WARBLER.—Previous to the capture of my Boerne specimens, there were
only about seven[19] skins of this elegant Warbler in existence. It
was a rare bird at Boerne, and my own series was not brought up to a
total of seven without special exertion. The first individual made his
appearance on March 12. Within forty-eight hours from that time, under
the influence of a biting norther, the mercury sank to 29° and hovered
about that figure for several days. So that in his semi-tropical
habitat this little bird is sometimes called upon to endure pretty
severe weather. The remaining examples were taken at intervals up to
March 24, after which I saw none. I found them usually in cedar
brakes; never more than a few rods distant from them. They were
sometimes very shy, at other times easily approached, but almost
always pursued their various avocations rather silently. I did not
hear the song at all, until by this I was attracted to the last
specimen that I procured. The notes were an exact counterpart of the
song of _Dendrœca discolor_, as I heard it in Alabama, and, indeed,
for the utterances of that bird I mistook them.
By the few examples of this species hitherto existing in cabinets, the
plumage of the adult male has been represented with much green on the
back. Four of my five males conform to this pattern of coloration, but
the fifth is in a much more beautiful dress, undoubtedly showing the
male bird in full perfection. In this specimen the back is deep black,
glossy and continuous. Upon close examination, faint and irregular
traces of greenish are perceptible, but in much too slight a degree to
materially affect the groundwork. This high state of plumage greatly
enhances the bird’s beauty and renders its wearer one of the
handsomest of the _Sylvicolidæ_.
26. =Dendrœca virens= (_Gm._) _Bd._ BLACK-THROATED GREEN WARBLER.—An
uncommon migrant, first seen on March 13. Found in hardwood growth and
never in company with the preceding species. On March 25 I heard a
male singing the plaintive song so familiar in northern woods.
27. =Siurus motacilla= (_Vieill._) _Coues._ LARGE-BILLED WATER
THRUSH.—A single male taken, March 25, in one of the “oases” of the
creek.
28. =Lanivireo flavifrons= (_Vieill._) _Bd._ YELLOW-THROATED VIREO.—A
pair taken on March 25.
29. =Vireo atricapillus=, _Woodh._ BLACK-CAPPED VIREO.—One specimen,
March 27. Could I have remained a few days later, other specimens
would have undoubtedly been detected.
30. =Vireo noveboracensis= (_Gm._) _Bp._ WHITE-EYED VIREO.—Common
summer resident, first seen on March 13.
31. =Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides= (_Sw._) _Coues._ WHITE-RUMPED
SHRIKE.—Of irregular and uncommon occurrence. I obtained one specimen
of _ludovicianus_ proper.
32. =Ampelis cedrorum= (_Vieill._) _Bd._ CEDAR BIRD.—Very irregular in
its occurrence, and never common.
33. =Progne subis= (_Linn._) _Bd._ PURPLE MARTIN.—Common summer
resident. Arrived from the south, Feb. 17.
34. =Petrochelidon lunifrons= (_Say_) _Lawr._ EAVE SWALLOW.—Common
summer resident. Arrived about March 20. The cañon, to which I have
several times alluded, contained many nests of this bird.
35. =Hirundo erythrogastra=, _Bodd._ BARN SWALLOW.—Common summer
resident. A single individual seen on March 4, but no others noticed
until the 10th of the month when there was a general arrival.
36. =Stelgidopteryx serripennis= (_Aud._) _Bd._ ROUGH-WINGED
SWALLOW.—But two observed,—March 3 and 4.
37. =Pyranga æstiva= (_Linn._) _Vieill._ SUMMER REDBIRD.—One specimen
taken in April.
38. =Astragalinus tristis= (_Linn._) _Cab._ GOLDFINCH.—Rather common
winter visitant.
39. =Centrophanes ornatus= (_Towns._) _Cab._ CHESTNUT-COLLARED
LONGSPUR.—This and the following species apparently do not winter
here. I first met with them in the second week of February. They were
often associated together, sometimes with the addition of a few Horned
Larks. The present species, though not common, was the more numerous
and lingered later, being taken up to March 2.
40. =Rhynchophanes maccowni= (_Lawr._) _Bd._ MCCOWN’S
LONGSPUR.—Uncommon migrant, taken between Feb. 11 and 21.
41. =Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus= (_Bp._) _Ridg._ WESTERN
SAVANNA SPARROW.—Common, throughout my stay, in cultivated fields.
42. =Poœcetes gramineus confinis=, _Bd._ WESTERN GRASS FINCH.—Abundant
in cultivated fields and less common elsewhere, throughout my stay.
Several specimens were taken in plumage intermediate between this and
the eastern form; and one which can hardly be referred to anything but
_gramineus_ proper.
43. =Coturniculus passerinus= (_Wils._) _Bp._ YELLOW-WINGED SPARROW.—A
single specimen, Feb. 14.
44. =Chondestes grammica= (_Say_) _Bp._ LARK FINCH.—Rare during the
winter. A general arrival on March 11, after which it was common.
45. =Zonotrichia querula= (_Nutt._) _Gamb._ HARRIS’S
SPARROW.—Excepting two specimens taken by Mr. Dresser near San
Antonio, this species has no Texas record. I found it very abundant
during the winter, and in smaller numbers up to within a few days of
my departure.
46. =Zonotrichia leucophrys= (_Forst._) _Sw._ WHITE-CROWNED
SPARROW.—Uncommon winter visitor.
47. =Zonotrichia gambeli intermedia=, _Ridg._ RIDGWAY’S SPARROW.—More
common than the preceding, tarrying into March, if not later.
48. =Spizella domestica arizonæ= (_Coues_) _Ridg._ WESTERN CHIPPING
SPARROW.—Rare during the winter. More numerous after Feb. 13. This
form is new to the State.
49. =Spizella breweri=, _Cass._ BREWER’S SPARROW.—One specimen, March
5, amongst sterile hills. Doubtless is not rare in suitable
localities, of which there are none in the immediate vicinity of the
village.
50. =Spizella pusilla= (_Wils._) _Bp._ FIELD SPARROW.—Common during my
stay.
51. =Junco hyemalis= (_Linn._) _Scl._ BLACK SNOWBIRD.—Common during my
stay.
52. =Junco oregonus= (_Towns._) _Scl._ OREGON SNOWBIRD.—Uncommon. In
addition to the specimens typical of the two Juncos here given, I
acquired a series of very puzzling examples intermediate between the
two. Such connecting links between the accepted species are perhaps
best accounted for under Mr. Ridgway’s theory[20] of hybridization,
until it can be decisively shown that they are an effect of climatic
causes.
53. =Peucæa ruficeps eremœca=,[21] _Brown_. ROCK SPARROW.—This
beautiful Sparrow was uncommon though apparently resident at Boerne. I
found it altogether in rocky localities, usually in close proximity to
the creek, but occasionally upon barren hills, a mile or more from
water. It has the same shy, skulking habits which are familiar in
other species of the genus, rarely taking wing, on the approach of an
intruder, so long as rock, bush or weed affords a hiding place. The
male’s song, which I first heard on Feb. 25, is a pretty warble, not
strongly accentuated, and quite unsparrowlike,—equalling neither in
sweetness nor in quality of music, the beautiful chant of _P.
æstivalis_. Before becoming thoroughly familiar with it, I more than
once attributed it to some unknown Warbler. The call-note is extremely
fine and sharp, suggesting the _eep_ of _Ampelis cedrorum_.
54. =Melospiza fasciata= (_Gm._) _Scott_. SONG SPARROW.—Rare
throughout my stay. Specimens are not typical of this form, but are
not referable to any of the western varieties.[22]
55. =Melospiza lincolni= (_Aud._) _Bd._ LINCOLN’S FINCH.—Arrived March
4; common thereafter.
56. =Passerella iliaca= (_Merrem_) _Sw._ FOX SPARROW.—Two or three
individuals met with. This species was detected in the valley of the
Brazos by Mr. L. Kumlien,[23] but is not included in the papers of
other Texas collectors.
57. =Pipilo maculatus megalonyx= (_Bd._) _Coues._ SPURRED TOWHEE.—To
this form I refer a large series of Pipilos, which is by far the most
remarkable of the many curious series from this locality. The relation
of some specimens to restricted _maculatus_ and the variety _arcticus_
is indicated in the extract from Mr. Ridgway’s letter, under _M.
fasciata_. Other examples are links in the chain of evidence that is
gradually accumulating against the specific distinctness of _Pipilo
erythrophthalmus_. Indeed, I am not sure that they may not be
considered as establishing the intergradation between that form and
the _maculatus_ group. The extreme approach to the eastern bird is
seen in a single specimen, in which the white spotting, partially
concealed, appears upon the outer scapulars alone, and there only in
very slight measure.
58. =Cardinalis virginianus= (_Briss._) _Bp._ CARDINAL.—Abundant
resident. In a series of fifty specimens, two or three are typical,
the remainder exhibiting to a greater or less degree the characters of
both _virginianus_ as restricted and var. _igneus_. In one specimen
the black band across the culmen is hardly perceptible, but in none
does the red of the forehead reach completely to the bill.
59. =Calamospiza bicolor= (_Towns._) _Bp._ LARK BUNTING.—One specimen,
in a scattering grove of post oaks, March 24.
60. =Molothrus ater= (_Bodd._) _Gray_. COWBIRD.—A few females shot out
of flocks of the following variety, in March.
60 _b_. =Molothrus ater obscurus= (_Gm._) _Coues_. DWARF COWBIRD.—On
Jan. 20 I shot the first females that I had observed, after which they
soon became common. No males were detected until Feb. 25, but from
that time both sexes were found in abundance.
61. =Agelæus phœniceus= (_Linn._) _Vieill._ RED-WINGED
BLACKBIRD.—Abundantly represented, during the winter, but by females
only, so far as my observations went. The males are said by the
villagers to occur rarely.
62. =Sturnella neglecta=, _Aud._ WESTERN FIELD LARK.—Abundant during
my stay.
63. =Icterus spurius= (_Linn._) _Bp._ ORCHARD ORIOLE.—One individual
seen in April.
64. =Scolecophagus cyanocephalus= (_Wagl._) _Cab._ BREWER’S
BLACKBIRD.—Found throughout my stay; in great abundance up to the
middle of March.
65. =Corvus corax carnivorus= (_Bartr._) _Ridg._ RAVEN.—Uncommon.
Usually solitary, but on Jan. 28, I noticed a flock of a dozen.
66. =Corvus frugivorus=, _Bartr._ CROW.—Rare.
67. =Eremophila alpestris chrysolæma= (_Wagl._) _Coues_. MEXICAN
HORNED LARK.—Abundant up to the first week of March, after which none
were seen until March 27. From this time occasional individuals only
were observed.
68. =Milvulus forficatus= (_Gm._) _Sw._ SCISSOR-TAIL.—Arrived March
24, and became at once common.
69. =Myiarchus crinitus= (_Linn._) _Cab._ GREAT-CRESTED
FLYCATCHER.—One specimen taken March 30.
70. =Sayornis fuscus= (_Gm._) _Bd._ PEWEE.—Found rather uncommonly
throughout my stay.
71. =Caprimulgus vociferus=, _Wils._ WHIP-POOR-WILL.—One specimen
taken April 2.
72. =Picus scalaris=, _Wagl._ TEXAS WOODPECKER.—An abundant resident.
73. =Sphyrapicus varius= (_Linn._) _Bd._ YELLOW-BELLIED
WOODPECKER.—Rare and irregular.
74. =Centurus carolinus= (_Linn._) _Bp._ RED-BELLIED WOODPECKER.—The
rarest species of this family: but three seen.
75. =Centurus aurifrons=, _Wagl._ GOLDEN-FRONTED WOODPECKER.—Uncommon
resident. Unlike Mr. Sennett,[24] I found it always very shy.
76. =Colaptes auratus hybridus= (_Bd._) _Ridg._ HYBRID
FLICKER.—Uncommon and of irregular occurrence. This form does not
appear to have been met with in Texas limits before. The present
locality is at all events exceptionally southern.
76 _b_. =Colaptes auratus mexicanus= (_Sw._) _Ridg._ RED-SHAFTED
FLICKER.—One specimen, taken Jan. 2. Others doubtless occurred amongst
the shy Flickers which escaped my gun.
77. =Ceryle alcyon= (_Linn._) _Boie_. BELTED KINGFISHER.—A pair seen
on Feb. 18, one of which was shot by a friend on Feb. 21.
78. =Geococcyx calfornianus= (_Less._) _Bd._ CHAPARRAL COCK.—Though
said by the inhabitants to be usually numerous, I found it rare during
my stay.
79. =Tinnunculus sparverius= (_Linn._) _Vieill._ SPARROW HAWK.—Common
winter visitant.
80. =Accipiter fuscus= (_Gm._) _Bp._ SHARP-SHINNED HAWK.—Common winter
visitant.
81. =Cathartes aura= (_Linn._) _Illig._ TURKEY BUZZARD.—Common
resident.
82. =Catharista atrata= (_Wils._) _Less._ BLACK VULTURE.—Common
resident.
83. =Zenaidura carolinensis= (_Linn._) _Bp._ CAROLINA DOVE.—In great
numbers throughout my stay.
84. =Meleagris gallopavo=, _Linn._ MEXICAN TURKEY.—The Boerne Hotel
occasionally favored its guests with Wild Turkey obtained of ranchmen
from the surrounding country, but I did not meet with the bird myself.
85. =Ortyx virginiana texana= (_Lawr._) _Coues_. TEXAS QUAIL.—Uncommon
resident. Nearly all of my specimens lack the outer one or two joints
of all the toes,—a result, perhaps, of excessive cold.
86. =Ardea herodias=, _Linn._ GREAT BLUE HERON.—Occasionally observed.
87. =Charadrius dominicus=, _Müll._ GOLDEN PLOVER.—Uncommon after
March 9, which was the date of its arrival.
88. =Oxyechus vociferus= (_Linn._) _Reich._ KILLDEER.—Abundant
resident.
89. =Podasocys montanus= (_Towns._) _Coues_. MOUNTAIN PLOVER.—Occurs
uncommonly in the migrations. A flock of about twenty individuals
encountered on Jan. 2; two specimens taken on March 15; and a flock of
a dozen or more seen on March 17. They were very tame, but, from some
peculiar constitutional trait, difficult to kill. This Plover was not
procured in southern Texas by Mr. Sennett nor by Dr. Merrill. It was,
however, met with by Mr. Dresser,[25] and two specimens obtained in
the State by other collectors are catalogued in the ninth volume of
Pacific Railroad Reports.
90. =Gallinago media wilsoni= (_Temm._) _Ridg._ WILSON’S SNIPE.—In the
course of the winter I met with perhaps a dozen individuals, at one
particular spot in the bed of the creek, where a little grass afforded
partial cover. Specimens which I shot are exactly similar to eastern
examples in plumage, but when freshly killed all agreed in having
pale, flesh-colored legs and feet—those of the female being tinged
with greenish-yellow. So far as my own experience goes, this is a
peculiarity never seen in eastern Snipe, in which the legs and feet
are olivaceous.
91. =Actodromas maculata= (_Vieill._) _Coues_. GRASS-BIRD.—One
specimen, March 21.
92. =Actodromas bairdi=, _Coues_. BAIRD’S SANDPIPER.—One specimen,
March 16. A Sandpiper seen on Feb. 18, and two small flocks seen in
March were also probably of this species.
93. =Totanus melanoleucus= (_Gm._) _Vieill._ GREAT YELLOW-LEGS.—One
seen, Jan. 1; three others observed in the last week of March.
94. =Rhyacophilus solitarius= (_Wils._) _Cass._ SOLITARY
SANDPIPER.—One specimen, March 25.
95. =Bartramia longicauda= (_Bechst._) _Bp._ UPLAND PLOVER.—First seen
on March 22, and but few noted subsequently.
96. =Numenius longirostris=, _Wils._ SICKLE-BILLED CURLEW.—Two
observed, Dec. 21.
97. =Numenius borealis= (_Forst._) _Lath._ ESQUIMAUX CURLEW.—Rather
common migrant, first seen on March 9.
98. =Grus canadensis= (_Linn._) _Temm._ SANDHILL CRANE.—Solitary
individuals occasionally noted.
99. =Anas obscura=, _Gm._ BLACK DUCK.—Small flocks rather unfrequently
found in the creek.
100. =Chaulelasmus streperus= (_Linn._) GRAY GADWALL.—I did not detect
this species until March 25, after which I found it uncommonly.
101. =Nettion carolinensis= (_Gm._) _Bd._ GREEN-WINGED TEAL.—Rare.
First seen Feb. 6.
102. =Fulix collaris= (_Donov._) _Bd._ RING-BILLED BLACK-HEAD.—One of
three shot, Feb. 27.
103. =Mergus merganser americanus= (_Cass._) _Ridg._ GOOSANDER.—Small
flocks observed in January.
104. =Plotus anhinga=, _Linn._ SNAKE-BIRD.—A female shot by a friend,
on March 24.
To the foregoing list of species actually taken or identified beyond
question, are to be added six others which I was unable to fix
decisively. These are a Hawk, believed to have been _Ictinia
subcærulea_, seen in pursuit of a Buzzard, on March 4; a red-tailed
_Buteo_ of which I saw a pair, Feb. 26; a shy, black _Buteo_, almost
undoubtedly _Buteo abbreviatus_, frequently observed about the
village; an Owl, apparently _Strix nebulosa_, several times scared up
in an unusually dense grove of deciduous trees; a Hummer, noted a few
times towards the close of my stay; and a beautiful _Larus_ which
hovered over the stage as it forded the creek, on my return journey to
San Antonio.
=Recent Literature.=
MEMORIAL VOLUME OF GARROD’S SCIENTIFIC PAPERS.[26] Garrod’s work is
apparently not so well known in this country as it must eventually
become, forming as it does a permanent way-mark in the progress of the
science, and contributing indispensable material for the solving of the
most vexed problem in ornithology—we mean a sound, rational
classification of birds, based on morphological data according to the
theory of genetic relationship, and as such one which any considerable
number of ornithologists can agree to adopt and stand by. As is well
understood, those of us who have no classification of our own to
advance, fall back upon some convention as make-shift, practically
waiving the points at issue. As far as taxonomy is concerned, the
present attitude of ornithology is thoroughly iconoclastic; but, while
we agree that much of what has been set up must be upset, few claim to
know what ought to replace the broken images, and fewer still agree on
that point. There is nevertheless a large amount of material at hand,
the soundness and utility of which no one questions; and of late years
Garrod has been both indefatigable and successful in setting bricks and
mortar. Of the anatomical papers in the present volume, some 73 in
number, more than half relate to birds, describing conditions of the
osseous, muscular, respiratory, vascular, digestive and nervous systems
which appear to promise most of value in taxonomy, and discussing in
candid and scientific spirit, from a vantage-ground of long experience,
the bearing of the anatomical points upon classification. Of the
accuracy and high rate of reliability of these papers there can be no
question; they are sufficiently lucid to shine with their own light, and
there is a certain “finish” about them which is truly admirable. This is
seen when the author is drawing the comparisons which his extensive
knowledge enables him to adduce, and summing his conclusions. These are
always clean-cut and luminous, so that we know exactly where to find
Garrod, whether we like him and agree with him or not. It is scarcely
possible that he has been exempt from the all but inevitable tendency of
the mind’s eye to magnify the particular subjects there focussed for the
time, and so get them more or less out of perspective of the whole range
of vision; but he seems to have known and guarded against this most
scrupulously, unless, perhaps the “ambiens” muscle proved too much for
him. On the whole, we do not think that even the warm praise of the
editor, his personal friend and admirer, is too much to say, and we
quote with pleasure:
“Of his zoölogical papers indeed, the ornithological ones must probably,
on account of their more novel character, and as affording entirely new
data for the solution of the various problems connected with the
classification of Birds, which he revolutionized, be considered of the
greater importance. No future worker in that group can neglect the facts
or ideas concerning it that we owe to Garrod, and they alone suffice to
put his name in the very first rank of those who have ever studied these
creatures, and to stamp his work on Birds as truly ‘Epochmachende.’ „
Garrod’s numerous papers, covering the period of 1871–79, are scattered
through various periodicals; and it is a subject for congratulation that
they have been collected in one convenient volume, under careful
editorship. At a meeting of the Zoölogical Club to consider the wish of
friends to possess some permanent memorial of Garrod, it was decided,
with wisdom and good taste which none can impugn, “that the most
appropriate and desirable one would be the publication, in a collected
form, of all the papers published by Garrod in various scientific
journals and periodicals, with a portrait and memoir of the author.”
This decision has been ably carried into effect by Mr. Forbes, whose own
contributions to the same subject already prove him to be one on whom
the mantle may fittingly descend. We wish there were more work of this
kind, even if not of the same highest quality, done by our own
countrymen; but at present no one of them seems especially interested
excepting Dr. Shufeldt, whose studies thus far possess much value and
give still more promise. Noticing only two or three American names on
the list of subscribers, we venture to hint that the work may be
procured by others in the usual way.
We cannot of course go into any examination of these papers in an
editorial notice like the present, or even adduce the leading results of
the author. It must suffice to say that among them is an entirely new
classification of birds, primarily based upon the ambiens. Among the
more important papers we may mention those on the carotid arteries; on
certain muscles of the leg (Garrod’s _pièce de resistance_); on the
anatomy of Pigeons, of Parrots, and of Passerine Birds; and on the
trachea in _Gallinæ_. All these are of general import, bearing on broad
questions of taxonomy, as distinguished from minor papers, however
valuable, in which special points are examined. The editor has done well
to preserve the original pagination of the text and numeration of the
illustrations for facility of citation, and the plates are said to be
faithfully reproduced.—E.C.
SHUFELDT’S OSTEOLOGY OF THE NORTH AMERICAN TETRAONIDÆ.[27]—This
osteological memoir is, so far as we know, the most complete of any on
American birds of one group. In general the descriptions, with the aid
of the numerous plates, can be easily understood. In treating of the
skull Dr. Shufeldt adopts the old theory that it is nothing but the
modified end of the back bone, and gives a diagramatic figure of the
skull of _Centrocercus_ much like that given by Owen of the Ostrich.
This view will of course be rejected by all who do not consider the
membrane and cartilage bones of the skull to be from the same source.
The use of “hyoid arch” when speaking of all the tongue bones is, we
think, liable to lead many young students astray; we would suggest
“hyobranchial arches,” or “hyoid arches.”
A point of considerable interest is a small ossicle which occurs at the
inner side of the II metacarpal—III metacarpal of Dr. Shufeldt’s
homologies of the hand—near its base. This bone is compared to the
pisiform bone of the Mammalia by the author. Besides this, two proximal
and two distal carpal bones are found, just as in the chick. Thus the
chick and the young _Centrocercus_ have the same structure of the hand
except the presence of a IV metacarpus in the first and a “pisiform” in
the second. We notice that the “index” is described as being composed of
only one phalanx; this we believe to be an oversight of the author; at
all events most of the European Gallinæ have two phalanges, the last one
bearing a claw. On reference to fig. 57 it will be seen that the distal
end of the first phalanx in _Centrocercus_ is very large and looks as if
there should be another joint. As regards the tarsus, Dr. Shufeldt has
been able to demonstrate the existence of a fibulare, tibiale, and
intermedium, which ultimately become anchylosed with the tibia. Dr.
Shufeldt also states that as a whole the different parts of this
skeleton in _Centrocercus_ are slow to anchylose, thus rendering the
bird an extremely favorable one for the study of the separate elements
of the skeleton.
The description of the osteology of _Lanius ludovicianus
excubitorides_,[28] by the same author, is short, concise, and may be
summed up in the statement that the skeleton of this bird is strictly
Passerine.—J. AMORY JEFFRIES.
ILLUSTRATIONS OF OHIO NESTS AND EGGS.[29]—We are glad to record the
progress of this great work, of which we have had former occasions to
speak so highly. The ninth fascicle is the last which has reached us,
carrying the number of plates to twenty-seven, each with its sheet or so
of letter-press. The high standard of the work is on the whole
maintained, although, to our eye at least, the plates lack somewhat of
the peculiar attractiveness that the earlier ones had for us. It may,
however, be only the charm of novelty that we miss; and there is
certainly no falling off in the conscientious endeavor to unite fidelity
to nature with artistic excellence in depicting these beautiful objects.
Should the project be carried to completion, the work will certainly
become a standard of reference. It deserves to be better known and more
widely circulated than it appears thus far to have become, and we trust
that time will serve to make its merit fully appreciated.