurements as follows: Total length, 249 (240-260); length of tail, 61 (55-65); length of hind foot, 32 (30-33).
Color.—As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that, least width of color of underparts averaging, in males from Minnesota, 32 (19-51) per cent of greatest width of color of upper parts. Black tip of tail in 12 male topotypes in white winter pelage averaging 52 (45-58) mm. which is 60 (53-66) per cent of length of tail-vertebrae.
Skull.—Male (based on adults from Aitkin): See measurements and plates2-4. As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that: Weight of 2 adults from Aitkin, 2.2, 2.3 grams (9 subadults from T. 61 N, R. 26 W, average 1.95 grams); basilar length, 39.7 (38.5-40.7); length of tooth-rows rarely more (usually less) than length of tympanic bulla.
Female (based on adults from Minnesota as listed in table of cranial measurements, which see): See plates9-11. As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that: Weight, of a subadult from T. 61 N, R. 26 W, 0.91 grams; basilar length, 32.8 (31.8-33.6); breadth of rostrum rarely equal to as much as 30 per cent of basilar length.
Fromrichardsonii, topotypes ofbangsidiffer in that cranial measurements in males are approximately 7 (5-9) per cent less, linear measurements of teeth are 10 (9-11) per cent less and the skull is a fifth lighter. In relation to basilar length the tympanic bullae ofbangsiare longer. Skulls of females are individually indistinguishable, those ofbangsiaveraging approximately 1 per cent less in linear measurements. Comparison with the smallercicognaniiis made in the account of that subspecies.
Remarks.—Before the subspecific namebangsiwas proposed, individuals of this subspecies ordinarily were recorded in the literature asMustela cicognanii. The best single lot of material is in the zoölogical collection of the University of Wisconsin. The late naturalist Albert Lano preserved a large share of the material from Minnesota. The large series from Elk River of that same state was mostly collected by Bernard Bailey although his Aunt, Anna (Bailey) Mills, and her brother the late Vernon Bailey, at an earlier time saved some specimens from Elk River. The namebangsiwas proposed in recognition of the superior work done on American weasels by the late Outram Bangs.
From the range ofM. e. invictain the Rocky Mountains, that ofbangsiis separated by the Great Plains from a large part of which region the species is unknown.M. e. bangsidiffers frominvictain greater degree of sexual dimorphism in size, and in each sex by larger size, narrower light-colored underparts, and deeper braincase as measured at the anterior margin of the basioccipital. Inbangsithe braincase is deeper relative to the length of the skull as well as, of course, actually deeper.
Of the two subspecies whose ranges do meet that ofbangsi, it more closely resemblesrichardsoniithancicognanii. Fromrichardsonii, especially from southeastern populations of the same in which the skull is of the same size as inbangsi, the latter differs in longer hind feet. This is an average difference and by one interpretation the animals here referred tobangsimight be lumped with some of the populations from the southeastern part of the range ofrichardsoniiand the whole lot treated as intergrades betweenrichardsoniiandcicognanii. Nevertheless, the animals here referred tobangsiare not geographically intermediate betweenrichardsoniiandcicognaniiand this consideration had much to do with the decision to recognize as a separate subspecies the animals here namedbangsi.
Within the range of the subspecies there is some geographic variation; the hind feet of animals from Iowa average slightly shorter than those of animals from Minnesota and Wisconsin but are nowhere nearly so short as incicognaniiat the same latitude in the eastern United States.
It is noteworthy that the few specimens seen from Isle Royal have the long hind feet ofbangsiand not the short hind feet ofcicognaniiwhich occurs all along the northern mainland.
Because an oft cited record of occurrence even though erroneous, has a way of being repeated in later works, attention is here called to the alleged occurrence of this ermine in northwestern Ohio at New Bremen. Henninger (1921:239) published the original account of the supposed occurrence but as I pointed out in 1937 (p. 304), the specimen concerned proved upon examination to be a female ofMustela frenata noveboracensis. Henninger was misled probably by the short tail; the end of the tail had been lost and healed over before the animal's death. The present study has revealed thatM. ermineaeverywhere east of the Cascade Mountains assumes a white winter coat. Had this been known when Henninger obtained his specimen he probably would not have wrongly identified the animal from New Bremen which was in the brown, winter pelage.
Specimens examined.—Total number, 222, arranged alphabetically by provinces and states and, arranged from north to south, by counties in each state. Unless otherwise indicated, specimens are in the University of Wisconsin Museum of Zoölogy.Iowa.Dickinson County: W side Lake Okobogie, 1[48].Winnebago County: Lake Mills, 7[65].Worth County: Northwood, 1[65].Clay County: "Dewey's Pasture, near Ruthven," 1[76].Manitoba.Aweme, 4[47]; Red River Settlement, 1[91].Michigan.Isle Royal: Tobin Harbor, 1[76]; Bell Isle, 1[76]; Washington Harbor, 3[76].Ontonagon County: Ontonagon, 2 (1[76], 1[14]); T. 51N, R. 43W, S. 17, Porcupine Mts., 1[76].Gogebic County: Little Girls Point, 5[76]; Ironwood, 1[76].Iron County: no locality more definite than county, 1[76].Luce County: Tahquamenon River Falls, 1[91].Chippewa County: Sault Ste. Marie, 2[76].Emmet County: Wilderness State Park, 2[76].Cheboygan County: Univ. Mich. Biol. Station, 1[76].Washtenaw County: Ann Arbor, 1[76].Minnesota.Kittson County: no locality more definite than county, 1[2].Roseau County: Deer Township, 1[14]; Falun Township, 2[14].Marshall County?: Moose River, 5[93]; Warren, definitely in Marshall County, 1[93].Cook County: Grand Marais, 3 (2[76], 1[14]).St. Louis County: 2 mi. E Babbitt, 14[93]; Burntside [= Burnside] Lake, 1[91].Itasca County: T. 61N, R. 26W, 23.Clay County: Moorhead, 3[9].Aitkin County: Aitkin, 13 (11[60], 1[7], 1[4]).Otter Tail County: Arthur, 3[60]; Ten Mile Lake, 1[76]; Parkers Prairie, 2[75].Chisago County: North Branch, 1[60].Sherburne County: Elk River, 42 (16[91], 5[14], 20[59], 1[74]).Hennepin County: Lake Minnetonka, 1[75]; Minneapolis, 1[91]; Fort Snelling, 5 (4[2], 1[60]).North Dakota.Pembina County: Walhalla, 1[91].Nelson County: Stump Lake, 1[91].Eddy County: Brantford, 2[76].Wisconsin.Douglas County: T. 44N, R. 13W, 1; Gordon, 1.Bayfield County: Brinks Camp, Washburn, 1[2]; "near Cable," 1.Ashland County: Bear Lake, 2.Iron County: Fisher Lake, 4; Mercer, 5.Vilas County: Mamie Lake, 16[91]; Ox Bow Lake, 1[91].Oneida County: Tomahawk Lake, 1[60].Langlade County: T. 34N, R. 11E, 3.Rush County: Ladysmith, 1.Dunn County: Colfax, 2.Door County: Mink River, Ellison Bay, 1[76].Dodge County: Fox Lake, 1[50]; Beaver Dam, 12[50].
Specimens examined.—Total number, 222, arranged alphabetically by provinces and states and, arranged from north to south, by counties in each state. Unless otherwise indicated, specimens are in the University of Wisconsin Museum of Zoölogy.
Iowa.Dickinson County: W side Lake Okobogie, 1[48].Winnebago County: Lake Mills, 7[65].Worth County: Northwood, 1[65].Clay County: "Dewey's Pasture, near Ruthven," 1[76].
Manitoba.Aweme, 4[47]; Red River Settlement, 1[91].
Michigan.Isle Royal: Tobin Harbor, 1[76]; Bell Isle, 1[76]; Washington Harbor, 3[76].Ontonagon County: Ontonagon, 2 (1[76], 1[14]); T. 51N, R. 43W, S. 17, Porcupine Mts., 1[76].Gogebic County: Little Girls Point, 5[76]; Ironwood, 1[76].Iron County: no locality more definite than county, 1[76].Luce County: Tahquamenon River Falls, 1[91].Chippewa County: Sault Ste. Marie, 2[76].Emmet County: Wilderness State Park, 2[76].Cheboygan County: Univ. Mich. Biol. Station, 1[76].Washtenaw County: Ann Arbor, 1[76].
Minnesota.Kittson County: no locality more definite than county, 1[2].Roseau County: Deer Township, 1[14]; Falun Township, 2[14].Marshall County?: Moose River, 5[93]; Warren, definitely in Marshall County, 1[93].Cook County: Grand Marais, 3 (2[76], 1[14]).St. Louis County: 2 mi. E Babbitt, 14[93]; Burntside [= Burnside] Lake, 1[91].Itasca County: T. 61N, R. 26W, 23.Clay County: Moorhead, 3[9].Aitkin County: Aitkin, 13 (11[60], 1[7], 1[4]).Otter Tail County: Arthur, 3[60]; Ten Mile Lake, 1[76]; Parkers Prairie, 2[75].Chisago County: North Branch, 1[60].Sherburne County: Elk River, 42 (16[91], 5[14], 20[59], 1[74]).Hennepin County: Lake Minnetonka, 1[75]; Minneapolis, 1[91]; Fort Snelling, 5 (4[2], 1[60]).
North Dakota.Pembina County: Walhalla, 1[91].Nelson County: Stump Lake, 1[91].Eddy County: Brantford, 2[76].
Wisconsin.Douglas County: T. 44N, R. 13W, 1; Gordon, 1.Bayfield County: Brinks Camp, Washburn, 1[2]; "near Cable," 1.Ashland County: Bear Lake, 2.Iron County: Fisher Lake, 4; Mercer, 5.Vilas County: Mamie Lake, 16[91]; Ox Bow Lake, 1[91].Oneida County: Tomahawk Lake, 1[60].Langlade County: T. 34N, R. 11E, 3.Rush County: Ladysmith, 1.Dunn County: Colfax, 2.Door County: Mink River, Ellison Bay, 1[76].Dodge County: Fox Lake, 1[50]; Beaver Dam, 12[50].
Ermine
Plates2,3,4,9,10,11and41
Mustela erminea invictaHall, Journ. Mamm., 26:75, February 27, 1945; Hall, Journ. Mamm., 26:180, July 19, 1945.Putorius cicognanii, Preble, N. Amer. Fauna, 27:230, October 26, 1908.
Mustela erminea invictaHall, Journ. Mamm., 26:75, February 27, 1945; Hall, Journ. Mamm., 26:180, July 19, 1945.
Putorius cicognanii, Preble, N. Amer. Fauna, 27:230, October 26, 1908.
Type.—Male, subadult, skull and skin; no. 101122, Mus. Vert. Zoöl.; Benewah, Benewah County, Idaho; October 24, 1926; obtained by William T. Shaw.The skull has a hole in the right squamosal bone on the floor of the braincase, and lacks the hamular process of the left pterygoid. The postmolar part of the right lower jaw is missing. The teeth all are present and entire. The skin is in white, winter pelage, well made, and in a good state of preservation.Range.—Central Rocky Mountain region from Jasper Park south over Alberta, southeastern British Columbia, Washington east of the Cascades, and north and central Idaho and northwestern Montana. See figure25on page95.Characters for ready recognition.—Differs fromM. e. richardsonii, in males, by skull lighter than 1.9 grams, mastoid breadth less than 19.9, depth of skull at anterior margin of basioccipital less than 12.4, in females by corresponding measurement of depth less than 10.1, and weight of skull less than one gram; fromM. e. fallenda, in both sexes, by upper lips white (not brown), in males by skull averaging longer (37.0 versus 35.7), in females by breadth of rostrum less, instead of more, than 30 per cent of basilar length; fromM. e. streatori,gulosa, andmuricusby hind foot more than 36 and basilar length more than 35 in males and by hind foot more than 29.5 and basilar length more than 30.5 in females; further distinguished fromstreatoriby white (not brown) upper lips and fromgulosaby black tip of tail more than half length of tail-vertebrae.Description.—Size.—Male: Ten adults and subadults from central Idaho County yield average and extreme measurements as follows: Total length, 291 (272-328); length of tail, 86 (75-100); length of hind foot, 39.9 (38-44).Female: Five adults and subadults from the same locality yield average and extreme measurements as follows: Total length, 255 (245-270); length of tail, 71 (68-76); length of hind foot, 32.3 (32-33).Color.—As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that underparts in summer Marguerite Yellow or more whitish; least width of color of underparts averaging, in four females from Idaho and Montana, 38 (33-43) per cent of greatest width of color of upper parts. Black tip of tail in same specimens 38 (31-42) mm. which is 57 (52-65) per cent of length of tail-vertebrae.Skull.—Male (5 adults from Idaho County): See measurements and plates2-4. As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that: Weight, 1.5 (1.4-1.7) grams; basilar length, 37.0 (35.8-39.8).Female (illustrated by adult and 4 subadults in table of cranial measurements, which see): See plates9-11. As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that: Weight, 0.72 (0.7-0.9) grams; basilar length, 32.2 (31.6-32.8).
Type.—Male, subadult, skull and skin; no. 101122, Mus. Vert. Zoöl.; Benewah, Benewah County, Idaho; October 24, 1926; obtained by William T. Shaw.
The skull has a hole in the right squamosal bone on the floor of the braincase, and lacks the hamular process of the left pterygoid. The postmolar part of the right lower jaw is missing. The teeth all are present and entire. The skin is in white, winter pelage, well made, and in a good state of preservation.
Range.—Central Rocky Mountain region from Jasper Park south over Alberta, southeastern British Columbia, Washington east of the Cascades, and north and central Idaho and northwestern Montana. See figure25on page95.
Characters for ready recognition.—Differs fromM. e. richardsonii, in males, by skull lighter than 1.9 grams, mastoid breadth less than 19.9, depth of skull at anterior margin of basioccipital less than 12.4, in females by corresponding measurement of depth less than 10.1, and weight of skull less than one gram; fromM. e. fallenda, in both sexes, by upper lips white (not brown), in males by skull averaging longer (37.0 versus 35.7), in females by breadth of rostrum less, instead of more, than 30 per cent of basilar length; fromM. e. streatori,gulosa, andmuricusby hind foot more than 36 and basilar length more than 35 in males and by hind foot more than 29.5 and basilar length more than 30.5 in females; further distinguished fromstreatoriby white (not brown) upper lips and fromgulosaby black tip of tail more than half length of tail-vertebrae.
Description.—Size.—Male: Ten adults and subadults from central Idaho County yield average and extreme measurements as follows: Total length, 291 (272-328); length of tail, 86 (75-100); length of hind foot, 39.9 (38-44).
Female: Five adults and subadults from the same locality yield average and extreme measurements as follows: Total length, 255 (245-270); length of tail, 71 (68-76); length of hind foot, 32.3 (32-33).
Color.—As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that underparts in summer Marguerite Yellow or more whitish; least width of color of underparts averaging, in four females from Idaho and Montana, 38 (33-43) per cent of greatest width of color of upper parts. Black tip of tail in same specimens 38 (31-42) mm. which is 57 (52-65) per cent of length of tail-vertebrae.
Skull.—Male (5 adults from Idaho County): See measurements and plates2-4. As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that: Weight, 1.5 (1.4-1.7) grams; basilar length, 37.0 (35.8-39.8).
Female (illustrated by adult and 4 subadults in table of cranial measurements, which see): See plates9-11. As described inMustela erminea richardsoniiexcept that: Weight, 0.72 (0.7-0.9) grams; basilar length, 32.2 (31.6-32.8).
Fromfallenda,invictadiffers in that the skull of the male has a relatively narrower rostrum and relatively shallower braincase. Females show the same differences but the degree of difference is about as great again as in males. The teeth are almost exactly the same size in the two subspecies. The weight is the same in males but in femalesinvictais 18 per cent heavier.
Fromstreatori,invictadiffers in that males average larger in every measurement taken except that the anteroposterior diameter of the inner moiety of M1 is less; 36 per cent heavier; linear measurements of the skull are about 5 per cent larger and those of the teeth, with the one exception noted, about 6 per cent larger; relative to the basilar length the tympanic bullae are longer and the rostrum is relatively narrower. In females, measurements of the skull average 8 per cent more and those of the teeth 7 per cent more except that, as in males, the inner lobe of M1 is actually shorter. Females ofinvictaare 12 per cent heavier; relative to the basilar length the skull is narrower throughout and the tooth-rows are shorter than instreatori.
Fromgulosa,invictadiffers in that males average larger (about 12 per cent) in every measurement taken, excepting the anteroposterior diameter of M1 which is the same; 50 per cent heavier; relative to the basilar length the length of the tooth-rows and interorbital breadth are less. In females the inner lobe of M1 is smaller but every other measurement taken of the skull and teeth is more,invictaaveraging about 8 per cent larger and 22 per cent heavier; relative to the basilar length, the tooth-rows are shorter and the skull is narrower interorbitally, through the rostrum and across the zygomata.
Frommurica,invictaof corresponding sex differs in being larger in every measurement taken; males average 17 per cent larger in cranial measurements, 13 per cent larger in dental measurements and are 83 per cent heavier; corresponding percentages for females are 11, 9 and 20. Exception must again be made for the anteroposterior diameter of the inner lobe of the last upper molar which is less in females, and only slightly more in males. In males ofinvictathe tympanic bullae are longer in relation to the basilar length.
From the geographically remotecicognanii, skulls of both males and females ofinvictaare to me individually indistinguishable. There is, nevertheless, an average difference not apparent to the eye between skulls of males. If the length of the tooth-rows be taken as a standard (100 per cent), the rostrum, ofinvicta, as measured across the lacrimal processes is broader (89 rather than 84 per cent) but the width across the fourth upper premolars is less, 94 rather than 97 per cent of the length of the tooth-rows.