_ CORNELL LAB of ORNITHOLOGY. a , a} LIBRARY at Sapsucker Woods — Illustration of Bank Swallow by Louis Agassiz Fuertes Cornell etre Library QL 696. 623012 1 “Win DATE DUE GAYLORD PRINTED IN U.S.A. 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/cu381924022570232 —— = 696 : ! C 9 3 ‘ SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIO 012 UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM | g 44 Bulletin 86 A MONOGRAPH OF THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON, TYPE OF A NEW FAMILY ‘OF GOATSUCKERS: BY HARRY C. OBERHOLSER + Of the Biological Survey, United States “Department of Agriculture WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1914 LABORATORY OF ORNITHOLOGY LIBRARY SN 7 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM Bulletin 86 A MONOGRAPH OF THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON, TYPE OF A NEW FAMILY OF GOATSUCKERS BY HARRY C. OBERHOLSER Of the Biological Survey, United States Department of Agriculture CRE > CERO WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1914 ° BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM Issuep Apri 6, 1914. ADVERTISEMENT. The scientific publications of the United States National Museum consist of two series, the Proceedings and the Bulletins. The Proceedings, the first volume of which was issued in 1878, are intended primarily as a medium for the publication of original, and usually brief, papers based on the collections of the National Museum, presenting newly-acquired facts in zoology, geology, and anthro- pology, including descriptions of new forms of animals, and revisions of limited groups. One or two volumes are issued annually and dis- tributed to libraries and scientific organizations. A limited number of copies of each paper, in pamphlet form, is distributed to specialists and others interested in the different subjects as soon as printed. The date of publication is printed on each paper, and these dates are also recorded in the table of contents of the volumes. The Bulletins, the first of which was issued in 1875, consist of a series of separate publications comprising chiefly monographs of large zoological groups and other general systematic treatises (occa- sionally in several volumes), faunal works, reports of expeditions, and catalogues of type-specimens, special collections, etc. The ma- jority of the volumes are octavos, but a quarto size has been adopted in a few instances in which large plates were regarded as indispen- sable. Since 1902 a series of octavo volumes containing papers relating to the botanical collections of the Museum, and known as the Contribu- tions from the National Herbarium, has been published as bulletins. The present work forms No. 86 of the Bulletin series. RicHarp RatuHeun, Assistant Secretary, Smithsonian Institution, In charge of the United States National Museum. Wasuineton, D. C., March 12, 1914. qu TABLE OF CONTENTS. List;-of illustrations: « . ././)s/2 fee ses oe seca cece tele pseiwsin it oncnesaesassaenes vil Tntroduchionsc.csje: ss sess Sac Saeid piss g de sinter Again seinen Soe onscis aise Haale os 1 Genus Chordeilessccwcassciscsasiccidjerepsiesee geipsicip ence ceverecceensseeces icine 3 SYNONYM Ys ee csussmaswaangaamenisitaaniaci retin peice towoabaciewe se eoeee 3 Disenosisss sosesaexieeeemnsacninataacminauuigurnntecge ot qeai eae ecereeese 3 Generic characters. aoheesieises 3 TYPO ssecuivsy starve dedeanasddau ehvcawastadcneneaecnencaeeeeoeaetenae 3 Geographical distribution.............-.--2-0-0-2-0- cece eee eee eee Settee 4 Faunal distribution..........---.--2 0-2 eee eee eee eee Benes oS Seee 4 Variance in generic characters.........--------2002+eeeeeeeeee eee eee eeee 4 Relationships... +. sé. .ueessasawcseee veeceenes cebbeeegeiddee sce ceewe 6 Phylogeny is scsieen sais seats seieie see wee eeea eee ee eee test adieaeakd=% 12 Sequence of forms 202 o2e2escieoctesscetaseseeees dees ic seeidedderceed 13 Species and subspecies: su. ss2ssssevecsscocescevassessewcneteasecunesies 15 Recognition of subspecies.........-.2-2. 220-222 e cece eee eee eee eee eee 16 Identification of specimens...........----.2 0220-2 cece ee eee eee eee eeee 17 Variations os, osc elec cdine dé ceandndowned Seeeae een eauereseseeeeeseceee ees 18 General habite:. 2 cccccecccotcceedontes Ch ee ReR EEE REE RENEE eS Ss 19 AS ORY sv cisiersicidi ss ce ceceebietetis ae eaticisise eeticaaecrete Oeste ee Ge USES ESET EES Se 19 Orme TCA tT cs. ciais sce sc Geacaiesaislbia aie te decides armpordia sid ied eisisre sities oe Ose SS ees 20 EAE RTUTO® i ie (sclateicie tte acinrd Aaaciei sR Isa Hine Oe ene 21 Key to species and subspecies...........22222- 0020202 e cece eee ee eee eee eee 22 Chordeiles virginianus.........-..-.-----0- 0-2 -ee eee ee ee cee cere ene ee ee 26 SYMOMYMY 22-2 keane ccemenperedeeseceeemeee ides Soleant 26 Specific characters (adult male)............----2--- 20222 e eee eee eee 26 Adu EME s.020104 o5.cccdsereneeetesscenemeeaeeseteseeseeensedoes 27 Furst Atti PUM AGS: occa orcmerrseaeseeecuctasaeseeeseewnes anes 27 JuVvenal plumage. ..cc.cncsueacaieadacineta si Sckteteewet eaeeea sees 27 Natal plumage... ccwcseswanaweaeiu wena see ee aes en eve veawueeesaaacs 27 Seasonal variston-occcscececces evap es yiee eos cane wae See ee es 27 MOltssnatiaeauetedcoe sce oy Sore ka ecto he ken oe oom annem meres 28 Individual variation........-.-.2.-2-.0-2-0. 2202 eee eee eee eee eee 28 Geographical variation......--..-..-2.- 22-20. 2 eee eee eee eee nee 28 Geographical distribution... /......-.2..2-2-- 0-22-22 e eee eee eee eee eee 30 Zonal distribUMOn.- 2. oo. 2 sess sks sec ssses css ses ee eeemesswonsnex 30 Phylogeny isis sec cteisvieine d's's lols stoves vee e's’ pee ee gels om eaeeedeerer 31 Migrations 220204: es: . 22 guile sess eee begs even eeentoxaneeioeeaaess 32 Ha btB essed eeeciceibeees (ia saedees eves dese aaseda as vaeeneusaemewennd 33 History ecw cnet athe fal te Nea aac ve ee 34 Chordeiles virginianus virginianus.......--.-..---.....02.-0020000- 85 Chordeiles virginianus hesperis........-...-.-.-.2222-0202.ee eee eeee 46 Chordeiles virginianus sennetti...........-......- 2200202 eee eee eee 52 VI CONTENTS. Genus Chordeiles—Continued. Chordeiles virginianus—Continued. Chordeiles virginianus howelli..............2.-2+0+.-e0eeeeeeeeeeeeee Chordeiles virginianus henryi....-..-.....2..-.20-cseeeeen eee eee eeee Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis..............2.20-+2220-2eeeeeeeee Chordeiles virginianus chapmani..............-2-2- 2222-222 e cece ee Chordeiles virginianus vicinus........--.2-.02- 0228 e seen eee cece cence Chordeiles virginianus minor...........-.202...- 2-202 e eee ee ee eee Table of comparative measurements...............2-22-2- 22-2 - ee eee Chordeiles actitipennis.....2 02..cccasce dene coin ee ce ee ci enees cena ss Specific characters (adult male).....-....-.---- 2-202 e eee cece eee Adultfemale: s2.5 osssiiuccehiseu deine edleoy ose edtinagaseheeemeics's First:autumin plumage. «22.0.2 sc. ecee eee ese ced cscaeeeeseeecenee cee Juvyenal plumape..< ssccessuwee su ccawekwaes = se ousemeenee seeeuive es Nestling plumage. secscccsccseeecceseeecde ss oss eveucuseaexecdseeces Seasonal Variation’: cc. jceccee Secu exsals Yee oe eaesemcee Sete ewe eee eee Geographical variation.............-222. 2020s eee e eee eee eee eee Geographical distribution..............2. 222.0222 0 eee cece cece cece Zonal distHibuton ws sarosssaotskewen yh seNs ee so seveusececcakoeinrnins Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis.................2..-2-2-2-2-22+2- Chordeiles acutipennis exilis...........2..0002222eeeeee eee e eee ceeeee Chordeiles acutipennis micromeris.....-.....-..---- 22-22 e eee eee eens Chordeiles acutipennis texensis.............-.22----220- 22 cece cece eee Chordeiles acutipennis inferior.............-...2.02022 20s ee cece eens Table of comparative measurements........--....--.-----2-2-eeee eee Chordeilés tipestrisi 2: ce ccasasemcgis cca cieaug sos waa oat a a ialers DY DOD VOY cieyie s cieletarsparrcnersiracte Sate eae ete Sanders paamerenauh eit udees Specific characters (adult male)..............------..0---2--0-02 2000 Adult female sece tock oasecak/shinatlece sc oe Seseanewe ewe. ees LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Page. Prats 1, fig. 1.—Palatal surface of Caprimulgus europaeus..............-.--.- 120 2.—Palatal surface of Chordeiles virginianus virginianus......... 120 2, fig. 1.—Palatal surface of Antrostomus carolinensis...........+..... 120 2.—Palatal surface of Setochalcis vocifera vocifera..........-.... 120 3.—Breeding ranges of the subspecies of Chordeiles virginianus......... 120 4.—Breeding ranges of the Central American and North American sub- 120 species of Chordeiles acutipennis....-...-...-..-..-.2-2-00---- 120 5.—Breeding ranges of the South American subspecies of Chordeiles 120 ACULPCNNIS sie Gace cae mmncandwmarnieee rewee ne ee ceeelemrice 120 6.—Breeding ranges of the subspecies of Chordeiles rupestris........... 120 A MONOGRAPH OF THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAIN- SON, TYPE OF A NEW FAMILY OF GOATSUCKERS. By Harry C. OBErHOoLser, Of the Biological Survey, United States Department of Agriculture. INTRODUCTION. The present study of the Caprimulgine genus Chordeiles found its origin in the attempt to identify the nighthawks of Texas. It soon became evident that nothing short of a thorough revision of the two North American species, Chordeiles virginianus and Chor- deiles acutipennis, would produce anything like satisfactory results. This was finally undertaken, partly at the instance of Mr. Robert Ridgway; and the only other species of the genus, Chordeiles rupes- tris, has been included for the sake of completeness. By reason of the complicated and almost infinite variations due to sex, age, individuals, and geographic areas, the present group is one of the most difficult of all North American birds; and its elucidation has involved the expenditure of an incredible amount of time and labor. The material available consists altogether of 1,165 specimens, including the types of most of the valid forms (excepting Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis, Chor- deiles virginianus minor, Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis, Chor- deiles acutipennis exilis, and Chordeiles rupestris rupestris), and of one synonym, Chordeiles gundlachii Lawrence. These specimens are distributed among the three species as follows: Chordeiles virgini- anus, 780; Chordeiles acutipennis, 379; Chordeiles rupestris, 6. This material has been derived from the following sources: The United States National Museum, including the Biological Survey collection; the American Museum of Natural History; the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia; the Museum of Comparative Zodlogy in Cambridge, Massachusetts, including the collection of Messrs. E. A. and O. Bangs; the Carnegie Museum of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology in Berkeley, Cali- fornia; the Field Museum in Chicago, Illinois; the Victoria Memo- rial Museum in Ottawa, Ontario; and the private collections of Mr. Joseph Grinnell, Mr. F. Seymour Hersey, Dr. G. C. Rinker, 1 2 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. Dr. L. B. Bishop, Mr. J. H. Fleming, and Mr. A. C. Bent. To the authorities of these institutions, to the curators of their bird: collec- tions, and also to the gentlemen above mentioned, the writer wishes here to express his thanks for their courtesies. Moreover, to Dr. Charles W. Richmond, of the United States National Museum, he 1s as usual indebted for many kindnesses in connection with the present investigation. The drawings of skulls on plates 1 and 2 were exe- cuted by Miss R. G. Collette. For the names of colors Mr. Robert Ridgway’s recently published Color Standards and Nomenclature: has been adopted as the standard. The numbering of the primaries is from the outermost, since this is so much more convenient in descriptive ornithology, although, of course, indefensible from a morphological standpoint. Detailed synonymy has been omitted under the forms of both Chordeiles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis, because such synonymy would be merely a duplication of that in Mr. Ridgway’s Birds of North and Middle America, part 6,? which is soon to appear. All measurements are in millimeters. The specimens used in the average measurements under each subspecies, and with which com- parisons are made, are taken just as far as possible from typical specimens—that is, from examples best exhibiting the differential characters. In the tables of detailed measurements all the birds used in the diagnostic averages, as well as all other than adult birds, are indicated by reference marks. The various dimensions of which use is made in the following pages have been taken as follows: Length of wing—Measured in a straight line from the bend of the closed wing to the end of the longest primary, with the primaries in their natural position—that is, not straightened. Length of tail—Taken with dividers from the point of insertion of the middle rectrices to the tip of the longest. Exposed culmen.—Measured in a straight line from the beginning of the feathers on the culmen to the tip of the maxilla—that is, the chord of the exposed culmen. Length of tarsus —A straight line from the center of the heel joint on the posterior side to the middle of the joint between the metatarsus and the middle toe on the anterior side. Middle toe.—Measured along the upper side from the middle of the joint between the metatarsus and the middle toe to the base of the uncovered claw. 1Ridgway, Color Standards and Color Nomenclature, 1912 (=January 16, 1913), pp. (1-4) ; i-iv; 1-44; frontispiece; pls. 1-53; Washington, D. C. 2Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, pt. 6, 1914, In this volume Mr. Ridgway has adopted from my manuscript my conclusions regarding the subspecies of Chordeiles; but he has not seen the introductory portion of the present bulletin, pages 1-23. THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 3 Genus CHORDEILES Swainson. Ohordeiles Swainson, Fauna Bor.-Amer., vol. 2, 1881 (1832), p. 496 (type, by original designation and monotypy, “Chordeiles virginianus [Ca- primulgus americanus, Wils.)” qui Caprimulgus virginianus, Gmelin). Chordeilus “ Swans.” Gray, List Genera Birds, 1840, p. 7 (type, by orig- inal designation and monotypy, Caprimulgus virginianus, Gmelin). Microrhynchus Lzsson, L’Echo du monde Savant, July 16, 1843, col. 109 (type, by monotypy, Caprimulgus exilis Lesson) (nee Microrhynchus Dejean [Megerle MS.], 1821, Coleoptera; Bell, 1835, Crustacea). Chordiles “ Swans, 1831” TsoHupi, Untersuch. Fauna Peruana, Ornith., 1846, p. 21 (type, by monotypy, “Oh. semitorquatus Cab. MSS. [=] Cap. pruinosus Licht. Mus. Berol. vid. Tsch. Consp. av. Nro. 37,” qui Caprimulgus evilis Lesson). Chordediles Cananis [Wiegmann’s] Archy fiir Naturg., XIII, vol. 1, Novem- ber, 1847, p. 8346 (nom. emend. pro Chordeiles Swainson). Ramphaoratus BonaParts, Rivista Contemporanea, vol. 9, February, 1857, p. 215 (p. 9 of reprint), (type, by virtual monotypy, Caprimulgus ezilis . Lesson). “ Chordedilus 1861 Cas.” Gray, Hand-list Gen. Spec. Birds, vol. 1, 1869, p. 61 (in synonymy). Diagnosis Similar to Nyctiprogne Bonaparte, but bill stronger and broader basally; nostrils more rounded, more exposed, more tubular, and opening more obliquely, less laterally; tertials longer. Similar to Nannochordeiles Hartert, but wing more pointed (less rounded), the third primary (counting from the outermost) much shorter than the first and second, instead of about the same length; tail more deeply emarginate. Chars. gen.—Medium-sized, long-winged Chordeilidae; bill rather small and weak, decidedly hooked; nostrils rather large, strongly tubular, and opening obliquely; no long or conspicuous rictal bris- tles; no occipital, frontal, or nuchal crest; tail rather long, more than half (about 55-60 per cent) of wing, emarginate, the outer rectrices longest, all of moderate width, rounded or squarish at tips; wing long and pointed, the first or second primary (counting from the outermost.) longest, the third shorter than either; tertials reaching nearly to the tip of sixth primary, or beyond; secondaries short, the shortest one not reaching the tips of primary coverts or not extend- ing far beyond; feet rather weak; tarsus feathered in front for about the proximal third; tarsus usually shorter than middle toe without claw ; outer toe slightly shorter than inner toe; exposed culmen about half the length of tarsus.? Type.—Caprimulgus virginianus Gmelin (by original designation and monotypy)._ 1 Nannochordeiles Hartert, Ibis, July, 1896, p. 374 (type, Chordeiles pusillus Gould). 2No osteological characters appear in this diagnosis, because proper comparative ma- terial of the most closely related genera is not available. Consult, however, pp. 6-9 of the present bulletin. 4 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. Geographical distribution —Nearly all of South America, the West Indies, Central America, and North America excepting the far northern part. Faunal distribution—All or parts of the Patagonian, Brazilian, Subandean, Amazonian, Antillean, and Central American subregions of the Neotropical Region; the Sonoran and Boreal subregions of the Nearctic Region; but avoiding the barren grounds and alpine summits of the circumpolar Arctic Region. : Variance in generic characters.—No two of the three species at pres- ent composing this genus, Chordeiles virginianus, Chordetles acuti- pennis, and Chordeiles rupestris, are exactly alike in structural char- acters, although they all agree with the generic diagnosis above given. In Chordeiles virginianus, type of the genus, the first (out- ermost) primary is usually longer than the second, occasionally about equal, but rarely shorter; the secondaries relatively short, the shortest usually not reaching the tips of the primary coverts by at least 5 millimeters, often much more; and the distance from the bend of the folded wing to end of shortest secondary generally less than from the latter point to the tip of fourth primary (count- ing from the outermost); outer pair of rectrices relatively narrow and their tips much rounded; maxillo-palatines relatively rather broad and somewhat triangular; anterior processes of the palatines relatively rather broad and strong; vomer very narrow; pterygoids with an antero-exterior angle which approaches the palatine; inter- orbital region very broad; and the ridges on median portion of frontals not strongly developed. In Chordeiles acutipennis, however, the outermost (first) primary is usually shorter than the second, occasionally about equal or longer; secondaries longer than in Chordeiles virginianus, the shortest usually not falling short of the tips of the primary coverts by more than 3 millimeters, commonly longer or at least not shorter than the pri- mary coverts; the distance from the bend of the folded wing to the end of the shortest secondary greater, usually decidedly so, than the distance from the latter point to the end of the fourth primary; outer pair of rectrices relatively broader than in Chordeiles vir- gimianus, and their tips more truncate; maxillo-palatines relatively rather narrower and more elongated; anterior processes of the pala- tines more slender; vomer rather broader; pterygoids without a dis- tinct antero-exterior angle; interorbital region somewhat narrower; and the ridges on median portion of frontal bones more conspicuous. In Chordeiles rupestris the first (outermost) primary is longer than the second; the tertials are relatively longer than in Chordeiles virgi- manus and Chordeiles acutipennis, usually reaching or overreaching THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 5 the tip of the sixth primary; the secondaries as in Chordeiles acuti- pennis; the tail-feathers as in Chordeiles virginianus; skull not examined. It is thus apparent that Chordeiles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis differ in structural characters, which, were they trenchant and constant, instead of only average, would clearly warrant generic separation. But Chordeiles rupestris appears to be practically inter- mediate between these two species, or, to be more exact, partakes of the structural characters of both, though in pattern of coloration it is widely different from either. In the small series examined the characters of Chordeiles rupestris, as above given, are pretty con- stant, but in a larger series greater range of variation would doubt- less be evident. The present case, therefore, might appear at first sight to be an ideal one for the profitable employment of sub- genera; since if anything more than personal caprice is to determine what is to be considered a genus and what a subgenus, it is probably to be found in the principle of intergradation, a principle of general acceptance as applied to species and subspecies; by which a full genus would be a group trenchantly defined by structural char- acters, even though these differences be relatively slight; and a sub- genus one the structural diagnostic characters of which intergrade through intermediate species with some other group, even if the extreme differences be relatively great. In the present case, however, we have a rather peculiar and unusual condition, for while there is more or less connection between the three species which would, by the above criterion, possibly form three subgenera, the intergrada- tion is complicated by the fact that all the structural characters separating the species are, in Chordeiles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis at least, decidedly inconstant. To consider instable struc- tural characters of this sort as the basis for subgeneric separation seems to the writer certainly undesirable. These birds have, however, a decided interest for the student of evolution, because it is very evident that we have in these three species a case of genera in process of development. Unfortunately we have not sufficient osteological material to determine the amount of varia- tion in cranial characters; but to show, as far as possible by actual figures, the constancy of the external structural characters separating Chordeiles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis, and thus to indi- cate the state of their relative evolutionary divergence, the writer ex- amined a large number of specimens of each species and counted the individuals showing the different variations of the two most tangible characters, i. e., the comparative length of the outermost primary, and the relative length of the shortest secondary as com- 6 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. pared with the primary coverts. A tabulation of these results is given herewith: ir- iles acuti- Characters. Chordeiles vir — First pri 4 ; Longer than second 90 (85.7%) 12 (11.5%) Equal to second........ 2.2... .2e-ceee ccc ee eens ceencccenserccceesees 7 eas 11 poses Shorter than second. ............---.2-2--2eeeeeeeee 5 (4.9% 78 (75.0%, Longer than second on one side but shorter on the other. 3 (2.8%) 3 (2.9%) Total number of birds examined ................-0cee cece eee ee eee 105 104 Shortest secondary: Longer than teimary DOCU cree w ine bonuuesee ems vate eee 6 (5.3%) 92 (82.9%) Equal to primary COVOrtS....2.00.20-eeneesscaececcannenecccsscaavas 3 (2.8%) 8 (7.2% Shorter than primary coverts...........2.0.002c-cceeecececeeeeeeees 103 (91.9%) 9 (8.1% Longer than primary coverts on one side but shorter on the other... 0 (0.0%) 2 (1.8%, Total number of birds examined... 2.2.2... 2.22.02 c eee e ee eee ee eee ee 112 111 The above figures are based on so large a number of specimens that their percentage would probably not be materially changed by the examination of a greater number. From these percentages it will be seen that Chordeiles virginianus is more stable in its structural characters, at least in the two here considered, than is Chordeiles acutipenmis; or, in other words, is farther along in its differentiation. Thus, in Chordeiles virginianus the first primary is longer than the second in 85.7 per cent of the specimens, while in Chordeiles acuti- pemnis it is shorter than the second in only 75 per cent. Also in Chordeiles virginianus the shortest secondary is shorter than the pri- mary coverts in 91.9 per cent; in Chordeiles acutipennis it is longer than the primary coverts in only 82.9 per cent. Further comparisons can easily be made from the table. Of the two characters here ex- ploited, the length of the secondaries thus seems to be the better. There does not seem to be any difference in these structural characters among the different subspecies of either Chordeiles virginianus or Chordeiles acutipennis; and the above percentages of the two species include representatives of various subspecies indiscriminately. Relationships—The genus Chordeiles has always without ques- tion been placed in the family Caprimulgidae. A careful examina- ‘tion and comparison, however, of a series of skulls of Chordeiles virginianus and the skull of Chordeiles acutipennis texensis, with crania of Antrostomus carolinensis, Setochalcis + vocifera, Phalaenop- tilus nuttallii, and Nyctidromus albicollis merrilli, and with Hux- ley’s figure of the skull of Caprimulgus europaeus? (see pl. 1, fig. 1), reveal differences that make advisable, indeed even necessary, the re- moval of Chordeiles from the family Caprimulgidae. So far as cranial characters are concerned, Chordeiles virginianus (see pl. 1, fig. 2) and Chordeiles acutipennis are generically identical, since aside from some unimportant details, which are surely not of more 1See p. 11. 2Proc. Zool. Soc, Lond., 1867, p. 453. THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. q than specific value, the skulls of these two species are the same. Both Chordeiles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis are per- fectly desmognathous, as the figure of the former? and the pre- viously published figure of the latter* clearly show, which charac- ter alone in such a complete exemplification should be sufficient as a basis for recognition of a distinct family. In both species the maxillo-palatines meet on the median line and become ankylosed, at least in old birds, with each other and with the vomer. There is thus no doubt about their complete desmognathism. Besides this, however, Chordeiles differs from all the above-mentioned genera of Caprimulgidae in many other respects, as follows: Premaxillary (to eranio-facial suture) relatively as well as actually much shorter, only 37 per cent of the total length of the skull, whereas in Setochalcis vocifera it is 49 per cent; this, together with the actually as well as relatively much higher braincase, giving to the skull in general a curious humpbacked, pug-nosed appearance; interorbital portion of frontal region very much broader, medially depressed and fur- rowed, but laterally rising in a crest to the edge of the orbits, while in the other genera examined just the reverse is the case, the frontal region being rather inflated, with the orbital edges more or less rounded; vomer relatively narrow and slender; maxillo-palatines subtriangular instead of more or less strap-like or shoe-shaped ; mid- dle portion of palatines much broader, the lateral outline thus less constricted medially, more nearly straight, giving to the posterior portion a decidedly less flaring effect; antero-internal processes of palatines reaching to the maxillo-palatines; palatal opening between the halves of the premaxillary much smaller, narrower, and somewhat narrowly triangular instead of oval in shape; gall bladder absent ; * rictal bristles wanting. Unfortunately I have been unable to examine the skulls of the South American genera commonly referred to the Caprimulgidae, so that it is impossible to determine with exactness which of the above characters are to be regarded as supergeneric. Doubtless some of them will prove, upon examination of all the remaining groups, to be merely generic. The same lack of material renders doubtful the precise limits of the family group which includes Chordeiles. The nearest ally of Chordeiles is without much doubt Nannochordeiles Hartert, and this certainly belongs to the same family, while Vycti- progne is probably also not distantly related. From external char- acters it would perhaps be better to include both Zurocalis and 1The statement of Beddard (Structure and Classification of Birds, 1898, p. 239) that in Ohordeiles virginianus the maxillo-palatines do not meet across the vomer is doubtless a slip or the result of examining an imperfect, abnormal, or immature skull, for in every one of the half dozen skulls we have examined these bones meet just as in Ohordeiles acutipennis. 2 See plate 1, fig. 2. 8 Shufeldt, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1885, pl. 59, fig. 4. * According to Beddard, Structure and Classification of Birds, 1898, p. 242, 8 Podager, though the latter is aberrant. The salient reliable differ- ential characters of the two families here most concerned are in part well shown on plates 1 and 2, accompanying the present paper, and BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. are also all given in the tabular exposition below: Characters, Caprimulgidae. Chordeilidae. Schizognathous) ..0.2c+scerescwnvansas Desmognathous. Broad ssc saci eaisehsins oiaketedenkatees Narrow. Strap-like, hook-like, or shoe-shaped. .| Subtriangular. Antero-internal proces- Medially narrow, with lateral outline much constricted. Widely separated from maxillo-pala- Medially broad, with lateral outline little constricted. Reaching to maxillo-palatines. ses of palatines. tines, Premaxillary.......-....| Long; 49 per cent of total length of | Short; 37 per cent of total length of skull. High. Medially concave. Wanting. Wanting. Included genera......... Systellura Ridgway........----------- Chordeiles Swainson. Stenopsis Cassin. ...........0-0--0---0+ Nannochordeiles Hartert. Antiurus Ridgway ........-.--..----- Nyctiprogne Bonaparte. Nyctipolus Ridgway......-.-.- Lurocalis Cassin.* Setochaicis Oberholser 4... - .| Podager Wagler.8 Setopagis Ridgway. ..... Phalaenoptilus Ridgway. Nyctagreus Nelson..... Otophanes Brewster......... Nyctiphrynus Bonaparte 5... Antrostomus Bonaparte............... Nyctidromus Gould........-.....-..-.- Siphonorhis Sclater.........--.-....2-- Caprimulgus Linneus ..............-- Eleothreptus Gray ......-.-2-...22-02-- Cosmetornis Gray ......-...-..20.2200- Macrodipteryz Swainson......... ..... Scotornis Swainson.........-....00.... Hydropsalis Wagler........-...-....-- Macropsalis Sclater..............2..... Lyncornis Gould 3. ... Eurostopodus Gould’ 1By some authors, as, for instance, Beddard and Parker, the Caprimulgidae are considered schizognathous, although by Huxley originally placed in the aegithognathous series. It is, of course, true that they are not typically schizognathous, having some aegithognathous characters; but it is also evident that, all things considered, they are much nearer the schizognathous than to the aegithognathous type. 1 Except in the genera Lyncornis and Eurostopodus. 2 Provisionally included. 4See p. 11. 5 Nyctiphrynus Bonaparte (Rivista Contemporanea, vol. 9, February, 1857, p. 215 [p. 9 of reprint]) con- tained originally three species: Caprimulgus ocellatus Tschudi (type of Ptilonycterus Ridgway, 1912); Caprimulgus nuttallii Audubon (type of Phalaenoptilus Ridgway, 1880); and Caprimulgus guianensis Gmelin (= Caprimulgus albicollis Gmelin) (type of Nyctidromus Gould, 1838). The first species was thus last made type of a new genus; and this genus Nyctiphrynus was restricted by Gray (Hand-List Gen. and Spec. Birds, vol. 1, 1869, p. 59) to the same bird, Caprimulgus ocellatus Tschudi. 1, therefore, now desig- nate Caprimulgus ocellatus Tschudi as the type of Nyctiphrynus Bonaparte, and Ptilonycterus Ridgway consequently becomes its synonym, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON——OBERHOLSER. 9 The genera in the above lists are arranged in what seems to be their natural order, but manifestly the osteology of all must be studied before a finally satisfactory sequence can be devised. The Chordeilidae, by reason of their desmognathism and the loss of the gall bladder, seem to be a less ancient and less primitive group than the Caprimulgidae. The full and formal diagnosis? of the Chordeilidae, based, of course, almost entirely on Chordeiles, is as follows: CHORDEILIDAE, new family. Caprimulgi with sternum one-notched on each side; carotids two; syrinx tracheo-bronchial; oil gland present; ceca present; cervical vertebre: 13; fourth (outer) toe with but four phalanges; claw of middle toe pectinated; muscular formula AXY; biceps slip present; expansor secondariorum absent; glutacus primus extending over bi- ceps; gall bladder lacking; powder downs absent; skull broad, the zygoma spreading and distinctly angular, the interorbital breadth great; braincase high; frontals medially concave; premaxillary short, only 37 per cent of total length of skull; palate perfectly des- mognathous; maxillo-palatines relatively broad and subtriangular, ankylosed with each other and with the vomer; palatines much in- flated posteriorly and across their middle portion, not meeting except at their hind ends, the foramina in their middle portion small, their lateral outines little constricted medially, their antero-external proc- esses long and slender, their antero-internal processes reaching to the maxillo-palatines; vomer long, slender, and pointed at its anterior end; basipterygoid processes well developed; rictal bristles wanting. The type genus of this family is Chordeiles Swainson. The geographical range of the family is as follows: South Amer- ica, Central America, North America, and the West Indies; thus practically all of the Neotropical ‘and Nearctic zoogeographical regions. ; The genera to be included in the family Chordeilidae have already been discussed.? In making comparisons of the skulls of Chordetles with those of several genera of true Caprimulgidae some interesting facts concern- ing the latter family were discovered. The current genus Antro- stomus Bonaparte, by many authors considered to include a well- known group of American species, by others united with Caprimul- gus, is not only perfectly distinct from the latter, but is itself divisible into two very divergent groups. In the following comparisons the skulls of only three species, Caprimulgus europaeus, Antrostomus 1Characters common to all Caprimulgi are omitted. 2See p. 8 13732°—Bull. 86-—14——2 10 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. carolinensis, and “Antrostomus ” vociferus, have been used, but skins of a considerable number of other American and Old World species have been examined. All comparisons with Caprimulgus, however, are entirely with Caprimulgus europaeus (see pl. 1, fig. 1), the type of Caprimulgus Linneus, for it is plain that the genus Caprimulgus, even restricted to Old World species, is a very heterogeneous group, and much in need of careful revision, for which the writer has at present neither time nor adequate available material. In the first place, Antrostomus carolinensis (see pl. 2, fig. 1), the type by subsequent designation? of the genus Anétrostomus Bona- parte,* and apparently the only member of this group as I now re- strict it, differs greatly from Caprimulgus in both cranial and external characters, and is really more closely related to Vyctidromus than to either Caprimulgus or Setochalcis.t Its diagnosis is as follows: Genus ANTROSTOMUS Bonaparte. Similar to Caprimulgus Linneus, but interorbital region of frontals narrower; palatines of very different shape, the distance from their posterior border to the posterior ends of the foramina in their middle portion much greater, nearly double, and these openings much smaller; the inflated posterior parts of the palatines them- selves produced on each side considerably farther back than at the median line, thus more drawn to a point, and the postero-external outline of palatines laterally much less convex, in fact almost straight; vomer broader, and pointed, instead of bluntly rounded, at its anterior end; maxillo-palatines longer and relatively narrower, more strap- shaped, less shoe-shaped or hook-like; the palatal opening between the halves of the premaxillary smaller and more regularly oval; rictal bristles with long and conspicuous lateral filaments; tail more rounded; and pterylosis different.® All the other American goatsuckers commonly referred to the genus Antrostomus, excluding those recently removed to other genera by Mr. Robert Ridgway,’ agree, so far as I have been able to exam- ine them, very closely in external generic characters, but I have seen the skull of only “ Antrostomus” vociferus, from which I have drawn the cranial characters for this group. Since there are external generic differences distinguishing all these species from both Cap- rimulgus and Antrostomus (carolinensis), and likewise so many and such excellent cranial characters in “Antrostomus” vociferus (see 1Oaprimuigus Linneus, Syst. Nat., ed. 10, vol. 1, 1758, p. 198 (type, by tautonymy Caprimulgus europaeus Linneus). : 2Gray, List Gen. Birds, 1840, p. 7. even gras Geog. and Comp. List Birds Europe and, North Amer., 1838, p. 8. ee p. 11, ® See Clark, Auk, vol. 18, 1901, pp. 168-169. ® Ridgway, Proc, Biol. Soc. Wash., vol. 25, May 4, 1912, pp. 98-99, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSEBR. 1l pl. 2, fig. 2), it seems necessary to separate all these American species under the name— SETOCHALGCIS,! new genus. Somewhat resembling Antrostomus Bonaparte (as restricted above), but interorbital region of frontals much wider; palatines with inflated posterior portion smaller, the postero-external angles more sharply pointed and little if any extended backward beyond the median part of the palatines; vomer somewhat more sharply pointed ; maxillo-palatines smaller, shorter, less sharply pointed and much more widely separated; the oval palatal opening between the halves of the premaxillary more elongate; pterygoids not so far separated from the basisphenoid, resting almost against it for the anterior half of their length; rictal bristles without lateral filaments; second primary (counting from the outermost) longest, the third but little shorter, the first considerably shorter than the third and about equal to the fourth (in Antrostomus the second primary is the longest, but the third is decidedly shorter, the first still a little shorter, but very much longer than the fourth) ; three primaries sinuate on their outer webs, instead of two as in Antrostomus; wing relatively shorter; and pterylosis different.? Superficially similar to Caprimulgus Linneus, but palatines very differently shaped, the distance from their posterior border to the pos- terior ends of the foramina in their middle portion much greater, and these openings much smaller ; the postero-external angles of palatines much more sharply pointed, and the postero-external outline laterally much less convex, indeed nearly straight ; vomer broader, and pointed, instead of bluntly rounded, at its anterior end ; maxillo-palatines more oval or strap-like, not so shoe-shaped or hook-like, and much more widely separated; the palatal opening between the halves of the premaxillary smaller, narrower, more oval (less ovate); pterygoids not so far separated from the basisphenoid, but resting almost against it for the anterior half of their length; second primary (counting from the outermost) longest, the third only a little less, the first. consider- ably shorter than the third and about equal to the fourth (in Caprimulgus* the second primary is also the longest, but the third is decidedly shorter, the first still a little shorter or equal, but very much longer than the fourth); three primaries sinuate on their outer webs, instead of two as in Caprimulgus, tail more rounded; wing relatively shorter. The type of this genus is Caprimulgus vociferus Wilson. 1 Se, ontéc, tinea; xadkic, avis nocturna. 2 See Clark, Auk, vol. 18, 1901, pp. 168-169. Tt should be remembered that all these comparisons with Caprimulgus refer to Capri- mulgus europaeus only. See p. 10. 12 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. Its geographical range is as follows: South America, Central America, the West Indies, and North America excepting the northern and central western portions. The species and subspecies at present referred to this genus, of most of which the writer has examined skins, are as follows: Setochalcis sericocaudata (Cassin.)* Setochalcis rufa rufa (Boddaert). Setochalcis rufa otiosa (Bangs). Setochaleis saturata (Salvin). Setochalcis badia (Bangs and Peck).? Setochalcits salvini (Hartert).® : Setochalcis cubanensis (Lawrence). Setochalcis vocifera vocifera (Wilson). Setochalcis vocifera arizonae (Brewster) .* Setochalcis vocifera macromystax (Wagler).® Setochalcis vocifera oaxacae (Nelson) .® Setochalcis vocifera chiapensis (Nelson). Setochaleis ridgwayt ridgwayt (Nelson). Setochalcis ridgwayi goldmani (Nelson).” Phylogeny—The genus Chordeiles, like the American branch of the family Caprimulgidae, is of South American origin. This is evi- dent from the facts that two of its three species, Chordeiles acutipennis and Chordeiles rupestris, are still permanently resident there; that the forms of Chordeiles acutipennis which live in Central America and Mexico are more or less migratory; and, futhermore, that Chor- deiles virginianus, the remaining species, though at present entirely West Indian and North American in its distribution during the breeding season, returns entirely to South America to pass the winter. It seems probable that the present genus with its two nearest ge- neric allies, Vannochordeiles and Nyctiprogne, had a common im- mediate ancestor; though, perhaps, Vannochordeiles, which is really 1 This is the original spelling of the specific name. 2 This is apparently the same as the subsequent Antrostomus nelsoni Ridgway (Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., vol. 25, May 4, 1912, p. 90). 3 This is the same as Antrostomus notabilis Nelson, of later date. 4This is a perfectly good race, differing from Setochalcis vocifera macromystax of the eastern, central, and south central parts of Mexico, from southern Coahuila to Guerrero, in lighter and more brownish coloration both above and below. It was originally de- scribed by Mr. William Brewster as Antrostomus vociferus arizonae (Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 6, 1881, p. 69) from the Chirieahua Mountains in southern Arizona. It ranges north to southern Arizona and central western Texas; west to Arizona; south to Jalisco, Mexico; east to Durango, Mexico, aud central western Texas. 5 This is Oaprimulgus macromystag Wagler (Isis, 1831, col. 533), which has no more specific locality than “‘ Mexico.” Since, in view of the several subspecific forms since described, it is desirable to have a more definite type-locality, we designate as such Mount Orizaba, Puebla, Mexico. 5 Still known from only the type specimen, a female, and if distinct from Setochalcis vocifera macromystar Wagler, is certainly but a subspecies of Setochalcis vocifera, 7 Clearly not more than subspecifically different from Setochalcis ridgwayi, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 13 a small, somewhat modified Chordeiles, is a more direct offspring of the latter group. The real relationship and therefore the origin of the three species of Chordeiles is a problem of some difficulty. It seems probable, however, that Chordeiles virginianus, to have become, in structure, pattern of coloration, and color so well differentiated specifically from both Chordeiles acutipennis and Chordeiles rupestris; to have estab- lished itself entirely outside of South America; to have spread over and permanently occupied as a summer home so large an area; and to have become modified into so many geographic races, notwithstand- ing the very brief period in each year during which the modifying in- fluences could be operative, must be a relatively ancient species. On the other hand, Chordeiles acutipennis, less stable than Chordeiles virginianus in structural characters, less dispersed into territory where it is migratory, modified into fewer subspecific forms, and these less strongly differentiated from the parent stock, and still largely resident in South America, seems to be of more recent origin. But Chordeiles rupestris, which is very different from Chordeiles acutipennis in pattern of coloration and in structure, and which occupies approximately the same area in South America, probably, therefore, developed simultaneously from the same ancestor. Fur- thermore, the close superficial resemblance in color and markings which Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis from northern South America bears to Chordeiles virginianus minor from Jamaica and Cuba is at least suggestive, if not significant. Thus we naturally arrive at the hypothesis that all three species of Chordeiles were de- rived from a common ancestor, probably resembling Chordeiles vir- ginianus in structure and Chordeiles acutipennis in coloration, but now extinct, from which Chordeiles virginianus first became differ- entiated, and afterwards both Chordeiles acutipennis and Chordeiles rupestris, the latter so greatly specialized, as it is now seen to be in color pattern, by some unknown agency, possibly individual variation and subsequent fortuitous, temporary segregation. The only region where the two species, Chordetles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis, occupy a common breeding area is in the southwestern United States and extreme northern Mexico. Here the former seems to have immigrated first, and from the north and east; while afterwards Chordeiles acutipennis, then a perfectly distinct species, extended its range northward from southern Mexico until it overlapped that of Chordeiles virginianus, and it seems to be still pushing northward. Sequence of forms.—An ideal linear sequence of species and sub- species, which shall show their proper phylogenetic relationship, is, however, desirable, probably out of the question in a complicated group like the genus Chordeiles. As some such arrangement is, of 14 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. course, necessary for the sake of convenience, and as it is more satis- factory for a list or technical treatise to begin the catalogue of sub- species under each species with the “ typical,” or rather the first-de- scribed race, the name of which the species as a whole bears, the writer has tried to arrange the subspecific forms in as natural an order as is possible under these circumstances, and this sequence he has fol- lowed in the detailed treatment of the forms of the genus. A linear arrangement more satisfactory from the standpoint of re- lationship may, of course, be obtained by disregarding the purely arbitrary placing of the first-described form of a species at the head of the list of subspecies. Such a list, with due regard for the phy- logeny and present-day affinities of both species and subspecies, and one which seems to the writer to express, as eloquently as a mere list can, their known or assumed relationships, is as follows: Chordeiles virginianus minor. Chordeiles virginianus vicinus. Chordeiles virginianus chapmani. Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis. Chordeiles virginianus virginianus. Chordeiles virginianus hesperis. Chordeiles virginianus sennetti. Chordeiles virginianus howelli. Chordeiles virginianus henryi. Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis. Chordeiles acutipennis exilis. Chordeiles acutipennis micromeris. Chordeiles acutipennis texensis. Chordeiles acutipennis inferior. Chordeiles rupestris rupestris. Chordeiles rupestris xyostictus. Chordeiles rupestris zaleucus. The necessity of beginning in each species with the oldest or lowest form brings into juxtaposition, in a linear arrangement, the lowest or oldest form of any one species with the highest or most recent form of the preceding species, but there seems to be no better way. In the above list this is most noticeable with regard to Chordeiles wirginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis, for, of the races of the former, Chordeiles virginianus minor is undoubtedly the one most closely allied to Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis, though of neces- sity placed farthest from it serially. The sequence of subspecies under each species is also difficult to ex- press in a single linear list, owing to the fact that some races are about equally related to two or three others. Thus in the case of 7 THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 15 Chordeiles virginianus the subspecies are properly placed in their phylogenetic order as far as the fourth, for Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis is surely a pale form derived from Chordeiles virginianus chapmani. But Chordeiles virginianus virginianus is without doubt also an offshoot from Chordeiles virginianus chapman, and subspecifi- cally not very closely allied to Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis. The rest follow in their presumed natural order. In Chordeiles acutipennis a practically natural order is possible, the only races which require comment in this connection being Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis and Chordeiles acutipennis exilis. Were the linear sequence to be strictly geographical, that of the first three races of Chordeiles acutipennis would be Chordeiles a. ewilis, Chordeiles a. acutipennis, Chordeiles a. micromeris; for the first is geographically isolated from the Central American form not only by a hiatus in the breeding range but by the interpolation of Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis. This race, Chordeiles acutipennis exilis,* is, however, in some characters a departure from Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis in the direction of Chordeiles acutipennis micromeris, though not exactly intermediate, and is probably the result of envi- ronmental conditions somewhat similar to those of the last-mentioned form. In the case of Chordeiles rupestris, the material is so limited that only a suggestive opinion is possible. If all the characters of Chor- deiles rupestris xyostictus* and Chordeiles rupestris zaleucus,* par- ticularly of the latter, prove constant in a larger series, the former is probably the one most closely allied to Chordeiles rupestris rupestris, . since it differs only in colors, whereas Chordeiles rupestris zaleucus differs also in pattern of coloration. Species and subspecies.—There seem to be only three specific types referable to the genus Chordeiles, namely, virginianus, acutipennis, and rupestris; but these are so trenchantly different from each other both structurally and in pattern of coloration that there can be no question of their entire distinctness. All the other forms are clearly subspecies. The 17 forms here recognized are distributed as follows: Chordeiles virginianus, with 9 races; Chordeiles acutipennis, with 5; and Chordeiles rupestris, with 3. For convenience of reference a list of all these, with their type localities, is added here: 1See p. 98. 2 See p. 116. 3 See p. 118. 16 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. Name. Type-locality. Chordeiles virginianus virginianus.....-.----+++-+++ Eastern Virginia. Chordeiles virginianus hesperis.......---++++--+200e+ Bear Lake, San Bernardino Mountains, southern California, Chordeiles virginianus sentetti........+sccen-eeeeeee 50 miles west of the Pembina Mountains, central northern North Dakota. Chordeiles virginianus howelli.......-.--+---0eeee* Lipscomb, northwestern Texas. Chordeiles virginianus henryt......-- .---| Fort Webster, southern New Mexico. Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis *.. .-.-| Valley of Aserri River, near San José, Costa Rica. Chordeiles virginianus chapmant........-- ...-| Gainesville, northern Florida. Chordeiles virginianus vicinus... .-| Long Island, Bahama Islands, Chordeiles virginianus minor.........0-++ .---| Northern coast of Cuba. Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis....... ....| Cayenne, French Guiana, Chordeiles acutipennis exilis 8.........0.-ccceseeeeee Northern Chile. Chordeiles acutipennis micromeris $........000-00004 Xbac, northern Yucatan, Mexico. Chordeiles acutipennis terensis..........20+eeeeeee0e Ringgold Barracks, near Rio Grande City, southern Texas, Chordeiles acutipennis inferior 5. .........02+2e0e-000 Triunfo, southern Lower California, Mexico. Chordeiles rupestris rupestris...... Rocky islands of the Rio Negro, northern Brazil. Chordeiles rupestris tyostictus °. Bogota, Colombia. Chordeiles rupestris zaleucus 7........2.--20-eee ones Pebas, northern Peru. 1 New subspecies; see p. 57. 5 New subspecies; see p. 109. 2 See p. 71. ® New subspecies; see p. 116. 8 See p. 98. 7 New subspecies; see p. 118, 4 New subspecies; see p. 100. Recognition of subspecies —All but two of the forms here treated. as subspecies are found to intergrade with some one or even several other forms, either by gradual mergence across an intermediate geo- graphic area, or if isolated on islands or elsewhere, then by individual variation, and i in the first case not infrequently both geographically and individually, so that each species is made up of a complete chain of connected races. The two exceptions mentioned are Chordeiles rupestris xyostictus*® and Chordeiles rupestris zaleucus,? both being little-known birds of probably limited distribution, the characters of which are such as reasonably presuppose their subspecific, rather than specific, relationship, for which reason we have here assigned them such a rank. The problem of the number of subspecies to be recognized is, as in the case of similar wide ranging and plastic animals, a somewhat difficult one, particularly in Chordeiles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis. The great individual variation seriously complicates the situation, for however few may be the subspecific divisions of particularly these two species, such subspecies will more or less overlap those of one or more others, hence the characters can in no ease be more than average. There are, notwithstanding this exces- sive and troublesome individual variation, well-marked geographic ® See p. 116. 9See p. 118, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 17 differences which, upon examination of proper series, are apparent at a glance; and there are also other geographic variations, not very evident, except by careful study, and which may or may not have special significance according to the attitude of the investigator. The nominal designation of these small and apparently more or less ephemeral differences may, it seems to me, properly,be left until future time and study shall make such a course advantageous. For the pres- ent purpose, therefore, the writer has contented himself with recog- nizing in nomenclature such differences of size, pattern, and color as appear to maintain during the breeding season a fair average differ- entiation and uniformity over an isolated or reasonably different or extensive geographic area. The results, while they thus bring into evidence probably all the significant geographic variations of the several species, at least in so far as the available material warrants, are at the same time not excessive subdivision. Fewer subspecies would obscure interesting geographic variations, with little or no gain in the ease of identification of given specimens; more would seem, from the outlook of our present material, superfluous and inadvisable. Identification of specimens—The naming of subspecies is most important in that it brings into prominence the facts of geographic distribution and evolution and provides convenient handles for their use. In the case of migratory birds it furnishes a means, often of great value, sometimes indispensable, of tracing their wanderings. Given any certain number of races, therefore, of a Chordeiles or species of any other genus, with a mass of undetermined material, it naturally follows that proper identification’ must precede any use of the facts which such material exhibits. This, however, in difficult groups, like Chordeiles, is often a matter of considerable difficulty, and for satisfactory results requires a good series of authentic speci- mens for comparison, coupled with a thorough knowledge of differ- ential characters and variations. In the present genus, so great and so complicated is the variation of individuals, sex, and age, that it is absolutely necessary to make comparisons with specimens of the same sex and age and with typical series. On this account very full comparisons are, in the following pages, made under the head of each subspecies. As is always the case with subspecies, the differences separating which are only average, there are specimens in nearly all the races of Chordeiles, which individually are not separable from certain individuals of some other race. With breeding birds of this kind identification is in most cases comparatively easy, for if their respective localities are within the known range of any sub- species they are, of course, identifiable as individual variants of such 18 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. subspecies. But birds from intermediate areas require more careful examination, and often a series from a locality is necessary for their proper allocation. Since, however, the certain breeding period of Chordeiles is comparatively so short, most of the specimens col- lected are either migrants or not surely breeding birds, and their subspecific determination becomes often a matter of great difficulty, and sometimes of more or less uncertainty as well. For obvious reasons an attempt has been made to name every specimen handled in the present investigation, and the results are contained in the lists of specimens under each subspecies. With such a large proportion of specimens of unknown breeding origin, in a group which presents so many puzzling and overlapping vari- ations as do the subspecies of Chordeiles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis, it is too much to hope that I have correctly placed every single individual of the large number that I have examined; but I have carefully scrutinized and compared every one, so that the final determination as printed represents, in each individual case, the best opinion I can offer with the means at my present disposal. Some doubtful specimens have been identified and reidentified dur- ing the progress of the work as many as six or eight times, not always, it must be admitted, with the same result! In instances such as those mentioned above, where a given variant specimen can be matched by individuals belonging to two or even more races, the specimen has been assigned to that form’ by the average subspecific characters of which it is most closely approached; and, in deter- mining this, both the average of single characters among individuals of the same form, and an average of all the differential characters of the given subspecies are taken into consideration. This seems to be the only logical way to treat such cases, and by it we probably much more closely approximate the truth than by any other method. Variation.—The species of this genus have a wide range of all kinds of variation excepting seasonal, which is at a minimum, due partly to the comparatively little abrasion to which the plumage is subject; partly to the great similarity of freshly molted birds to those in worn plumage, for there are, on the fresh feathers, no differently colored tips or edges to wear off; and partly, in the case of a semiannual molt, to the sameness of successive adult plumages. Individual variation is often so great as seriously to complicate the problem of geographic forms, as well as to render difficult the identification of specimens. Furthermore it is just as great in the sedentary as in the migrant forms. This is, however, fully treated under the various species and subspecies. Sexual differences are about equally great in all the species. In Chordeiles acutipennis and Chordeiles virginianus they are of very THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. 19 similar kind, and are mostly differences of color; while in Chordeiles rupestrs they consist more in the pattern of coloration. The variation due to age is likewise about the same in Chordeiles virginianus and Chordeiles acutipennis, and is so great that there is no difficulty at all in distinguishing immature from adult birds. The immature plumages of Chordeiles rupestris appear to be unknown, but their relative differences are probably much the same as those of the other species of the genus. Geographic variation is not so great as in many other birds of even less but otherwise similar geographic range but of greater plasticity. This variation has been kept down in part, doubtless, by the extensive migration of the northern forms; but it probably can not be fully ac- counted for in such a way, since the species least or not at all migra- tory, Chordeiles acutipennis and Chordeiles rupestris, are seen to be, if anything, less variable than the highly migratory Chordeiles virginianus. Apparently such a condition of limited geographic vari- ation is induced also by the excessive individual variation in species of this genus; by their inherent smaller degree of plasticity; as well as by the phylogenetic age of the species, as compared with those of other genera. The last may also be a determining factor in the species of Chordetles, as compared with each other; and if Chordeiles acuti- pennis and Chordeiles rupestris are of more recent evolution than Chordeiles virginianus, as seems probable, this may be, in geographic variation, an offset to their more sedentary habits. General habits—The nighthawks of this genus are birds of the open country. Being strong of wing, they are of easy though power- ful flight, and spend much time in the air, where they obtain most of their insect’ food, which their great mouths admirably fit them to scoop in while on the wing. Their feet are weak, and not well adapted to perching in the ordinary way; so the birds rarely alight high up in trees, but crouch on the ground or other flat surface, on posts, fence-rails, rocks, prostrate trees, or low branches; and, when on a branch, log or fence-rail, sit almost invariably lengthwise of the perch. These nighthawks build no nest, but deposit their two well-mottled eggs on the ground or similar places. The young are practically helpless for some time ‘after birth. Unfortunately these birds furnish a good mark for the hunter, and often on this account fall to the gun of the sportsman or pot-hunter. They deserve a much better fate, for they are beneficial birds, living almost entirely, if not exclusively, on insects. History.—tThe earliest account of any species of this genus is by Catesby,1 who in 1748 described Chordeiles virginianus as the 1Nat. Hist. Carolina, Florida, and Bahama Islands, vol. 2, Appendix, 1743, p. 16, pl. 16. 20 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. “Whippoorwill, Caprimulgus minor Americanus.” The South Amer- ican Chordeiles acutipennis was first brought to notice by Buffon who gave, under the name “ L’Engoulevent acutipenne de la Guyane,” a description and a brief note on its habits. Both these species, when subsequently given a binomal name, were referred to the genus Caprimulgus Linnzus, as was also a third species described later by Spix? as Caprimulgus rupestris. Swainson was the first author to recognize their structural differences from Caprimulgus, and first separated the nighthawks generically as Chordeiles.? Another spe- cies, described as Chordeiles pusillus,* has since been made the type of a new genus Vannochordeiles by Dr. E. Hartert.5 Further species which have been at one time or another by some authors referred to Chordeiles, but which all belong in other genera, are Siphonorhis americanus, Nyctiprogne leucopyga, Nytipolus hirundinaceus,® Luro- calis semitorquatus, Lurocalis nattereri, and Nyctibius leucopterus. Nomenclature——Swainson’s name for this generic group, Chor- deiles, first proposed by him in 1832,” is by several years the earliest appellation, and is of undoubted application, since it is monotypic, and has for its type by original designation “ Chordeiles virginianus (Caprimulgus americanus Wils.),” which is, of course, none other than Caprimulgus virginianus Gmelin. A subsequent generic name is Microrhynchus Lesson,’ type by monotypy, Caprimulgus exilis Lesson; but besides being 11 years antedated by Chordeiles Swainson is, furthermore, untenable under any circumstances by reason of Microrhynchus Dejean,® a genus of Coleoptera, and Microrhynchus Bell,’ a genus of Crustacea. In 1857 Bonaparte, either unaware of Microrhynchus Lesson, or considering it unusable, proposed Ram- phaoratus™ in the following fashion: ’ 9. Ramphaoratus, Bop. 35. truncatus, Bp. Mus. Br. (caberculatus? Jardin. 36. exilis, Less. pruinosus, Tschudi). From this it is evident that he intended to include two species: the first an undescribed form to be based on specimens in the British Museum, and which he regards as probably or possibly identical with 1 Hist. Nat. des Oiseaux, orig. ed., vol. 1779, pp. 547-548, 2? Avium Spec. Nov. Bras., vol. 2, 1825, p. 2, pl. 2. > Fauna Bor.-Amer., vol, 2, 1881 (1832), p. 496. *Gould, Proce. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1861, p. 182. 5 Ibis, July, 1896, p. 374, ®See p. 97. 7 Fauna Bor.-Amer., vol. 2, 1831 (1882), p. 496. 8 L’Echo du Monde Savant, July 16, 1843, col. 109. ® Catalogue des Coleoptéres, 1821, p. 98 (Megerle MS.). ” Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1835, p. 88. ™ Rivista Contemporanea, vol. 9, February, 1857, p. 215 (p. 9 of reprint), THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. 21 “ caberculatus” Jardine, this undoubtedly a misprint for [Capri- mulgus| labeculatus Jardine, a synonym of Chordeiles acutipennis; and the second species, Caprimulgus ewilis Lesson, with which he synonymizes Caprimulgus pruinosus Tschudi. Since the Ramphaora- tus truncatus of Bonaparte is a nomen nudum, it leaves Caprimulgus exilis Lesson as the virtually monotypic type of Ramphaoratus. The generic term Chordeiles has, like so many others, suffered at the hands of emenders, who, in seeking to “ improve” the name, have in some cases made it worse. This is an excellent example of the impossibility of formulating any satisfactory rule for the emenda- tion of names, because, as in the present instance, there are often several different ways of spelling the same word, by varying the terminations, all of which are orthographically and classically cor- rect, and merely a matter of preference. The best course, therefore, from the standpoint of either reason or convenience, is to adhere to the original spelling of generic names, even though in some instances this be, from a classical point of view, evidently wrong. The name Chordeiles has been spelled in at least five different ways, including the original, and under the International Code of Nomenclature most of these would be regarded, so far as their form is concerned, as tenable generic terms. Mr. G. R. Gray in 1840? first changed the name to Chordeilus, designating the type, as in the original Chor- deiles, Caprimulgus virginianus Gmelin. Next Tschudi in 1846? spelled it Chordiles, and included only “Ch[ordiles]. semitorquatus Cab.,” which is, of course, the same as Caprimulgus exilis Lesson. In 1847* Cabanis emended it to Chordediles, and the type of this is, of course, the same as that of the original Chordeiles. In 1869+ Mr. G. R. Gray credits Cabanis with the orthography “Chordedilus,” supposedly used in 1861; but, after careful search, I have not been able to locate the reference. There may be still other spellings of Chordeiles buried in the literature, but I have been unable to discover them. The word Chordeiles is derived from the Greek yop, a string (of a lyre or other musical instrument), and 8e/Ay, evening, or twilight; and the longer forms of the word, Chordediles and Chordedilus, are better, orthographically, than the contraction Chordeiles. This, however, does not, of course, concern us in the scientific use of the name. Literature-—Few extended papers on this genus have appeared, and most of its literature consists of scattered notes on the species, -- often in connection with birds of other genera and families, in 1 List Genera Birds, 1840, p. 7. 2 Fauna Peruana, Ornith., 1846, p. 21. 3 [Wiegmann’s] Archiy ftir Naturg., vol. 13, pt. 1, November, 1847, p. 346. « Hand-List Gen. Spec. Birds, vol. 1, 1869, p. 61. 22 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. faunal papers or books on birds of large groups or extended geo- graphic areas. The two most valuable articles on the genus as a whole are, of course, Dr. Hartert’s account in the Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum, and in the Tierreich. Full citation of these and the other more important papers dealing wholly or in part with the birds of the present genus are given in the following chrono- logical list, from which, however, are omitted references to several of the original descriptions, since these can be found in the synonymy of the various forms of the genus: Sprx, J. B—Avium Species Novae, quas in itinere per Brasiliam annis 1817- 1820 colleg. et descripsit; vol. 2, 1825, p. 2, pl. 2. Cassin, JoHn.—lIllustrations of the Birds of California, Texas, Oregon, British and Russian America; 1855, pp. 237-239. BuRMEISTER, C. H. C.—Systematische Uebersicht der Thiere Brasiliens, vol. 2, 1856, pp. 393-397. Barrp, S. F.—Reports of Explorations and Surveys to Ascertain the most Practicable and Economical Route for a Railroad from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean, vol. 9, 1858, pp. 150-155. Scratrr, P. L.—Notes upon the American Caprimulgide. Subfamily III. Caprimulgine. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1866, pp. 131-1385. PELZELN, AUGUST VON.—Zur Ornithologie Brasiliens, 1 Abth., 1868, p. 14. Barrp, 8S. F.; Brewer, T. M.; and Rieway, R.—History of North American Birds; Land Birds, vol. 2, 1874, pp. 399-408. TACZANOWSKI, LADISLAS.—Ornithologie du Pérou, vol. 1, 1884, pp. 210-215. Coves, Extiott.—Key to North American Birds, second edition, 1884, pp. 453- 455. Suvreitpt, R. W.—Contribution to the Comparative Osteology of the Tro- chilidw, Caprimulgide, and Cypselide. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1885, pp. 886-915, pls. 58-61. Riweway, Rosert.—Manual of North American Birds, 1887, pp. 297, 300-301. Coves, Exxiotr.—New Forms of North American Chordiles. Auk, vol. 5, January, 1888, p. 37. Hartert, Ernst.—Chordeiles. Catalogue of the Birds in the British Mu- seum, vol. 16, 1892, pp. 521, 609-618. SaLvin, OsBeRT; and GopMaN, F. D.—Biologia Centrali-Americana ; Aves, vol. 2, November, 1894, pp. 395-398. BENDIRE, CHARLES.—Life Histories of North American Birds, from the Par- rots to the Grackles, with Special Reference to their Breeding Habits and Eggs, 1895, pp. 163-174. Hasrrert, Ernst.—Das Tierreich. I. Lieferung: Podargidae, Caprimulgidae, und Macropterygidae, 1897, pp. 18-21. Bepparp, F, E.—The Structure and Classification of Birds, 1898, pp. 234-242. Cougs, ELLiotr.—Key to North American Birds, fifth edition, vol. 2, 1903, pp. 563, 568-570. : HetiMayer, C. E.—The Birds of the Rio Madeira. Novitates Zoologicae, vol. 1910, p. 378. Key to species and subspecies.—The following key to the forms of Chordetles is confessedly but little more than a comparative state- ment of characters, although purposely rather full; and while it may in some cases suffice for the identification of a bird in hand, its main THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 23 purpose is, of course, to aid in comparison of specimens. So diffi- cult, in fact, are the birds of this genus, that, owing to the wide range of individual and other variation in them all, it is quite out of the question to prepare a satisfactory key for use without recourse to properly determined material. The present attempt at a key is based entirely on adults, since the juveniles are not represented completely enough in our series to be included. This key is, of course, dicho- tomous, and first sets off the forms of each species, then the sexes of each. KEY TO THE SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES OF CHORDEILES, BASED ON ADULTS. a, Abdomen and crissum pure white; jugulum pale grayish; basal portion of tail, secondaries, and of inner primaries largely white; 3 outer primaries without white or buffy spots; axillars and part of under wing-coverts pure white. (Chordeiles rupestris.) b.. Larger; fourth primary (counting from outermost) without a white spot; tail with much less brown at base and elsewhere; dark brown tips of rectrices not mottled with paler. (Males.) c. Upper parts darker. Chordeiles rupestris zaleucus. ce. Upper parts lighter. d'. Somewhat smaller; upper surface much darker, the deep brown mark- ings dacidedly larger; breast much less heavily spotted, sometimes even nearly immaculate________-_____ Chordeiles rupestris rupestris. ad, Somewhat larger; upper surface much lighter, the deep brown mark- ings decidedly smaller; breast much more heavily spotted. Chordeiles rupestris xyostictus. b%. Smaller; fourth primary with usually a spot of white; tail with more brown at base and elsewhere; dark brown tips of rectrices mottled with paler. (Females.) c. More grayish above; white spot on inner vane of fourth primary very large and reaching shaft; inner webs of rectrices with large dark brown spots or broad bars___-_-______- Chordeiles rupestris zaleucus. c*. More ochraceous or buffy above; white spot on inner vane of fourth primary absent or very small and not reaching shaft. @. Larger; upper surface lighter, less heavily marked with dark brown; breast more heavily spotted__-----_ Chordeiles rupestris xyostictus. @. Smaller; upper surface darker, more heavily marked with dark brown; breast less heavily spotted____Chordeiles rupestris rupestris, a Abdomen and crissum barred with blackish or brown; jugulum dark brown or blackish; basal portion of tail, secondaries, and of inner primaries not nearly all white, but mostly brown; 3 outer primaries with a large white or buffy.spot; axillars and all of under wing-coverts heavily barred with dark brown or blackish. b*. White or buffy patch on usually 4 outer primaries situated between the tips of the fifth and eighth primaries (counting from the outermost) ; primary coverts and outer webs of primaries and secondaries with con- spicuous spots or bars of buff or ochraceous; first (outermost) primary usually shorter than second. (Chordeiles acutipennis.) c. Larger; wing speculum larger and white; a white subterminal bar on tail; throat-patch white. (Males.) 24 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. d'. Size greater (wing averaging more than 180 mm.). . Chordeiles acutipennis texensts. ad. Size smaller (wing averaging less than 178 mm.). é. Lower parts darker, more heavily barred. Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis. e. Lower parts lighter, less heavily barred. f. Smaller (wing averaging under 160 mm.); pale bars on under side of tail more whitish; light bars on posterior lower parts averaging wider__-------.-.----_ Chordeiles acutipennis ewvilis. f. Larger (wing averaging over 165 mm.) ; pale bars on under side of tail more buffy or ochraceous; light bars on posterior lower parts averaging narrower. g'. Light bars on tail broader; size averaging larger. Chordeiles acutipennis inferior. g.. Light bars on tail narrower; size averaging smaller. Chordeiles acutipennis micromeris. ce. Smaller; wing speculum smaller, and buff or largely so; no white sub- terminal bar on tail; throat-patch buff or ochraceous. (Fematles.) ad. Large (wing usually more than 174 mm., averaging over 170 mm.). Chordeiles acutipennis texensis. a’. Small (wing usually less than 168 mm., averaging under 170 mm.). e". Above darker; lower surface darker and posteriorly more heavily barred; size smaller_________ Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis. e*. Below paler; lower surface lighter and less heavily barred; size greater. f'. Larger (wing averaging more than 166 mm.) ; light bars on tail broader Chordeiles acutipennis inferior. f*. Smaller (wing averaging less than 163 mm.) ; light bars on tail narrower. g'’. Posterior lower parts darker; size greater. Chordeiles acutipennis micromeris. g’. Posterior lower parts lighter; size smaller. Chordeiles acutipennis exilis. 7. White or buffy patch on usually 5 outer primaries situated between the tips of the seventh and tenth primaries; primary coverts and outer webs of primaries and of secondaries without spots or bars of buff or ochrace- ous, or with at most faint markings; first primary usually longer than second. (Chordeiles virginianus.) ce’. Larger; alar speculum larger, and plain white without dusky markings; a white subterminal bar on tail; gular crescent pure white; lower parts less buffy. (Males.) ad. Light mottlings of upper surface deeply tawny. e’. Posterior lower parts paler, more buffy or whitish; upper surface lighter; size larger (wing averaging 199.7 mm.). Chordeiles virginianus henryi. e. Posterior lower parts darker, more ochraceous or tawny; upper surface darker; size smaller (wing averaging 168 mm.). Ohordeiles virginianus minor. @ Light mottlings of upper surface ochraceous buff or white. e. Smaller (wing usually less than 188 mm.). f. Upper surface darker, the pale mottlings much less numerous. Chordeiles virginianus chapmani. f. Upper surface lighter, the pale mottlings much more numerous. a, oe a Ge ua —_ 159 SapsuckeraotsEeYs CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 25 Cornell University Ithaca, New Yok: $486@ler (wing usually less than 176 mm.) ; upper parts darker. Chordeiles virginianus vicinus. 9. Larger (wing usually more than 180 mm.) ; upper parts lighter. Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis. e”, Larger (wing usually more than 192 mm.). f'. Upper surface darker, more blackish, the light moitings much less numerous______________ Chordeiles virginianus virginianus. f*. Upper surface lighter, more brownish, the light mottlings much more numerous. g’. Above darker, the light mottlings less numerous. Chordeiles virginianus hesperis. g’. Above lighter, the light mottlings more numerous. ih’. Dark brown of upper parts more rufescent, the light mott- lings more ochraceous or buffy. Chordeiles virginianus howelli. h?. Dark brown of upper parts more grayish, the light mott- lings more grayish or whitish. Chordeiles virginianus sennetti. ce, Smaller; alar speculum smaller, and more or less mottled with dusky; white subterminal bar on tail absent or very narrow; gular crescent buff or ochraceous; lower parts more buffy or ochraceous. (Fematles.) ad’. Size small, the length of wing usually less than 185 mm., averaging less than 183 mm. é. Upper surface paler (the ground color lighter and the light mark- ings lighter or much more numerous) ; lower parts lighter; pos- terior lower surface less heavily barred. Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis. é. Upper surface darker (the ground color darker, and the light mark- ings more deeply colored or much less numerous) ; lower parts darker; posterior lower surface more heavily barred. f. Lower parts and light markings of upper surface more tawny or ochraceous; size smaller (wing averaging 168.7 mm.). Chordeiles virginianus minor. jf. Lower parts and light markings of upper surface more grayish or whitish; size larger (wing averaging over 172 mm.). g'. Larger (wing averaging 179.4 mm.) ; posterior lower parts more whitish (less ochraceous) ; upper surface darker (the ground color more deeply blackish, the light markings less numer- ous) Chordeiles virginianus chapmani. g°. Smaller (wing averaging 173.2 mm.) ; posterior lower parts less whitish (more ochraceous); upper surface lighter (the ground color less deeply blackish, the light markings more numerous) Chordeiles virginianus vicinus. d?. Size large, the length of wing usually more than 190 mm., averaging more than 188 mm. é. Upper surface more brownish, the light markings more ochraceous or tawny; posterior under surface more buffy or ochraceous. f'. Lower parts lighter, posteriorily less ochraceous or buffy (more whitish) ; upper surface lighter-_Chordeiles virginianus howelli. f’. Lower parts darker, posteriorly more ochraceous or buffy (less whitish) ; upper surface darker__Chordeiles virginianus henryi. 18782°—Bull. 86—14-——3 Laboratory of Ouwdtholoe? 159 Sapsucker Woods Roge Cornell University ‘thaca,y New York 1485" 26 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. e7. Upper surface more blackish, the light markings more whitish (less ochraceous or tawny); posterior under surface less buffy or ochraceous (more whitish). f'. Under surface somewhat darker, more tinged with buffy or ochra- ceous; ground color of upper parts more blackish and the light markings less numerous and somewhat more ochraceous. Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, f*. Under surface somewhat lighter, less tinged with buffy or ochra- ceous; ground color of upper parts more brownish and the light markings more numerous and somewhat more whitish (less ochraceous). g. Dark ground color of upper surface more grayish and somewhat lighter; light markings above more numerous and more gray- ish or whitish; lower surface slightly lighter. Chordeiles virginianus sennetti, g’. Dark ground color of upper surface more brownish and some- what darker; light markings above less numerous and more brownish, buffy or ochraceous; lower surface slightly darker. Chordeiles virginianls hesperis, CHORDEILES VIRGINIANUS (Gmelin). [Caprimulgus] virginianus Gmetin, Syst. Nat., vol. 1, pt. 2, 1789, p. 1028 (Virginia).* Chars. sp. (adult male) —Interorbital region of skull very broad; longitudinal ridges on the median portion of frontal bones not strongly developed; maxillo-palatines relatively rather broadly subtriangular; vomer very narrow; antero-exterior processes of the palatines moderately slender; pterygoids with a decided exterior angle near the anterior end, whereby the terminal portion is usually more or less parallel with the posterior border of the palatine, and nearly or quite in contact with the latter; first (outermost) primary usually longer than the second; shortest secondary usually falling short of the tips of primary coverts by at least 5 mm.; distance from bend of folded wing to end of shortest secondary nearly always less than from latter point to end of fourth primary (counting from the outermost) ; tips of rectrices rounded ; upper surface black or brown- ish black, mottled with whitish or buffy; tail dark brown or blackish, irregularly barred with white, gray or buff; wing-quills fuscous, usually the 5, occasionally the 4 or 6 outer primaries with a large white or rarely buffy spot between the tips of the seventh and tenth primaries (counting from the outermost); primary coverts, also outer webs of primaries and secondaries, either immaculate or with at most faint spots or bars; throat of male white; jugulum and breast dark brown or blackish, spotted with whitish, buff, ochraceous or tawny; remainder of lower surface whitish or buffy, barred with blackish or dark brown; axillars and under wing-coverts dark brown or blackish, barred with whitish or buffy. 1 Further synonymy under the various subspecies, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 27 Adult female.—The female differs from the male in being of some- what smaller size; in having the white wing-patch smaller and usually more or less mottled with dusky; the white subterminal tail- bar almost always absent, but if present much narrower; the light throat-crescent cream buff to tawny ochraceous, and often more or less spotted with dusky; lower parts usually more brownish, and pos- teriorly averaging much more buffy or ochraceous, the crissum rarely if ever pure white. Some of these sexual differences are, however, not so strongly marked in certain of the subspecies as in others. First autumn plumage.—Although there is some difference in the various races of the species, the first autumn plumage is more or less intermediate between the juvenal and adult plumages. The male in first autumn plumage exhibits the following differences from the adult male: Upper parts with much more numerous pale mottlings, and thus lighter; white speculum smaller; primaries more or less broadly tipped with whitish or buffy; tail without subterminal white band; jugulum and upper breast much vermiculated with whitish, grayish or dull buffy; white throat-patch smaller, less well-defined, somewhat creamy or buffy, and much mottled, usually all over, with dusky. The female in first autumn plumage is similar to the adult of the same sex, but has the upper parts much more mottled with lighter ; the upper breast and jugulum more vermiculated with paler; the buff throat-patch much more heavily marked with dusky, some- times almost obliterated. In this condition the female is much like the male of the first autumn, but the throat is usually more deeply buff and more heavily spotted with dusky. Juvenal plumage.—In. this stage, which immediately precedes the first autumn plumage and succeeds the natal or nestling plumage, and which the bird wears for apparently only a short period, both male and female are usually much lighter above than in the adult plumage or that of the first autumn, the ground color being paler and the light mottlings prevailing; the lower surface has its dark areas also paler, the barring on breast more vermiculate and nar- rower; the bars on the rest of the lower surface lighter and less dis- tinct; the throat-patch not very strongly indicated, and buff or ochraceous buff. Natal plumage.—Upper parts grayish or buffy white, everywhere with coarse mouse gray, drab gray, or clove brown mottling; or fawn color with Prout’s brown markings; below, white or cream white, mottled on throat and jugulum with gray or grayish brown; or pale fawn color, mottled on throat and jugulum with Prout’s brown. Seasonal variation—tThe color differences due to season are very slight, probably in part, at least, because of the little wear to which the plumage is usually subject. What little there is consists chiefly in the somewhat more brownish or lighter shade of the dark parts, 28 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. both above and below, after the breeding season; and the sometimes more deeply ochraceous or tawny of the light markings in freshly plumaged birds. . Moilt.—The natal plumage is naturally of brief duration, and with the beginning of the bird’s growth in size passes directly into the juvenal plumage, which, in turn, through a practically continuous molt gives way to the first autumn plumage by at least some part of September, at which time the bird is full grown. During this process the wing-quills and rectrices are grown only once, but the contour feathers of the juvenal plumage are wholly or in large part replaced. This livery is worn until January or February, when by a complete molt the fully adult plumage is assumed. The adult birds after the breeding season molt usually the contour feathers, but not the wing quills and rectrices, this taking place be- tween the middle of July and the middle of September, mostly between July 15 and August 15. The birds are thus, with wings and tail intact, even though molting other feathers, free to start on their migration. During January or February another molt, this time complete, takes place, so that. by the time the birds are ready for their long northward journey they have an entirely new suit. These different plumages have already been described. Individual variation —The differences exhibited by various indi- viduals of the same sex and age is very great, with respect to both size and color, in all of the forms of this species. This variation in color affects chiefly the amount of light mottling on the upper sur- face; the fineness or coarseness of these markings; their color, which in some subspecies is so decided that it amounts to two phases; the width of the dark barring on the abdomen; the width and number of dark bars on the crissum, these in some individuals being heavy and close together, in others narrow or far apart; and the length of wing and tail. In only one or two of the subspecies are there really two color phases, gray and ochraceous or tawny, for such differences are usually subspecific. There is, moreover, usually not much purely individual variation in the shade of the dark brown or blackish areas, though occasionally such instances crop out in some of the races. Geographical variation.—-For a bird so highly migratory, Chordeiles virginianus has responded rather remarkably well to the climate, environment, and other modifying influences of the various parts of its breeding range. The number of subspecies that now appear recognizable is nine, an increase of two over the previous number. Two of these are West Indian, the others continental. Nearly all of them correspond very well to the characteristics exhibited by races of other species which range over areas of similar physiographic conditions, the principal exception being Chordeiles virginianus hes- THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. 29 peris, the Pacific coast race, which extends also eastward over the arid Great Basin. The four southeasternmost forms, Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis, Chordeiles virginianus chapmani, Chordeiles virginianus vicinus, and Chordeiles virginianus minor are the small- est, and of these the two island races, C. v. vicinus and C. v. minor, represent the minimum. The five remaining races are all of large size and practically alike in this respect. It is interesting to note the reduplication of certain characters, such as the coloration of the upper parts, in forms widely separated geographically. Thus Chordeiles virginianus vicinus, except for its small size and more ochraceous lower surface, would pass very well for the far distant Chordeiles virginianus hesperis of Oregon and California; while Chordeiles virginianus minor of Cuba bears similar resemblance to Chordeiles virginianus henryi of Arizona. Furthermore, it is doubt- less worth while to mention the development of blackish or dark grayish races in the northern and eastern portions of North America; of a light grayish form on the northern Great Plains; of light, rather ochraceous races in the middle Rocky Mountains, the southern part of the Great Plains, and in Texas; of a rather dark, very tawny or ochraceous subspecies in arid Arizona and New Mexico; and of a dark, very tawny or ochraceous but very small bird on the Greater Antilles. The nine forms of Chordeiles virginianus here recognized are com- monly considered subspecies, and correctly so. The Cuban Chor- deiles virginianus minor indicates by the range of its individual vari- ation its close connection with Chordeiles virginianus vicinus of the Bahama Islands, which race in turn overlaps in the same way the characters of Chordeiles virginianus chapmant. The last mentioned passes gradually through geographical intermediates into Chordeiles virginianus virginianus. In the same manner Chordeiles virginianus virginianus intergrades with Chordeiles virginianus sennetti and Chordeiles virginianus hesperis; and the last with both Chordeiles virginianus sennetti and Chordeiles virginianus howelli2 Chor- deiles virginianus howelli* intergrades geographically with Chor- deiles virginianus henryi, and both of these with Chordeiles virgini- anus aserriensis, which in turn connects with Chordeiles virginianus chapmani. . Most of the characters distinguishing the subspecies of Chordeiles virgimianus lie in differences of size, chiefly of wing and tail, some- times also of tarsus and middle toe; of the general tone of the upper surface, whether light or dark, grayish, blackish, buffy, ochraceous or tawny, this lightness or darkness due to the difference in ground color and in the color, abundance, and fineness of the light markings; of the general tone of the lower surface, whether light or dark, 1 See p. 57. 30 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. grayish, buffy or ochraceous; and of the width of the dark bars on the abdomen. Geographical distribution—As a species Chordeiles virginianus ranges, during the breeding season, in the West Indies and North America, form the northern edge of Mexico, the Gulf coast of the United States, and the Greater Antilles, north to the edge of the Barren Grounds in central Quebec, northern Ontario, southern Mackenzie, and northern Yukon; and from the Atlantic coast to the Pacific. It migrates across Mexico, Central America, and through the West Indies to southern South America, where the various sub- species probably winter together. The summer ranges of two of the races, Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis! and Chordeiles virginianus vicinus, is somewhat re- stricted geographically, but most of the others are considerably ex- tended. . The northernmost form, Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, occupies an immense area stretching all the way across the continent, and at least equal in extent to the combined ranges of all the other subspecies. The breeding areas of all but two of the forms of Chordeiles vir- ginianus are continuous with some one or more of the others, al- though, of course, the lines delimiting the ranges on the accompany- ing map leave intermediate spaces due to lack of specimens from such regions. The subspecies of the Greater Antilles, Chordeiles vir- ginianus minor, and that of the Bahama Islands, Chordeiles vir- ginianus vicinus, are, of course, separated from each other and from the mainland forms by the surrounding water. The southeastern bird, Chordeiles virginianus chapmant, adjoins Chordetles virgimanus virginianus, Chordeiles virginianus howelli? and Chordeiles vir- ginianus aserriensis.1 Also Chordeiles virginianus virginianus west- ward meets Chordeiles virginianus howell? Chordeiles virginianus sennetti and Chordeiles virginianus hesperis; and the last also reaches Chordeiles virginianus sennetti. The central form of the west, Chor- deiles virginianus howelli? lies surrounded by all of the six other mainland races, every one of which it touches at some part of the boundary of its range, as the distribution map shows. The far south- western bird, Chordeiles virginianus henryi, adjoins, in addition, Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis on the southeast, and probably also Chordeiles virginianus hesperis on the northwest. Zonal distribution —In the West Indies during summer this species occupies the Upper Tropical Zone of the Neotropical Region; on the North American Continent the Lower Austral, Upper Austral, 1See p. 71, 8 See p. 57. THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWaINSON—OBERHOLSER. $1 Transition, Canadian, and Hudsonian zones of the Nearctic Region. Four of the subspecies, Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis,’ Chordeiles virginianus chapmani, Chordeiles virginianus vicinus, and Chordeiles virginianus minor, are confined to a single life zone; one, Chordeiles virginianus sennetti, to two zones, and each of the four remaining races is spread over several zones. The ranges of all conform very satisfactorily to the boundaries of their respective zones. Phylogeny.—As a species Chordeiles virginianus is, as already re- marked,? of South American origin. To the dispersal of strong- winged birds like this, physical features, such as high mountain ranges and wide expanses of water or desert, present no obstacle; and an unsuitable summer temperature and the lack of proper food at this season are therefore apparently its only real barriers. Thus its emigration from South America, from whatever primal cause, was easy, as was also the finding of a new home, since on account of its annual migratory return to the south, the only requisite for its new abode was a suitable place for reproduction. Its present dis- tribution, routes of migration, and the evidently close relationship of the Cuban Chordeiles virginianus minor with Chordeiles acutipen- nis acutipennis from South America all indicate that Chordeiles vir- ginianus reached the North American Continent through the West Indies. Birds that remained to breed on the Greater Antilles re- tained more nearly the original characters of the species, while those that pushed on northward and westward became more and more differentiated. The Floridian Chordeiles virginianus chapmani is, of course, the form least removed from the island birds, both geo- graphically and phylogenetically. From this area the species prob- ably spread northward and northwestward, where it developed into the large, dark race, Chordeiles virginianus virginianus. This, in turn, spread westward and southwestward over nearly the whole western United States, where environmental and perhaps other factors have produced the four large paler races of the more or less arid interior: Chordeiles virginianus hesperis, Chordeiles virginianus sennetti, Chordeiles virginianus howelli, and Chordeiles virginianus henryi; of which the last is undoubtedly phylogenetically as well as geographically farthest removed from Chordeiles virginianus vir- ginianus. Simultaneously, in all probability, the advance of Chor- deiles virginianus chapmani along the Gulf coast to southern Texas ultimately resulted in the development of the small, pale race in semi- arid southern Texas. The uniformity of Chordeiles virginianus vir- gémianus throughout its wide breeding range from ocean to ocean is apparently due to the comparative uniformity of climatic and en- 1See p. 71. 4See p. 12, 32 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. vironmental conditions over this area, together with the very brief period of each year that the bird spends on its breeding grounds, where alone the differentiating influences have opportunity to exert themselves. Under these conditions it is entirely probable that any future development of geographical races from what is now the sub- species Chordeiles virginianus virginianus will be exceedingly slow. Migration—Comparatively few birds of any kind exceed this nighthawk in the length of their migration journeys, and very few land birds travel as far. From thé Arctic Circle. in the Territory of Yukon to Patagonia is more than 8,000 miles, but the nighthawk’s long wings and consequent powers of flight enable it easily to per- form this extensive regular annual journey. Judging from the scarcity of available records, it seems probable that the passage through Mexico and Central America, and over the West Indies, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Caribbean Sea to northern or central South America is made with considerable rapidity. Like most other birds which travel long migration routes, this species is, generally speaking, an early migrant in autumn and a com- paratively late arrival in spring. Notwithstanding this, the first in- dividuals in spring sometimes reach the southern border of the United States by March 15, and the latest stragglers in autumn occa- sionally prolong their stay in the same region until even November 27; but these dates are of course exceptional, since the spring appear- ance is usually three or four weeks later, and the autumnal disappear- ance a month or so earlier. The nighthawk usually reaches Montreal and Quebec early in May; Grand Falls, the northern limit of itsrange in central Quebec, during the last week of May; Fort Chipewyan, AI- berta, the last week of May; Fort Wrigley, Mackenzie, the first week of June; and British Columbia by the last of May or first of June. On the other hand, migrant birds are sometimes still in southern Texas on May 29, and even in Costa Rica as late as May 927. The southward migration must begin very soon after the young are on the wing, since transient birds from the north appear in the middle and southern United States by the first of August, sometimes by the middle of July; and they reach Nicaragua by the middle of September. Montreal in Quebec, also southern Manitoba and British Columbia, are deserted usually during the first two weeks of Sep- _ tember, and Fort McMurray, Alberta, in August. It is thus evident that the migratory movements, in the United States at least, cover a total period of more than four months in autumn and of nearly three months in spring. There is thus in Colorado and the surround- ing States a scant three or four weeks’ period of summer, from about June 15 or 20 until the middle of July, during which the presence of a nighthawk is presumptive evidence of its breeding in the locality. The above remarks apply to Chordeiles virginianus as a species, since sufficient data have not yet accumulated to work out the migra- THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 33 tion of the subspecies separately. It is more than possible that an adequate series of specimens of the various races (for nothing else will answer) would show some interesting differences in their mi- gration. The migration routes, however, by which several of the different races reach their common winter home in South America are discernible in a general way from the data now available. Con- cerning the migration of Chordeiles virginianus minor and Chordeiles virginianus vicinus we know nothing at all. The two eastern forms, Chordeiles virginianus chapmani and Chordeiles virginianus vir- ginianus, fly southward across the Gulf of Mexico to Yucatan and through Central America to South America, or through the West Indies and across the Caribbean Sea. The return journey is apparently by the same route. The route of Chordeiles virginianus sennetti is unknown; but all the other western races pass south through Mexico and Central America and return the same way. A possible but unproved variation of this may take some or all of the birds from the easternmost part of the ranges of Chordeiles vir- ginianus howelli, Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis, and Chordeiles virginianus hesperis across the western end of the Gulf of Mexico to Yucatan, and thence through Central America. There is no authentic record of any of these western races in the United States east of Illinois, or anywhere in the West Indies. Habits.—Few birds bear such a misnomer as the nighthawk; for it is not a hawk, or even nearly related to one, nor is it a night-flier, except by moonlight, though it prefers the twilight and the declining hours of the day, as well as cloudy weather. It lives mostly in the open country, such as the plains and prairies, and is a common sight along roadsides, fence-rows, railroad tracks, and the like. It avoids the deep forest, though it often enters the outskirts of wood- land. Its flight is strong, swift, and light, at times not a little sug- gestive of the sparrow hawk (Cerchneis sparveria) or other of the small falcons. It is much on the wing, and some of its aerial per-" formances are really wonderful. Its ordinary call on the wing is a sharp one- or two-syllabled note something like “ aeh-eek ” or “ peenk,” and remarkably characteristic. The well-known booming sound so frequently heard is made by the quick passage of air between the primaries as the bird is suddenly checked in rapidly descending flight. Its food, which it obtains on the wing, consists probably all of insects, such as moths, flies, beetles, grasshoppers, and crickets. This nighthawk lays its eggs on the ground on bare rocks, or even on the flat roofs of houses in cities. No nest at all is con- structed. The time of nesting is somewhat earlier in the southern part of its range; but for the species as a whole, it lasts from late April to early August, though there is apparently but one brood. 384 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. The two elliptical eggs are white, buff or gray, much marked through- out with blackish, drab, gray, olive, and plumbeous. History.—This species was first brought to scientific notice in 1743, by Mark Catesby, in the supplement to his “ Natural History of Canolina, Florida, and the Bahama Islands.” He, however, con- fused the nighthawk (Chordeiles virginianus) and the whip-poor- will (Setochaleis vocifera), in which mistake subsequent authors for more than 50 years followed him. Alexander Wilson, in his “American Ornithology,”+ was the first to discriminate the two species satisfactorily, and to point out in detail the real differences between them. The first technical description, however, applicable to any form of the species appeared in 1789, when Gmelin called the northeastern bird Caprimulgus virginianus.2, No subdivision took place until 1855, when Cassin separated the lighter western birds as Chordeiles henryi.2 In the following year the Cuban bird was described un- der two names, of which Doctor Cabanis’ Chordediles minor* has priority. Not until 1888 were any further races added, in which year Chordeiles virginianus sennetti was discovered and published, and the Florida bird separated as Chordeiles popetue [=virginianus] chapmani, both by Doctor Elliott Coues.> Eight years later Mr. George K. Cherrie named a migrant bird from Costa Rica as Chordeiles vir- ginianus aserriensis, which now proves to be the same as a hitherto unrecognized race from southern Texas. In 1903, Mr. J. H. Riley set apart a Bahama race as Chordeiles virginianus vicinus; and in 1905 Mr. Joseph Grinnell separated the birds from the Pacific coast of the United States as Chordeiles virginianus hesperis.2 In the present paper one further subdivision is made, by restricting Chordeiles virginianus henryi chiefly to Arizona and New Mexico, and creating a new race from the northern and eastern part of its former range, Texas to Wyoming, under the name Chordeiles virginianus howelli.® Although some of these above-mentioned forms of Chordeiles vir- ginianus originally passed as distinct species, all are clearly but sub- species, since abundant evidence of intergradation exists in every case, either through geographical or individual intermediates. 2 Amer, Ornith., vol. 5, 1812, pp. 78-82. 2 Syst. Nat., vol. 1, pt. 2, 1789, p. 1028. STllust. Birds Cal., Texas, Ore., Brit. and Russ. Amer., vol. 1, 1855, p. 239. 4 Journ. f. Ornith., January, 1856, p. 5. 5 Auk, vol. 5, January, 1885, p. 37. ® Auk, vol. 13, April, 1896, p. 136. 7 Auk, vol. 20, October, 1903, p. 4382. 8 Condor, vol. 7, Nov. 22, 1905, p. 170. >See p. 57. THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON-——OBERHOLSER. 35 CHORDEILES VIRGINIANUS VIRGINIANUS (Gmelin). [Oaprimulgus] virginianus GMELIN, Syst. Nat., vol. 1, pt. 2, 1789, p. 1028 (Virginia) (based on: [Caprimulgus] europeus B.[=]Caprimulgus minor americanus, Linnaus, Syst. Nat., ed. 12, vol. 1, 1766, p. 346; Hwipperiwill, Katm, Resa Norra Amer., vol. 3, 1761, p. 93 [Racoon, New Jersey]; Caprimulgus virginianus, Brisson, Ornith., vol. 2, 1760, p. 477 [Virginia]; Whip-poor-will, Caprimulgus minor Americanus, -Catressy, Nat. Hist. Carolina, Florida, and Bahama Islands, vol. 2, Appendix, 1748, p. 16, pl. 16 [Virginia]; Whip-poor-will, Epwarps, Nat. Hist. Birds, vol. 2, 1747, p. 63, pl. 63 [Virginia]; Le Whip-pour-will, Burron, Hist. Nat. des Oiseaux [orig. ed.], vol. 6, 1779, p. 534 [Vir- ginia]; Longwinged Goatsucker, PENNANT, Arctic Zool., vol. 2, 1785, p. 436 [excl. pl. 18], No. 337 [Charleston, South Carolina, to Henly House, Albany River, Ontario]; Virginia Goatsucker, LatHam, Gen. Synop. Birds, vol. 2, pt. 2, 1783, p. 595 [Virginia]). Caprimulgus popetue ViertuoT, Ois. Amer. Sept., vol. 1, 1807, p. 56, pl. 24 (Nova Scotia). Caprimulgus americanus Witson, Amer. Ornith., vol. 5, 1812, p. 65, pl. 40 (eastern Pennsylvania) (nec Caprimulgus americanus Linnz=vus, 1758, qui Siphonorhis americanus Auct.). Caprimulgus variegatus ViEILLoT, Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat., 2d ed., vol. 10, 1817, p. 288 (Paraguay). Claprimulgus]. jaspideus Mrrrem, in Ersch und Gruber, Allgem. Encycl. Wissensch. und Kiinste, sec. 1, vol. 15, 1826, p. 148 (Paraguay). Chars. subsp.—Size large; upper parts black or blackish, the light markings sparse or only moderately numerous, and mostly whitish or buffy, with very little tawny; general tone of lower surface rela- tively dark, the dark areas of anterior portion blackish, the posterior part slightly washed with cream color or buff, and heavily barred with blackish. Description —Adult male, No. 38895, Museum Comparative Zodl- ogy, Pocantico, New York, May 19, 1891; W. E. D. Scott; original number, 11425. Upper surface blackish clove brown, irregularly spotted with brownish white, cream white, cream color, cream buff, buff, ochraceous buff, and ochraceous, these markings most numerous on cervix, largest on scapulars (which are also much mottled with grayish and buffy on their subterminal unexposed portions), least frequent on pileum and back, which are almost unmarked, and in the form of irregular bars on the upper tail-coverts; tail grayish clove brown, crossed by about seven (none of which is terminal) irregular and broken bars of brownish white, buffy white, and pale brown, these bars widest on the middle pair of rectrices, and by a broad sub- terminal band of white on all but the two middle feathers; wing- quills dark brown, like the tail, but slightly darker, the outer six primaries crossed by a broad band of pure white posteriorly (dis- tally) to the tip of the ninth primary (counting from the outermost) ; secondaries and inner primaries narrowly tipped with pale brown- ish; outer half or so of the inner webs of the secondaries with 36 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. narrow brownish or buffy white bars; the tertials mottled with light brown, brownish white, and buffy white in the form of broad but much broken and obsolescent bars; superior wing-coverts grayish clove brown like the quills, the primary coverts immaculate, the others spotted irregularly and rather thickly, but not confluently, with brownish white, cream white, and cream buff; moustachial stripe and sides of head and neck blackish clove brown, the auriculars and subocular region narrowly streaked with deep tawny, the sides of neck anteriorly broadly streaked with tawny ochraceous, posteriorly more or less spotted with buffy and brownish white; the moustachial stripe spotted with cream white and buff; a superciliary stripe con- sisting of small spots of anteriorly cream white, posteriorly cream buff, confluent with the light streaks on the side of the neck and the light spots on the cervix; lores mixed with whitish; a broad gular _ crescent and the middle of chin pure white; jugulum and upper breast grayish seal brown, the former with conspicuous subtriangular spots of tawny ochraceous and cream buff, the latter with spots and irregu- lar or broken bars of cream color, cream white, and brownish white; rest of lower surface cream buff, heavily barred with the brown color of wing-quills, these bars widest and farthest apart on crissum; inferior wing-coverts brown like the wings, somewhat spotted and irregularly barred with cream white, cream buff, and ochraceous buff ; axillars dark brown, barred with buff and cream white; edge of wing along the alula white. Iris black or hazel brown; bill black or dark brown; feet dark brown, dull grayish brown, or plumbeous. Measurements.—Male: Total length (in flesh), 235-247.6 (average, 241.9) mm.;+* extent of wing, 596.9-622.3 (610.7). Female: Total length (in flesh), 228.6-254 (241.5) ;? extent of wing, 583.4-606 (574.4).® Male:* Wing, 184-208 (average, 198) mm.; tail, 106-118 (110.9); exposed culmen, 6.1-7.5 (6.5) ; tarsus, 13.5-15.2 (14.4); middle toe, 18-15.5 (14.9). Female:5 Wing, 187.5-203 (196.5) mm.; tail, 105-118.5 (112); exposed culmen, 6.2-7.2 (6.7) ; tarsus, 13.8-15.5 (14.8); middle toe, 14-16.5 (15.5). Type-locality—Eastern Virginia. Geographical distribution—Kastern and northwestern North America, south in winter to southern South America. Breeds in the 1 Six specimens. 2 Nine specimens. 3 Seven specimens. ‘Twelve specimens, from Nova Scotia, Quebec, Alberta, British Columbia, New Hamp- shire, Massachusetis, and New York. 'Ten specimens, from Nova Scotia, Ontario, Maine, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. 87 Upper Austral, Transition, Canadian, and lower part of the Hud- sonian zones, north to Grand Falls on the Hamilton River, and to Lake Mistissini, central Quebec; Moose Factory, northern Ontario; York Factory and Fort Churchill, northeastern Manitoba; Fort Chipewyan and Fort Smith, northeastern Alberta; Fort Resolution and Fort Providence, central southern Mackenzie; Fort Wrigley, the western part of Great Bear Lake, and the Mackenzie River just below Fort Good Hope, central western Mackenzie; and La Pierre House, northern Yukon; west to La Pierre House, northern Yukon; mouth of the Tatchun River, White Horse Rapids, and Caribou Crossing on the Yukon River, and the northern end of Lake Teslin in central southern Yukon; Telegraph Creek, the Coast Range, Lund on Malaspina Inlet, Comox, and Errington on Vancouver Island, western British Columbia; south to Victoria, southwestern British Co- lumbia; Semiahmoo, northwestern Washington; Sumas and Osoyoos Lake, central southern British Columbia; Sproat’s Landing on the Columbia River, southeastern British Columbia; Banff, southwestern Alberta; Prince Albert and Quill Lake, south central Saskatchewan ; Carberry, southern Manitoba; Walker and St. Cloud, central Minne- sota; Waseca, central southern Minnesota; Forest City, central north- ern Iowa; Ames, central Iowa; Indianola, south central Iowa ; Omaha, Lincoln, and Beatrice, southeastern Nebraska; Topeka, central eastern Kansas; Jasper in Jasper County, and Marble Cave in Stone County, southwestern Missouri; Pettigrew, northwestern Arkansas; Mammoth Spring, central northern Arkansas; Monteer, central southern Missouri; St. Louis, central eastern Missouri; Odin, south- ern Illinois; Terre Haute, Bloomington, and Bedford, southern Indiana; Bowling Green, central southern Kentucky; Nashville, cen- tral Tennessee; Chattanooga, southeastern Tennessee; Ellijay and Young Harris, central northern Georgia; Asheville and Weaverville, southwestern North Carolina; Wytheville, Lynchburg, Newport News, and Cape Charles, southern Virginia; east to Cobbs Island, eastern Virginia; Ocean View, eastern Delaware; Five Mile Beach and Sea Isle City, eastern New Jersey; Montauk, eastern Long Island; New- port, southern Rhode Island; Woods Hole, Boston, and Ipswich, east- ern Massachusetts; Portsmouth, southeastern New Hampshire; Bath, Mount Desert Island, and Calais, southern Maine; Barrington, Hali- fax, and Sydney, eastern Nova Scotia; Anticosti Island, and the Nat- ashkwan River, eastern Quebec; and the Bay of Islands, western Newfoundland. Migrates south through Colorado, Texas, eastern Mexico, southeastern United States, the Bermuda Islands, Cuba, Isle of Pines, Jamaica, Barbados, Costa Rica, and Panama, to South America. Winters in South America, north to the Orinoco River in central Venezuela, and Bogota, central Colombia; west to Bogota, Colombia; Matto Grosso, western Brazil; Tucuman, northwestern 38 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. Argentina; and Cordoba, north central Argentina; south to Barracas al Sud, Province of Buenos Aires, central eastern Argentina; and east to Buenos Aires, central eastern Argentina; Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, southeastern Brazil; and Guiana. Accidental north to Melville Island, northern Canada. Remarks.—In the adult female of this race the posterior lower parts are much more tinged with buff or ochraceous than in the male; and the ground color of the upper surface averages lighter, duller, and more brownish, with more numerous light markings, which are more buffy or ochraceous. Birds in first autumn plumage are, on the upper surface, almost like the average of adult Chordeiles virginianus hesperis, and similar also to the adult of Chordeiles virginianus sennetti, but the dark areas are more intensely blackish, though occasional Bperinene are indistinguishable in this respect. The adult male is normally very deeply blackish above, with a comparatively small amount of light mottling; but he varies individu- ally to dull brownish, with a large amount of light marking, until he becomes almost indistinguishable from dark examples of Chordeiles virginianus howelli1 Light-colored specimens of this sort are No. 88139, U.S.N.M., Stamford, Connecticut, and No. 13249, E. A. and-O. Bangs, Santa Fe, Isle of Pines. The light markings of upper parts are usually grayish, creamy white, and buff, but vary sometimes to almost pure white, sometimes to deep tawny. The ground color of the lower parts is normally grayish white, and varies little, though sometimes almost pure white, sometimes slightly washed with buff. The female is also variable above, and occasionally (such as No. 174915, U.S.N.M., Cumberland County, New Jersey; and No. 46920, Mus. Comp. Zoél., Long Island, New York) very closely resembles adult male Chordeiles virginianus hesperis. The ground color of the ventral surface is commonly cream white, but deepens in some birds to ochraceous buff. The light throat-patch is normally buff, ranging, however, on the one hand to cream white, on the other to deep ochra- ceous buff. Notwithstanding its vast range, this subspecies exhibits almost no geographical variation, except where its breeding area closely ap- proaches that of some other race. Adult birds from Vancouver Island, British Columbia, and from the Yukon River in Yukon are apparently in no respect, of either size or color, distinguishable from those of Nova Scotia, eastern Quebec, and New England. A single female from Sproat’s Landing, southeastern British Coulmbia (No. 970, Victoria Mem. Mus., June 26, 1890), and another, a male, from Banff, Alberta (No. 1256, Victoria Mem. Mus., June 8, 1891), both seem to be typical of Ohovdeiles virginianus virginianus, and appar- 1See p. 57. THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. 39 ently represent the breeding form at these localities. Specimens from Ashcroft, Lac La Hache, Hope, and Chilliwack, in southern British Columbia, have considerable indication of the more brownish, more heavily light-mottled upper surface of Chordeiles virginianus hesperis, but are, on the whole, nearer Chordeiles v. virginianus. An adult from Carberry, Manitoba (No. 57875, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., July 29, 1892), and a half-grown young from the same locality (No. 57876, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., Aug. 1, 1892) are somewhat vergent toward Chordeiles virginianus sennetti, but are not pale enough above for the latter and apparently belong under the typical form. Another adult from Winnebago County, Iowa (No. 26724, A. N. S. Phila., Sept. 1, 1879), which seems to represent the breeding bird of this locality, is likewise intermediate, but nearer Chordeiles v. virginianus. A typical example of Chordeiles v. virginianus from Trail, extreme southeastern British Columbia (No. 2811, Victoria Mem. Mus., June 14, 1902), is doubtless a migrant, since the breed- ing subspecies at this place is Chordeiles virginianus hesperis. Simi- larly migrant also doubtless are two adult males (No. 15638 and No. 15639, L. B. Bishop, June 5, 1906) from Maple Creek, south- western Saskatchewan, where the breeding subspecies is Chordeiles v. hesperis. Two other adult males (No. 18449 and 3578, L. B. Bishop), respectively from Stump Lake, N. Dak., August 2, 1905, and Towner County, N. Dak., June 8, 1897, are likewise best considered migrant Chordetles v. virginianus, though verging a little toward -C. v. hes- peris, since the breeding bird of these localities is Chordedles vir- ginianus sennetti, and these two specimens are too dark for that race. Another example (No. 63939, U.S.N.M.), from Pembina, N. Dak., taken June 16, 1873, is unquestionably perfectly typical of C. v. virginianus, and hence a belated migrant, for we have an actu- ally breeding female of Chordeiles virginianus sennetti from this same locality, taken three days earlier. A single individual from Cushion Lake, southeastern Missouri (No. 205012, U.S.N.M.), is typical Chor- deiles v. virginianus, but does not, in all probability, represent the breeding form of this locality, which form is reasonably sure to be Chordeiles virginianus chapmani. A single male, perhaps a migrant, from Richland County, southeastern Illinois (No. 90781, U.S.N.M., May 25, 1883), is apparently nearer the typical subspecies, though the breeding bird of the adjoining county of Wabash is Chordeiles vir- ginianus chapman. Birds taken on ‘Smiths Island, southeastern Virginia, prove to be smaller than northern specimens, and are, in fact, about half way be- tween Chordeiles virginianus virginianus and Chordetles virginianus chapmani; but, both size and coloration taken into consideration, seem to be nearer the former. A single adult female, from Fort Macon, North Carolina (No. 57908, U.S.N-M.), taken June 10, 1869, 40 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. seems to be undoubtedly of the present race, being altogether too large for Chordeiles virginianus chapmani; if so, it is only a late migrant, because a male collected at the same locality on the same day is certainly Chordeiles v. chapmani, the breeding form of the region. Specimens from various parts of the breeding range of Chordeiles virginianus virginianus exhibit the following average measurements : iti Exposed Middle Localities. Wing. Tail. aalaen: Tarsus. toe. Eight males, from Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Hamp- mm. mm. mm. mm. mm. shire, Massachusetts, and New York..........-.... 198.1 111.5 6.5 14.6 15 Two males, from Alberta...........0-.eeeeeneeeeeeee 192.8 111.5 6.5 13.8 14 Two males, from British Columbia... 202.5 107.8 6.8 14.3 16.3 Five males, from southeastern Virginia 193.3 110.1 6.6 14.5 15.2 Ten females, from Nova Scotia, Ontario, Massachu- setts, Maine, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia..... 196.5 112 6.7 14.8 15.5 Six females, from southeastern Virginia.............. 185 109.3 7 14.7 16.1 In view of the fact that the migration route of this subspecies is across the Gulf of Mexico and through, or rather over, the West Indies, there are surprisingly few records from these islands, even the Greater Antilles. A single specimen, taken, September 29, 1887, on the island of Barbados,' is the only authentic record from any of the Lesser Antilles. There are no certain records from any part of Mexico excepting the northeastern corner (Nuevo Leon, May 197), nor from Central America northwest of Costa Rica. The single bird found dead, in 1820, on Melville Island, Franklin Territory, Canada,® was, of course, a mere straggler so far beyond even the northernmost extension of the breeding range of the subspecies. Except, perhaps, in the southern part of its range, Chordeiles vir- gintanus virginianus rears but a single brood. In the south it breeds chiefly in May and June, and there is record of eggs as early as April 28; in the north, during June and July, and there are un- hatched eggs to be found sometimes as late as July 31. The earliest binomial name for the eastern nighthawk is Capri- mulgus virginianus of Gmelin,* based on the bird from Virginia. His diagnosis is in full as follows: C[aprimulgus]. fuscus, transversim griseo-fusco et hinc inde cinereo-varius, subtus ex rubescente albus transversim striatus, menti macula trigona alba, area oculorum et cervice aurantiis maculis varia. Habitat aestate in America septentrionali, praesertim Virginia, ewropaeo minor, 8& pollices longus, in montanis, vespere prope domus frequens, eoque tempore 1¥Feilden, Ibis, 1889, p. 486. 2 Hartert, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., vol. 16, 1892, p. 611. ® Sabine, Suppl. Appendix Parry’s 1st. Voyage, 1824, p. exciv. 4 Syst. Nat., vol. 1, pt. 2, 1789, p. 1028, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 41 ad ortum solis usque saepissime altissima voce wiperi-wip clamans, ova 2 viridia, maculis et striis atris varia in campo aperto in nuda terra pariens. Caro sapida. Genae ex cinereo fuscae; remiges atrae, 5 primae circa medium, rectrices extimae prope apicem macula alba notatae; pedes incarnati. From this it is readily discernible that his description of the bird is applicable to only the nighthawk, but that the particulars con- cerning its habits relate nearly or quite all to the whip-poor-will (Setochaleis vocifera). The source of this confusion lies in the accounts of the species given by the eight previous authors whose works Gmelin cites, which citations we have given in full above in the synonymy of the present race.t Of these the Caprimulgus minor americanus of Linneus* is based exclusively on the descriptions in the works of Catesby, Kalm, and Edwards. Catesby’s account® of his “ Whip-poor-will,” or “ Caprimulgus minor Americanus,” from Virginia, which is apparently the earliest extended notice of the species, relates certainly, so far as the plate and description of the bird are concerned, though neither is entirely accurate, to Chordeiles virginianus virginianus; but the habits that he describes are just as certainly those of Setochalcis vocifera. What Catesby says about habits is practically all in a letter from a Mr. Clayton, of Virginia, which he quotes, as follows: The Whippoorwill is not so large as the Bird called here the Hast-India Bat, i.e, Caprimulgus, but in shape, and colour of the feathers, it very much resem- bles it, having also at each side of its mouth three or four stiff black hairs like those of a horse’s main, two or three inches long. These birds visit us about the middle of April, from which time, till the end of June, they are heard every night, beginning about dusk, and continuing till break of day; but it is chiefly in the upper or western parts that they are so very frequent. I never heard but one in the maritime parts, although my abode has been always there; but near the mountains, within a few minutes after sun-set, they begin, and make so very loud and shrill a noise all night, which the echoes from the rocks and sides of the mountains increase to such a degree, that the first time I lodged there I could hardly get any sleep. The shooting them in the night is very difficult, they never appearing in the daytime. Their cry is pretty much like the sound of the pronunciation of the words Whip-poor-will, with a kind of chucking noise between every other or every two or three cries, and they lay the accent very strong upon the last word Will, and least of all upon the middle one. The Indians say these Birds were never known ’till a great massacre was made of their countryfolks by the Hnglish, and that they are the Souls or departed Spirits of the massacred Indians. Abundance of people here look upon them as Birds of ill omen, and are very melancholy if one of them happens to light upon their house, or near their door,-and set up his cry (as they will sometimes upon the very threshold) for they verily believe one of the family 1See p. 35. 2 Syst. Nat., ed. 12, vol. 1, 1766, p. 346. % Nat, Hist. Carolina, Florida, and Bahama Islands, vol, 2, Appendix, 1743, p. 16, pl. 16. 18732°—Bull. 86-—14-——4 42 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. will die very soon after. These Birds, as I have been credibly informed, breed exactly as the Goat-Sucker before mentioned, which is thus: they lay only two eggs of a dark greenish colour, spotted and scrawled about with black, in the plain beaten paths, without the least sign of any nest, upon which they sit very close, and will suffer a very near approach before they fly off. Kalm, who calls the bird “ Hwipperiwill,” gives much the same sort of an account. Edwards,? Latham,’ and Buffon,‘ all give a good description of the nighthawk, but reproduce Catesby’ 3 account of the habits of the whip-poor-will, Edwards giving it in Catesby’s (=Clay- ton’s) own language. Pennant’s description of his “ Longwinged Goatsucker ” 5 relates wholly to Chordeiles virginianus, but his plate is Setochalcis vocifera. Brisson gives a detailed description,’ which applies wholly to the nighthawk. It is interesting to note how closely all these subsequent authors have copied Catesby, with very little or no additional information; except Brisson, whose long, care- ful description is evidently original. Since in all these accounts the portions descriptive of the plumage and other specific characters relate entirely to the nighthawk, the name Caprimulgus virginianus of Gmelin has a clear title. The Caprimulgus popetue of Vieillot,? from Nova Scotia, is, of course, a synonym of Caprimulgus virginianus Gmelin, being many years posterior, though a number of authors have used it for the species. Wilson’s Caprimulgus americanus,? from eastern Pennsyl- vania, is also the same. There seems to be no reasonable doubt con- cerning the identification of Caprimulgus jaspideus Merrem” and Caprimulgus variegatus Vieillot,? both from Paraguay, for the ac- companying descriptions agree very closely with Chordeiles vir- gintanus virginianus. As will be seen by the quotation from Gmelin given above, Vir- ginia is mentioned as the particular part of North America in which this bird was supposed to be found. Most of the other authors whom Gmelin cites give Virginia as the locality also. They mention western Virginia especially, but since this is so evidently based on the account of habits, which are plainly those of Setochalcis vocifera, and since the specimens that served as the basis for the descrip- 1 Resa Norra Amer., vol. 3, 1761, p. 93. 2Nat, Hist. Birds, vol. 2, 1747, p. 63, pl. 63. 3 Gen. Synop. Birds, vol. 2, pt. 2, 1783, p. 595. 4 Buffon, Hist. Nat. des Oiseaux, vol. 6, 1779, p. 534. 5 Arctic Zool., vol. 2, 1785, p. 436. 6 Ornith., vol. 2, 1760, p. 477. 7 Ois, Amer, Sept., vol. 1, 1807, p. 56, pl. 24. 8 Amer. Ornith., vol. 5, 1812, p. 65, pl. 40. tae Ersch and Gruber, Aligem. Encycl. Wissensch. und Kiinste, sec, 1, vol, 15, 1826, p. 1 2 Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat., 2d. ed., vol, 10, 1817, p. 238, 4 See p. 40, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON——-OBERHOLSER. 43 tions came in all probability from the eastern portion of this State, it seems best to fix the type-locality, which we do here, as eastern Virginia. Specimens examined—Of this race 198 specimens have been examined, from the following localities: Alberta.—Athabaska Lake (June 1, 1901); Slave River, 10 miles below Peace River (June 7, 1901) ; Banff (June 8, 1891). British Columbia.—Wayne Island (Aug. 19, 1892); Vernon (Aug. 4, 1892) ; Ashcroft (July 2, 3, 5, and 8, 1889) ; Sumas (Aug. 8, 1891) ; Trail (June 14, 1902); Errington, Vancouver Island (Aug. 29 and 30, 1910; Sept. 9 and 15, 1910) ; Osoyoos Lake (June 6, 1905) ; Hope (Sept. 3, 1890); Lac La Hache (June 29, 1892); Sproat’s Landing, Columbia River (June 26, 1890); Chilliwack (June 29, 1859) ; Okanagan Falls (June 19 and 21, 1913) ; Penticton (June 23 and 27, 1913); New Westminster (June 4, 1886) ; Victoria (July 25, 1894). Mackenzie-——Mackenzie River, below Fort Good Hope. Manitoba—Carberry (July 29, 1892; Aug. 1, 1892) ; Lake Winne- pegosis (July 3 and 5, 1913). Nova Scotia —Dighy (July 14, 1907) ; Newport (Aug. 21, 1900). Ontario—Moose Factory (Aug. 4, 1860; Aug. 16, 1860); Bruns- wick House (June 9, 1908); Point Pelee (May 29, 1909). Quebec.—Fauriel, Grosse Isle, Magdalen Islands (June 15, 1901). Saskatchewan.—Maple Creek (June 5, 1906). Yukon—White Horse Rapids, Yukon River (July 11, 1899); Caribou Crossing, Yukon River (June 27, 1899). Colorado—Gunnison (Aug. 24, 1885). Connecticut Stamford ; East Hartford (Aug. 5, 1893). Florida.—Whitfield (May 2, 1903; Apr. 15, 28, and 28, 1903) ; Dry Tortugas (Apr. 13 and 14, 1890); Amelia Island (May 16, 1906; Apr. 20, 1906). Itlinois.— Jacksonville (May 21, 1892) ; Lake Forest (May 19 and 23, 1906) ; Richland County (May 25, 1883). Iowa.—Winnebago County (Aug. 12 and 26, 1879; Sept. 1 and 3, 1879) ; Grinnell. Kansas —Hamilton (Aug. 10, 1913). Moaine—King and Bartlett Lake, Somerset County (July 15, 1893) ; Island Falls (Sept. 17, 1878). Maryland—Cornfield Harbor (July 18, 1894); Takoma (May 11, 1896; Capitol View (May, 1899); Piney Point (July 17 and 20, 1889) ; Laurel (Aug. 2, 1889; Sept. 18 and 27, 1889); Aikin (Aug. 30, 1894). Massachusetts: —Wayland (Sept. 17, 1879); Waltham (May 18, 1878); Great Island (July 14, 1391) ; Dorchester (Sept. 1 and 8, 44 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 1887) ; Brookline (June, 1872); Wareham (June 10, 1893) ; Cotuit (July 15, 1879) ; Marshfield (July 14, 1879) ; Cambridge; Princeton. Michigan—Palmer Park, Wayne County (May 26, 1907). Minnesota—Fort Snelling (May 22, 1890; June 4, 1891); Grant County (spring, 1877; May 20, 1876); Moorhead (Aug. 31, 1912: Sept. 28, 1912). Missouri.—Charleston (May 8, 1879; May 6, 1878) ; Marble Cave, Stone County (June 30, 1892) ; Cushion Lake (May 6, 1909). New Hampshire.—Hollis (July 27, 1886; May 26, 1876). New Jersey.—Corona, Bergen County (Aug. 29, 1888); Mount Ephraim (Sept. 10, 1884); Cumberland County (Aug. 23, 1887) ; Cape May (May, 1842). New York.—Baldwin, Long Island (Sept. 3, 1908) ; Good Ground, Long Island (July 3, 1884); New York (1871); Lake Grove (May 30, 1889); Hastings-on-Hudson (May 30, 1892); Shelter Island, Suffolk County (Oct. 15, 1897) ; Pocantico (May 19, 1891) ; Roslyn, Queens County (September, 1887). North Carolina.—Fort Macon (June 10, 1869); Raleigh (Aug. 31, 1894) ; Weaverville (May 24, 1893). North Dakota——Pembina (June 16, 1873); Turtle Mountains (June 8, 1897) ; Stump Lake, Nelson County (Aug. 2, 1905). Pennsylvania.—Carlisle (May 16, 1844; June 10, 1844); Chester County (June 2, 1894; Aug. 21, 1894) ; Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia (May 7, 1880; Sept. 10, 1878) ; Marple, Delaware County (May 23, 1881) ; Erie (May 18, 1889); Bethesda (July 13, 1896); Big Tink Pond, Pike County (Aug. 26, 1908). South Carolina.—Ladys Island (May 12, 1869). Tennessee —Bellevue, Davidson County (May 28, 1895); Straw- berry Plains, Texas.—Brownsville (May 4, 1889) ; Corpus Christi (May 28 and 29, 1891). Virginia—Dunn Loring (Sept. 2, 1891); Arlington (Aug. 22, 1879); The Isaacs (May 24, 1899); Smiths Island (May 21, 1894; May 9 and 27, 1899; May 20, 1910; June 4, 12, 23, and 30, 1899); Gainesville (Aug. 25 and 29, 1887; Aug. 14, 1886). West Virginia.—White Sulphur (July 8 and 19, 1898). Wisconsin.—Camp Douglas (Aug. 12, 1891); Cassville (June 3, 1912) ; Lake Koshkonong (June 24, 1873; July 8, 1873). Campeche.—La Tuxpana (Sept. 28, 1912). Argentina.—Ysca Yacu, Province of Santiago (Jan. 31, 1906). Costa Rica.—Rio Sicsola, Talamanca (Sept. 24, 1904) ; Miravalles (May 25, 1906). Isle of Pines, West Indies —Santa Fe (May 10, 1904). Jamaica,—Spanishtown (September, 1863). THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. Measurements of specimens of Chordeiles virginianus virginianus. Bg , {2 ; ‘ 18 4 ld6 Museum and No.| Sex. Locality. Date. Collector. a cI BE Z|\38 Bld a8] |= mm.| mm.|mm.| mm.) mm, Carnegie Mus.| Male....| Fauriel, Grosse | June 15,1901 | D. A. At- [195 [110 | 6.5) 14 | 15 9988.1 Isle, Magdalen kinson. + » Que- ec. U.S.N.M. 2039891..].. Dishys Nova | July 14,1907 | W. a: Os- |192 113 6.3) 15 | 14.5 001 U.S.N.M. 1099171..}... Hollis, N. H...... July 27,1886 . H. Fox. ./201. 5/112 6.2) 14 | 15.2 wie Mus. N. H. |. Coat Island, | July 14,1901 | C. B. Cory. .|184 [107.5] 7 | 14.5) 15 E. “Acai. -Bangs |. Waltham, Mass...| May 18,1878 a andO.|208 |118 | 7.5] 14.3] 14.5 angs. Am. Mus. N. H. Good Ground, | July 3,1884] W. Dutcher.|205 {113.5} 6.1) 15 | 15.5 65271.1 ae Island, Am. Mus. N. H. |...do..... Lake Grove, | May 30,1889 |..... AGvesees 1194.5}107 | 6.1) 15.2) 14.7 65274.) pon Island, M.C.Z.388951......|...do2...] Pocantico, N. Y..] May 19,1891 Ww, E. D. 205 [11 | 6.2} 14.8] 15.5 cott. U.S.N.M.1687121..|...do.._.. Slave River, 10 | June 7,1901| E.A.and A. {188 [108 6.514 | 15 miles below E. Preble. Peace | River, Alberta. U.S.N.M. 1686361..]...do..... Sea Lake, | June 1,1901 |.-... do.....- 197. 5/115 6.5} 13.5] 13 erta. U.S.N.M. 1532861..]...do..... Wayne Island, | Aug. 19,1892} T.Collenson.|201 {106 6.1) 13.5) 15 a oes Colum Mus. Vert. Zool. |...do..... Errington, Van- | Aug.30,1910| H.S.Swarth|204 109.5) 7.5) 15 | 15.5 15695.1 couver Island, ts ea Colum? 12. U.S.N.M. 135353... .]...do..... Batts Island, | May 21,1894] C. W. Rich- |199.5]112.5) 6.5) 14.2) 15.3 a. Carnegie Mus. 6365.|...d0.....|..... OG saps eine June 30, 1899 7.1, 15 | 16 Carnegie Mus. 3943.}. June 4,1899 6 | 15.5) 16.1 Carnegie Mus. 3941.|. -| May 27,1899 6.9] 13.8) 14.2 Farge Mus.te June 12, 1899 |. 6.5] 14.2) 14.2 aah ila, |. fs May 24° 1893 6 | 14.5) 15.1 A. N. 8, Phila. |...do.....! Raleigh, N. C.....] Aug. 31,1894] H.H.andC. |204.5|109 | 7.2) 13.8] 14.7 45229. 5 Brim- ley. U.S.N.M. 2039881..| Female . Aieey Nov aae July 13,1907] W. oa Os- |198 [106 6.5] 14 | 15.5 good. Carnegie Mus. |...do..... Brutiswick House, June 9,1908| M. A. Carri- |191.5]113.5] 6.5} 13.8) 14 30429,1 Ontario. er, jr. Carnegie Mus. |...do.....|..... o....--2ee-2-feeeee do...... A E nos fia | 7 | 15 | 16 F ‘odd. E, A. and O. |...do..... Marshfield, Mass..| July 14,1879] E, A.and O. |187.5/108.5| 7.2) 14.5) 15 Bangs 750.1 Bangs. ~ N. 8. i ---d0..... King and Bart- | July 15,1893] A. B. Van |200 |118.5) 6.3) 15 | 15 47663.1 lett Lemurs Som- der Wielen. erse' ‘0. os A 8. Phila. |...do..... Bethesda, ‘tan er July 13,1896 | F.G. Meyers |196. 5/108.5] 6.2) 15.5] 16.3 ALN. 8 Phila, |...do..... Chestnut Hill, ; Aug. 1,1878} W. L. Ab- |193 [105 7 | 14.6] 15.6 26711.1 adele hia, bott. reer & Phila. |...do..... Oeste County, | June 2,1894] H. Garrett..|199 118 6.9] 15 | 16.5 Am, Mus. N. H. |...do..... Ene, PWerarsta seintions May 18,1889] G. oe Sen- |203 {117 6.9] 15.1] 15.1 nei Carnegie Mus. |--.do..... White Sulphur, | July 8,1898} T. Surber.../203 [113.5] 6.9) 15 | 16 . Va. U.S.N.M. 57903....]...do..... Fort Macon, N. C.| June 10,1869] E.Coues..../197 [112 7.1) 15.9} 16.2 U.S.N.M. 212719...|...do..... suulins Island, | May 20,1910} J. H. Riley../194 [109 6.5] 14.9) 15.7 Carnegie Mus. 3942. |. .. T June 4,1899 ae Shu- /181. 5/108. 5]... 14.3) 14.3 Carnegie Mus. 4231,].. June 12,1899 do 113 7 | 14.6) 15 Carnegie Mus. 4230.].. .d di -5{107.5] 7.2) 15 | 15.5 Carnegie Mus. 4232. -5111 ff 7.1) 13 | 14.2 Carnegie Mus. 6364. |. . .di 51107 7 [15 | 15.9 feldt.] 1 Used in measurement averages on p. 36. 1 Specimen described on p. 35. 46 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. CHORDEILES VIRGINIANUS HESPERIS Grinnell. Chordeiles virginianus hesperis GRINNELL, Condor, val. 7, November 22, 1905, p. 170 (Bear Lake, San Bernardino Mountains, California). Chars, subsp—Similar to Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, but male with upper surface lighter, the ground color more brownish, the light markings more numerous, particularly on back, scapulars, tertials, and superior wing-coverts; the posterior lower parts less washed with buffy, and the dark bars averaging narrower. Measurements——Male: Total length (in flesh), 220.7-260.3 (aver- age, 240.5) mm.;* extent of wing, 568.2-609.6 (588.9) .1 Female: Weight, 4 ounces avoirdupois.? Male:* Wing, 183-211 (average, 200) mm.; tail, 107-120 (112.9) ; exposed culmen, 6.0-8.0 (6.9); tarsus, 13.8-15.2 (14.3); middle toe, 14-15.5 (14.7). Female:* Wing, 187-203 (194.9) mm.; tail, 105-119 (112.2); ex- posed culmen, 6.1-8.0 (7.0); tarsus, 18-15.2 (14.5); middle toe, 14.2-16 (15.3). Type-locality—Bear Lake, 6,700 feet altitude, San Bernardino Mountains, southern California. Geographical distribution—Extreme western United States and southern edge of southwestern Canada; south in winter, probably to South America. Breeds in the Upper Austral, Transition, and Canadian zones, north to Indian Head and Maple Creek, southern Saskatchewan; Many Island Lake, near Walsh, southeastern Al- berta; Trail, southeastern British Columbia; and Fort Steilacoom, Puget Sound, northwestern Washington; west to Aberdeen, central western Washington; Astoria, Newport, and Glendale, western Oregon; Humboldt Bay and Ukiah, northwestern California; Au- burn in Placer County, central California; and the Kern River Lakes and Santa Barbara, southwestern California; south to Ven- turia County, and to the South Fork of the Santa Ana River, and Fish Creek in the San Bernardino Mountains, southwestern California; east to Sugarloaf Peak in the San Bernardino Mountains, south- western California; Furnace Creek in Death Valley, southeastern California; Mount Magruder, southwestern Nevada; Eureka, central Nevada; Fairfield, north central Utah; Promontory, central north- ern Utah; Blackfoot, southeastern Idaho; Upper Geyser Basin, in Yellowstone National Park, northwestern Wyoming; Bozeman, Great Falls, and the Bear Paw Mountains, central Montana; and Indian Head, central southern Saskatchewan. Migrates southward through Kansas, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Mexico, and Nicaragua, Winters probably in South America. 1 Two specimens. 2Qne specimen. 3 Ten specimens, from California, Oregon, and Montana. *Ten specimens, from California, Oregon, and Idaho. THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. 447 Remarks—The female of this race differs in color from the male in her usually more buffy posterior lower parts; rather lighter, more brownish (less blackish) ground color of the upper surface, with light markings there averaging darker, duller, less sharply contrasted with the dark areas, and usually somewhat more ochraceous or brownish (less whitish). She is, in fact, more like Chordeiles virgini- anus howelli+ than is the male. She is even more different from the female of Chordeiles virginianus virginianus than is the male from that form, being rather readily separable by her lighter, more brownish (less blackish), more heavily light-mottled upper parts, these light markings paler tawny or ochraceous; paler under sur- face, the dark brown areas less blackish, the tawny and ochraceous parts, including the throat, paler, the posterior portion more nar- rowly barred and less strongly tinged with buff or tawny. The juvenal and first autumn plumages are distinguishable from the same stages of Chordeiles virginianus virginianus and Chordeiles virginianus chapmani by their lighter upper surface, the ground color of which is more brownish, the light markings usually some- what more buffy and more numerous. Most specimens are, on the upper surface, very much like adult. male Chordeiles virginianus senmetti, occasional birds almost indistinguishable, but are rather more brownish and buffy. Individual variation in color is very marked, more so in the female than in the male. In the male the ground color of the lower ‘parts is normally creamy white, varying to pure white and to cream buff; in the female normally cream buff, varying to cream white and to ochraceous buff, the light throat-patch ranging from ochraceous buff to buffy white. The upper surface of the male is normally blackish brown, with considerable light mottling, mostly of white and grayish white, with some buff. The general impression is lighter than in Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, darker than in Chor- deiles virginianus sennetti. Sometimes it is more blackish, some- times more brownish, and the mottlings are occasionally, at least in part, ochraceous buff. The upper surface of the female is normally as described above, but varies occasionally (No. 161983, U.S.N.M., Quincy, California, June 21, 1889) to dark grayish brown with ex- tensive white, scarcely any buff, markings, practically as in typical male Chordeiles virginianus sennetti; to a more extensively blackish general color (No. 94978, U.S.N.M., Fort Klamath, Oregon, July 25, 1883), with few light markings, very much like the adult male Chor- deiles virginianus virginianus; to a more rufescent brownish, though dark color (No. 19839, Carnegie Mus., Beaverton, Oregon, June 28, 1884), with nearly all the light markings buff, ochraceous, or tawny, 1 See p. 57. 48 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. very closely resembling the adult male of Chordeiles virgimanus henryt; or even to a lighter brown, very much mottled (No. 6819, J. Grinnell, Bluff Lake, San Bernardino Mountains, California, July 22, 1905), like the male of Chordeiles virginianus howelli. As in Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, there is little or no geo- graphical variation in this race. Breeding birds from southern Cali- fornia seem to be practically identical in both color and size with those from northern California, Idaho, western Montana, and other parts of the breeding range. Breeding birds from Nevada seem to be all Chordeiles v. hesperis, and identical with California specimens. One breeding example from the Hood River, Oregon (No. 156571, U.S.N.M., June 21, 1897), looks like Chordeiles virginianus virgint- anus; but others from North Dalles and Fort Steilacoom, Washing- ton, from Heppner and the John Day River, Oregon, are surely Chor- deiles v. hesperis; and while all the breeding birds available from Oregon and southern Washington are somewhat intermediate between C. v. virginianus and C. v. hesperis, they are much nearer the lat- ter. A single specimen from the Milk River, at latitude 49°, Mon- tana (No. 67646, U.S.N.M., July 24, 1874), others from the Sun River and elsewhere in western and central Montana, as well as southern Idaho, are practically indistinguishable from California examples of Chordeiles virginianus hesperis. One half-grown. bird in juvenal plumage from the Upper Geyser Basin, Yellowstone Na- tional Park, northwestern Wyoming (No. 62256, U.S.N.M., Aug. 20, 1872), is apparently the present form, being much too grayish for Chordeiles virginianus howelli,s and too dark for Chordeiles vir- ginianus sennetti. Breeding birds from Trail, southeastern British Columbia, close to the boundary of the State of Washington, verge toward Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, but are decidedly nearer Chordetles v. hesperis. A series of breeding specimens from Maple Creek, southwestern Saskatchewan, and two individuals from Indian Head, Saskatchewan, incline somewhat toward Chordeiles v. sen- netti, but are clearly the present form. Average measurements of breeding specimens from different parts of the range compare as follows: Localities. Wing. Tail. _ aaa Tarsus. Mads mm. mm. mm, mm. mm. Five males, from southern California............--.. 200 113.5 7.2 “14.3 14.7 Five males, from Oregon and Montana.............. 200 112.2 6.7 14.4 14.8 One male, from Utah........-...0-- eee ee ence eee eeee 195 107.5 6.9 8G) 16 Five females, from southern California............... 194.1 112.5 6.9 14 5 Five females, from Oregon and Idaho..............-. 195.6 111.9 7 15 15.6 One female, from Utah.........-.--..--- 22 eee eee 187 108 6.6 14.5 16.3 THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. 49 Like Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, this nighthawk lingers late in the spring south of its breeding range. A single typical male taken at Johnson Lake, Valley County, Montana, June 3, 1910, and another obtained at Saratoga, southeastern. Wyoming, June 7, 1911, are evidently both but transients. So are also one taken by Alex Wetmore at Greybull, in Bighorn County, central northern Wyo- ming, June 14, 1910, and another at the same locality on June 15 of the same year, for the breeding bird of this region is Chordeiles virginianus howelli; and, furthermore, Mr. Wetmore assures us that the species had first arrived in this valley only a few days previous, and appeared to be on the move. Likewise the autumn migration begins very early, sometimes, at least, by the middle of July, thus before the breeding season is over, as the following records of prac- tically typical specimens indicate: One taken, July 14,1909, at Wins- low, Arizona, by C. Birdseye; one, August 3, 1904, at Tres Piedras, New Mexico; one, August 11, 1902, in the Huachuca Mountains, Arizona, by H. S. Swarth; one, August 18, 1909, at Tuba, Arizona, by E. W. Nelson; and another, September 1, 1908, in Buckskin Valley, Iron County, Utah, by W. H. Osgood. It has been reported from Poway, San Diego County, California, during migration, but apparently not certainly from Lower Cali- fornia. Three specimens collected by Dr. C. W. Richmond on the Escondido River, 50 miles above Bluefields, Nicaragua (No. 128370, U.S.N.M., adult male, Sept. 17, 1892; No. 128371, U.S.N.M., adult male, Sept. 17, 1892; and No. 128373, juvenal male, Oct. 28, 1892), are apparently typical Chordeiles virginianus hesperis. The last one (No. 128373) is the example mentioned by G. K. Cherrie* as like the type of his new race, Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis, but darker. An adult female (No. 27101, Field Mus.) from Miravalles, Costa Rica, is certainly Chordeiles v. hesperis, although M. A. Car- riker, jr., has recorded it as Chordetles virginianus virginianus? This nighthawk breeds chiefly during June and July, sometimes as early as May 24; at Big Stick Lake, near Maple Creek, Saskatche- wan, Dr. L. B. Bishop found eggs on July 19, 1906. According to Joseph Grinnell it breeds chiefly in the Canadian Zone, though also in the upper part of the Transition Zone, in the San Bernardine Mountains of southern California. In other localities, however, it nests regularly all through the Transition Zone and also in the Upper Austral Zone. Specimens examined.—Specimens to the number of 120 have been seen, from the localities in the subjoined list: Alberta.—Many Island Lake, near Walsh (July 13, 1906). British Columbia.—Trail (June 18, 14, and 16, 1902). 1 Auk, vol. 13, April, 1896, p. 186. 2 Ann, Carnegie Mus., vol. 6, 1910, p. 501, 50 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. Saskatchewan—Indian Head (June 18, 1892) ; Maple Creek (June 14, 1905; June 5, 1906; July 4 and 30, 1906) ; Hay Creek, near Maple Creek (July 6, 1906); Big Stick Lake, near Maple Creek (July 19, 1906). Arizona.—Tuba (Aug. 18, 1909); Winslow (July 14, 1909) ; Hua- chuca Mountains (Aug. 11, 1902). California.—Fish Creek, San Bernardino Mountains, 9,000 feet altitude (June 15, 1905); Bluff Lake, San Bernardino Mountains, 7,500 feet altitude (July 21, 22, 24, and 25, 1905); Sugarloaf Moun- tain, San Bernardino Mountains, 7,500 feet altitude (Aug. 23, 1905) ; Bear Lake, San Bernardino Mountains, 6,700 feet altitude (July 30, 1905) ; South Fork of Santa Ana River, San Bernardino Mountains (6,200 feet altitude, July 2, 4, 7, and 8, 1906; 7,000 feet altitude, June 27, 1905); Troy Meadows, Sierra Nevada (Aug. 2, 1911); Trout Creek, Sierra Nevada, Tulare County (3,000 feet altitude, July 28, 1911; 6,000 feet altitude, July 30 and 31, 1911); Jackass Meadow, Sierra Nevada, Tulare County, 7,750 feet altitude (July 30, 1911); Parker Creek, Warner Mountains, 5,500 feet altitude (June 22, 1910) ; Squaw Mountain, Warner Mountains (July 20, 1910) ; Coppervale, Lassen County (June 15, 1906); Millford, Honey Lake (June 18, 1906); Quincy (June 21, 1889); Redding (June 17, 1883); Lake City (June 11, 1896) ; Mount Shasta (Aug. 4, 1883; July 29 and 31, 1904); Blue Canyon (June 9, 1882); Tulare Valley; Cisco (June 30, 1885) ; Furnace Creek, Death Valley (June 19, 1891). Colorado.—Estes Park (Aug. 3 and 10, 1893). Idaho.—Pocatello (June 10, 1911); Birch Creek (Aug. 4, 1890); . Big Butte (July 9, 1890); Arco (nestling, July 25, 1890) ; Nampa. Kansas.—Hamilton (Sept. 10, 1913). Montana.—Milk River at 49° north latitude (July 24, 1874) ; Sun River (Aug. 10 and 24, 1867) ; Great Falls (July 20, 1890) ; Johnson Lake, Valley County (June 3, 1910) ; Bozeman (Aug. 9, 1888) ; Cor- vallis (July 7, 1910) ; Gold Creek, Powell County, 5,000 feet altitude (Aug. 26, 1910). Nevada.—Big Creek Ranch at base of Pine Forest Mountains (June 16, 1909); Pyramid Lake (June 28, 1893; July 3, 1903); Virgin Valley, Humboldt County (June 8, 1909); Gardnerville (July 13, 1898) ; East Humboldt Mts. (Aug. 4, 1868) ; Carson (June 18, 1881). New Mexico.—tTres Piedras (Aug. 3, 1904, J. H. Gaut). Oregon.—Newport (June 16, 1901) ; Adel, Lake County (June 20, 1896) ; John Day River (June 21, 1899) ; Beaverton (June 28, 1884; June 21, 1890; July 3, 1890) ; Fort Klamath (July 25, 1883) ; Hepp- ner (June 10, 1896); Lake Alvord (July 31, 1896); Hood River (June 21, 1897); Astoria (nestling, July 19, 1897) ; Crooked River, 20 miles southeast of Prineville (June 28, 1896); 7 miles northwest of Corvallis (July 22, 1898); 1 mile southeast of Corvallis (July 4, 1899). THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER. 51 Texas.—Brownwood (Aug. 25, 1888). Utah.—Buckskin Valley, Iron County (two specimens, Sept. 1, 1908) ; Fairfield (June 21 and 27, 1890). Washington—North Dalles (Rockland) (July 38, 1897); Fort Steilacoom, Puget Sound (July 16, 1858). Wyoming.—Stinking Creek (=Shoshone River) (June, 1860) ; Greybull (June 14 and 15, 1910); Saratoga (June 7, 1911) ; Upper Geyser Basin, Yellowstone National Park (Aug. 20, 1872). Campeche—La Tuxpana (Oct. 4, 1912). Nicaragua.—Escondido River, 50 miles from Bluefields (Oct. 28, 1892; Sept. 17, 1892). Measurements of specimens of Chordeiles virginianus hesperis, Sa) 4{2 Museum and No.| Sex. Locality. Date. Collector. Ef q 33 u3 . Ko me Ele jadi a |e mm.) mm.| mm.| mm.) mm. J. Grinnell 6917 1...| Male2_..] Bear Lake (6,700 | July 30,1905} J. Grinnell. ./205 |116.5) 8 | 14.5] 15 feet alt.), San Bernardino Mountains, Cal. J. Grinnell 6467 1...]...do..-. Ce ots Ogee 000 | June 15,1905 |..... do......-{198 [113 7 | 14.5) 15 eet alt.), Bernardino Mountains, Cal. J. Grinnell 6842 !...!...do....|Bluff Lake (7,500 | July 24,1905 |..... do... - - .|191. 5/107 6. 5] 13.8] 14 feet alt.), San Bernardino . Mountains, Cal. J. Grinnell 6860 1...].. do... -|...-. do. July 25,1905 |..... (i Oe 1207 |120 7.5) 14.2) 15 Mus. Vert. Zool. |...do....| Trout Creek tex 5000} J uly 28,1911 |..... (eee 198. 5/111 7 | 14.5) 14.6 199101. feet alt.), Sierra Nevada Moun- tains, Tulare County, Cal. J. Grinnell——1...]...do....]| Newport, Oreg...| June16,1901 | B.J. Breth- |211 118.5) 6.2) 15.2} 15.2 erton. a Tae Zool. |...do...- 7ene Day River, | June21,1899 | Loye Miller.|205 115 6.6) 14 | 14 Teg. , Carnegio Mus. |...do....] Beaverton, Oreg..| June 21,1890 | A. W. An- /200 |112.5) 8 | 14.5) 15.5 19840,1 thony. U.S.N.M. 1403921.]...do....| Heppner, Oreg...] June 10,1896 | E.A.Preble./201 103 6 | 14.1) 15 U_S.N.M. 228076 1-|.--do...- Corvallis, Mont...] July 7,1910 | B. Bailey...|183 [107 6.5) 14 | 14.2 U.S.N.M. 130394...]...do....| Fairfield, Utah. ..| June 21,1890 | V. Bailey.../195 |107.5| 6.9] 15 | 16 Mus. Vert. Zool. | Female . Trout Creek (6,600 July 30,1911 | J. Grinnell. ./187 {110 6.5) 14.2] 15 19911.1 feet alt.), Sierra Nevada Moun- tains, Tulare County, Cal. Mus. Vert. Zool. |...do..-.|----.' DOs asics cieccisositece.nis! do....-- 7 | 14.5] 16 19912.1 J. Grinnell 7553 1...]...do....| South Fork Santa | July 4, 1906 7 =| 14.2) 15 AnaRiver(6,200 feet alt.), San Bernardino Mountains, Cal. J. Grinnell 7549 2...]...do....].---- Cee July 2,1906 |..... do...-.- 196 {112 6.5) 13 | 15 J. Grinnell 6819 1...|...do....} Bluff Lake (7,500 July 22} 1905 |..... do...-.. 196. 5/108. 5) 7.5] 14 | 14.2 feet alt.), San Bernardino Mountains, Cal. Carnegie Mus, |...do....| Beaverton, Oreg..| July 3,1890} A. W. An- |191 [110.5] 7.3] 14.8] 15.5 19841.1 thony. ce Mus, |..2d0..++|.--+5 Bey scaeesonnen Tune 28, 1884 |... - eee 202 }113 | 8 | 15.2) 16 Ui, 1s. x M. 140393 1.]...do....] Crooked River, 20 | June 28, 1896 | V. Bailey... .[197. 5/115 6.9] 15.2] 16 miles southeast of Prineville, Oreg. U.S.N.M. 1422241.|...do....| Big Butte, Idaho.} July 19,1890 | C.P.Streator|203 [116 6.8] 14.8) 14.8 U.S.N.M. 140407 1.]...do....|-.--- Oe wie sie aie sian el so.010 2 We meas fuses do. ... . -|194. 5/105 6.1) 15 | 15.5 U.S.N.M. 140395...]...do.... Fairfield, Utah...| June 27,1890 | V. Bailey...|187 |108 6.6] 14.5] 16.3 1 Used in measurement averages on p. 46 2 Type. 52 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. CHORDEILES VIRGINIANUS SENNETTI Coues. [Chordiles popetue] Sennetti Cours, Auk, vol. 5, January, 1888, p. 37 (50 miles west of Pembina [sic], North Dakota; and Wharton County, Texas). Chars. subsp—Resembling Chordeiles virginianus hesperis, but upper surface of male lighter and more grayish, i. e., the dark brown ground color lighter and more grayish, the light markings finer, more numerous, and paler, more grayish or whitish (less ochraceous) ; general tone of lower surface lighter, the dark anterior portions more grayish, the bars on posterior portion narrower, sometimes inter- rupted. Measurements.—Male: Total length (in flesh), 212.6-247.6 (aver- age, 231.6) mm.;+ extent of wing, 412.8-590.6 (541).* Female: Weight, 2 ounces 4 drams to 3 ounces 8 drams avoirdu- pois? (average, 2 ounces 13.3 drams). Male:* Wing, 186-213 (average, 198.3) mm.; tail, 101.5-112.5 (109.1) ; exposed culmen, 6.0-7.2 (6.9); tarsus, 13.5-15.8 (14.6); middle toe, 13.9-16 (15.3). Female:+ Wing, 175-201 (189.5) mm.; tail, 102.5-115 (108); ex- posed culmen, 6.0-7.5 (6.5); tarsus, 13.8-15.3 (14.7); middle toe, 14-16 (14.9). Type-locality —Fifty miles west of the Pembina Mountains, in cen- tral northern North Dakota. Geographical distribution.—Central northern United States, prob- ably south in winter to South America; breeds in the Upper Austral and Transition zones, north to Pembina, to Towner County, and old Fort Union, northern North Dakota; and Strater, northeastern Mon- tana; west to Strater, Darnall’s Ranch in Dawson County, and Fort Keogh, eastern Montana; and Uva, southeastern Wyoming; south to Uva, southeastern Wyoming; Rosebud, central southern South Da- kota; Thomas County and Antelope County, north central Nebraska; Sioux City and Dickinson County, northwestern Iowa; east to Dick- inson County, northwestern Iowa; Madison, southwestern Minnesota; and Pembina, northeastern North Dakota. Migrates through Kansas and eastern Colorado, and probably Central America. Winters prob- ably in South America. Remarks.—This is easily seen to be one of the palest races, and is characterized, particularly in the male, by the grayish cast of light and dark colors both above and below, as compared with the other forms. The broad light streaks on the nape, especially, are very light buff or even whitish, and the upper surface of the wings has much 1Four specimens, 2 Three specimens. %Ten specimens, from South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota, and Montana. “Ten specimens, from South Dakota and North Dakota, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—OBERHOLSER,. 53 light gray and whitish with a minimum of buff. The male of this subspecies is readily distinguishable from Chordeiles virginianus vir- ginianus by its much lighter upper surface, the dark ground color less blackish, more grayish brown, the light mottlings much more numerous, finer, paler, and less ochraceous (more whitish or grayish) ; and also by its lighter lower surface, the posterior portion white instead of more or less tinged with buff or cream color, and less heavily barred with blackish, and the dark brown of anterior por- tion more grayish. The female is more brownish below on the dark areas than is the male, also more washed with buff on the posterior portion; above usu- ally darker and with less white mottling, the dark areas slightly more brownish, the light markings duller, more brownish, or more tinged with buff or ochraceous (not so whitish), and thus not so sharply contrasted. She differs from the female of Chordeiles vir- gintanus virginianus in much lighter, more grayish (less brown- ish) upper surface, with much more numerous light markings; and paler lower parts, the dark portions more grayish (less brownish), the light areas more whitish (less tawny or ochraceous), and pos- teriorly less heavily brown-barred. From the female of Chordeiles virginianus hesperis she may be distinguished above by the some- what lighter, more grayish shade of the dark brown ground color, and more whitish (less ochraceous), and usually more numerous light markings, the cervical streaks particularly paler, less buffy; and below by her somewhat paler and more grayish general cast, and the less deeply buff-tinged and less heavily barred posterior portion. The first autumn plumage is lighter above than that of any of the other races, so much so that no special comparison is necessary; the upper surface being of a pale silvery gray, finely vermiculated, and sometimes also spotted with black and dark brown—really a very beautiful bird. As in the adult there is, however, much individual variation; some specimens are much more coarsely vermiculated, and even blotched and streaked with black above; some examples have a pure gray cast, others have a decided tinge of buff both above and below. The nestling is usually pure white or cream white below, and duller, buffy white, with dark gray markings above; but occasionally pale fawn color below, and fawn color with Prout’s brown markings above. Individual variation has about the same range in the female as in the male. The latter is normally pale above, with numerous light grayish or whitish mottlings, from which it varies in occasional ex- amples to a bird much more extensively blackish above, with much less light mottling and practically not distinguishable from typical 54 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. Chordeiles virginianus hesperis. Such are No. 18473, L. B. Bishop, adult male, Stump Lake, North Dakota, August 4, 1905; and No. 26715, Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, adult female, Huron, South Dakota, July, 1881. Birds of this description may, however, almost always be separated from Chordeiles virginianus hesperis by their pale, lightly barred under surface. The other ex- treme is a bird which has the markings of the upper parts very whitish, numerous, and extensive (No. 26717, Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., adult male, Huron, South Dakota, July, 1881). Another variation produces a bird in which most of the light markings on back, scap- ulars, pileum, and hind neck are buff, cream buff, or cream color (No, 19835, Carnegie Mus., adult male, Madison, Minnesota, June 4, 1891). In some examples the lower tail-coverts and the middle of abdomen are almost immaculate white. There is some variation also in the depth of the color and in the width of the dark brown bars on the posterior lower parts. As may be seen from the table of measure- ments, this form varies greatly in size, apparently more so than some of the other races. A single adult female (No. 1960, collection of L. B. Bishop), from Towner County, North Dakota, taken June 11, 1895, is very brownish, and ochraceous or buffy both above and below, and is practically indistinguishable in appearance from very typical female Chordeiles virginianus howelli, thus strikingly different from any of the females of Chordeiles virginianus sennetti examined. It is, of course, just possible that this individual wandered northward from the range of Chordeiles virginianus howelli,: but it seems better to regard it as an abnormal variation of Chordeiles virginianus sen- netti, This subspecies has a more restricted distribution than most of the others. The birds from Huron, South Dakota, and from eastern South Dakota and eastern North Dakota in general are most typical, in that they carry to the extreme the characters of the subspecies; and the type of this race, from 50 miles west of the Pembina Mountains, is practically the same as these. Specimens representing the breeding bird of Dickinson County, Iowa, and Madison, western Minnesota, verge toward Chordeiles virginianus virginianus, but are much nearer the present race. Examples from Strater, and from Darnall’s Ranch, Dawson County, in northeastern Montana, are darker above, and very close to Chordeiles virginianus hesperis, but are, as a whole, nearer Chordeiles v. sennetti. A single specimen (No. 171808, U.S.N.M., June 3, 1889) from Fort Keogh, central eastern Mon- tana, seems to incline a little toward Chordeiles virginianus howelli ,1 in its more brownish and ochraceous colors above. Females from Towner County, North Dakota, are apparently darker on the upper surface than the females from farther south, but the males from the 1See p. 57, THE GENUS CHORDEILES SWAINSON—-OBERHOLSER. 55 corresponding localities do not*seem to differ. Two birds shot on Washington Creek, Kansas, September 12, 1908, identified and recorded? by Alex Wetmore, constitute one of the two authentic records for Kansas. Strangely enough, however, Chordeiles vir- ginianus sennetti has apparently not a single record for Texas, although it almost certainly migrates through this State; since all the alleged instances of its occurrence there, so far as we have been able to determine, prove to be misidentifications of Chordeiles vir- gintanus howelli* or Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis.2 Nothing definite is known concerning its winter home, but this is presumably South America. This race, like most of the others, rears but one brood a year— in June or July. There are records of eggs from Miner County, South Dakota, as early as June 6 (1894) ; and from Towner County, North Dakota, as late as June 30 (1895) ; while we have seen nestlings from Devils Lake, taken on July 18 (1901). The Sennett nighthawk was first described by Dr. Elliott Coues* in the following language: 2. Sennetti, large, silvery grayish-white predominating above, the white below greatly in excess of the narrow, irregular or broken, dark bars, and lit- tle or no rufous anywhere. Hab. Dakota to Texas, in any treeless country. Types 65,490, Mus. Smiths. Inst., formerly 3301, Mus. HE. C., 50 miles west of Pembina, Minn., July 16, 1878, and 4927, Coll. George B. Sennett, Wharton Co., Texas, May 27, 1887. Each of the specimens mentioned as types bears on the back of its label this legend, in the handwriting of Doctor Coues: “A type of the species Elliott Coues.” The first example, which is now in the United States’ National Museum, has commonly received the dis- tinction of being the type, but its correct locality is not ‘50 miles west of Pembina,” as Coues and subsequent authors give it; but “50 miles west of Pembina Mis.,” as the original Jabel, in Doctor Coues’ own well-known chirography, shows. This specimen is an adult male in worn summer plumage, of large size—that is, as big as Chor- deiles virginianus virginianus, and of pale gray coloration, like the breeding birds of North Dakota and South Dakota; in fact, a good representative of the race that passes current under the name Chor- deiles virginianus sennetti. The alleged type specimen from Whar- ton County, Texas, which is now in the American Museum of Natural History, in New York, is, however, a typical breeding bird of the smail, more buffy, though pale, form of southern Texas, which we hereinafter separate as Chordeiles virginianus aserriensis Since this example does not, consequently, agree with the original diagnosis, 1 Condor, vol. 11, 1909, p. 159. 2 See p, 57. 3 See p. 71. * Auk, vol. 5, January, 1888, p. 37, } 56 BULLETIN 86, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. and since the specimen first mentioned, from 50 miles west of the Pembina Mountains, does so agree, the latter must stand as the type. Specimens examined.—Seventy-seven specimens have been avail- able, from the localities that follow: Colorado.—Barr (Aug. 8, 1910). Iowa.—Dickinson County (June, 1881) ; 4 miles southeast of Boone (Oct. 27, 1898). Kansas—Burlington (October, 1891) ; Hamilton (Sept. 17, 1913). Minnesota.—Madison (May 25 and 28, 1891; July 4 and 18, 1891) ; Grant County (spring, 1877) ; Kimbrae (Sept. 13, 1897). Montana.—Fort Keogh (June 8, 1889) ; Darnall’s Ranch, Dawson County, 30 miles south of Glasgow (July 8, 1910); Strater, Valley County (July 16 and 18, 1910). North Dakota—Fort Union (July 1, 1843) ; 50 miles west of the Pembina Mountains (July 16, 1873); Fort Rice (June 18, 1873); Pembina (June 13, 1873—parent of eggs) ; Linton (June 27, 1912) ; Big Muddy Creek (July 2, 1873); Towner County (June 1, 1895; June 7, 1895; June 11, 1895; June 30, 1895; July 8, 1895; July 17, 1895; July 31, 1896); Rock Lake, Towner County (July 7, 1905) ; Devils Lake Indian Reservation (July 22, 1905) ; Tellers Bay, Devils Lake (July 18, 1901); Wolford, Pierce County (July 20, 1905) ; Turtle Mountain, Rolette County (July 6, 1902); Ottofy, Nelson County (June 19, 1905); Adler, Nelson County (July 31, 1902; Aug. 12, 1901) ; Stump Lake, Nelson County (June 22, 1905; July 21, 1902; July 26, 1902; Aug. 2, 1902; Aug. 4, 1905; Aug. 9, 1901; Aug. 14, 1905); Souris River (Sept. 3, 1873); Kenmare (July 15, 1918) ; Sentinel Butte (June 7, 1913) ; Glenullin (July 9, 1913) ; Bismarck. South Dakota.—Huron (July, 1881); near Rosebud (Aug. 14, 1911) ; Missouri River 40 miles above Fort Pierre (June 30, 1856). Wyoming.—Litile Medicine (Aug. 4, 1899) ; Uva (July 6, 1909). Measurements of specimens of Chordeiles virginianus sennetti. O oO g8| 4 bs Museum and No.| Sex. Locality. Date. Collector. | # | = oad or % iy f > — on jo 7 A wes c Pa, 105° 100° 95° see A A — BREEDING RANGES OF THE CENTRAL AMERICAN A 1. Chordeil 2. Chordeil 8. Chordeil BULLETIN 86 PL. 4 “ iddISSISStw ° 80° 75 TEER IID IRE CIEE TOI ELE RTH AMERICAN SUBSPECIES OF CHORDEILES ACUTIPENNIS. pennis micromeris. pennis texensis. ipennis inferior. BULLETIN 86 PL. 5 U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM 15 60 45 on 5 Male Gallinas ae” ak = inidad a{ a, corey a aN ROI AY EN arith IN eto wor ; Jo Nom Up o A ig ort - Lo} VE 1." asa Per Bogota j mol ee: Bax fo" a CcCOLOM A am ? N ~ = MarajoI, 0 eQuit i feed amazes ara Xx pce “UADop sie ~/ ne ¥ & Maranhao 0 e es Sy, A . k Blan Ve 1 t &) y 1 xy put Fg gi yy, & Aa) ~. se” 1s < “St Ro Q SS . y - N Soe Pernambueo iS) 0 . —_ hi i maa b tf i ee dcuzco;" ( Zz I -2 Bana by Pe iS Ba, tay Chine igi NY (fe L YOM Saints ela Paz BR | 1 f ors eSufrey lS ™ \ Ba ? s 20 Dp a : om i s z " 2 — cana aes Ved es ee r- ‘aan ‘ay eing Pi j a, / © Posse os | a 4 30) 3° ) : re) ors ina Pe, i : ae Sting | Rg, 3 ~ Mon He eo 46 “4 fuanE ° By ee lonado, N ‘ San aN ! a Re Ai. as 1 priben, , — < 30 Chiloet} \\ ie y “> 40) ot ia S $ ( vy 2 an y : MAP OF yt dpriana | SOUTH AMERICA, re 3 50 Straits of Magell ie del Fuego Net o Po Spe Horn \ 13 2 17 32 a7 62 ? BREEDING RANGES OF THE SOUTH AMERICAN SUBSPECIES OF CHORDEILES ACUTIPENNIS. 1. Chordeiles acutipennis acutipennis, 2. Chordeiles acutipennis exilis. U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 86 PL. 6 75 60 45 30 ig) C.Gallinas ia g *atacaid) A Trinidad . 5 f ant 2 ly Cartagengy” 7% vo rece ee | or Oa Te, aH to acatho 0% A\VE N por : wee po Se Ur é A or" ou 19] 4 3 Sh Panag De BN 4/ iS Marajo I oh ea; uv ava 0 lo 20 Rosario’ * “a ‘ “4 Fvideo 30 BuenosAirgse vo aldonado, aay, y Aq s p MAP OF ypFatond SOUTH AMERICA. pe Straits of Magelg~ ierra del Fuego g o So Spe Horn 17 32 ‘47 62 13 BREEDING RANGES OF THE SUBSPECIES OF CHORDEILES RUPESTRIS. 1. Chordeiles rupestris rupestris. 2. Chordeiles rupestris xyostictus. 8. Chordeiles rupestris zaleucus. INDEX. [Figures in black-faced type indicate family, generic, specific, or subspecific headings.] Page. acutipennis, Caprimulgus............. 87,93, 94, 97 Chordeiles............0.2.-----+ 1, 2,4, 5, 6, 7,12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 97, 112 Chordeiles acutipennis.......... 1, 13, 14, 15, 16, 24, 31, 89, 90, 91,92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 102, 104, 105, 110, 111 acutus, Caprimulgus.........---+--e-eeeeeee 93, 94 albicollis, Caprimulgus.........-.--.---+--05 8 americanus, Caprimulgus..........-.... Caprimulgus minor. Siphonorhis........ 6,9, 10 12 12 VoCiferusS......2...-2e0ee eee eee 10 arizonae, Setochalcis vocifera,..-.......--..- 12 aserriensis, Chordeiles virginianus........... 1, 14, 15, 16, 25, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 49, 55, 61, 62, 67, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 80 OS1O, OTS. occ ce cciceccncecesecveusetadesesiniee 96 badia, Setochaleis.........--.---.22.2.22000- 12 brasilianus, Caprimulgus................. 93, 94,97 Chordeiles acutipennis.......... 97 Butorides virescens......-......0222202-.2005 94 eaberculatus, Caprimulgus...........-.-...- 21 Ramphaoratus........--22...- 20 Caprimul gt wiciiacececcsnsicnmasnnc assis cieisiccia ae 9 Caprimulgidae. - 6,7, 8, 9,12, 22 Caprimulginae. ... 4... ¢eesccesseeaweewevnresas 22 Caprimulgus.................20005 8, 9,10, 11, 41,97 acutipennis.............. 87, 93, 94,97 BCUUUB oo ie.cin seve meeeeeus esse 98, 94 AIDICUINS 4s orscsoereeseenvsanss 8 americanus.......----.-.. 3, 20,35, 42 brasilianus. . . 93, 94,97 caberculatus 21 europaeus.........---.-..-. 6, 9, 10, 35 OXI oes sete cotcas 3, 21, 93, 98, 99 guianensis........-...... eeanse hirundinaceus................. jaspideus......... 2 labeculatus.........-...... exes 21 macromystax.......-...-..-..- minor americanus... 13732°—Bull. 86-149 © Page. Caprimulgus pruinosus.........----..-.--+ 3, 21, 98 rupestris.......- 20,118,114 semitorquatus 94 stenopterus 94 variegatus 35, 42 virginianus.... 3, 20, 21, 26,34, 35, 40, 42 vociferuS..........2.-.-2----05- 11 carolinensis, Antrostomus..........-.-.-+-+- 6, 9,10 Cerchneis sparveria...........-2.-------eeeee 33 chapmani, Chordeiles popetue.............- 34,75 Chordeiles virginianus...........- 14, 15, 16, 24, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34,39, 40, 47, 75, 76,77, 78, 80, 82, 83 chiapensis, Setochalcis vocifera.............. 12 Chordediles.... minor eveusee 34, 82, 84 Chordedilus ...< occa. veeseneeesscasccexse ces 21 Chordeiles:..cccsusaeciveeesveoceonseecesa ves 1,3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 18, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 acutipennis............. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7,12, 18, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 97, a acutipennis .......... 13, 14, 15, 16, 24, 31, 89, Py 91, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 102, 104, 105, 110, 111 brasilianus........... 97 exilis..... 1,14, 15, 16, 24, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101 inferior .. 14,16, 24, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 103, 104,105, 109,111 micromeris........... 14, 15, 16, 24, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 100, 102, 103, 104, 109, 111 pruinosus............ 99 texensis.. 6,14, 16, 24, 89, 90, 91,92, 102, 103, 105, 108, 109 HUNCH... ceeecereeense 1, 82, 84, 85 HOUEY 5 5 peciecatueestencansinmenencs 63 bic a 9 eee ti eet 34, 63, 65, 68 labeculatus.......... Mol 94 peruvianus........ 98 popetue chapmani-- - 84,75 sennetti.. - 52,73 PUGUINB sos ccccncnnerctewansses ones 20 rupestris.... --- 1,4,5,12, 13,15, 19, 23, 113, 114, 117, 118, 120 rupestris. ool negemreeeee we 1, 14, 15, 16, 23, 118, 11.4, 116 xyostictus............. - 14,15, 16, 23, 114, 116, 117, ‘us, 120 zaleucus.. 14, 15,16, 23,114, 118 BEDI os ine soos euesnesees watesteedes 94 121 122 INDEX. Page. Page. Chordeiles texensis.............+ seseseeeese 93,108 | exilis, Ramphaoratus...........-2-222000000+ 20 virginianus...........-.- wrsne 1,2)8,4,5, | S0ntencher sc ccccswn -- 10,42 6,7, 12,13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, longwinged. -- 35,42 24, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,34, Virginia......... 35 42, 61,77, 83, 86, 87, 88,89, 92 | goldmani, Setochalcis ridgwayi 12 aserriensis......--.--- 1,14, || CTACK Obxii2 cca ecioedeeice 2 15, 16, 25, 29, 30, | guianensis, Caprimulgus.................--.. 8 31, 33, 34, 49, 55, | gundlachii, Chordeiles.................. 1, 82, 84, 85 61, 62, 67, 71, | hawk, sparrow......-.......0cceececeeeeeeee 33 72, 73, 74, 76, 80 | henry, Chordeiles............0.2.00cceeeeeeee 63 chapmani..... 14,15,16,24, | henryi, Chordeiles.................2... 34, 63, 65, 68 F 25, 29, 30, 31, 33, Chordeiles virginianus.............. 14,16, 34, 39, 40, 47, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 82, 83 24, 25, 29, 30, al, 34, 48, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70,71 hesperis........... ~ 44, 16, 25, 26, 28, 29 , 30, 31, 33, 34, 38, 39, 46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 59, 60, 61, 62, 65, 66, 72, 73, 76, 80, 97 howelli......--...... 14,16, 25, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 88, 47,48, 49, 54, 55, 57, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67,71, 72,110 1,13, 14, 16, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31,33, 82, 84, 85 Sennetti.............- 14,16, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 38, 39, 47, 48, 52, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 62,66, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 80, 99 14, 16, 25, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 80, 81, 83, 84 1,14, 15, 16, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 58, 54,55, 59, 66, 75, 76,77, 83 Chordeilidae......--cecessccccccccennnncee 3,8, 9, Chordeilus...... ++ 3,21 Chordiles............ - 3,21 pruinosus..... . 98 prumosus « 98 semitorquatus..... - 3,98 cosmetornis...............006- as 8 Crapaud-volant ou tette chevre de la Guiane.. 94,97 cubanensis, Setochalcis. 12 Cypselidee............004 22 East India Datscccscnsvereveceeceiecaseainee 41 Eleothreptus.....-2-...-22cccecesenssececven 8 Engoulevent acutipenne dela Guyane.... 93, 94,97 europaeus, Caprimulgus. ............... 6,9, 10,35 PRPOStODOQUE cc.ceeeiinintivinn nin ocewewersane 8 exilis, Caprimulgus.....-...... -- 3,21, 93, 98,99 Chordeiles acutipennis............. 1,14, 15, 16,24, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101 24, 25, 29, 30, 31, 34, 48, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, n hesperis, Chordeiles virginianus............. 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 38, 39, 46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 59, 60, 61, 62, 65, 66, 72, 73, 76, 80,97 hirundinaceus, Caprimulgus Pees jenenbcetes 97 14,16, 25, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 38, 47, 48, 49, 54, 55, 57, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 71, 72, 110 hhwipperiwill...... 2. eee cece eee eee 35, 42 Hydropsalis..... 8 inferior, Chordeiles acutipennis.............. 4, 16, 24, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 103, 104, 105, 109, 111 jaspideus, Caprimulgus..............-...2... leucopterus, Nyctibius.............. leucopyga, Nyctiprogne. longwinged goatsucker... Lurocalis.............2.+ nattereri...._.. semitorquatus... Dyncomis oc