Sp Issued February 29, 1908. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - BUREAU OF BIOLOGICAL SURVEY-—BULLETIN No. 32 y FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS BY W. L. McATEE ASSISTANT, BIOLOGICAL SURVEY £ x WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1908 6. HART MERRIAM, Chief | 7 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924090192620 Bul. 32, Blological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. Piate |. CARDINAL -AND GRAY GROSBEAKS. {Top figure, male cardinal; middle figure, male gray grosheak; bottom figure, female cardinal.] BREUKER & KESSLER CO. PHILADS Issued February 29, 1908. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE BUREAU OF BIOLOGICAL SURVEY—BULLETIN No. 32 C. HART MERRIAM, Chief ° FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS BY W. L. McATEE ASSISTANT, BIOLOGICAL SURVEY MOTTON ‘ WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1908 ORN ITH one 616 * P24 Mil - |9Os.., LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. U.S. Department or AGRICULTURE, Bureau or Brorocican Survey, Washington, D. C., November 1, 1907. Sir: I have the honor to transmit henewithi for pilbieatiu as Bulletin No. 32 of the Biological Survey a report on the food habits . of the grosbeaks, by W. L. McAtee. The grosbeaks are a small group of finches, hitherto more widely appreciated for their bright plum- age, sweet song, and attractiveness as cage birds than for their serv- ices to agriculture. These are here shown to be of such character as to entitle the several members of the group to every consideration at the hands of the farmer. The illustrations which accompany this paper are considered essen- tial to a proper understanding of the text. Respectfully, H. W. Hensuaw, Acting Chief Biolagical Survey. Hon. Jamss WILson, y Secretary of Agriculture. 2 ee CONTENTS. Introduction pct cn a eh a lle een ee aie WA oo on ke ere ec etine ocus pina ci ke deanna mem ESC NE A os oe See garcia eee generac Economic relations_....______________-_-----------------------~--- W OSUCGULe: Foe cee i seecekuies aeG races aee eee ba eseae Agim PO00= 2 225.6 2222 a a a SS eas pidcrot NE So! Mae OR ee ae aS GS a eR yt ame TE om Summary__---_--_--_--__ sete emda eae List of seeds, fruits, and invertebrates enteNos i.e eee cee Ga SSG k oon no eee ee ee ed eee ee entne einai Appearance, distribution, and habits________________---____-------. Economie relations ___________.-..---__--_--------__----=--_-_----- VOID FOO soa reer Go ween oe oe seemeatee ates Animal TO0d e222 32 eS ee ee i Mineral master oeo23 22 ooo leek ee Pe ete a eld ae eee ite List of seeds and invertebrates eaten___._____________------_------ Rose-breasted grosbeak Fe aa ee Ne Appearance, distribution, and habits__---__._______-____ Be eee Economic relations ______.___-----------_-----__-_-_-__-_.--- VOROTHOE L000 cance nema sme cae Sohn ineabeecihauaiaeea cam Animal food ___._-._-____2_-_-__--_----_--_- See er ROSE ens GaSe as ees rs wae rs een ees a ice wie lex oe ae eee ae reece area ae List of seeds, fruits, other vegetable substances, and invertebrates Black-headed grosbeak ‘Appearance, distribution, and habits_ : MCOnOMmIG PEMA TONS) on. wea tet ee eee ee eee Wepetablesto0dys22s-t Soe t e ee ee ke ee ARTA T 10 aI 2 GE papa a a tae a ehh AN aay EI Nestlings: 22. -oceee ceo o ees eesaee es a it Se os estas List of seeds, fruits, and invertebrates eaten_______________________ Blue wrosbeak =. 2-252 ee i es es ee Appearance, distribution, and habits__.--_-----____.-________ Economic relations _--_--_-------------_-- ese en eee See ce Vegetablé food ....--.2------s2se2csevessae ea eeed eee Animal 1000..22- -sscccseaecss saeco Sete eee ceases Young ~—— e 2 = od LAER LED? | 65 eee Ee ea em A - List of seeds, fruits, and invertebrates eaten Relations of grosbeaks and other birds to parasitic insects_.__.._________ General conclusion _.____--_------_--_---_-____-_._____.-_-- 55 86 ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATES. eS Page. Piate I. Cardinal and gray grosbeaks : Frontispiece II. Seeds and fruits eaten by grosbeaks__________________________ 10 III. Black-headed and rose-breasted grosbeaks________»___________ - B4 IV. Blue grosbeaks_______._--- ee 78 TEXT FIGURES. Wie. 1. Seeds of smartweed ____..______________-_-_---_------_--- ee “1, 2. Seeds of cockspur grass___________________---_-__-_ eee 12 8. Seeds of blue vervain_________________ eee ee eee 12 4. Seeds of ribgrass ________________-___-___ ee 12 5. Seeds of corn gromwell_____-__----_------__--------------_-_- 13 6. Seeds cf ragweed __________--__-__--___-______--____-___ ee 13 7. Caterpillar hunter _.-_-____________-__- ee 14. 8. Bollworm or corn-ear worm_____________--_-____---_____-_____ 16 9: (Cotton, eut-wormttt. cn se 2223 bee 16 10, Zebra; caterpillar: 2.3, 06 eee ete 17 11. Harvest-fly a Se ie ee ae ee ae ee eS 8 ce oe 17 Diy Pe UU a Seis a we es es SER alee tare nial ar At ag eh ee ott ae 19 es Sa F152 6 a eS eR ee 19 14, Rose-beetle __.__-__-__-_ SerSee Re UES Ean een aad as USES eee 20 15. A flower eating scarabeid_______________--____________ LL ee 20 16. Locust leaf-miner_________ pesraes eaieey hes s C0 n 21 17. Seeds of yellow foxtail_______________-_____-__ eee 29 18. Seeds of rough tumbleweed__. _-_-_________-_-___-____ Reems 29 19. Cotton boll weevil___.___-__. _---___-___-_--- ee 30 20. Cotton, worth. 225-252 ---ssceclcce eee bebeeteccasccese ote 31 21. Seeds of black bindweed____--__________+-----4----_-~-___-____ 41 22. Pine: DUDRESU.<<5604-0 ances eoemeaceeeeeosee eee ate cae 44 23, Seed. corm ‘scarab td ae ew 45 BA. (PWM CUnCUlNO ss =n. sss eh ek ed he 46 25. Potato. beetle... 2222 -a2 52 ons eeosa secu esses essen ess asec 47 26. Spotted cucumber-beetle ________-_____--___-_--_-__ ee 49 27. Fall cankerworm -__._--__.----------- eS ean 51 28> ATM WVOP 8 oo es ee ee ee een 51 29. Orchard tent-caterpillar___.__.._.-_.--__-___-_- eee 52 30. Gipsy moth _________-___--___ Beer op epee eae or, 52 31, Brown-tail. moth -...-~---.---- 4-220 cc usec cee eeu e ee 53 32. Buffalo tree-hopper..__.___..-_-__-__----------_-__-_-__--__-_- 54 33. Australian ladybird____-____-_-__--____________. 2 ee 69 of, Coline moth 2c ees ple i re tale 7 35. Spring cankerworm___._.-.-.--_-___-__--.__.-+--_.--_- ae 73 30>. Blaielesolive scales. hig 8 ee eee hose ee ee eras 73 87. Seeds of green foxtail _-____..__- ee eee ee eee 81 38. Purslane caterpillar______-----_.---_._.------_-_.-_-__._-____. _ 82 389. Lesser migatory locust._--__------.-.-----_-~-__-_-____---_u____ 83 40. Coral-winged locust .-_----------------.-.. See een ee eee 84 4 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. INTRODUCTION. Two distinct groups of finches or sparrows are commonly known as grosbeaks. One of these, which includes the pine and evening grosbeaks, is of little practical importance, since its members breed and pass most of their lives in mountainous regions, or in the northern parts of North America. The other group includes the cardinal, gray, rose-breasted, black: -headed, and blue grosbeaks, which spend either the summer or the entire year within agricultural regions of the United States. Hence their food habits are of considerable im- portance to the farmer. The members of the first-named group may be dismissed with the statement that during the period when they occur in non-mountainous districts their food consists largely of wild seeds and berries. Appar- ently the best relished are those of mountain ash, choke cherry, box elder, white ash, and maple, and of spruce, red cedar, and other con- iferous trees. The food habits of the second group are treated in detail in the following pages. CARDINAL. (Cardinalis cardinalis. Plate I, Frontispiece.) DISTRIBUTION AND HABITS. The brilliant and easily recognized cardinal ranges over much of North America. It occurs from southernmost Mexico and northern Central America north to New York, Ontario, and northern Iowa, and west to central Kansas, Arizona, and Lower California. In parts of this area the size and color have been so modified by climatic _and other causes that 12 varieties or subspecies are distinguishable. Five of these reside in the United States, and while they bear no dis- tinctive vernacular names, the species as a whole is well supplied, being variously known as cardinal grosbeak or cardinal, Virginia nightingale, redbird, and also as the crested or topknot redbird, in distinction from the summer redhird or tanager. The cardinal is resident wherever found; that is, the neighborhood where the bird rears its young is its home throughout the year. It is most abundant perhaps in the Southern States, where almost univer- 5 6 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. sally it is known as the redbird, and is often kept as a household pet. Affection for the bird, however, is not confined to the South, for its loud, ringing song, bright plumage, and vivacious manner make it a favorite wherever it lives. When winter’s snows cover its favorite feeding grounds the redbird becomes bolder and seeks its fare about” sheds and barns and even among the horses’ feet. Spring return- ing, its natural food supplies are once more available, and then the cardinal mostly frequents hedges, fence rows, and brushy thickets. The cardinal is one of the few birds which sings throughout the year, although, of course, its songs are rendered more frequently and in greater perfection during the breeding season. The nest is loosely built and generally is placed in a bush or vine, often in the densest tangles; in it three or four speckled eggs are laid. The first set of eggs usually is completed in May, but the second clutch is sometimes postponed until late summer. The cardinal is very sensitive to any interference in its domestic affairs, and un- finished nests and even those containing full complements of eggs are ‘deserted upon slight provocation. Hence one who would have cardinals for neighbors must see to it that the birds’ privacy is un- disturbed. The male redbird is a model parent, rushing to the de- fense of the nest in every emergency, doing a great share of the feeding and otherwise caring for the young. The first birds of the year usually begin to shift for themselves about midsummer. The nest of the redbird is often within a few feet of the ground, and this circumstance leads to the destruction of many ‘sets of eggs and broods of young by snakes, cats, and prowling wild mammals. Hence the bird needs protection, and when this is afforded it easily maintains its numbers. : ECONOMIC RELATIONS. As mentioned above, the cardinal has ever been a favorite cage bird, and in some localities in the south great numbers have been trapped and sold into captivity. In times past it has suffered greatly also from the persecution of millinery collectors. Despite legal enactments against the killing of birds for hat gear, even yet the practice has by no means ceased, and among other useful birds the cardinal still suffers to a greater or less degree. In the District of Columbia cardinals were noted on hats as late as 1906. The extent of the former traffic in wild birds for cage purposes was remarkable. “Thousands of mockingbirds, cardinals, indigo birds, and other bright-plumaged species were formerly trapped for sale in this country and abroad, and so assiduously did the bird trap- pers ply their vocation that in some lacalities these species were al- most exterminated.” @ J @T, §. Palmer, Yearbook, Department of Agriculture, 1905, pp. 557-558. TRAFFIC IN CARDINALS. ic ia Referring to the cardinal in particular. Nuttall* makes the state- ment: ‘ So highly were these birds esteemed for their melody that, according to Gemelli Carreri [who wrote in 1699], the Spaniards of Havana, in a time of public distress and scarcity, bought so many of these birds * * * that the sum expended, at ten dollars apiece, amounted to no less that 18,000 dollars. The liking of the islanders for this bird has suffered no abatement in later days, according to W. E. D. Scott,’ who wrote in 1889: “ The cardinal is in great demand as a pet by the Cubans, and on that account is a regular feature of the auction rooms, being supplied from the northern keys and the mainland” [of Florida]. However, recent laws, while they have not wholly put an end to these baneful practices, have greatly restricted them, and the cardinal, along with other insectivorous birds, is nowadays comparatively well protected. That from an economic standpoint the bird deserves complete protection, the following discussion of its food habits will make clear. Four hundred and ninety-eight stomachs of this species have been examined. They were collected during every month of the year -and in twenty States, the District of Columbia, and Ontario. But for the fact that this material is unevenly distributed, seasonally and geographically, the results obtained from its examination would be perfectly satisfactory. As it is, Texas is much more completely - represented than any other State, and May than any month, while the feeding habits for June and October are known only from exam- ination of a very small number of stomachs. These conditions neces- sarily affect the results, but in view of the large number of stomachs, it is believed that a fairly correct idea of the normal food habits of the species has been: obtained. As a result of our investigations it appears that, for each of the twelve months, the cardinal averages 28.99 percent of animal food and 71.01 percent of vegetable. The maximum percentage of animal food for any one month is 78.4, being the average for 123 birds taken in May. The minimum is 4.9 for 41 birds in January. VEGETABLE Foon. It is generally stated that the cardinal is largely, if not entirely, vegetarian. While this statement is perhaps too strong, the result of the present. investigation leaves no doubt that vegetable prod- ucts compose the redbird’s main subsistence at nearly all times of the year. In only one month do they constitute less than half the food, while for the erftire year they average 71.01 percent. Grain amounts to 8.73 percent; wild fruit, only the seeds of which are usually ‘eaten, composes 24.17 percent; weed and other seeds 36.38 percent, and miscellaneous vegetable substances 1.73 percent. @Manual of Ornithology, The Land Birds, 1832, p. 525. > Auk. VI, 1889, p. 324, quoting Atkins, ss 8 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. GRAIN. A little more than 7.1 out of a total of,8.73 percent of grain eaten by the cardinal grosbeak is corn, while other cereals, including wheat, oats, sorghum, and rice, constitute the remaining 1.62 percent. Eleven birds had eaten oats, 4 wheat, 2 sorghum, and 1 rice, but so trifling is the percentage of these grains that practically no damage is done except under very unusual conditions, such as the concentration of a great number of redbirds in a small area; but this is improbable, because the redbird usually is nongregarious. , In regard to corn, however, which was eaten by 68 of the birds examined, more extended consideration is desirable. The redbird’s fondness oy Indian corn is noted by many writers, but extensive injury to the crop is charged by very few. Leverett M. Loomis,* in writing of the birds of South Carolina, says the cardinal is “ held in considerable ill repute because of its alleged depredations on newly planted corn.” A correspondent in Alabama writes that the redbird is injurious to’corn in the roasting-ear stage, and that it also “ pulls the corn in the spring when it is just up with two or three leaves.” Little direct evidence concerning the redbird’s depredations on corn is derivable from our examinations, because none of the birds studied . were collected in newly planted fields or where corn was exposed to attack. It should be stated, however, that during March, April, and May, which months cover the planting seasons from southernmost United States to Canada, less than the average amount of corn is con- sumed. Corn constitutes a greater proportion, of the food in January than in any other month, and practically all eaten at this season is waste. So also in November and December, when corn makes up 4 and 7 percent, respectively. Waste grain is often eaten in spring and even in midsummer, according to observations by the writer. The cardinal is said to bore into grain stacks and also to visit corn- cribs in winter, but probably it does so only under stress of unusual circumstances, as deep snow, and in all likelihood the damage is trivial. Lining the crib with medium-meshed wire netting, which can be done at small cost, will prevent access by the birds, and at the same time guard against attacks of rodents and poultry, while in no way interfering with the necessary ventilation. Considerable corn is eaten by the redbird during June, July, and August, and a portion of this may be pilfered from the standing crop. At this season, however, the birds are scattered, and it is not likely that much damage results in any one locality. From the above it appears that present evidence does not suffice to determine the exact relation of the redbird to the corn crop, although, so far as it goes, it is in the bird’s favor. To summarize: ¢ Auk, VII, 1890, p. 125. i | WILD FRUIT EATEN BY CARDINAL. 9 Very few complaints have been made of attacks on corn by the red- bird. Though this evidence is negative, it possesses some weight, since accusations against serious grain pests are always numerous and emphatic. The greatest proportion of corn is eaten in winter, hence is waste; and finally, the redbird does not flock habitually, and never at a season when corn is exposed to attack. For these reasons it may be concluded that the cardinal’s depredations on corn are of little consequence. ' WILD FRUIT, Wild fruit, or rather the seeds of wild fruit, pulp being present in very few stomachs, was eaten by 312 of the redbirds examined, and, with the exception of weed seeds, is the largest item of the vegetable food. Of all fruits wild grapes are most important. From November to April their seeds constitute 17 percent of the cardinal’s fare. They were eaten by 178 birds and in every month; forming on the average 11.9, percent of the subsistence throughout the year. Three species, the summer grape (Vitis aestivalis, Pl. II, fig. 8), the frost grape (V. cordifolia), and the bullace or southern fox grape (V. rotundi- folia) were identified, and there is no doubt that the redbird feeds upon all kinds of wild grapes growing within its range. Although wild grapes are such favorite food, they seldom are swallowed whole, only one or two entire grapes betng found in the stomachs. Further, very few entire seeds are swallowed. The seeds are generally crushed -and ground by the powerful beak into such small bits that their iden- tification is very difficult. The presence of great numbers of fruit seeds with little or no pulp is accounted for by well-known habits of the bird. It searches con- tipually among leaves and rubbish on the ground, where it secures many of the seeds and shriveled fruits. It also gathers dried berries from the vines in winter. The fruits of various dogwoods rank next to grapes in the red- bird’s regimen. They were eaten by 52 birds and constitute 3.97 percent of the total food examined. Rough-leaved (PI. IT, fig. 6) and flowering dogwood (PI. II, fig. 5) seeds were identified. Any one familiar with.the intense bitterness of these fruits will admit that the cardinal possesses considerable individuality of taste. All fruits united, other than cornel berries and grapes, form 8.3 percent of the annual food. Most important among them are black- berries and raspberries, which ‘were eaten by 34 birds. Mulber- ries were eaten by 31, and hackberries by 23 redbirds. Among the latter fruits two species were identified—the common hackberry or sugar berry (Celtis occidentalis, Pl. II, fig. 2) and the southern hackberry (C. mississippiensis). The fost named was eaten by nearly 20 cardinals collected in one locality in Texas. Smilax seeds, iden- 10 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS.” tified as of the bristly or bamboo greenbrier (Smilax bona-noz), which are almost as hard as wood, were taken by 2 individuals. It would be well for humankind if more birds were fond of the seeds of these detestable vines. One cardinal ate seeds of Solomon’s seal (Polygonatum biflorum). Cherries also are on the redbird’s bill of fare. One correspondent states that redbirds filch cultivated varieties, but as none appeared in any of the stomachs examined, the occurrence probably is exceptional. Chokecherries are consumed, however, and Dr. A. K. Fisher has observed a cardina] eating the fruit of a seedling cherry (Prunus avium). Wilson says cardinals feed upon the seeds of apples, but this habit also must be rare; in the course of the present investigation no culti- vated fruit of any kind was found. Six cardinals devoured blueberries (Vacciniwm spp. including V. virgatum), three ate the aromatic berries of spice bush. (Lindera benzoin), and 6 took the purple fruit of the pokeberry (Phytolacca decandra, Pl. TI, fig. 4). The seeds of the succulent fruit of the prickly pear (Opuntia opuntia, Pl. II, fig. 9) were found in the stomachs of 3 cardinals, taken near the District of Columbia, where the plant abounds on the rocky banks of the upper Potomac. Six redbirds fed upon the drupes of sumac, including those of the poison ivy (Rhus radicans) and of the skunk bush (Aus trilobata). These fruits are sometimes eagerly sought. The writer once in winter observed a scattering flock of 50 or more redbirds feeding on the berries of scarlet sumac. : The elderberry, which is so relished by the rose-breasted grosbeak, is rather neglected by the cardinal, only 2 haying selected it. .Two also ate ground cherries and black haws, while but 1 stomach con- tained rose hips, though the bird has often been observed devouring these fruits. Juneberries (Amelanchier canadensis, Pl. I, fig. 3) and others of the same genus are eaten; both holly (lex apni and inkberry (J. glabra) are occasionally secured, as well as red cedar berries (Juniperus virginiana), the fruit of the knockaway tree (Ehretia elliptica), and red haws (Crategus sp.). In a stomach col- lected in South Carolina in January were more tlfan 12 seeds of the berry of the passion flower (Passiflora incarnata). To the above list of fruits eaten by the cardinal, various authors add the wahoo berry (Luonymus sp.), Mexican mulberry (Callicarpa americana), and drupes of the cabbage palmetto (Sabal palmetto) and saw palmetto (Serenoa serrulata). Among many items of vegetable food to be classed as miscellane- ous are some of particular interest. Acorns were eaten by a few cardinals and one bird even selected a hickory nut. The strength of bill necessary to shear into such hard seeds may be imagined, and it Bul. 32, Biologica! Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE Il. SEEDS AND FRUITS EATEN BY GROSBEAKS. (1, Wild black cherry (Prunus serotina). 2, Hackberry (Ctitis occidentalis). 8, Juneberry (Amelanchier canadensis). 4, Pokeberry (Piytolacca decandra). 5, Flowering dogwood (Cornus florida). 6, Rough-leaved dogwood (Cornus asperifolia). 7, Spiderwort (Tra- descantia virginiana). 8, Summer grape (Vitis xstivalis). 9, Indian fig (Opuntia opwn- tia). 10. Bur grass (Cenchrus tribuloides). 11, Button weed (Diodia teres). 12, Milk thistle (Mariana mariniana). 1, Natural size; 2, 5, 9, 10 (bur), magnified twice; 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, magnified three times; 3, 4, 10 (seeds), magnified four times.] s WEEDS EATEN BY CARDINAL. 11 is noteworthy that the cardinal appears to be the only one of the grosbeaks which uses its massive beak for the purpose for which it seems especially designed, namely, the cracking and grinding of hard seeds. The samaras of maple were found in a few stomachs, and in Florida Mr. C. J. Maynard ¢ observed more than 20 cardinals feeding on the seeds of a single maple. The somewhat similar winged seeds of the tulip tree also serve as food, and, according to the experience of the writer, are a favorite winter diet of the redbird around Wash- ington. Galls were eaten by 4 birds, and buds, which often have been stated to be especially sought after by grosbeaks, by only 2. WEEDS. The seeds of bindweeds, grasses, sedges, etc., form 36.38 percent of the entire food—more than half of the vegetable diet of the species. They were eaten by 361 of the birds examined, and range from 6 to 49 percent of the fare in different months, ‘the greatest quantity being consumed in winter. The seeds of the various smartweeds (fig. 1) and bindweeds (fig. 21) are of most impor- tance, having been consumed by 81 cardinals, and constituting 5.57 percent of the annual food. Six species were identified, and it is ic.1—Seeds of smart- probable that the seeds of all members of this Wrlrsiumye Carvom large genus are eaten indiscriminately. They Hillman, Nevada Ex- are among the commonest and worst weeds of — P*timent_ Station.) both dooryards and cultivated fields. Besides being notorious crop chokers and seed adulterants, smartweeds are the main support of the disastrous corn-root aphids before the latter are transferred to the corn by their ant guardians. Hence the cardinal’s habit of devouring smartweed seeds is beneficial, not only in abating direct injury by these pernicious weeds but also in tending to diminish the number of aphids by destroying their most important host plants. The seeds of foxtail grasses (figs. 17 and 37) are next in impor- tance. Foxtail is only too well known for its keen competition with cultivated crops, and is to be classed among the most troublesome weeds. Its seeds compose 3.21 percent of the cardinal’s food, 51 out of 498 birds examined having eaten-them. Bur grass (Cenchrus tribuloides, Pl. II, fig. 10) should be mentioned here, as it is pos- sible some of its seeds were wrongly classed with those of foxtail, the shelled kernels of which they greatly resemble. They have been positively identified in several stomachs. Henry Nehrling ® says car- dinals “are very fond of bur grass seeds or sand spurs * * * “Birds of E. N. A., 1881, p. 109. >Our Native Birds of Song and Beauty, II, 1896, p. 196. 12 ! FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. ‘ which are furnished: with formidable spines. This grass is a very vile weed of the southern fields and the orange groves of Florida.” The seeds of other grasses, including cockspur grass (L’chinochloa crus-galli, fig. 2), crab grass (Syntherisma sangui- nalis), and allied species, which are well-known weeds, were fed upon by 31 redbirds, yard grass (Eleusine indica) by 31, and unidentified grasses by 22. Seeds of the nearly related sedges (Carex et al.) were devoured by 41 car- Fie. 2.—Seeds of cockspur grass a - : (Echinochloa crus-galli). (From dinals, those of vervians (Verbena Hillman, Nevada Experiment hastata, fig. 3, and V. urticefolia) by ces 25. Twenty-two birds ate seeds of the well-known ragweeds (fig. 6), and 39 those of various spurges. Among the other weed seeds eaten in smaller quantities are those of dodder, a serious pest in grain crops; vetch, dock, sow thistle, plantains, includ- ing the detestable ribgrass (fig. 4) ; tum- bleweed (fig. 18), sunflower, violets, gera- niums, stargrass, spiny sida, corn grom- well (fig. 5), spiderwort (PI. II, fig. 7), lamb’s-quarters, chickweed, stick-tight, aaa : sorrel, button weed (PI. IT, fig. 11), and 5 A 8. stick-seed. To this list W. D. Doan adds Fic.3—Seeds of blue vervain . * (Verbena hastata). {From clover and partridge pea.* One plant in itiman, Nevada Experiment the above list, namely, buttonweed, is Station.) known also as alligator head in the South, where it is a bad weed in rice fields. It has been said that “ as the seeds are about the color of the soil they are not easily seen and are not apt to be picked up by birds.” This is a mistake, however, for these seeds are devoured by many kinds of birds, and some, as the bobwhite, eat large numbers co Fic. 4.—Seeds of ribgrass (Plantago lanceolata). (From Hillman, of them. Nevada Experiment Station.) After plants have seeded it is impossible for man appreciably to diminish the number of seeds. But this work is the peculiar function of a Bull. 3, Agr. Exp. Sta., W. Va., 1888, p. 74. , CARDINALS AS WEED DESTROYERS. 13 seed-eating birds, and their great value to the farmer consists in , the service they render in this direction. The warfare against seeds, so costly to him, is waged by the whole body of sparrows and other seed-eating birds year in and year out without cessation. Were it not for them the number of weeds would be vastly greater and the re- sulting damage cor- respondingly larger. How great this dam- age is will appear from the statement that the loss to the Fc. 5.—Seeds of corn gromwell (Lithospermum arvense). (From Hillman, Nevada Experiment Station.) wheat interests of Minnesota from dockage, largely due to the presence of weed seed, is about $2,500,000 annually.e Moreover, conditions in Minnesota are not. exceptional, and in every State the total annual loss from weed seeds is very great. So far, then, as farmers can protect and increase the number of ,weed-seed eating birds to that extent will they reap the benefit of increased service from these faithful servants. The redbird eats the seeds of many of the most harmful weeds, making more than a third of its subsistence upon them. Hence it occupies a very impor- tant place among the weed-destroying birds, and should be prized accordingly. “ ANIMAL Foo. Though in quantity much less than the vegetable food, the animal _ portion of the cardinal’s diet is much more diverse and is comprised in no less than six of the natural classes. These are myriapods, centi- pedes, insects, spiders, bivalves, and _ univalves. Insects are vastly more important than the others ; AD es -and constitute cee Se Lit MANIA Mepetaere Beta ORB onkok 29108 7 percent, the total proportion of animal matter consumed. The percentage is appor- tioned among the orders of insects as follows: Wasps 0.92, bugs 3.72, butterflies (and caterpillars) 5.1, grasshoppers 6.42, and beetles 10.48. 4 Bull. 95, Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1906, p. 195. 14 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. The last-named group includes two mainly beneficial families, the ground beetles (Carabide) and the fireflies (Lampyride). Since the destruction of these beetles by the cardinal tends to neutralize the _ good done in other ways, it is important to understand thoroughly the nature of the bird’s relation to them. Among the most beneficial of beetles are the caterpillar hunters (Calosoma, fig. 7), which ascend trees in quest of their prey, a rare habit among ground beetles. Thus these beetles attack caterpillars in a way others are unable to do. Two cardinals ate beetles of this genus. Another large carabid (Pasimachus), an enemy of grasshoppers and the army worm, was eaten by one redbird. Others devoured include Harpalus caliginosus, which is the bulky black beetle often seen feeding on the flowers of ragweed and which is evidently not entirely predaceous, and a larva of the nearly related beetle Dicaelus. Three birds captured individuals of the medium-sized but very’ hard Scarites subterraneus, which generally hides under stones by day. Specimens of two species of Anisodactylus and one beautiful blue Callida also were eaten. In all 34 red- birds fed upon beetles of this useful family, but each must have eaten spar- ingly, for the beetles compose but 0.75 percent of the entire food, an amount too small to be reckoned against the con- sumer of more than 8 times that quantity of grasshoppers, in addition to many other injurious insects. Fireflies were eaten by only 4 cardi- r nals, one of the birds obtaining the com- Fic. 7—Caterpillar hunter (Caloe mon black and yellow soldier beetle Be en gate eee ee (Chauliognathus marginatus), which commonly feeds on the pollen of midsummer blossoms, and another, one of the small black fireflies (Telephorus pusillus), the larve of which are enemies of some common agricultural pests. Fireflies are eaten in such moderate measure that it is impracticable to assign them a percent, and we may conclude, so. far as the present data go, that the cardinal does né appreciable injury to this group of insects. The wasps and similar insects (Hymenoptera) include among their number many beneficial parasitic species, and for that reason their status as food of the redbird must be looked into. Fifty-nine of the grosbeaks examined had eaten these insects, but they amount to only 0.92 percent of the total food. None were positively identified as parasitic species, while some injurious forms were distinguished. Eleven cardinals ate ants, including the harvesting ants (Pogono- mynmex) and the small reddish Lasius, which foster plant lice, nota- bly the corn root aphids. One grosbeak ate a sawfly, which also is an insect of unsavory reputation. — , INSECT FOOD OF CARDINAL. 15 The cardinal is frequently alluded to in ornithological literature as preying upon bees. Peter Kalm published the first of these state- ments in 1770, and the later ones were probably suggested by, if not copied from, his. Wilson (1831), Nuttall (1832), and later‘ authors reiterate the charge, though the context does not show that any of them knew of the matter at first hand. It is quite possible that, so far as this particular trait is concerned, the cardinal has been con- founded with the similarly colored but otherwise very different sum- mer redbird, which is well known to prey upon bees. At any rate, it is significant that the present examination did not reveal a single bee among the insect food of the redbirds. On the whole, the cardinal shows no great relish for Hymenoptera, and'among the species eaten those injurious to man and the less valuable kinds predominate. Among other possibly beneficial insects, the redbirds had eaten an assassin bug and a remarkable predaceous neuropteron (d/antispa brunnea), also a nymphal and an adult dragon fly. The latter crea- tures probably do as much harm in destroying young fish as good in preying upon insects. At most, not more than 2 percent, probably much less, of the cardinal’s food consists of useful insects, while 12 times as much consists of injurious species, the destruction of which is a benefit. One of the most important constituents of the major proportion is Lepidoptera. They compose 5.08 percent of the annual subsis- tence, amounting, however, in May to 26.71 percent. The adults taken consist of 5 moths and 1 butterfly, which together make up 0.17 percent of the food. Caterpillars are much more relished and 137 redbirds fed upon them, sometimes obtaining from 7 to 18 each. The cotton worm (Alabama argillacea, fig. 20), which formerly was a serious pest and which even now spoils a late-planted crop, was eaten by 3 cardinals. There is evidence that the bird habitually feeds upon this insect, and as early as 1885 C. V. Riley remarked ¢ that “ birds -are of incalculable benefit” in combating the cotton worm, and the cardinal is one of those which prey upon it more or less persistently. A second cotton pest, the bollworm (Heliothis obsoleta, fig. 8), which is familiar also as the corn ear-worm, is occasionally devoured, and a third, the cotton cutworm (Prodenia ornithogalh, fig. 9) is greatly relished. Ninety-six of the latter were eaten by 31 cardinals from the Texas cotton fields. The destruction of cotton insects by the redbird is important, since the bird~is numerous in the cotton re- gion and feeds upon the worst enemies of the plant. The sphinx caterpillars, so many of which are injurious to culti- vated plants, were eaten by 20 redbirds. The species identified are the laurel sphinx (Sphinx kalmiw) and the purslane sphinx (Deile- phila lineata, fig. 38), the latter being a general feeder and attacking @Pourth Ann. Rep. U. S. Ent. Comm. 1885, p. 88. 18848—Bull. 32—08——2 16 | FOOD HABITS OF THE -GROSBEAKS. several garden and field crops. Measuring worms were eaten by 2 Fic. 8.—Bollworm or corn-ear worm (Heliothis obsoleta). (From Quaintance, Bureau of Entomology.) cardinals, the ze- bra caterpillar (fig. 10) of the cabbage by 1, while 2 secured chrysalides of the notorious codling moth. It thus ap- pears that the lepidopterous food of this grosbeak contains a number of serious pests, and the bird ac- complishes much good by destroy- ing them. A somewhat larger number of cardinals than ate caterpillars preyed upon grasshop- pers, and these in- sects form a corre- spondingly larger proportion of the food, namely 6.43 percent. Crickets and long and short horned locusts were eaten and a decided taste for the eggs of katydids is shown, they being consumed by 21 red- birds. Among the short-horned grasshop- pers the small shield-back grouse locusts were taken, and also the lesser migratory locusts (Melanoplus atlanis, fig. 39), which during the invasions of the Rocky Mountain grasshopper was second only in importance to that formidable insect. The cardinal did its share in repelling the locust hosts in the seventies, Mr. Aughey, of Nebraska, finding more than 20 locusts per bird during his examina- tions. It is certain that the redbird’s aid in restricting the less conspicuous pests of the present day is no less valuable. a Fie. 9.—Cotton cutworm (Prodenia ornithogali). (From Chittenden, Bureau of Entomology.) Other insects bearing the name “locusts,” but not at all closely INSECT FOOD OF CARDINAL. 17 related to the grasshoppers, belong to the order Hemiptera, which furnishes 3.72 percent of the cardinal’s subsistence. These dogday locusts, harvest or jarflies, which injure the twigs of trees, are, on account of their loud, vibrating song, among the best-known insects. Fig. 10.—Zebra caterpillar (Mamestra picta). (From Chittenden, Bureau of Entomology.) Their great size would, seem to prevent most birds from capturing them, but 9 of the redbirds examined had accomplished the feat. The common harvest fly (Cicada tibicen, fig. 11) was identified from Fig. 11.—Harvest fly (Cicada tibicen). (From Lugger, Minnesota Experiment Station.) two stomachs, and according to A. W. Butler® the seventeen-year locust (Tibicen septendecim) also is eaten by the redbird. Several insects of this order are miniatures of the cicadas, such as the jumping plant-lice (Psyllide) and leaf-hoppers (Tettigonide). ¢Bull, 12, Div. Ent., 1886, p. 30. 18 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. ‘These and the curiously shaped tree-hoppers (Membracide), all of which are more or less injurious, are occasionally taken by the red- bird. More often this grosbeak secures the tiny bark-lice or scale insects (Coccide). These minute but nevertheless destructive pests, which have not long been known to be preyed upon to any extent by birds, were devoured by 21 cardinals. The cherry scale (H'ulecanium cerasifex), which is sometimes injurious, was identified from one stomach, while another contained scales which are probably the locust bark-scale (2. robiniarum). Other scale insects of the same genus were fed upon by 15 cardinals and those of a related genus (Toumeyella) ‘of the southeastern United States by 2. Other Hemiptera were eaten by 59 grosbeaks,.31 selecting the vile- smelling stinkbugs (Pentatomide), including the green tree-bug (Nezara hilaris) and 1 specimen of Huschistus.. The secretions of the latter insect have proved fatal to such hardy creatures even as weevils, but apparently they do not daunt the cardinal. One assassin bug and 1 species of the chinch-bug family also were devoured. Practically all of the Hemiptera eaten are injurious, and some, such as the scale insects, extremely so. Consequently, the cardinal’s habit of preying upon them is highly beneficial. Passing to beetles, we find weevils are eaten to a greater extent than any others. These compactly formed snout-bearers belong to 10 fam- ilies, members of 3 of which are preyed upon by the cardinal. Most of the weevils. attack nuts, fruits, and seeds, including those of culti- vated plants. Hence, they are generally harmful and many kinds are exceptionally destructive. Weevils often are obscurely colored and have the habit of feigning death, but notwithstanding these protec- tive devices they are captured in large numbers by all insectivorous birds. One hundred and fifty-seven cardinals ate weevils in quan- tity sufficient to make 3.26 percent of the food of all examined. ‘Scarred snout-beetles and curculios are equally relished. Sixteen red- birds fed upon a species (Compsus auricephalus) of the former group, which, in the adult state, occurs upon. the leaves of cotton. The tiniest fragment of this insect suffices for identification, because of the beautiful covering of silvery green and golden scales. Thir- teen other grosbeaks ate scarred snout-beetles which can not be identi- fied. Of curculios, the acorn weevil (Balaninus nasicus), with a snout almost as long as the body, and several species of 5 weed-mining genera were captured. Six redbirds ate the injurious clover weevils (Sitones). The cotton boll weevil (fig. 19) also is occasionally eaten by the cardinal, 2 of the present collection having secured specimens of this highly destructive insect. Twelve redbirds captured curcu- lios which were not further determined. Bill-bugs (fig. 12), which as larvee live in the roots of grasses or sedges and as adults often in- ‘jure corn by drilling holes in the stems of young plants, were de- INSECT FOOD OF CARDINAL. 19 voured by 13 cardinals. Two species (Sphenophorus cariosus and ' S. compressirostris) were identified. Lamellicorn or scarabeid beetles are next in importance to weevils in the beetle diet of the cardinal. They were eaten by 77 birds and compose 2.56 percent of the annual food. Many of them feed on ex- crementitious matter and are of neutral economic significance; but few of these are consumed by the bird. Those secured in- clude the common road-frequenting dung beetles, which were captured by 6 cardi- nals, and the large resplendant scavenger Phaneus carnifex. Other species in this family, however, are not so harmless as the above. The spotted vine-chafer (Pelidnota punctata), which is an important grape pest in the eastern United States, the two-spotted Anomala, which also devours the foliage yy¢.12—A pill bug (Spheno- of the grape, and the cetonias (Z’uphoria phorus). (From Forbes, Tili- inda, fig, 15; H. fulgida, et al.), which feed 7° "*Periment Station.) upon all sorts of flowers and sometimes on young Indian corn, are all accepted as food by the cardinal. The southern june beetle or figeater (Allorhina nitida, fig. 18), which causes con- siderable damage in Florida and neighbor- ing States, was found in a few stomachs; but since the cardinal evinces a strong prefer- ence for large insects and. abounds in this beetle’s favorite home, many of them, no doubt, are devoured. Of great- est interest in this fam- ily are the rose-chafers (Macrodactylus subspi- Fie. 18.—Figeater (Allorhina nitida). (Irom Howard, } Si Se cee ne naa, nosis, fig. 14.) These bee tles are so abundant at times, says Prof. J. B. Smith, that they “ruin not only vineyards, but orchards and gardens, eating every kind of fruit and flower; 20 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. two or three days suffice to ruin a vineyard.” These insects have very long and spiny legs, and opinions differ as to whether birds eat them, some affirming that they do, others that they do not. Asa matter of fact, they are preyed upon by several wild birds, including the yellow-billed cuckoo, crow blackbird, kingbird, phoebe, green- Fic. 14.—Rose beetle (Macrodactylus subspinosus). (From Riley, Bureau of Entomology.) crested flycatcher, redheaded woodpecker, and cardinal, the last- named being one of the most important of their enemies. Four of the birds examined during the present investigation had eaten rose- beetles, each of them,taking several, and on July 5, 1906, the writer watched a brood of young which were being fed rose-chafers, remains Fic. 15.—Flower eating scarabeid (Huphoria inda). (From Chittenden, Bureau of Entomology.) of 17 being recovered from ejecta. These facts indicate that the cardinal is so fond of the rose-beetle as to capture it whenever possible. This habit of the bird, together with its inroads upon’ the vine-chafers of the family, are of considerable economic importance. Next in importance among beetles in the diet of the cardinal grosbeak are the bronzy wood-borers (Buprestide), which compose INSECT FOOD OF CARDINAL. 21 1.17 percent of the subsistence, being eaten by 31 birds. In the larval state these beetles excavate tunnels in trees and do immense damage. Two species were identified in stomachs of the redbird, namely, the locust borer (Agrilus egenus) and another (Dicerca obscura) which bores into various deciduous trees. The beetles of this family seem to be a regular item of diet of all kinds of grosbeaks, and we may be sure that their destruction is highly beneficial. The rather similar appearing. click-beetles, adults of the disastrous \ wWireworms, were secured by 23 redbirds. Twelve birds ate long- horned borers (Cerambycide), 2 species being identified, neither of which is an important pest. However, the entire family is injurious, and the cardinal should be commended for diminishing the numbers of any of the species. The closely related family of leaf-beetles (Chrysomelidx) does not furnish a large percentage of the redbird’s fare, although several of its species are captured. The notorious spotted cucumber -,beetle (Diabrotica 12- punctata, fig. 26), the strawberry root - borer , (Co- laspis brunnea), plum leaf - beetle (Nodonata _ tris- tis), sweet potato leaf-beetle (Cop- ric. 16.—Locust leaf-miner (Odontota dorsalis). (From Chit- tocycla), willow tenden, Bureau of Entomology.) and poplar species (Chrysomela bigsbyana and Jelasoma scripta), besides some others that feed on weeds and other wild plants, are occa- sionally eaten. Two additional species, the locust leaf-miner and the three-lined potato beetle, deserve more extended notice. Concerning the locust leaf-mining beetle (Odontota dorsalis, fig. 16), Dr. S..D. Judd says, in “ Birds of a Maryland Farm:”¢ In the summer of 1895 a destructive outbreak * * * turned all the -locusts of the farm as brown as if they had been scorched by fire, ruining the verdure of the river bluff. * * * From 1896 to 1902, inclusive, the beetles did not again ruin the foliage. * * * In 1896 the trees further up the river, however, were turned brown, showing that the escape of those at Marshall Hall was not due to climatic conditions unfavorable to the insects; therefore it is possible that the birds were at least to some extent responsible for it. «Bull. 17, Biological Survey, 1902, pp. 29-30, 22 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. The cardinal is one of the birds which assisted in checking this infestation. Two individuals taken atthe time had eaten leaf- miners, one having secured no fewer than 10. Before the advent of the Colorado beetle, a smaller leaf-beetle (Lema trilineata), which naturally feeds on ground cherries (Phy- salis), turned its attention to potatoes and made itself widely known. Even at present it is by no means harmless in the Southern States. It is encouraging, therefore, to know that the cardinal seems to relish the species, one bird collected in Florida having eaten 14 of them. The cardinal has been reported to feed upon the genuine potato beetle also, by E. B. Williamson? and F. H. Chittenden.’ Thus while not preying extensively upon the Chrysomelide, the redbird at times renders valuable service by eating some of the pests so numerous in the family. The cardinal occasionally captures a few other kinds of beetles, such as the darkling beetles (Tenebrionide) noted for their nauseous secretions, and the blister beetles (Meloide), the fluids of whose _ bodies are highly vesicatory. But few additional insect are consumed. One cardinal had eaten a two-winged fly, a member of an order the individuals of which are perhaps more abundant than those of any other, yet which is surpris- ingly exempt from the attacks of birds. Three redbirds devoured fragile mayflies of the kinds that often swarm about the lights of cities. They sometimes eat the larger kinds also, as was observed by Dr. A. K. Fisher, July 4, 1906, when a male cardinal was seen carry- ing in its beak one of the large dark mayflies (Hexagenia bilineata). Belonging, together with the insects, to the subkingdom of the jointed animals (Arthropoda) are the spiders and centipedes, which in a small way contribute to the fare of the cardinal. One bird had eaten a centipede, while 22 obtained spiders or their egg sacs. Snails and other mollusks were eaten by a great many of the birds examined, namely 112. Whether they were taken for grinding material or for food is a question, but the latter seems more likely in view of the large number devoured. One grosbeak had eaten several small bivalve shells which must’ have been obtained from water, and another secured a large slug. The following note by D. E. Lantz shows that occasionally’ verte- brates serve as food.¢ December 27 [1884], while hunting, I saw a male cardinal grosbeak eating a field-mouse. Several others attempted to take it from him, but were unsuc- cessful. At my approach they left it lying on the snow. It was about half consumed. @Pyoc. Columbus Hort. Soc., XIII, 1898, p. 42. ®’ Circular 87, Bureau of Entomology, 1907, p. 12. ©O and O., X, 1885, p. 29. NESTLING CARDINALS. ° 293 MINERAL MATTER. v Mineral matter taken for grinding purposes, among which were many bits of cinder in addition to the usual quartz fragments and sand, averaged 5.7 percent of the gross contents of the stomachs examined, NESTLINGS. The nestlings of the cardinal, in common with those of most birds, are highly insectivorous. During the preparation of this report 4 have been examined, with the result that 94.75 percent of their food was found to be animal matter and 5.25 vegetable. Two of the num- ber were young, just out of the nest, and they had consumed the vegetable substances; 2 were nestlings, and their diet was en- tirely animal. The stomach of one of the latter contained the thorax of a large cicada, and that-of the other the remaining por- tions of that luckless insect. Both had been fed caterpillars— purslane (fig. 38) and laurel sphinxes—and each contained grass- hoppers and spiders. A few larve and eggs of other insects also were in their stomachs, One of the young, just out of the nest, had been given a cicada, and, in addition, some 9 grasshoppers, a snail, and a few-seeds, while the other had eaten lamellicorn beetles, weave. and blackberry seeds. The proportions of the principal food items of the four nestlings are as follows: Cicadas, 17.25 percent; grass- hoppers, 20; caterpillars, 21.25; and beetles, 23.25. Two other fiedge- lings in the collection had only a few bits of snail in their stomachs. Observations upon nestling birds in the field being recognized as valuable in supplementing data obtained from the examination of stomachs, an effort was made throughout the season of 1906 to locate and thoroughly study a grosbeak family. Owing to various vicissi- tudes, satisfactory observations were made upon only one nest.. Fifty- six trips by the parents were made to this nest in six and one-half hours, an average of 8.6 an hour. The young were fed 178 times, an average of 89 each. The longest interval between visits was thirty- five minutes, the shortest two. The character of the food could not be determined by observation, but it was learned in another way. None of the excrement was re- moved from the box, whereas the nest in which the youngsters had been reared was kept perfectly clean. The fecal matter was dried and examined, and while by no means all of its constituents could be identified, enough was learned to indicate that the study of excreta is a very satisfactory method of determining the food of nestling birds. The nest of any fairly bold bird may be kept under surveillance and the waste matter collected before the parents remove it. The extent of the information as to the food eaten by the young to. be obtained in this way is astonishing. 24 -, FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. . For instance, a single casting of a young cardinal, covered with its thick, chalky, and gelatinous layers, was preserved, and from it were taken the following: One insect egg, the leg and scutellum of a scarabeeid beetle, head and other remains of a leaf-hopper, bits of a snail, and 11 seeds and the core of a mulberry. From the remainder of the total quantity the following were identified: Seventeen rose- beetles (Macrodactylus subspinosus, fig. 14), 2 other scarabeids, 1 click beetle (Limonius sp.), 1 caterpillar hunter (Calosoma scru- tator, fig. 7), 1 leaf-hopper (Jasside), 3 grasshoppers, 1 spider, 1 dragon fly, many bits of snail, 17 blackberry seeds (Rubus sp: )s and 291 seeds of mulberry (Morus rubra). The only beneficial species in the above list is the caterpillar hunter, while among the injurious forms, four in number, the rose-beetle is very important. This in- sect’s habits, as well as its occasional overwhelming abundance, have been described on a preceding page. The infestation of the insect about the District of Columbia in 1906 was especially severe. Not only roses were attacked by the insects, but elder blossoms were covered, and around the basswoods their humming was as loud as of a swarm of bees. Frequent attempts were made to discover whether the cardinal feeds upon them, but no oppor- tunity was afforded until the above-mentioned nestlings were discov- ered at the extreme end of the rose-beetle season. The fact that so many were taken at that time is good evidence that special search was made for them. ; Among the food given to the inmates of a nest under observation in 1907, the following were identified by sight: A chrysalis, a caterpillar or sawfly larvee, a horsefly, and a grasshopper. From a small quan- tity of excrement were recovered bits of snail, grass seed, a small caterpillar, ground and click beetles, and 3 rose-beetles. The cap- ture of the latter is again significant, as they were very scarce up to that time. This fondness for rose-beetles distinguishes the bird as an important guardian of the plants the insects attacks. SUMMARY. Examination of nearly 500 stomachs of cardinals shows that the bird’s diet is about three-tenths animal and seven-tenths vegetable. The cardinal has been accused of pilfering certain grains, notably corn, to an injurious extent, which charge the evidence from stomach examination neither proves nor disproves. But in view of the fact that only 8.78 percent of the total food is grain, and that more than half of that amount is waste, the loss is greatly overbalanced by the destruction of weed seeds alone, which compose more than half of the vegetable food. Moreover, some of the weeds consumed are espe- cially destructive to grain crops. In securing its insect food the cardinal injures us in 1 case and benefits us in 15. In other words, considering the animal food alone, . CARDINAL’S FOOD ITEMIZED. 95 only 1 cardinal does harm to 15 which do good. The presence of this single harmful bird among so many beneficial ones no more justifies us in classing the species as injurious than would a like proportion of disabled men justify the condemnation of a whole regiment. On the contrary, since the cardinal, by its general food habits, does at least 15 times more good than harm, it must be classed among the very useful species. The following list of important pests the bird has been shown to prey upon is in itself sufficient proof of the cardinal’s value. \ The list includes the Rocky Mountain locust, 17- year cicada, potato beetle, cotton worm, bollworm, cotton cutworm, cotton-boll weevil, codling moth, rose-beetle, cucumber-beetle, fig- eater, zebra caterpillar, plum scale, and other scale insects. A host of minor insect pests are attacked and the seeds of many noxious weeds are destroyed. The cardinal much more than pays its way, and deserves and should receive strictest protection. The bird is easily attracted by food in winter and by the provision of suitable nesting sites in summer. Being thus responsive to human care, and being so valuable economically, the cardinal’s presence on the farm, and even -in the city garden, should be encouraged in every possible way. With proper protection and encouragement it will become more and more numerous and render husbandry a correspondingly increased amount of useful service. LIST OF SEEDS, FRUITS, AND INVERTEBRATES EATEN BY THE CARDINAL GRAIN. Corn (Zea mays). Oats (Avena sativa.) — tice (Oryza sativa). Wheat (Triticum vulgare). Kafir corn (Sorghum vulgare durra). WILD FRUITS. Red cedar (Juniperus virginiana). Skunk bush (Rhus trilobata). Solomon’s seal (Pologonatum bi- | Poison ivy (Rhus radicans). florum). Holly (Ilex opaca). Bristly greenbrier (Smilar bona-nox). | Inkberry (Ilex glabra). Hickory (Hicoria sp.). Maple (Accr sp.). Oak (Quercus sp.). e Summer grape (Vitis aestivalis). Southern hackberry (Celtis mississip- | Frost grape (Vitis cordifolia). piensis). Pullace grape (Vitis rotundifolia). Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis). Maypop (Passifiora incarnata). Mulberry (Morus sp.). Prickly pear (Opuntia opuntia). Pokeberry (Phytolacca dccandra). Rough-leaved cornel (Cornus aspert Tulip tree. (Liriodendron tulipifera). folia). Spicebush (Lindera benzoin). Flowering dogwood (Cornus florida). Blackberry (Rubus sp.). Blueberry (Vaccinium virgatum). Rose (Rosa sp.). Knockaway tree. (Hhretia elliptica). Juneberry (Amelanchicr canadensis). | Nightshade (Solanum sp.). Red haw (Crategus sp.). Elder (Sambucus sp.). Cherry (Prunus sp.). Arrowwood (Viburnum sp.). 26 -FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. WEEDS. Large erab grass (Syutherisma san- guinalis). Barnyard grass galli). ; Yellow foxtail (Chetochloa glauca). Bur grass (Cenchrus tribuloides). Wire grass (Hleusine indica). Sedge (Carew sp.). Spiderwort (Tradescantia sp.). Rush (Juncus sp.). Star grass (Hypowis hirsuta). Star grass (Hypowis juncea). Dock (Rumez sp.). Knotgrass (Polygonum aviculare). Pale persicaria (Polygonum lapathi- folium). Pennsylvania persicaria (Polygonum pennsylvanicum) . Smartweed (Polygonum punctatum). Virginia knotweed (Polygonum virgin- ianum). , Hastate tearthumb (Polygonum arifo- lium). (Echinochloa crus- Goosefoot (Chenopodium sp.). Pigweed (Amaranthus sp.). Chickweed (Alsine media). Vetch (Vicia sp.). ; Cranesbill (Geranium sp.). Sorrel (Ovalis sp.). Croton (Croton sp.). Spurge (Huphorbia sp.). Spiny sida (Sida spinosa). - Violet (Viola sp.). ? Dodder (Cuscuta sp.). 4 Stickweed (Lappula sp.). . Gromwell (Lithospermum arvense). White vervain (Verbena urticaefolia). Blue vervain (Verbena hastata). Rib grass (Planiago lanccolata). Plantain (Plantago sp.). Buttonweed (Diodia teres). Prickly sow-thistle (Sonchus asper). Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiaefolia). Sunflower (Helianthus sp.). Sticktight (Bidens sp.). COLEOPTERA. Ground beetles (Carabide) : Calosoma scrutctor. Pasimachus sp. Scarites subterraneus, Dicaelus sp. Callida sp. Harpalus caliginosus. Anisodactylus rusticus. Anisodactylus agricola. Click-beetles (Elaterids) : Melanotus sp. Bronzy wood-borers (Buprestide ) ; Dicefca obscura. grilus egenus. Fireflies (Lampyride) : Chauliognathus marginatus. Telephorus pusillus. Lamellicorn beetles (Scarabzeide) : Phanaeus carnifer. Aphodius lividus. Aphodius inquinatus. Macrodactylus subspinosus. Anomala binotata luteipennis. Pelidnota punctata. ‘ Allorhina nitida. Euphoria fulgida. Euphoria inda. Long-horned beetles (Cerambycids) : Liopus adspersus. Hippopsis lemniscata. Leaf-beetles (Chrysomelide) : Donacia sp. Lema trilineata. Cryptocephalus calidus. \Colaspis brunnea. Nodonota tristis. Chrysomela sp. Calligrapha bigsbyana. Zygogramma. heterotheca, Jfelasoma scripta. " Diabrotica 12-punctata. Odontota dorsalis. Coptocycla sp. Darkling beetles (Tenebrionids) : Blapstinus pratensis. Blister beetles (Meloide). Scarred snout-beetles (Otiorhynchi- die) : Graphorhinus vadosus. Compsus auricephalus. True snout-beetles (Curculionidae) : Sitones sp. Pachytychius amenus. Anthonomus grandis. . CARDINAL’S FOOD ITEMIZED. 27 COLEOPTERA—Continued. True snout-beetles—Continued. Billbugs—Continued. Conotrachelus sp. Sphenophorus cariosus. Tyloderma baridiwm. Sphenophorus compressirostris. Baris interstitialis. Barkbeetles ,(Scolytide) : Balaninus nasicus. Tomcius impressus. Billbugs (Calandride) . Rhodobaenus 13-punctatus, HEMIPTERA. Cicadas (Cicadide) : Seale insects—Continued. Cicada tibicen. Toumeyella sp. : Tree-hoppers (Membracidee). Stink-bugs (Pentatomide) : Leaf-hoppers (Tettigonide). , Euschistus sp. Jumping plant-lice (Psyllidz). Nezara hilaris. Scale insects (Coccide) : Lygeide. Eulecanium cerasifez. Assassin bugs (Reduviide). Hulecanium robiniarum (?).° ORTHOPTERA. Short-horned grasshoppers (Acridii- ; Long-horned grasshoppers (Locusti- dee): die). Melanoplus atlanis. Crickets (Gryllide). Tettix sp. LEPIDOPTERA. Hawk-moths (Sphingide) : Deilephila lineata. Sphine kalmie. Owlet-moths (Noctuids) :._ Mamestra picta. Prodenia ornithogalli. Alabama argillacea. Owlet moths—Continued. Heliothis obsoleta. Spanworms (Geometride) : Nadata gibbosa. ‘ Leaf-rollers (Tortricide) : Carpocapsa pomonella. HYMENOPTERA. Rough-heaied ants (Myrmicide): | Sawflies (Tenthredinide). Pogonomyrmesz sp. i Smooth-headed ants (Formicide) : Lasius sp. OTHER INSECTS. Dragon fly (Odonata). Mantispa brunnea (Neuroptera). Two-winged fly (Diptera). Mayfly (Ephemerida). OTHER INVERTEBRATES. Spiders (Araneida). Centipedes (Chilopoda). 1 Snails and slugs (Gastropoda). Bivalves (Pelecypoda). i t 28 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. GRAY GROSBEAK. (Pyrrhulovia sinuata, Plate I, Frontispiece.) APPEARANCE, DISTRIBUTION, AND HABITS. This grosbeak, which so far has received no distinctive popular name, may be known as the gray grosbeak or parrot-bill. It is almost the same size as the cardinal, closely resembles that species in song and general demeanor, and has similar nesting habits. Moreover, it frequents the ‘same kind of country and is resident wherever found. In appearance, however, it is quite dissimilar. In strong contrast to the glowing hue of the cardinal, the genera} color of both sexes of the parrot-bill is hght gray. The wings, tail, and long crest are suffused with dark red and the wings are lined with rose. This color also surrounds the beak of the male and ex- tends over throat and breast in an irregular patch. The beak is yellowish and is very curiously modified, being short, thick, srrangyy curved, and apparently of great power. The gray grosbeak occurs over ‘about the lower third of Arizona and New Mexico and the lower half of Texas, not reaching, however, the extreme eastern part of the latter State. There are two sub- species, the Arizona parrot-bill (P. sinuata) and the Texas parrot- bill (P. s. tewana). Their range extends south to central Mexico. ECONOMIC RELATIONS. Seventy-four stomachs of gray grosbeaks have been examined. All are from Texas, 59 being collected in August and 15 in Septem- ber. They do not, therefore, give an adequate idea of the food habits of the species, except for that locality and season. Vegetable mat- ter averages 71.19 percent of the contents, and animal matter 28.81 percent. Contrasting the latter amount with 36.54 percent of ani- mal food obtained during a corresponding period by the cardi- nal, which is highly vegetarian, it appears exceedingly low. It is accounted for, however, by the extraordinary preference of the parrot-bill for a single item of its vegetable diet, namely, the seeds of grasses. VEGETABLE Foon. Another remarkable feature of the vegetable diet is the scarcity of fruit. Only a few pokeberries were eaten, not enough in fact to be allotted a percentage valuation. Cardinals, however, collected in the same locality at the same time consumed almost 12 percent of fruit in August and nearly 30 percent in September. It appears, therefore, that the gray grosbeak is distinguished from its nearest relative by a remarkable indifference for fruit. SEEDS EATEN BY GRAY GROSBEAK,. 29 WEEDS. Grass seeds constitute an average of 53.09 percent of the total food of the birds examined, or more than five-sevenths of the vegetable food alone. Most important among them are foxtail (Chwtocholoa, fig. 17) and bur’ grass (Cenchrus, Plate IT, fig. 10), which together amount to 43.59 percent of. all the bird’s food. Since these grasses are among the most pernicious weeds, the parrot-bill is more than welcome to all of their seeds it desires. The seeds of other grasses also: are im- portant, furnishing 9.51 percent of the bird’s subsistence. Among them are seeds of witch and crab grasses, most species of which are weeds. Yard or wire grass (Lleusine indica) also is eaten. Seeds of a spurge (Croton sp.) contribute 9.81 percent Fic. 17.—Seeds of yellow fox- 5 5 a tail (Chetochloa glauca). to this grosbeak’s fare, and other weeds, in- (From Hillman, Nevada Ex- periment Station.) cluding bindweed (fig. 21), lambs’ quarters, tumbleweed (fig. 18), sunflower, carpet weed, nightshade, vervain (fig. 3), mallow, etc., compose 6.13 percent. Thus the gray eroabealet is a great consumer of weed seeds, and it is remarkable that seeds form practically seven-tenths of the food in August and September, when insects are superabundant. The bird’s habit of feeding upon weeds is undoubtedly beneficial, especially be- cause it eats so many seeds of foxtail and bur grass, pests with which every farmer in the South has to contend. GRAIN, The only grain found in stomachs of this species is sorghum. Six birds had eaten it in quantity sufficient to make an average of 2.03 percent of the total food. Ignoring even the fact that sorghum is “ty 8 ii * Aa c ® Fic. 18.—Seeds of rough tumbleweed (Amaranthus retrofierus). (From Hillman, Nevada Experiment Station.) usually grown for fodder, not for grain, the amount consumed is so small that there need be no fear of damage by this shy and uncom- mon bird. ANIMAL Foon. — a While the parrot-bill consumes a smaller proportion of animal ‘matter than other grosbeaks, it selects about the same things, the principal items being grasshoppers, caterpillars, and beetles. 30 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. Neither parasitic Hymenoptera nor predaceous beetles were found in the stomachs examined, a showing much to the bird’s credit. Only one useful insect had been eaten, it belonging to the queer neurop- teroid genus Mantispa, the members of which are rare. They are predaceous when adult and when young are parasitic in the egg-sacs of spiders. The remainder of the animal food is composed of injurious species, among which are important pests. Beetles constitute 4.66 percent of the food, weevils alone being 3.42. Of greatest interest among the latter is the cotton-boll weevil (Anthonomus grandis, fig. 19), the most serious agricultural pest of recent years. While the gray gros- beak does not feed upon it regularly, nevertheless the habit of picking it up when occasion offers is highly commendable. Among other weevils eaten are additional species of curculionids and scarred snout- beetles, including the same silvery-green and golden species (Comp- sus auricephalus) eaten by the cardi- nal. Leaf beetles (Chrysomelide) probably ‘are next in importance. The parrot-bill is sharp- eyed enough to find a species (Chlamys plicata) of this family that is noted for the perfection of its protective de- vices. This’ little beetle is curiously sculptured and has furrows in which all the appen- dages fold, and, being bronzy in color, its resemblance to the drop- pings of caterpillars is‘almost perfect. The CAlamys sometimes feeds upon raspberry leaves, but has never been found very injurious. Nevertheless, it is entirely vegetarian, like all the other beetles of the family, species of which, even if not at present positively injuri- ous, are liable to become so at any time. The parrot-bill should re- ceive nothing but praise for its destruction of leaf-beetles. Bronzy wood-borers (Buprestide) and long-horned beetles (Cerambycids), both of which are destructive to forest and orchard trees, also were found in stomachs of this species. Beetles, as a whole, are exceeded in amount by caterpillars, the latter constituting 10.82 percent of the diet. One of the species identified, namely, the cotton worm (Alabama argillacea, fig. 20), has long been known as a great pest throughout the Southern States, Fic. 19.—Cotton-boll weevil (Anthonomus grandis). (From Howard, Bureau of Entomology.) : INSECT FOOD OF GRAY GROSBEAK. 31 and in certain years has caused a decrease in the crop of a quarter of a million bales, valued at $25,000,000. Many birds devour great numbers of cotton worms, and this fact alone justifies the oft-repeated statement that “too much can hardly be said in favor of insectivorous birds in cotton fields.” The gray grosbeak assumes a proper share in this valuable work, 14 of the 74 individuals examined having con- sumed cotton worms, which formed an average of 39.1 percent of their food. As many as 18 caterpillars were found in a single stomach. Another caterpillar enemy of the same crop, the cotton cutworm (Pro- denia ornithogalli, fig. 9), also is freely devoured. As beetles were less esteemed than cater- pillars by the gray grosbeak, so also are the latter less liked than the Orthoptera. This group contributes 11.52 percent of the total food. Both long and short-horned locusts and their eggs are devoured, 7 or 8 grasshoppers sometimes being secured by a single bird. The only species (Syrbula admirabilis) identified sometimes feeds on timothy. True bugs, comprising stink-bugs (Pen- tatomide) and their eggs, cicadas, leaf- hoppers (Jassidz), and lantern flies (Ful- goride) compose about 1.5 percent of the food. All of these insects are injurious and the bird does a service by feeding 5, 09 cotton worm (Ala upon them. bama = argillacea). (From One parrot-bill was bold enough to Filey, Bureau of Entomol- swallow a large hornet (Vespa sp.). A “er few ants also were eaten, and these, together with spiders and snails, complete the list of animals devoured. Although this grosbeak is not conspicuously insectivorous, almost all the insects it eats are injurious. MINERAL MATTER. While mineral matter was absent from the majority of the stomachs examined, enough was contained in the remainder tq make an aver- age of 3.62 percent for the whole number. SumMMaRy. The present incomplete data indicate that for a grosheak the par- rot bill is decidedly vegetarian, preferring vegetable food even in months when insects abound. More than 69 percent of its food during August and September consists of weed seeds, the small 18848—Bull. 32—08——3 32 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. amount of grain taken bringing the total amount of vegetable food up to 71.19 percent. More than half of the total subsistence con- sists of grass seeds alone. The 28.81 percent of animal food is made up almost exclusively of harmful species, among which are the most important pests of the cotton plant, namely, the cotton worm and the cotton boll weevil. Although the data on hand are insufficient to determine the exact ‘economic status of the bird, it may be stated with confidence that the gray grosbeak is almost entirely beneficial. LIST OF SEEDS AND INVERTEBRATES EATEN BY THE GRAY GROSBEAK. GRAIN. Kafir corn (Sorghum vulgare durrt). WEEDS. Joint grass (Paspalum sp.). Crab grass (Syntherisma sp.). Yellow foxtail (Chetochioa glauca). Bur grass (Cenchrus tribuloides). Wire grass (Hleusine indica). Bindweed (Polygonum sp.). Goosefoot (Chenopodium sp.). Rough pigweed (Amaranthus flerus). Pokeweed (Phytolacca decandra). retro- Carpetweed (JMollugo verticillata). Sorrel (Oxalis sp.). | Spurge (Huphorbia sp.). Croton (Croton sp.). Mallow (Malva sp.). Sida sp. Vervain (Verbena sp.). Nightshade (Solanum sp.). Sunflower (Helianthus sp.). COLEOPTERA. Bronzy wood-borers (Buprestide). Long-horned beetles (Cerambycide) : ‘ Liopus crassulus. Hippopsis lemiiscata. Leaf-beetles (Chrysomelide) : Chlamys plicata, Scarred snout - beetles chide) : Compsus auricephalus. True snout-beetles (Curculionids) : Anthonomus grandis. Acalles sp. (Otiorhyn- HEMIPTERA. Cicadas (Cicadide) : Leaf-hoppers (Jassidx). Cicada sp. Lantern flies (Fulgoride). ORTHOPTERA. Short-horned grasshoppers (Acridii- | Long-horned grasshoppers (Locusti- dee): Syrbula admirabilis. de). LEPIDOPTERA. Owlet-moths (Noctuide) : Prodenia ornithogalli. Alabama argillacea, ROSE-BREASTED GROSBEAK. 33 HYMENOPTERA. Hornets ( Vespidse) : Smooth-headed ants (Formicide). Vespa sp. . NEUROPTERA. Mantispidse: Mantispa sp. OTHER INVERTEBRATES. Spiders (Araneida). | Snails (Gastropoda). ROSE-BREASTED GROSBEAK. (Zamelodia ludoriciana, Plate III.) APPEARANCE, DISTRIBUTION, AND HABITS. The rose-breasted grosbeak, one of the loveliest and most valuable of our North American birds, is easily recognized by its characteristic coloring and big bill. The male is gayly clad in rose, white, and black, the brightest tint partly covering the breast and lining the wings. The female, while soberly clothed in buffy, grayish, and brown, can not be mistaken, once the appearance of the species is familiar, the plump form and thick bill sufficiently distinguishing her. The song of the male rosebreast is as charming as his appearance is striking, its notes being among the sweetest and most inspiring of the avian chorus. The bird seems never to tire of his music and may - be heard during the hottest days and even at night. However, he is also a paragon of domesticity, taking turn with the female in incubating the eggs and later doing yeoman service in feeding the young. The bulky and loosely-fashioned nest is built in June, and 3 or 4 eggs are laid. The nests are very often placed in orchard trees; indeed, where conditions permit, they are almost invariably in the vicinity of cultivated lands. The birds are fairly common, especially in the northern part of their range, but they are not evenly distributed. For instance, in one locality, for no obvious reasons, grosbeaks are absent, while in another. near by several pairs may live. In Wisconsin 7 nests have been . found in a space of-not over 5 acres, and on the brushy banks of a little stream in New Jersey 11 pairs nested within a quarter of a mile. If these figures held for any considerable area, they would indicate that the bird was very abundant, and indeed it would appear that in most accounts the number of rose-breasted grosbeaks has been underestimated, unless we are to assume that of late years the bird has increased in numbers greatly. In parts of New England 34 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. during the last twenty years the bird is known to have increased, and where once rare it is now common. In western Pennsylvania rosebreasts are said to be as common as song sparrows, and E. A. Preble, of the Biological Survey, found them in migration one of the commonest birds along the Athabaska River, near the northern limit of their distribution. : The rosebreast ranges farther north than any other of the group of grosbeaks here treated. Breeding from the latitude of St. Louis and northeastern Kansas and in the Alleghenies from southern Ten- nessee, it occurs as far north as Newfoundland and Quebec in the east and in the west extends through the Dakotas and lower Saskatche- wan to Peace River Landing, Alberta, and the vicinity of Fort Smith, Mackenzie—the latter locality only 6° from the Arctic Circle. In winter the species is found from southern Mexico to below the Equator in Ecuador. ECONOMIC RELATIONS. Much interest attaches to the present species because of its well- known fondness for the Colorado potato beetle. More than 35 printed articles of greater or less length have been devoted to the bird because of this habit, and brief reports upon it appear in four previous publications of the Biological Survey.* One hundred and seventy-six stomachs of the rosebreasted gros- beak are available for present examination, and these were obtained in the seven months from April to November (excepting October), from 17 States and the District of|Columbia, besides Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Northwest Territory. A detailed inventory of the contents of these stomachs having been made and the results tabulated, it was found that the bird consumes an average of 52 percent of animal matter and 48 percent of vege- table per month during its stay in the summer home. The maximum amount (74.25 percent) of animal food is taken in June, the nesting month. Remarkable features of the food habits are the apparent dis- inclination for grasshoppers and the strong preference for wild fruits. VEGETABLE Foon. The vegetable part of the diet is composed of the following ele- ments: Weed seed, 15.74 percent; grain, 5.09 percent; garden peas, 1.87 percent; wild fruit, 19.3 percent, and other vegetable matter, including a small quantity of cultivated fruit, besides buds, flowers of trees, etc., 6.5 percent. s “Barrows, W. B., Rep. Commr. Agr. (1888), 1889, pp. 535-536; Merriam, C. Hart, Rep. Commr. Agr., 1889, p. 369; Beal, F. EH. L., Farmers’ Bull. 54, 1897, pp. 28-30; Beal, F. E L., Farmers’ Bull. 54, rev. ed., 1904, pp. 34-85, Blological Survey, U. §, Cept. of Agriculr BLACK-HEADED AND ROSE-BREA (Upper figures, black-headed grosbea male and grosbeaks, female and fem male.} ROSEBREAST VS. PEAS. 35 The items obtained from cultivated crops, being of chief interest, will be considered first. While it is needless to state that most of the testimony regarding the value of this bird is favorable, yet com- plaints of injury from it have been made which are verified by stom- ach examinations. The crop most frequently attacked by rose- breasted grosbeaks is the common garden pea. PEAS, Ten accounts from correspondence and published writings go to show that this grosbeak sometimes feeds upon peas. Six of them refer to damage in Iowa, two in Illinois, one in Massachusetts, and one general. Three persons regard the bird as very destructive; three, while stating that injury is committed, are less severe in their strictures; while the remaining four, admitting the consumption of a few peas, consider the bird’s services in preying upon injurious in- sects ample compensation for the loss sustained. The attacks of this bird upon peas were observed as early as 1839, W. B. O. Peabody ¢ writing as follows: At the latter part of the summer, our gardens are frequented by the young in great numbers, and bitter complaints are made, with or without reason, of their depredations on the peas. Among more recent charges of injury, that of H. J. Giddings, of Sabula, Iowa, may be cited, both because the amount of damage is extreme, and further because the observations are Supported in part. by stomach examination. Mr. Giddings says: During the last summer [1892] rosebreasted grosbeaks were unusually numerous here. * * * The last two weeks in. June and the first week in July (after the young had left the nest) they became very destructive, eating all kinds of fruit and entirely destroying a small patch of green peas in my garden. (Nov. 18, 1892.) Six prosbeak stomachs were sent in from this and other gardens where the birds had access to peas, but examination disclosed peas in only two of them, constituting in one case 10 percent of the ‘stomach contents and in the other 80 percent. Peas were found in one other stomach also, of the 176 examined, this having been col- lected in Minnesota in July. It held + peas, which were 80 percent of the contents. Were there no other-evidence, the above is sufficient to show that the rosebreast has a taste for green peas which is some- times gratified at the expense of the gardener. Some observers believe, however, that the bird makes full repara- tion for damage done. E. M. Hancock, of Waukon, Towa, states: The rosebreasted grosbeak has more than made amends for its pea stealing by its determined warfare upon the Colorado potato beetle, helping very ma- terially to keep down this pest. (April, 1886.) “Birds of Massachusetts, 1839, p. 329. 36 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. Henry Nehrling¢ writes: It is said to eat green peas, and for this reason it is often killed, though the .damage done in this way does not compare with the many benefits it bestows. The question is, Do stomach examinations support this view? Years ago Prof. F. E. L. Beal observed the rosebreast in the act of eating peas and found the pods cut open and the peas gone; the con- tents of a stomach were examined,.and two or three peas, several potato beetles, and a tomato worm were found; whence it is evident that this particular grosbeak, at least, was paying well for its peas. In this connection the record of 6 birds from Iowa gardens is of interest. Fifteen percent of their food was peas, and to that extent, of course, they were detrimental; but as an offset more than 17 per- cent consisted of bronzy wood-borers and 12.5 percent of weevils, in- cluding the injurious piné bark-weevil and 2 nut weevils. While these insects are very injurious to timber, it may be claimed that they are not of direct consequence to the gardener. But insects especially injurious to garden crops also were consumed,.14.8 percent of the food consisting of white grubs, which are enemies of strawberries, and a flower beetle, which injures young corn and many fruits, besides the notorious Colorado potato beetle. Caterpillars and ants also were preyed upon by these 6 birds, and scale insects (Hulecanium sp.), the very worst pest of fruit trees, formed 4.5 percent of their food. The gardener is vitally concerned in reducing the numbers of these insects, and it is evident that the 15. percent of peas consumed is paid for many times over by the destruction of more than three times that’ amount of garden and forest enemies. Moreover, to de- termine the true significance of the damage done, not only the birds which had eaten peas, but the species collectively must be considered. The present investigation shows that 3 birds out of 176 had stolen peas, while scores had literally feasted upon the worst enemies of ‘ agriculture. Peas constitute 1.86 percent of the total food of the grosbeaks examined, while noxious insects certainly compose thirty times as much. Viewed in the light of these facts, the loss sustained would be nothing compared to the benefits received were it not for the fact that the birds’ depredations are often local in character, as in the case cited above, one cultivator, perhaps, furnishing the supply of peas for all the grosbeaks in the neighborhood. However, even under such circumstances a remedy is available without the necessity of sacrificing the birds. Wire guards or bird netting afford protection, and in the case cited above Professor Beal at once stopped the grosbeaks’ visits to his pea patch by means of an old coat on a pole. ¢ Our Native Birds of Song and Beauty, II, 1896, p. 206. GRAIN EATEN BY THE ROSEBREAST. 37 GRAIN. Grain composes 5.09 percent of the food of the 176 rose-breasted grosbeaks examined, the cereals selected being corn, wheat, and oats. The bird has been accused of injuring each of these products, and stomach examinations lend support to the complaints. Corn.—Part of the damage to corn is of an unusual nature. H. S. Giddings, of Sabula, Iowa, writing about the same grosbeaks men- tioned above as injurious to peas, says: From the time they arrived until their departure they fed continuously on corn from a crib on my place. * * * Sometimes as many as 10 or 12 would be in the crib at once. b A The stomachs of 3 grosbeaks shot at this time contained corn, the grain constituting in each case about half the contents. Notwith- standing these facts, it is very doubtful if any considerable damage is ever committed in the manner described, if for no other reason than that the opportunity is seldom presented. Moreover, such depredations are easily prevented by simple and inexpensive means, such as lining the crib with wire netting and closing the doors when not in use. These precautions will not only keep out wild birds, but also rats, mice, and chickens, which animals undoubtedly destroy vastly more stored grain than all native birds together. A small quantity of the corn eaten by the rose-breasted grosbeak may be pilfered from the growing crop, one bird taken in Pennsyl- vania in July having eaten enough corn to form 8 percent of its stomach contents, and one from Illinois in September consumed 50 percent. There is no way of determining positively whether this grain was crop corn or waste; but if only 2 grosbeaks out of 176 take corn from the ear, there is no cause for alarm. The corn obtained in May by 2 other rosebreasts from Illinois and Minnesota may have been either seed or waste. Oats.—Seed oats may sometimes be devoured by grosbeaks. E. A. Mearns says: ¢ ‘Where fields newly sown with the cereal grains are convenient to its wood- land retreats, it * * * will collect in large flocks, and resort there con- tinually, as long as there is a grain of seed to be had. As this statement refers to a locality in New York where the rose- breast occurs only from May to September, the crop in.question must be oats. This grain was eaten by 5 of the birds examined, 4 of which may have obtained it from newly sown fields, but even this trifling injury to the crop may be prevented and other advantages secured by drill- ing. The fifth grosbeak, which was collected in Illinois in July, prob- ably obtained the oats it devoured from standing grain. e Bull. Essex Inst., 12, 1880, p. 21. 38 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. Wheat.—A certain quantity of wheat also may be taken from the heads, but no complaints of such damage have been received, the only observation at hand which bears upon the point being that of Audu- bon. Referring to a brood of young rose-breasted grosbeaks in the vicinity of Cincinnati, he says:* “The parents fed them on the soft grains of wheat which they procured in a neighboring field.” Four grosbeaks out of the 176 examined had fed upon wheat. That ob- tained by 1 collected in Connecticut in May is obviously waste, but 3 birds, which had eaten wheat during July and August in Iowa and Illinois, may have attacked standing grain. These 4 birds obtained about 3 kernels of wheat each, which is an average of less than a fourteenth of a kernel apiece for the 176 grosbeaks examined. Now, if the proportion of grosbeaks eating wheat, 4 to 176, or thereabouts, holds true for this species at large, and the birds.do not exceed the moderate average of 3 kernels each, it would require the united ef- forts of the grain eaters among some 300,000 grosbeaks to consume a quart (21,000 kernels) of average wheat. It is evident, therefore, that the rosebreast’s wheat-eating habits can not be termed injurious. To sum up the rosebreast’s relation to grain crops, as shown by the present investigation, 15 birds out of a total of 176 fed upon grain, including oats, wheat, and corn. Wheat and corn eaten by 4 of these very probably was waste, while 3 birds had taken corn from a crib, and 4 had eaten oats which may have come from newly sown fields. In both cases the injury was easily preventable. Six gros- beaks, consuming one or the other of the grains mentioned, may have pilfered standing crops. This latter injury to grain constitutes the only real case against the bird, and involves only 1.17 percent of the total food of the birds examined. If this ratio holds true for the entire species, the damage is of no special consequence. This view is further strengthened by the fact that no complaints have been made of injury to standing grain, the only stage in which it is subject to attack under the best methods of culture. BUDS. All grosbeaks are usually thought to feed much on buds, and none of the species are believed to be more fond of them than the rose- breast. Most writers have commented on this habit of the rose- breast, and it is referred to also by many correspondents. However, buds were found in but 2 of the stomachs examined, while flowers of trees were found in 4, and it is quite possible that more of the records of field observers relate to flowers than to buds. Among trees whose buds are said to be devoured are beech, cherry, pear, wild plum, soft ¢ Birds of America, IIT, 1841, p. 210. . BUDS AS FOOD OF THE ROSEBREAST. 39 maple, box elder, and elm. Apparently some of these are greatly relished. G. E. Atkinson, of Ontario, says: : They cut off the buds [of beech] close to the twig, eat the soft pip, and drop the shells. On May 11,’I * * * saw three rose-breasted grosbeaks feeding, * * * occasionally darting out at a passing insect. I managed to secure one and its stomach was packed with these buds. The practical significance of the rosebreast’s budding has been the subject of widely varying opinions. Seventeen statements concern- ing the subject are at hand, which, briefly put, are as follows: One author holds the grosbeak injurious; one thinks it may possibly be so; two perceive very little damage; one considers any detriment in this way fully recompensed by the bird’s utility in other directions; ten assert that no harm whatever is done, and two declare that bud- ding is beneficial. It will be of interest to cite in full some of these diverse opinions. KE. A. Mearns writes: ” Soon after its arrival, the rose-breasted grosbeak appears about our houses, and, possibly, does some damage to the fruit crops by eating the blossoms in the orchards; it is especially fond of those of the cherry, and the rapidity with which it dispatches them is quite marvelous. H. D. Minot says: ¢ He * * * eats buds, often committing depredations on our fruit trees; and he must be considered as injurious to agriculture. He frequently plueks blossoms, and, dexterously cutting off the petals, ete., lets them fall, while he retains the ovary which contains the seeds. Commenting upon the latter author’s statement, William Brewster observes : @ There are no good reasons for assuming that this injures the trees or even their crops of fruit. On the contrary, both are ‘probably benefited by the process, which is, in effect, a sort of fruit pruning, seldom if ever more severe than that practiced by the thrifty horticulturists. It will have been noted that the above quotations refer to flowers, which, as previously stated, seem to be eaten much more commonly than leaf buds. Dr. B. H. Warren found flowers of hickory in 11 stomachs, those of beech in 26, maple in 3, and other blossoms in 23 stomachs collected during May in Pennsylvania. Dr. A. K. Fisher has observed rosebreasts feeding on the flowers of elm and walnut, and during the present investigation flowers of oaks were found in 4 stomachs, the blossoms in two of them being of the post oak (Quercus minor). No appreciable damage ensues from the bird’s habit of feeding on the flowers of forest trees, since the fruits of these trees @ Trans. Canad. Inst., III (1890-91), 1892, p. 40. > Bright Feathers of North American Birds of Beauty, F. R. Rathbun, 1881, pp. 31-82. ; ¢ Land Birds'and Game Birds of New England, 2d ed., 1895,. p. 241. 4 Loe. cit. 40 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. are of little economic value. Moreover, it is noticeable that the fruit- producing or pistillate flowers are not the ones preferred, but the sterile staminate ones. These are produced in countless millions, and wither and fall away after a short season. All of the. plants named above, whose seeds are even occasionally utilized by man, such as the hickories, walnuts, beech, and oaks, have the staminate and pis- tillate flowers separate, while no use is made of the seeds of the maple and elm, which have both sexes present in a single flower. Buds were found in but 2’stomachs, those in one being identified as poplar, and remains of tender young shoots of some woody plant were eaten by another grosbeak. These results indicate a much slighter preference for buds than the bird is usually credited with. But even admitting that the bird relishes buds, it is difficult to conceive how forest and shade trees, numerous as they are, can possibly be injured, since the rosebreast never gathers in large flocks during the budding season. With fruit trees the case ts different, for an isolated tree in a home garden may receive the attentions of several birds at the same time. But even then the chance of injury is slight, and in the major- ity of cases the tree, as stated above, receives no more than a bene- ficial pruning. CULTIVATED FRUIT, The rosebreast is said to feed occasionally on cultivated fruits, but no complaints of serious injury by the bird have been received. Most observers state that they lose but little fruit by grosbeaks, and this is considered only partial payment for services rendered. One cor- respondent, after mentioning the fact that the birds eat the potato beetle, says: They also feed on my bervies. Still I plant enough for all, and put up with the loss for the sake of their good qualities. The rosebreast is reported to attack cherries, currants, and other berries. During the examination of stomachs, however, cultivated fruit was found to have been eaten by only 1 grosbeak. This bird and a companion were collected in a cherry tree in Massachusetts, where they were suspected of pilfering the fruit. One had eaten perhaps a single mouthful of cherry, which constituted 18 percent of its stomach contents, and had eaten also some weevils, stink bugs, and a potato beetle, all highly injurious insects. Several other grosbeaks of the present collection were killed because they were thought to be eating fruit, but their stomachs yielded no trace of it. WILD FRUIT. While cultivated fruit is a negligible item of the rosebreasted grosbeak’s bill of fare, wild fruit, on the contrary, is the most im- portant single article, constituting 19.3 percent, or almost a fifth of WILD FRUIT EATEN BY THE ROSEBREAST. 41 the total food. Many different kinds of fruit are eaten, among which elderberries are probably of most importance. Both the com- mon sweet elder (Sambucus canadensis) and the red-berried elder (S. pubens) were identified. Nineteen birds had eaten these fruits, which often composed from 60 to 90 percent of the stomach contents. In the gizzard of 1-grosbeak were found fully 200 seeds, which means that no less than 40 to 50 berries were taken at one meal. Blackberries and raspberries rank next in preference, 17 birds having eaten them, and they sometimes constitute 80 percent of the food of individual birds. Mulberries also are relished, the rosebreast often being observed feeding on the wild red mulberry (J/orus rubra). June berries (Amelanchier canadensis, Plate IT, fig. 3) were eaten by 3 of the grosbeaks examined, 80 seeds being discovered in 1 stomach. Eight or more of these rather large fruits must therefore have been taken by this bird. Among other wild fruits eaten by the birds examined are wild red and black cherries (Plate IT, fig. 1), choke cherry, rough- leaved dogwood (Plate II, fig. 6), winter- green, checkerberry, red haw, strawberry. supple-jack, and pokeberry (Plate IT, fig. 4). In addition to these, authors and correspondents add flowering dogwood ‘(Plate IT, fig. 5), juniper, and sour gum. WEEDS. 6 ba : Pa Although this grosbeak is not particu- F'* ees of black ae Jarly fond of the seeds of weeds, it takes bees (From Hillman, Ne part in the warfare which birds wage vada Experiment Station.) against these misplaced plants, and attacks some very troublesome species. Fifteen and three-fourths percent of the bird’s food is com- posed of weed seed, and a greater proportion is consumed in August and September than in other months. The seeds of smartweed and bindweed (fig. 21), species unfavorably known both in country and town, were selected by the greater number of rosebreasts. Those of tumbleweed or amaranth (fig. 18) are next in favor, and when eaten at all almost invariably compose the major part of the stomach contents. These weeds are obnoxious almost everywhere, and their bad qualities are universally acknowledged. Seeds of foxtail (figs. 17 and 37), — highly valued in the dietary of many birds, were fed upon by but 2 rose-breasted grosbeaks, and other grass seeds—a small wild oat in 2 cases—were eaten by 4 of the birds examined. Nightshade and sedge seeds were each selected by the same number of birds. The akenes of both common (fig. 6) and giant ragweed were sampled, and 42 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS, the seeds of vervain (fig. 3) and [dock are occasionally devoured. Milkweed and sunflower are added to this list by other writers. . MISCELLANEOUS VEGETABLE FOOD. oe The rosebreast feeds upon some vegetable matter which does not fall into any of the previously discussed categories. Seeds of the touch-me-not and blood-root, plants widely known for their flowers, are examples. Each was eaten by 1 individual, and 1 fed upon red- bud seeds also, which constituted 80 per cent of its stomach contents. The spiny, globe-like fruits of the sweet gum (Liguidambar styra- ciflua) are bitten into occasionally, but the remains found in the stomach so resemble another but unknown substance that it was pos- sible to identify them certainly in only one instance, and then by means of the very characteristic fertile seeds. The pendent sycamore , balls are sometimes rifled of their seed, as also are the aments of alder and birch. Among the objects most. puzzling to classify economically are the curious excrescences of plants, known as galls. These, as is well known, are nurseries for insects, within which the larve develop. They are eaten by many birds, extensively by some, and in an instance cited by Dr. A. D. Hopkins,* turkeys, chickens, and even hogs and cattle fattened on an abundant gall of the black oak, known in Mis- souri and Arkansas as “ oak wheat” or “ wheat mast.” An analysis accompanies this note which leaves no doubt that the nourishing elements of galls are of vegetable, not animal, origin. Although this may not be true of all galls, such as certain thin-walled kinds made by plant lice in which at the ‘proper stage the bulk of the imprisoned insects exceeds that of the shell, yet generally, no doubt, it is safe to classify galls as vegetable food. This has been done in the case of those eaten by grosbeaks. Nine rosebreasts had eaten galls, but in only one instance did they compose as much as half the food. The galls eaten appeared to be similar to the spherical species common on oaks. ANIMAL Foop. Animal food, consisting almost exclusively of insects, composes 52 percent of the food of the rose-breasted grosbeak. Nearly 36 per- cent is beetles, 3.82 percent caterpillars, 6.48 percent Hymenoptera, and 2.88 percent scale insects, the remainder (about 3.33 percent). being made up from several other groups of invertebrates. While the rosebreast feeds upon a large number of formidable insect pests, it devours some beneficial species also. The latter are accorded prior consideration. ’ «Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash., V, 1908, pp. 151-152. USEFUL INSECTS EATEN BY THE ROSEBREAST. 43 As just noted, almost 6.5 percent of the total food is Hymenoptera, and’as this group contains some of the most useful of all insects, it must be ascertained how many, if any, of these forms fall a prey to the bird. The beneficial Hymenoptera are the small parasitic species, the eggs of which are deposited in the bodies of caterpillars and in the éggs of many insects, to develop there and later destroy their hosts, and the larger wasps, which store up caterpillars and other creatures as food for their young. Very few parasitic species were found in the stomachs, the larger Hymenoptera apparently being preferred. In many cases a single wasp composed from 40 to 90 percent of the stomach contents of individual grosbeaks. It is pos- sible that among these are some of the highly beneficial solitary wasps, but the probabilities are that most of them belong to the more abundant, gregarious species, which although often beneficial would lose little by the destruction of few of their number. Fifty-four of the 176 grosbeaks examined were found to have eaten Hymenoptera of some sort, which shows that the bird has a decided liking for these insects; but, as just mentioned, few bene- ficial species are eaten, while a number of injurious ones are devoured. One grosbeak secured a cuckoo fly (CArysis sp.), which is a parasite of the useful solitary wasps. Three fed upon sawfly larvee, which have habits like caterpillars, and are injurious to roses, currants, pear, willow, and other plants. One bird when collected had 10 sawfly larve in its beak, which it was probably gathering for its young; while in the stomach of another grosbeak were 24 of these larve, which constituted 60 percent of the contents. The few ants taken are injurious, especially those of the genus Camponotus, which sometimes devour the wood of living trees, hollowing them out to mere shells. Two rosebreasts ate little mining bees (Andrena), one consuming 26 of these and nothing else. They have no special economic significance except as carriers of pollen. Passing now to beetles, this grosbeak was found to prey upon members of three useful families, the ground-beetles (Carabide), ladybirds (Coccinellide), and fireflies (Lampyride). Seven birds ate predaceous ground-beetles, but since they compose only a little more than 0.5 percent of the food from May to September, little harm is done. One of the 7 grosbeaks captured a large shining black ground-beetle (Pasimachus depressus), which is about an inch in length and is one of the most powerful insects of the family. Three birds ate coccinellid beetles, one securing a twice-stabbed ladybird (Chilocorus bivulnerus), a noted enemy of scale insects. If many such beetles were eaten, damage would be done, but as they compose less than 0.2 percent of the total food, it is evident that only occasionally one is snapped up. Moreover, the grosbeak compensates 44 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. for any injury done in this way by feeding upon the prey of these beetles—the scale insects. Fireflies, which are predaceous both i in the larval and adult stage, are constantly fed upon by grosbeaks. These insects are supposed to be excellent examples of protected species, having the power of secret- ing nauseous juices, while the “ fire ” is supposed to act as a warning signal and certify the bearer’s identity to its enemies. It is said that some birds refuse them. However, since 28 rose-breasted grosbeaks fed upon them and 6 to 12 of the beetles were found in single stom- achs, they must be relished by this species at least. Fireflies prey upon many important agricultural pests; hence the destruction of any considerable number of them is a loss; and while but 2.71 per- cent of the grosbeak’s food consists of these useful beetles, the bird is chargeable with a distinctively injurious habit. Thus far only a fourth of the rosebreast’s animal food has been discussed. Less than half this amount, or only about a tenth of the total animal matter, is made up of beneficial insects whose destruc- tion is a loss to man. The remaining nine-tenths con- sists in part of insects of neutral import, but mostly of positively injurious species. Included in the latter category are the bronzy wood- borers (Buprestide), among the most serious pests to fruit and forest. trees. The larve, known as flat- headed borers, do the mischief, often killing trees by rt ee tia completely girdling them just under the outer bark. uprestid : i 4 : (Chalcophore The adults are incased in a glittering coat of hardest Alaa be mail, and although they expose themselves on flowers reau of Ento- and leaves or on the limbs of trees, they are not fed mology. upon to a marked degree by most birds. The rose- breasted grosbeak, however, seems to relish them, 3.02 percent of its food being composed of these well-protected beetles. The larger spe- cies are sopietimes captured, one grosbeak having obtained the bulky buprestid Chalcophora virginiensis (fig. 22), which is very destruc- tive to pines. This species is an inch in length and as firm and hard as a nut. Smaller species of another genus (Dicerca, including D. obscura), which feed on hickory and other deciduous trees, also are devoured. Many others not identified were eaten by the 26 grosbeaks which secured buprestids, and the rosebreast must be characterized as one of the important enemies of these beetles. Resembling the buprestids in compact build and equaling them in evil qualities are the click-beetles (Elateride), the larve of which are commonly known as wireworms. Their attacks on meadow- grass, grains, and strawberries are of annual occurrence, and result in much damage. Twenty-three grosbeaks, or about one-seventh of aX INJURIOUS INSECTS EATEN BY THE ROSEBREAST. 45 the number examined. devoured click-beetles. thus benefiting the farmer considerably. Not so many of the birds fed upon long-horned borers, but the re- sulting benefits are less valuable only in degree, as the beetles of this family are often disastrous pests. They are frequently large and ’ strikingly colored, and one of the handsomest, as well as the most injurious kinds, the painted hickory borer (Cyllene pictus) is eaten by the rosebreast. This insect is known as the commonest and most destructive pest of the hickory. Another borer also (Phymatodes varius), which lives in dead wood, and which is sometimes injurious to the tanbark industry in the South, is devoured. The rosebreast shows particular fondness for large beetles, a taste readily gratified among the lamellicorn or scarabeid beetles. Among these larger species, beetles of the genus Dichelonycha, which feed upon flowers and sometimes are destructive to cultivated plants, were eaten by 9 rosebreasts. Six ate cetoniids (Euphoria fulgida, et al.), which are es- pecially adapted -for feeding on flowers, and which also at times turn their atten- tion to fruit and the tassels, silk, and young grains of corn. The beautiful and bulky goldsmith beetle, about three- fourths of an inch long. is captured oc- casionally, and for this service the bird is to be commended, as sometimes the larve are very destructive to strawber- “_ : ries. A white grub or larva of a june- a hateriay qranariasl. girs bug was the plump morsel obtained by rots Illinois Experiment another grosbeak. The ravages of this : beetle in lawns and strawberry plots are well known. The bird feeds also upon another good-sized scarabeid (nomala binotata). which injures grapes and other plants. Among the smaller members of this family the dung beetles, which occur in large numbers, flying near the ground along country roads. are frequently captured by this grosbeak. Most of them are of neutral economic position, but one species (Aphodius granarius, fig. 23), burrows into sprouting corn. Having this bad habit, the farmer is indebted to the grosbeak for preying upon it. Passing to a group of beetles. the weevils, which are an important element of the food of most birds, and which are so uniformly in- jurious that almost any one of them may be deemed a pest, it is grati- fying to note that the rosebreast does its share toward checking them. Moreover, among the kinds it eats is one of the very worst enemies of cultivated fruit in the United States, namely, the plum curculio (Conotrachelus nenuphar, fig. 24). One grosbeak devoured 46 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS., three of these destructive weevils, which may be taken as indicating that an opportunity to feed on them is not overlooked. In this ¢on- nection it is’ of interest to recall the other birds that are known to prey upon this pest. They are 8 in number: Great-crested flycatcher, Baltimore and orchard orioles, yellow-throated vireo, bank swallow, veery, hermit thrush, and bluebitd. The grosbeak does not confine itself to the plum curculio, but evinces a taste for related species, two of which were identified. These infest the hackberry and hick- ory, respectively. A fourth kind was present in the stomachs, but could not be assigned a specific name. The curculios destroy a large proportion of the fruit of the trees they attack, and are capable of doing vast damage; hence the services of the birds that devour them are of great value. Related to the curculios are the nut weevils (Balaninus), which attack their favorite plants in much the same way, and often ruin the crop of nut-bearing trees. Six grosbeaks ate from 1 to 3 each of these weevils, one bird captur- ing 2 acorn weevils (B. nasicus). Another cur- culionid (Hylobius pales), which feeds both in living pine trees and pine logs, is included in ; the grosbeak’s diet, and Fie. 24.—Plum cureulio (Conotrachelus nenuphar). 2 weevil (Ampeloglypter (From Chittenden, Bureau of Entomology.) ; sesostris) ; which infests the Virginia creeper, was highly relished by an Illinois rosebreast, 11 being eaten, which constituted 74 percent of the stomach contents. Others in the same group are consumed, as many as 4 or 5 being eaten by individuals of the more than 20 birds which fed upon them. A second family of weevils, the scarred snout-beetles, also con- tributes to the fare of this grosbeak, and four of them composed 87 percent of the food of one bird; while another rosebreast, one of four which fed upon clover weevils (Sitones), captured 13. Billbugs (Calandride) are represented in the bird’s diet by the conspicuously red and black colored snout-beetle (Rhodobaenus 13-punctatus), com- mon on thoroughwort (Zupatorium). A weevil of yet another branch of the suborder is sometimes devoured, namely, the peculiar brenthid (Eupsalis minuta), a very slender weevil which bores into living oak. Altogether weevils constitute 3.64 per cent of the rosebreast’s food, in which amount are included several great pests; hence the bird’s weevil-eating propensities result in much benefit to man. ROSEBREAST VS. POTATO BEETLE. 47 There remains for consideration the family of beetles which con- tributes most largely to the grosbeak’s subsistence, namely, the leaf- beetles (Chrysomelide). This family, as an item of food of the rosebreast, is not only most important among beetles, but is only second among both animal and vegetable items. In it are’ included a number of pests preyed upon by the bird, such as the striped and spotted cucumber beetles, the strawberry, —— the plum leaf- beetle, the locust leaf-miner, and in addition that pest which figures so largely in any discussion a the economic value.of the rose-breasted grosbeak, the notorious Colorado potato beetle (fig. 25). The original home of this insect was in Mexico and the Rocky Mountains, where it fed upon the sand-bur (Solanum rostratum), a plant closely related to the potato. Finding a new and abundant supply of food in the cultivated potato, the beetle immediately began to multiply and to migrate eastward, spreading from 1850 to 1874 over the northern half of the eastern United States. As it encount- ered practically no enemies in ‘its new home it became so abundant and inflicted so great damage that successful cultivation of potatoes seemed no longer possible. However, just as the beetle found .a new food, so it in turn be- came new food to a number of mammals, birds, and insects, and presently the farmers Fic. 25.—Potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata). learned to destroy it (From Chittenden, Bureau of Entomology.) in large numbers with poisons. Hence it is no longer greatly dreaded, though in most sections constant vigilance must be exercised to prevent it from ruining the crop. Naturally during the period when the beetle was doing most dam- age everyone was on the lookout for means of checking its increase, and the discovery of each new natural enemy was heralded far and wide. Attracting most notice among these was the rose-breasted gros- beak, and many articles were written calling attention to the newly discovered trait of this beautiful bird. It should be noted also that several other birds, including the bobwhite, prairie chicken, sharp- tailed and ruffed grouse, red-tailed hawk, nighthawk, cuckoo, crow, English sparrow, cardinal, scarlet tanager, wood, hermit, and olive- backed thrushes, and robin, eat potato beetles occasionally. The grosbeak’s habit of feeding on the potato beetle was noted almost simultaneously in many localities, and references are at hand for the States of Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio. The rosebreast actually exterminated the po- 18848—Bull, 32—08——4 48 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. tato beetle in many patches it patrolled. Mr. W. F. Bundy,* who was among the earliest to write upon the subject, says: I noticed last summer that great numbers of the Colorado potato beetles were destroyed by the rosebreasted grosbeak. * * * They were so abundant in this region [Jefferson, Wis.] * * * as to hold in check the vast army of these ravagers of the potato crop. The beetles are attacked as soon as they emerge from their winter quarters, according to Mr. J. S. Cook, of northern Illinois, who says: I have seen them *so gorge themselves with these beetles that they were scarcely able to fly. I have investigated in the spring, when the beetles first came out of the ground, and was unable to find a single one after following these birds. : Further testimony to the value of the bird is given by Prof. F. E. L. Beal,¢ who watched the grosbeaks and their young feeding upon the potato bugs in his garden at Ames, Iowa: When a careful inspection was made a few days later not a beetle, old ér young, could be found; the birds had swept them from the field and saved the potatoes. Comparison of the dates of the first appearance of the Colorado beetle with the earliest records when the rose-breasted grosbeak fed upon it shows that from six to ten years passed before the bird com- monly began to prey upon the insect. Even after the lapse of so much time it was one of the first enemies of the beetle noted and by far the most important among birds. The results of stomach examinations fully corroborate the testi- mony of field observers as to the extent to which the rosebreast feeds upon this beetle. Forty-three, or almost one-fourth of the birds examined, fed upon the potato beetle to such an extent that the in- sect makes up 9.05 percent of the subsistence of the entire number and nearly 35 percent of that of the individuals eating it. The significance of these figures will be better appreciated when it is considered that the potato beetle probably was not obtainable by many of the grosbeaks, and furthermore, that it is very unusual for birds to prey so extensively upon a single kind of insect, or even on the species collectively of a whole group. Such concentration of attack of a common bird upon a single species of insect, however numerous, can not but have a restraining influence on its numbers. The beetle is fed upon from May to September and both larve and adults are devoured, 10 to 14 being found in single stomachs. By feeding upon the larve the rosebreast directly benefits the potato plants, and by destroying adults the increase of the species is checked. @ Am. Nat., IX, 1875, p. 375. o> Trans. Ill. Hort. Soc., 37 (1903), 1904, pp. 331-332. ¢U. S. Dept. Agr., Farmers’ Bul, 54, 1904, p. 35, LEAF-BEETLES EATEN BY THE ROSEBREAST. 49 Although the potato beetle is the worst: pest in the Chrysomelide, this family contains other serious enemies of crops. The rosebreast feeds upon several of them, thereby further commending itself to our esteem. Both the small striped and the spotted cucumber beetles (fig. 26), which are abundant and injurious over much of the United States, are consumed. The importance of the bird’s inroads upon one of these little black and yellow species, which in the larval stage is the destructive corn root-worm, is emphasized by the fact that no direct. method of combating the insect has yet been devised. Twelve gros- beaks fed upon these beetles, as many as 7 being found in a single stomach. Further evidence of the bird’s strong preference for them is furnished by Mr. Ridgway, who observed a number of rosebreasts feeding exclusively on spotted cucumber beetles in a locality where the latter were very abundant. Ten of the gros- beaks examined had eaten another kind of leaf-beetle (Melasoma lappon- ica), which feeds on willows and pop- lars, sometimes working havoc by defoliating trees, especially in wind- breaks. These Le ie Sop. beetles appear to esate . d be much relished, Fic. 26.—Spotted cucumber-beetle (Diabrotica 12-punctata). as from 10 to oF (From Riley and Chittenden, Bureau of Entomology.) were taken by individual rosebreasts, of whose food they composed from 60 to almest 100 percent. Two or three other species of Chry- somelide, injurious to willows, to grapes, and to garden crops, are devoured. Nine birds ate beetles of one of these species (Calligrapha bigsbyana), which in individual cases constituted 70 per cent of the stomach contents. The rosebreast devours also two Hispid leaf- beetles, one of which causes considerable injury. This is the locust leaf-miner (Odontota dorsalis), which sometimes devastates whole- groups of trees, leaving. them as if scorched by fire. Eight grosbeaks had eaten leaf-miners, ard in one case 8 were consumed by a single bird. The long list of beetles of this family that are preyed upon by the rosebreast is completed by the strawberry root-worm (Z'ypophorus 4 50 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. canellus), which at times is very destructive, the plum leaf-beetle (Nodonota tristis), which causes dropping of cotton bolls, a species (Griburius equestris) which feeds on wild roses, and another wild- flower beetle (Cryptocephalus quadrimaculatus). With the Chrysomelide is concluded also the list of principal Coleopterous families. The grosbeak eats few others. One rose- breast devoured 5 of the decidedly malodorous burying beetles ‘(Stipha noveboracensis), which feed on carrion, while another cap- tured one hard, polished Hister, an insect of similar habits. Sixteen of the little orange and black ps fasciatus were secured by one of the three birds which fed upon this occasional depredator of stored vegetables and grain. It thus appears that a large number of the beetle enemies of agri- culture are preyed upon by the rose-breasted grosbeak. An almost equal array of serious pests is secured from the ranks of another order, which is eaten to only one-ninth the extent that beetles are, namely, the moth and butterfly order or Lepidoptera, This group may be discusséd conveniently under the heads“ larvee ” and “adults.” The latter do-not seem to be eaten to any great extent by birds, and only 2 rosebreasts fed upon them. Four moths were secured, but they composed less than 0.2 percent of the total food. The larve or caterpillars, however, are more generally relished by birds and often are eaten in large numbers. Twenty-two gut of the 176 rosebreasts had eaten caterpillars, some of them securing from 6 to 14 each, which usually constituted from 50 to 85 percent of the stomach contents. They make up 3.82 percent of the entire food of all the rosebreasts examined. It is well known that at times the depredations of lepidopterous insects, such as canker worms, tent caterpillars, gipsy moths, and many others, are very serious, threatening ruin to orchards and even large forests, and thus becoming of State, if not National, importance. The difficulties encountered in combating such pests render the aid of natural enemies most valuable. It should be widely known that the rose-breasted grosbeak is conspicuous among the enemies of these insects, and also that it feeds upon no fewer than eight of the very worst lepidopterous pests. Among the more widely known of these are the canker. worms, which are very destructive to both orchards and woodlands. They often strip orchards so that they appear as if fire swept, and when their attacks are continued for a few years the trees die. The rose- breasted grosbeak devours both the spring canker worm (Paleacrita vernata, fig. 35) and the fall canker worm (Alsophila pometaria, fig. 27). Two birds collected in Illinois in May had fed upon the former caterpillar, while O. W. Knight testifies that in Pleasant Valley, Me., the birds actively attack the other. ROSEBREAST VS. HAIRY CATERPILLARS. 51 The dreaded army worm (Heliophila unipuncta, fig. 28), which sometimes appears in myriads and devastate fields of grain and grass, also is the prey of this beautiful grosbeak. A bird from Illinois in July had captured 6 of these destructive caterpillars. The tent-caterpillars are another group of noxious lepidopterous insects, which are common in many parts of the United States. They greatly damage orchards, as well as shade and woodland trees. E. H. Forbush * is authority for the state- ment that the rose-breasted gros- beak preys upon the orchard tent- caterpillar (Malacosoma americana, fig. 29), and Prof. C. M. Weed? "20 fai cantermorm (Avert reports that the bird devours Entomology.) moths, larva, and pupe of the forest,tent-caterpillar (J/. disstria). Two other insects of this order, which are usually thought of together and which indeed are closely related, are the gipsy moth (fig. 30) and the brown-tailed moth (fig. 31). _ Mere mention. of their names calls to mind the _ enormous damage done by them in the State of ”’ Massachusefits, and of the costly efforts being ’ made to stamp out these disastrous - invaders from across the sea. Birds have proved of serv- ice as allies in this struggle, and the present species is by no means least in importance among them. In the original report ’,on the gipsy moth, as well as in later publications,? the rosebreast is listed among the species de- vouring the larve, while in regard to the brown-tail moth Messrs. Mosher and Kirkland report ¢ that ‘“‘a rose-breasted grosbeak ate 57 : caterpillars in twenty minutes.” Fie. 28.— Army worm B 5 iq $ . ‘ (Heliophila unipuncta). This species eats hairy and spiny caterpillars ee as readily as sméoth ones, and the idea so often “advanced that such hairy armature is effective protection against the attack of birds receives little support from the food habits of the grosbeaks. Tussock and gipsy moths and both of the tent caterpillars are devoured, though very hairy. The “Mass. State Bd. Agr. Rep. (1900), 1901, p. 315. ON. H. Exp. Sta. Bull. 75, 1900, p. 121. ¢ Forbush, E. H., and Fernald, C. H., The Gipsy Moth, 1896, p. 219. 4 Forbush, E. H., Mass. State Bd. Agr. Rep. (1900), 1901, p. 313. ¢ Forbush, E. H., Mass. State Bd. Agr. Rep., 1899, p. 322. 52 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. browntail, the hairs of which so irritate human flesh, also is eagerly eaten, and other caterpillars clothed with spines were found in the stomachs examined. In several gizzards; indeed, a mass of branching caterpillar spines was all that remained to show the nature of the \ f Fig. 29.—Orchard ' tent-caterpillar (Malacosoma americana). (From Riley, Bureau of Entomology.) food. It is evident that neither hairs nor even pricking, stinging spines are adequate to protect a caterpillar from a hungry grosbeak. Besides Hymenoptera, Coleoptera, and Lepidoptera, which have been discussed in the order named, but one group of insects of impor- tance in the dietary of the rosebreast. remains, that of true bugs (Hemiptera), includ- ing the stink bugs, tree hoppers, plant lice, and scale insects. From this miscellaneous as- semblage the grosbeak Fig. 30.—Gipsy ‘moth caterpillar (Porthetria dispar). gelects 3.89 per cent of (From Bureau of Entomology.) ats tae d, and two- thirds of this amount consists of the minute pests known as scale insects. From an economic standpoint also the latter are of great- est importance, as they rank among the worst enemies of agriculture in the United States. Orchards, both of the deciduous and citrus x ROSEBREAST VS. SCALE INSECTS. 53 fruits, are most seriously affected, while shade and forest trees also suffer greatly. Thirty-three of the rosebreasts examined had eaten scale insects, four tkinds of which were identified. The plum scale (Eulecanium cerasifex), which is an occasional pest on cherry, apple, and pear, besides the tree from which it is named, seems to be relished. A female grosbeak collected in Indiana in May had consumed 36 plum scales, which constituted 95 percent of its food. Of two birds from Tllinois, one ate 45 and the other more than 100 scales of this species, which composed 95 and 100 percent, respectively, of their stomach contents. Two nearly related species, the hickory scale (Z. cary) and the tulip scale (Z. éulipifere), which latter sometimes seriously Fic. 27,—Byown-tail moth (Huproctis chrysorrhoea). (From Howard, Bureau of Ento- mology.) . injures shade trees, also are devoured. Eleven grosbeaks ate uni- dentified species of the same genus of scale insects; two preyed upon the oak scale (Hermes), while the stomachs of 15 birds contained scale remains which defied determination. The fact that birds exert a restrictive influence upon scales has re- mained almost unknown, these small insects being considered well protected from feathered enemiies by their minute size and waxy secretions. Hence little attention has been paid to the subject, and the accounts of a few writers who announced the true relations of birds to scales were overlooked or ignored. Recent investigations have shown that many of our birds eat scales. The rose-breasted gros- beak is prominent among them, both because it eats a maximum num- 54 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. ber of species and because at times it makes scales a considerable part of its fare. These little pests can not have too many enemies for the good of mankind, and every bird that preys upon them should be wel- comed and protected. The rosebreast sometimes feeds upon plant lice (Aphididae), espe- cially those that live on birch; and a number of these fragile insects were found in a single stomach. Among other bugs, the odd little buffalo tree-hopper (Ceresa bubalus, fig. 32), and a few of the flower- bug and squash-bug families were found. Eight grosbeaks ate mem- bers of the stink-bug family. In feeding upon these insects the rose- breast gives further evidence of its indifference to flavors and odors which to us are repulsive and nauseating in the extreme. Two of the birds examined had devoured specimens of the banded soldier bug Ita. 32.—Buffalo: tree-hopper (Ceresa bubalus). (From Marlatt, Bureau of Entomology.) (Milyas cinctus), which preys upon many insects, including the po- tato beetle, and of another assassin bug (Sinea diadema), which preys upon cankerworms and other caterpillars, besides flies and bees, including the honey bee. Were the habit of devouring such bugs general, injury would result, but fortunately it is not. According to B. F. Gault, the rosebreast feeds upon the chinch bug, which at times has proved the worst crop pest in the.country. A remarkable feature of the rosebreast’s dietary is the few grass- hoppers eaten. These nutritious insects, which are welcomed ~by almost all birds, compose only 0.2 percent of the food of the whole number of grosbeaks examined. Results from the present collection of stomachs may not represent a fair average, but as proportionate numbers of the individuals examined were secured in the grass- FOOD OF NESTLING ROSEBREASTS. 55 hopper season the data indicates at least a well-defined tendency of the bird to neglect them. That it does not actually dislike grasshop- pers there is sufficient proof, for John Bachman wrote to Audubon « that a caged specimen “ate grasshoppers and crickets with peculiar relish,” and Samuel Aughey ® examined two specimens collected dur- ing one of the historic invasions of the Rocky Mountain locust, each of which “ had about a dozen of locusts in its stomach.” Comparatively little weight, however, attaches to these instances, since the conditions were unusual. It is worthy of note, that the closely related blackheaded grosbeak similarly neglects grasshoppers. Four rosebreasts fed upon this class of insects, 2 securing the pe- culiar shield-back grasshoppers, in one case to the number of 6, which composed 85 percent of the stomach contents, while the other 2 birds had eaten an ordinary grasshopper and an orthopterous in- sect not identified. The small quantity of animal matter not yet detailed comprises spiders and their egg-sacs, which were eaten by 3 grosbeaks, and insect eggs and a fly by 1 each. Only 1 bird of this species had eaten a snail, which indicates that the rosebreast cares less for this kind of food than does the cardinal. ; MINERAL MATTER. Mineral matter, estimated in relation to the entire stomach con-- tents, averaged 6.3 pereent. Besides the ordinary sand and fine gravel, fragments of fossil corals and crinoids had been utilized for grinding material. . NESTLINGS. Of the total.number of birds only 4 were young still being fed by their parents, but, as usual among species whose diet is mixed, the proportion of animal food to vegetable is much greater in the case of fledglings than of adults. These 4 young rosebreasts consumed 78 per cent of animal and 22 per cent of vegetable matter. The 2 that were out of the nest were more highly vegetarian, one having eaten 85 per cent of plant substances. The latter were a berry of -rough-leaved dogwood, some blackberries, of which 45:pits were pres- ent, and a few other seeds. Of the animal food consumed by the 4 young birds, caterpillars compose 20 percent, among them being the larve of sphinx moths, most of which are injurious to agricul- ture. Almost 25 percent: is composed of beetles of various families, including bronzy wood-borers, click-beetles, and leaf-beetles. Repre- senting the last family are the species Melasoma lapponica, which injures willow and cottonwood windbreaks, and that noted pest the ¢Audubon, J. J., Birds of America, ITI,-1841, p. 211. dFirst Ann. Rept. U. S. Ent. Comm., 1878, App. II, p. 32. 56 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. Colorado potato beetle. Two stomachs of nestlings containéd this lat- ter nauseous insect, larvee being found in one, adults in. another. Wasps composed almost half of the food of ‘one fledgling, and a weevil and some small cocoons constituted the remaining animal matter. Passing from these results of actual stomach examination to the experiences of observers,-it should be noted that the rosebreast’s habit of feeding its nestlings the larve of the potato beetle is fre- quently recorded. This fact is one of the best evidences of the importance of this beetle in the grosbeak’s regimen. Prof. F. E. L. Beal’ speaks of “a small potato field, which earlier in the season was so badly infested * * * that the vines were completely rid- dled. The grosbeaks visited the field every day, and finally brought their fledged young. The young birds stdod in a row on the topmost rail of the fence and were fed with the beetles which their parents gathered.” Prof. E. F. Hitchings, State entomologist of Maine, gives the following interesting note: Several years ago I observed a pair nesting in a clump of trees in * * * Waterville. A piece of potatoes was planted near by, and I watched the parent birds as they fed their young on the larve of the Colorado potato beetle. I examined the bills of the young and found them stained and even dripping with the juice of the insects. It took a great many young larve to satisfy them. (May 19, 1906.) When we reflect that every year there are thousands of grosbeak families throughout the breeding range of the species doing exactly the same thing, it can not be doubted that they exert a marked effect on the numbers of the potato beetle. The voracity of nestlings is proverbial, and their lusty appetites greatly enhance theiy value as destroyers of injurious insects. The number of insects eaten daily ‘by nestlings has been recorded in the _case of but few birds; hence we are fortunate in having E. H. For-. bush’s account of a study of the nestlings of the rosebreast : On June 12, 1899, Mr. Mosher watched the nest of a pair of rose-breasted gros- beaks from early morning to5 p.m. * * * For the first half hour the old birds were so excited by his presence that the feeding of the young birds was ° interrupted, so that no notes were taken until 6 a. m., and none were taken after . 5 p.m. The old birds visited the nest— Times Times. Between 6 and 7_-_------------- 52 | Between 12 and 1_--_---___--____ 32 Between 7 and 8___------------- 47 | Between 1 and 2_____--_________ 38 Between 8 and 9__--_------------ 43 | Between 2 and 3_---------___--- 41 Between 9 and 10_-------------- 30 | Between 3 and 4__------__-__-__ 22 Between 10 and 11__-----__----- 36 | Between 4 and 5_-_-----------_-_ 58 Between 11 and 12__------:__-_- 27 : A making altogether 426 visits during the portion of the day that they were watched. The food was mainly caterpillars of one kind or another, and there 4 Farmers’ Bull. 54, 1904, p. 35. ( SUMMARY OF ROSEBREAST’S FOOD HABITS. 57 were only four visits made by a parent bird when but one insect was fed to the young; they usually brought three or more. A bird often carries in this way from three to eleven or twelve small caterpillars in its mouth and beak at one time. Owing to the height of the nest above the ground, it was impossible to determine accurately the species of caterpillars brought to the young. A con- siderable portion of them were certainly leaf-rollers from the oak trees. It seems probable, then, that these two birds must have fed their young on that day at least 1,000 insects, mostly caterpillars. This certainly is a very moderate estimate of the number of insects destroyed in one day by the family when we _ take into consideration the food required by the old birds.¢ Although in this particular instance the precise nature of the food was not ascertained, there is much evidence to show that the same pests are fed to the young which are eaten by adults. SumMMaRY. Examinations of 176 stomachs of rose-breasted grosbeaks show that the food is composed of animal and vegetable matter in almost equal parts, the exact proportions being 52 and 48 percent, respec- tively. Of the portion of the diet gleaned from the plant kingdom, 5.09 percent is grain, 1.87 garden peas, and 19.3 wild fruit. A third of the grain eaten may possibly be pillaged from standing crops, but this is the only stage when injury by birds is not easily pre- vented. Even if the total amount of grain consumed is pilfered. frorn cultivated fields, it does not warrant hostile acts against a bird otherwise so beneficial. . Wild fruit is greatly relished, but cultivated fruit is not damaged, and although budding is practiced to a certain degree practically no harm results. , The rosebreast preys to some extent upon such beneficial insects as parasitic Hymenoptera, ground beetles, ladybirds, ‘and fireflies. Only a tenth of the animal food is of this character, however, while among the remaining nine-tenths, which consists almost exclusively of injurious insects, is included a large number of formidable pests. Among these are the cucumber beetles, the hickory borer, plum cur- culio, Colorado potato beetle, Rocky Mountain locust, spring and fall cankerworms, orchard and forest tent-caterpillars, tussock moth, army worm, gipsy and brown-tailed moths, and the chinch bug. The bird is known as an active enemy of the cankerworm and the army worm during their extraordinary infestations, and was among the birds which preyed upon the Rocky Mountain locust and the gipsy moth at the height of their destructiveness. Few birds have so good record both as to the large number of important pests attacked and the slight amount of damage done. * Forty-seventh Annual Report Mass. State Board of Agriculture (1899) 1901, p. 325. Zi 58 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. \ LIST OF SEEDS, FRUITS, OTHER VEGETABLE SUBSTANCES, AND INVERTE- BRATES EATEN BY THE ROSE-BREASTED GROSBEAK. CULTIVATED PLANTS. ~ Corn (Zea mays). Oats (Avena sativa). Wheat (Triticum vulgare). Cherry (Prunus cerasus). Peas (Pisum sativum). WILD FRUITS. Mulberry (Morus rubra). Pokeberry (Phytolacca decandra). Sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua). Blackberry (Rubus sp.). Strawberry (Fragaria sp.). Juneberry (Amelanchier canadensis). Red haw (Crataegus sp.). Wild red cherry (Prunus pennsyl- vanica). Choke cherry (Prunus virginiana). Wild black cherry (Prunus serotina). Redbud (Cercis canadensis). Supple-jack (Berchemia scandens). Rough-leaved cornel (Cornus asperi- folia). Checkerberry bens). Nightshade (Solanum sp.). Sweet elder (Sambucus canadensis). QRed-berried elder (Sambucus pubens). (Gaultheria procum- BUDS AND FLOWERS. Cottonwood (Populus sp.). | Post oak (Quercus minor). WEEDS. Green foxtail (Chetochloa viridis). Sedge (Carex sp.). Knotgrass (Polygonum aviculare). Pale persicaria (Polygonum lapathi- folium). ‘Pennsylvania persicaria (Polygonum pennsylvanicum ) ‘ Black bindweed (Polygonum convolvu- lus). Dock (Rumezx sp.). Pigweed (Amaranthus sp.). Bloodroot ‘ (Sanguinaria canadensis). Wild radish (Raphanus sativus). Youch-me-not (Impatiens biflora). Dodder (Cuscuta sp.). Plue vervain (Verbena hastata). Giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida). COLEOPTERA. Ground-beetles (Carabide) : Pasimachus depressus. Ladybirds (Coccinellide) : Chilocorus bivulnerus. Brachyacantha ursina. Histeridee : Hister sp. Nitidulids : Ips fasciatus. Click-beetles (Hlateride). Bronzy wood-borers (Buprestide) : Chalcophora virginiensis. Dicerca obscura. Fireflies (Lampyride) : Ellychnia corrusca. Photinus pyralis. Podabrus tomentosus. Telephorus bilineatus. Telephorus carolinus. Telephorus rotundicollis. Lamellicorn beetles (Scarabride) : Aphodius fimetarius. Aphodius granarius. Aphodius inquinatus. Dichelonycha elongata. Lachnosterna sp. LIST OF SEEDS, FRUITS, ETC. 59 COLEOPTERA—continued. Lamellicorn beetles—Continued. Cotalpa lanigera. Euphoria fulgida. Long-horned beetles (Cerambycide) : Phymatodes varius. Cyllene pictus. Leptura sp. Leaf-beetles (Chrysomelide) : Orsodachna atra. Cryptocephalus 4-maculatus, Griburius equestris. Typophorus canellus. Nodonota tristis. Leptinotarsa decemlineata. Chrysomela sp. Calligrapha bigsbyana. Calligrapha philadetphica. Melasoma lapponica. Diabrotica 12-punctata. Leaf-beetles—Continued. Diabrotica vittata. Odontota dorsalis. Odontota nervosa. Scarred snout - beetles chide). True snout-beetles (Curculionide) : Sitones sp. Phytonomus sp. : Hylobius pales. Conotrachelus albicinctus. ‘Conotrachelus juglandis. Conotrachelus nenuphar. Ampeloglypter sesostris. Balaninus nasicus. Brenthide : Lupsalis: minuta. ‘ Bill-bugs (Calandride) : Rhodobenus 13-punctatus. (Otiorhyn- HEMIPTERA. Tree-hoppers (Membracidz) : Ceresa bubalus. Scale insects (Coccide) : Kermes sp. Eulecanium carye. Hulecanium cerasifex. Eulecanium tulipifere. ' Plant lice (Aphidide). Stink bugs (Pentatomide). Coreide. Plant bugs (Capsidee). Assassin bugs (Reduviide) : Sinea diadema. Milyas cinctus. ORTHOPTERA. Short-horned grasshoppers. (Acridiide) : Tettixz sp. LEPIDOPTERA. Hawk moths (Sphingide). Owlet moths Noctuide) : Heliophila unipuncta. i Span worms (Geometride) : Paleacrita vernata. HYMENOPTERA. Short-tongued bees (Andrenide). Cuckoo-flies (Chrysidide) : Chrysis sp. Smooth - headed ants Camponotus sp. Saw-flies (Tenthredinide). — (Formicide) : OTHER INSECTS. Two-winged flies (Diptera). OTHER INVERTEBRATES. a Spiders (Araneida). | Snails (Gastropoda). 60 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. BLACK-HEADED GROSBEAK. (Zamelodia melanocephala. Plate III.) APPEARANCE, DISTRIBUTION, AND HABITS. In form and size the black-headed grosbeak is almost a counter- part of the last species, but it is very different in color. In the male blackhead, golden brown and lemon yellow take the place of the rose and white of the rosebreast; while the color of the underparts of the female is not soiled white, asin the eastern bird, but bright buffy. Both sexes of the western grosbeak have a horn-colored beak; that of the rosebreast is white. Occupying a range from the west coast eastward which is comple- mentary to, although slightly overlapping that of its eastern relative, the blackhead occurs from lowermost Mexico to southern British Columbia, northern Montana, western North Dakota, and north- eastern Nebraska. It breeds at both extremies, and withdraws in winter to the southern.third of its range, lingering as far north, how- ever, as central Mexico. | The male is a brilliant songster, the peer of any of his kin. He is also an excellent mate and parent, and assumes an equal share of the labors of the nesting season. The nests of this species are loosely built and generally are placed in low growth, often along streams. The eggs are 3 or 4 in number and are similar to those of the rose- breast. The young are hatched in May and June. Since the bird often makes its home in higher altitudes it is sometimes called the mountain grosbeak. ECONOMIC RELATIONS. So great is the economic importance of the black-headed grosbeak that partial accounts of its food habits appear in two previous pub- lications of the Biological Survey:* Only 70 stomachs were then available for examination, while more than three times that. num- ber® are now at hand, collected in five States and Territories. As the greater number are from California, the present report relates essentially to that State. The stomachs were collected from April to August, inclusive. The data show that about two-thirds of the bird’s food consists of insects and other animal matter and one- third of vegetable substances. To be more exact, 65.85 percent is animal, 34.15 vegetable. The maximum amount (79.95) of animal matter is consumed in June. From the standpoint of the agricul- turist great interest attaches to the vegetable food of this bird, as it is reputed to be destructive to cultivated fruit. 4 Farmers’ Bull. 54, 1904, pp. 35-86; Yearbook Dept. Agr., 1904, pp. 246 and 248, j : > About half of the total number of stomachs of this species were examined by Prof. F. HE. L. Beal. , BLACK-HEADED GROSBEAK VS. FRUIT. 61 VEGETABLE Foon. Wheat and oats constitute but 2.08 and 1.83 percent, respectively, of the total food. Weed seeds and miscellaneous vegetable matter make up 9.28 percent, while fruit exceeds the sum of all these ele- ments, and amounts to 20.96 percent of the entire subsistence, or almost two-thirds of the vegetable portion of the food. Fruit as an item of the bird’s food assumes all the more importance because much of it is cultivated. FRUIT. Cultivated fruit that can be positively identified averages 9.85 per- cent of the contents of the 226 stomachs examined, and wild species 6.87 percent. In addition, 2.02 percent consisted of blackberries and raspberries, which may have been either wild or cultivated; 2.72 percent was undetermined fruit pulp of equally doubtful economic significance. It seems certain, therefore, that considerably more than half, perhaps two-thirds, of the fruit consumed by black-headed gros- beaks is from orchards and gardens. As this may be taken from a restricted region in a limited time, the item is of considerable impor- tance in any locality where grosbeaks are numerous. Moreover, no fruit, however large and tough-skinned, is proof against the massive beak of the blackhead, and the bird is likely to damage a great deal more than it eats because of its habit of leaving fruits after it has.taken a single bite. Indeed, many of the fruits it attacks are so large that the bird could not swallow them entire. Apples, crabapples, peaches, apricots, pears, figs, plums, cherries, gooseberries, and blackberries are included in complaints of injury which have been received by the Survey and prunes and strawberries must be added to the number on the evidence of stomach examina- tions. According to Professor Beal,¢ in California the depredations by the black-headed grosbeak cause it to be ranked about fourth in impor- tance among fruit-eating birds. What this means will be better understood from account of the actual damage by the species. Prof. A. J. Cook gives the following instance: ® A cherry grower at Ontario, Cal., reports the loss of half of a $4,000 crop of cherries from the depredations of birds in 1898. The birds in order of im- portance are Piranga ludoviciana, Phainopepla nitens, and the BERSenY ppt es E. W. Nelson, of the Biological Survey, writes concerning his ac- quaintance with this grosbeak at Nevada City, Cal.:¢ I was told they were a great pest to fruit growers as they ate and destroyed a great many berries. This I proved by shooting several with their bills stained ‘@ Yearbook Department of Agriculture 1904, p, 246. > California Cultivator, Aug., 1898, p. 253. ¢ Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., 17, 1875, p. 359. eo 62 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. with blackberries and their crops full of them. I saw many of the berries which they had taken one bite from, leaving the rest. In New Mexico the bird bears no better reputation, according to * Jackson Tabor, of Folsom, who says: I have found the black-headed grosbeak to be very destructive to all kinds of vegetables and fruits. They made their first appearance in this country in the year 1888, and they came in swarms. * * * They destroyed the entire crop of gooseberries and commenced on crabapples, eating the apples off the top of the tree as I was picking them off the lower limbs. In the spring and early summer they take the cherries as fast as they get ripe,‘and the only © remedy seems to be to wage a war of extermination against them. (September 2, 1908.) Two stomachs were collected in Mr. Tabor’s orchard on this date and both contained fruit, that in one stomach being identified as crabapple. Following are the results obtained from the investigation of stom- ach contents: Cherries, both ripe and green, were selected by 41 of the grosbeaks examined, frequently composing from 45 to 95 percent of the stomach contents. All were identified by skins, not a seed being found, showing that the birds here and there bite into a cherry, destroying in this way many more cherries than if they satisfied their appetites by swallowing the fruit entire. Figs were next in order of preference, being devoured by 23 grosbeaks. In some cases they composed from 80 to 100 percent of the food. Among other fruits, remains of plums, crabapples, and apricots were found, each in one stomach, and strawberries in two. Uniden- tified fruit pulp and blackberries had been eaten by 23 birds. As noted above, it is uncertain whether these were cultivated or not, but probably the bulk were cultivated and should be charged against the bird. Thus far our investigations have revealed nothing but injury by the bird, but, as will be shown later, the blackhead is not exclusively _ an enemy. Protective MeTHops.—In senbaieion with this subject there re- mains to be considered possible methods of reducing or altogether preventing loss from depredations by these birds. The plan usu- ally suggested is the one mentioned in the above letter of Mr. Tabor, namely, “ a war of extermination.” This is generally effected by poisoning or shooting. Aside from the fact that the justice of this method is open to serious question, there is the greater objection that innocent-species often suffer equally with or even in greater degree than the marau- der. In illustration we quote from Frank Stephens: ¢ At Beale Spring both sexes were common and destroying quantities of fruit, to the great annoyance of the owner of the orchard, who employed an ¢ Condor, V, 1903, p. 103. PROTECTION OF FRUIT. 63 ‘Indian to shoot the birds. Unfortunately the Indian did not discriminate between the noxious and harmless species. When poisoning is resorted to as a means of defence the destruction of many beneficial birds is inevitable. Nevertheless, if the above methods are condemned the fruit grower is entitled to ask for an effective substitute. A device for the protection of a small number of trees, which can be applied on rather short notice, is bird netting. This was tested upon cherry trees some years ago at the Indiana Agricultural Experiment Station.t The netting was procured at a cost of 4 cents per square yard and 75 yards were required per tree, the latter having been set six years. The fruit produced in a single season paid for the netting, which with careful handling, it is said, will last for ten years or more. This method is practicable in the case of a few lawn or garden trees, or possibly even in small orchards, and is well worth trial by anyone who considers future as well as present fruit crops. For it is certain that in destroying grosbeaks we end the lives of creatures which do much to check serious insect enemies of fruit. In large orchards netting of course can not be used. Killing the grosbeaks is a last resort to be tried only when every other measure has been tested and failed. It is the less excusable because a method is available which, even in the case of large orchards, yields far better results. This is the planting here and there of wild fruit-bearing trees and shrubs, by means of which almost complete protection to cultivated fruit can be assured. The chief essential is that the decoy trees shall be early bearing species, for it is the universal testimony that almost all of the damage done is to early fruit. How this applies in California is made clear in the following account of Professor Beal’s experience in Alameda County. In the numerous orchards in Cull’s Canyon only one gros- beak was seen where a week before, the last few days in May, they “were common. It was a fine illustration of what has been demon- strated before—that the first fruits are the ones most eagerly eaten by the birds. When the early cherries were ripening in the orchard birds were to be seen on all sides—grosbeaks, orioles, tanagers, linnets, and jays, with now and then a blackbird or a flicker; but in June’ only one grosbeak and a few jays were seen, though the later cherries were just in perfection and nobody was disturbing the birds. A natural question is: Why are the later fruits comparatively immune to the attacks of birds? It may be urged that the feathered robbers. get enough, that their appetites flag. While perhaps true of some birds, satiety in no way explains the facts concerning the black- headed grosbeak, since this bird consumes twice as much fruit in July and August as in May, though the quantity secured from cultivated “Troop, James, Bull. 53, Dec., 1894, pp. 125-126, 18848—Bull. 32—08-——5 64 FOOD HABITS OF THE GROSBEAKS. sources is much less. It is evident that wild fruits are preferred, and that it is their abundance that protects the later ripening orchard varieties. In order to protect early cultivated fruit, therefore, it is necessary to plant, decoy fruit trees which will come into bearing at the same time as the earliest varieties. Such a fruit is the mulberry, which has long been known as a fa- vorite of all frugivorous birds. There are many varieties derived from both farion and native species, some one or other of which is suitable for any part of the United States. Perhaps the best of these to protect early fruit is the Townsend, which originated in northern Florida from the native red mulberry. This mulberry is very pro- lific and ripens fruit very early (in the latter part of March and April in Florida), a characteristic it will doubtless retain wherever it may be planted. Among other races of the same native stock are the Hicks, bearing in June and July, and the Stubbs, from June to August. The white mulberry of Asia (Mforus alba) has yielded the Black English, the season of which is May to July, and the New American, fruiting at the same time, but very hardy, being adapted to mountain climates. The Russian mulberry (Morus a. tatarica) also is hardy, and bears in May and June. The suitability of the mulberry for California is affirmed by Prof. E. J. Wickson,* who says: “Nearly all varieties of the mulberry have been introduced in California and grown rapidly and thriftily.” He commends the New American and Russian, mentioned above, and further states: “The mulbetry has a long season. The Persian ripens in Tulare the last of May and continually thereafter until October.” Although the mulberry is an excellent fruit when fresh, it has been put to little use, the main reason no doubt being that it is not adapted to transportation. Since it is not of commercial importance, why not use it to protect more valuable fruits? The returns from such an investment, according to the testimony of many observers, are great. Dr. C. Hart Merriam says:® Groves of mulberry trees during the period of fruiting are thronged by hun- dreds if not thousands of birds, comprising many species and representing diverse groups. Such insectivorous kinds as flycatchers, warblers, vireos, and even cuckoos, form a part of the heterogeneous assemblage, departing from their customary diet long enough to join the multitude of blackbirds, orioles, finches, sparrows, tanagers, waxwings, catbirds, bluebirds, and thrushes, which from daylight until dark gorge themselves upon the tender berries. It seems incredible that such small birds as warblers, vireos, and the least flycatcher can open their tiny mouths wide enough to swallow such large berries as they really do gulp down with little effort. I know of no better tree than the mul- berry to plant in public and private grounds for the purpose of attracting our . resident birds. @ California Fruits and How to Grow Them, San Francisco, 3rd ed., 1900, p. 398. ; > Rept. Chief Div. Ornith. and Mamm. (1890), 1891, p. 285. PROTECTION OF FRUIT. 65 Further evidence of the attractive qualities of the mulberry is given by Dr. A. K. Fisher, who states that at his home in southern New York, a dark fruited, juicy Russian mulberry was a favorite food of a number of birds. Robins, catbirds, cedar birds, orioles, and to a less extent several other fruit-eating-birds, fed by preference on mul- berries, and rarely attacked cultivated cherries, which were abundant. In fact, as the period of mulberry ripening extended beyond the time of cherry harvesting, the more valuable fruit was almost completely protected from the depredations of birds. The efficacy of the mulberry as a protection to cultivated fruits is fully confirmed also in a bulletin of the North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, which is exclusively devoted to the subject of mulberries: @ They serve an excellent purpose near cherry trees and on strawberry planta- tions in attracting birds away from these fruits. As long as there are ripe mulberries close at hand, the other fruit will suffer very little from birds. Such being the case, the several varieties of mulberries, on account of their great fruitfulness and the long bearing season, are well adapted to the protection of a wide range of fruit crops, including many of the later as well as the earlier ripening fruits. Among other species valuable for the same purpose are certain in- edible cherries. Mr. H. W. Henshaw informs the writer that a single tree of small sour cherries afforded almost complete protection to sev- eral trees of very fine cultivated cherries on the. place of Mr. Joseph Palmer, near Washington. At the time a visit was made to this place, catbirds, robins, and orioles were abundant, and surprise was ex- pressed that the crop of cherries was not molested. Pointing out a volunteer cherry tree, Mr. Palmer said: “There you see the reason; the birds will not touch the large colanane cherries when the small ones are to be had.” Examination of this tree was made anitings the present year (1907). It proves to be the Mahaleb or Saint Lucie cherry (Prunus mahaleb). The 1907 crop of all kinds of cherries was very small, but as far as could be determined under the circumstances, the Mahalebs were pre- ferred. In five minutes the writer noted in this tree 2 brown thrash- ers, 1 jay, 1 bluebird, 1 cedar bird, 1 kingbird, and 3 catbirds.