Part 13

NESTS AND EGGS OF OHIO BIRDS.—It is always a pleasure to record the progress of this notably meritorious work—a pleasure which we trust will be ours until the completion of the design which the authors have thus far carried out so successfully. As we have before remarked, there has been nothing since Audubon in the way of pictorial illustration of American Ornithology to compare with the present work—nothing to claim the union of an equal degree of artistic skill and scientific accuracy. We have no knowledge of the financial aspects of the case; but, as such a work is necessarily expensive, we can only trust that it continues to receive the support it so richly deserves. It is, we believe, sold only by subscription. The last number which has reached us is a double one, being parts 10 and 11, dating Oct. 1881 and Jan. 1882, containing Plates XXVIII-XXXIII, and pages 107–118. Plate 18 is perhaps the first in which the authors have introduced a bird—being the head of the Purple Martin protruding from the orifice of the C gourds so frequently put up in the South for its accommodation. This figure shows that Mrs. Jones can draw and paint a bird as well as its nest and eggs—and we should not be surprised if other birds appeared with their nests in future numbers. The temptation thus to enlarge upon the original plan of the work must be at times almost irresistible. Plate 29 is _Euspiza americana_, the simple nest of which gives less scope for the artist’s skill than the elaborately finished surroundings of the Song Sparrow’s nest of Plate 30. The extremes of size and coloring of the eggs of _Melospiza_ are well portrayed, as are those of the Thrasher, the rough exterior of whose nest fairly bristles on Plate 31. One of the most artistic pictures of the whole series is the lowly nest of _Helminthophaga pinus_ (Plate 32), with its characteristic surroundings at the foot of a slight bush clump. It is interesting to note in this case the curious “protective mimicry” by which the nest resembles a bunch of dead leaves and dried bark strips blown and caught among the roots of a bramble. One would have sharp eyes who would at first glance see it was something else. The last plate (33) represents the nest of the Summer Tanager, furnishing a good illustration of a “saddled” nest—by which we mean one placed directly upon a large horizontal bough, only confined by a few slight upright twigs. The text consists, as usually heretofore, of a folio to each plate, and continues to be prepared by Dr. Howard E. Jones. We find it to be a perfectly reliable account of the objects represented. The authors evidently have spared no pains or expense in maintaining the high standard of excellence they set for themselves at the beginning.—E. C.

PROF. MACOUN’S REPORT OF EXPLORATION.[53]—We hear so seldom from our friends of the Dominion, as far as ornithology is concerned, that the present contribution would be welcome as an index of their activity, even were it of less importance than we find it to be. It is difficult to cite the brochure correctly, as it has no title-page and bears no date or place of publication, and may be an “extra” of a portion of some more extensive government publication. However this may be, the pamphlet which reaches us through Professor Macoun’s kind attentions is the report of the Surveyor General to the Minister of the Interior, consisting chiefly (pp. 8–40) of Professor Macoun’s own report of his explorations during the summer of 1880 of that portion of the Souris River Valley lying within British Territory and of the adjoining region to the west and north—that is to say, north of our territories of Dakota and Montana. The region is one seldom examined even incidentally in the interests of ornithology, and the present paper possesses decided value, as the observer appeared to have paid special attention to the distribution of birds in the wide area traversed. After a résumé of the leading ornithological features of the region is presented an annotated list of the species secured, 109 in number. This list may be profitably examined in connection with the article on the birds observed along the parallel of 49° by the Northern Boundary Commission in 1873 and 1874. We feel at liberty to call attention to some manuscript alterations made by the author in our copy. For _Coturniculus passerinus_ read _Zonotrichia albicollis_; for _Myiarchus crinitus_, read _Tyrannus verticalis_; for _Archibuteo lagopus_, read _A. ferrugineus_, the range of which is thus carried beyond any point hitherto given; for _Tringa canutus_ read _T. bairdi_; for _Podilymbus podiceps_, read _Podiceps californicus_. We could wish the report were better printed; but poor presswork is the usual fate of public documents, English or American.—E. C.

KNOWLTON’S REVISED LIST OF THE BIRDS OF BRANDON, VERMONT.[54]—This is a briefly annotated list of 149 species occurring in the immediate vicinity of Brandon. The author says: “A few more species doubtless occur, especially among the Waders and Swimmers, but as they have never been actually noted, they have been rigidly excluded.” An examination of the List shows that, with perhaps one or two exceptions, he has succeeded in adhering to this principle, the result being a very reliable list as far as it goes. The further application of this rule doubtless accounts for the fact that many of the species are not stated to breed that yet no doubt do so.

The chief interest of the List lies in its bearing upon the extent of the Alleghanian fauna in the Champlain valley. The breeding of such species as _Dendrœca striata_ and _Zonotrichia leucophrys_, the occurrence of _Perisoreus canadensis_ and _Picoides arcticus_, and the absence of _Ortyx virginiana_ and one or two other species, are almost the only exceptions to an otherwise strictly Alleghanian fauna.

A number of species, especially among the migrants, would seem, from what the writer says, to be by no means numerous at this locality, and no doubt his statements are strictly in accordance with his experience. We have reason to believe, however, that a more thorough search might reveal greater numbers of some of these species.

It is to be regretted that Mr. Knowlton’s List could not have appeared elsewhere than in the columns of a newspaper, both for the sake of giving it a more permanent form, and of avoiding the typographical errors inevitable under such circumstances. It may be worth while here to mention that by a slip of the pen Mr. Knowlton has recorded Wilson’s Plover (_Ochthodromus wilsonius_) instead of Wilson’s Snipe.—C. F. B.

KRUKENBERG ON THE COLORING MATTER OF FEATHERS.[55]—This paper, the first of a series, seems to be the product of more careful work than previous publications on the subject. The author first states positively that the color may change after growth, the feather becoming lighter or darker as the case may be, but postpones deciding whether the change is the result of external or internal causes. Judging from the effects of stimulants upon Canaries with _fully_ grown feathers, I have no doubt that internal changes play an important part. At least, almost white Canaries will become very yellow, gray sometimes appearing, if properly fed.

Turacin, a red or purple-violet pigment, found in the feathers of the _Musophagidæ_ is first considered. Attention was first called to this pigment by Verreaux, who found that the purple-violet in the wing feathers of _Corythaix albicristatus_ was destroyed by wetting, but returned on drying. Later it was observed that the water in which these birds bathed became colored dark red. Facts worthy of consideration by all systematic ornithologists. Turacin is soluble in weak alkalies, insoluble in acids, and slightly soluble in water, especially if warm. It may be precipitated as an amorphous red powder by the action of acids. In solution the spectrum of Turacin is marked by two absorption bands, between D and E, much resembling those of oxyhemoglobin. Carbon dioxide and oxygen, however, have no effect on the color or the spectrum. As to its chemical composition the author differs from his predecessors in that he denies the presence of nitrogen, though copper and iron are both present in considerable quantities. By the action of concentrated sulphuric acid two products are formed, named α Turaceïn and β Turaceïn by the author.

Zoönerythrin, another red pigment of much wider distribution, is found in red feathers, as those of the Flamingo and the Cardinal Grosbeak. It is soluble in alcohol, ether, bisulphide of carbon, and the like, from which it can be precipitated by evaporation. The solution of this pigment is often favored by first digesting the feather in a trypsin or pepsin solution. Unlike Turacin, Zoönerythrin has no absorption bands, but all is absorbed beyond E.

Zoöfulvin, a yellow pigment of much the same solubility as the preceding, occurs in the yellow feathers of the European Oriole, the Canary, and the like. The spectrum has two bands between F and G which vary in position according to the solvent used.

As yet Dr. Krukenberg has been unable to extract any green, blue, or purple pigment from feathers, so that he agrees with Bogdanon that blue feathers have no pigment as proved by transmitted light. Of this any one can at once convince himself by holding the feather of a Bluebird immersed in water between himself and a window.—J. AMORY JEFFRIES.

MINOR ORNITHOLOGICAL PAPERS.—161. _The Ruddy Duck_ (_Erismatura rubida_). By Spencer Trotter, _Chicago Field_, Vol. XIII, p. 23.—Brief general account, including reference to their occasional great abundance in Chesapeake Bay.

162. _Bibliographical Manuals of American Naturalists. Chapter II. Dr. Elliott Coues, U. S. A._ By William Hosea Ballou. _Ibid._, XIII, pp. 92, 103, 123, 189, 205, 221.—Rather more than 400 titles of papers and works, relating mainly to ornithology.

163. _Nomenclature of the North American Grouse._ By Spencer Trotter. _Ibid._, XIII. pp. 314, 315.—Common and scientific names of North American Grouse, with their principal synonymy and habitats.

163. _The California Quails in Missouri._ By H. Clay Ewing. _Ibid._ XIII, p. 413.—Six or seven pairs, turned out near the junction of the Missouri and Osage Rivers in March 1879, raised broods the following season near where they were liberated.

164. _Bibliographical Manual of American Naturalists Chapter III. The Literature of Prof. Edward D. Cope._ By Wm. Hosea Ballou. _Ibid._ XIV, pp. 19, 20.—Contains a few ornithological titles.

165. _Can the Pinnated Grouse be successfully propagated?_ By H. W. Merrill. _Forest and Stream_, XVI, Feb. 10, 1881, p. 28.—Believes they can be “successfully propagated” with proper “regard to cover, food and range.”

166. _Pine Grosbeak_ (_Pinicola enucleator_, L., V.) and _Robin_ (_Turdus migratorius_, L.) _in Winter_ [_in Nova Scotia_]. By. J. Matthews Jones. _Ibid._, XVI. March 13, 1881, p. 86.—The former “quite common”; small flocks of the latter frequent the spruce woods every winter, in Point Pleasant Park, Halifax peninsula.

167. _The “Crane’s Back.”_ By J. C. Merrill. _Ibid._, XVI, March 10, 1881, p. 105.—A Cree Indian account of the _napite-shu-utle_, a bird said to migrate by taking passage on the backs of Cranes. The bird is believed to be a Grebe.

168. _A Hawk new to the United States._ By Robert Ridgway. _Ibid._, XVI, Apr. 14, 1881, 206.—From Oyster Bay, Fla., provisionally referred to _Buteo fuliginosus_. (See this _Bull._, VI, Oct. 1881, p. 207.)

169. _The Pine Grosbeak._ By Chas. E. Ingalls. _Ibid._, XVI. Apr. 14, 1881, pp. 206, 207.—Observations on its habits in winter in Massachusetts.

170. _Our unique Spoon-billed Sandpiper_, _Eurinorhynchus pygmæus_ (Linn.). By Tarleton H. Bean. _Ibid._, XVI, Apr. 21. 1881, p. 225.—Brief general history of the species, with record of its capture at Plover Bay, Eastern Siberia, and Point Barrow, Alaska.

171. _Domesticated Quail._ By Henry Benbrook. _Ibid._, XVI, May 5, 1881, p. 266.—_Ortyx virginianus_ successfully reared in captivity to the third generation. Believes that under favorable circumstances they could be bred “as easily as Turkeys.”

172. _Great Carolina Wren._ By William Dutcher. _Ibid._, XVI, July 14, 1881, p. 473.—Record of its capture at Greenville, N. J., within four miles of New York City.

173. _The Rail we shoot._ [By George B. Grinnell.] _Ibid._. XVII, Sept. 22, 1881, pp. 146, 147.—Classification, diagnoses and habitats of the _Rallidæ_ of the United States.

174. _Range and Rotary Movements of Limicolæ._ By W. Hapgood. _Ibid._, XVII, Oct. 20, 1881, pp. 225–228.—An important and suggestive paper on the migrations and range of American _Limicolæ_. The greater part of the species of this group are noticed at length. The paper relates especially to the winter haunts of these birds, and the conclusion is pretty fairly sustained that many of them pass beyond the tropics to winter in the Southern Hemisphere.

175. _Migration of Shore Birds._ By M. H. Simons. _Ibid._, XVII, Nov. 10, 1881, p. 288.—Apropos of Mr. Hapgood’s paper (see No. 174). the writer calls attention to the fact that many kinds of Shore Birds winter in Florida and the other Gulf States. “Didymus.” under the same caption, has some pertinent suggestions in reference to Mr. Hapgood’s paper.

176. _The Herring Gull and the Ring-bill on Georgian Bay._ By Rev. J. A. Langille. _Ibid._, XVII, Nov. 17, 1881, p. 307.—On the habits, etc., of these species at their breeding haunts in Georgian Bay.

177. _Beechnuts and Woodpeckers._ By C. Hart Merriam, M.D. _Ibid._, XVII, Dec. 1, 1881, p. 347.—A reply to several pseudonymous articles in previous numbers of this journal (_Forest and Stream_) in reference to the Red-headed Woodpecker’s habit of eating beechnuts. Other notes on the same subject, by various contributors, follow in this and succeeding numbers.

178. _The Enemies of Game Birds._ By Adolphe B. Covert [and others]. _Ibid._, XVII, Dec. 8, 1881, p. 366, Dec. 22, p. 407, and Dec. 29, p. 428.—Various enemies are mentioned, among whom the Red Squirrel is prominent.

179. _Habits of Woodpeckers._ By W. Beeke [and others]. _Ibid._, XVII, Dec. 15, 1881, p. 387.—In reference to their laying up stores of beechnuts for winter use, particularly refers to the Red-headed Woodpecker.

180. _Inquiries about the Snow Grouse_ [lege Goose]. By William Dutcher. _Ibid._, XVII, Dec. 22, 1881, p. 407.—In reference to the distribution of _Anser hyperboreus_ on the Atlantic coast, and to the change of plumage in the Blue Goose (_A. cærulescens_) in captivity.

181. _The Sparrow Curse in Australia._ _Ibid._, XVII, Dec. 22, 1881, pp. 407, 408.—Abstract of a “progress report” of a government commission appointed to investigate “alleged injuries caused to fruit growers, gardeners, farmers and others by [the imported] Sparrows.” The analysis of the testimony taken is suggestive reading in its bearing upon the “Sparrow Pest” of our own country.

182. _The Snow Goose and Blue Goose._ By C. S. Wescott. _Ibid._, XVII, Jan. 5, 1882, p. 447.—Respecting their specific diversity, and on the occurrence of the Snow Goose in Delaware Bay. This is followed by a communication (under the same caption) from Arthur Edward Brown, who states that seven Blue Geese have lived seven years in the Philadelphia Zoölogical Garden without showing any material change of color.

183. _Der Schwalbenweih_ (_Nauclerus forficatus_). Von H. Nehrling. _Ornithologisches Centralblatt_, VI. No. 2, 15 Jan. 1881, pp. 9, 10.—Account of its habits, etc., as observed in Texas.

184. _Der Gelbkopfstärling oder Gelbkopftrupial_ (_Xanthocephalus icterocephalus_ Baird). Von H. Nehrling. _Ibid._, VI, No. 11. 1 Juni, 1881, pp. 81–84, No. 13, 1 Juli, 1881, pp. 97, 98.—General history.

185. _Die Wandertaube_ [_Ectopistes migratorius_]. Von Chas L. Mann. _Ibid._, VI, No. 21, 1 Nov. 1881, pp. 164–166. (Aus: _Jahresber. des Naturhist. Vereins in Wisconsin 1880–81_.)—On the great numbers destroyed by pigeon hunters for the market. Contains interesting statistics of the slaughter and the manner in which it is prosecuted.

186. _Zwei amerikanische Prairiefinken._ Von H. Nehrling. _Monatsschrift des Deutschen Vereins zum Schuke der Vogelwelt_, VI Jahrg., No. 3, März, 1881, pp. 58–64.—General account of the “Lerchenfink (_Chondestes grammica_ Bp.)” and the “Savannenfink (_Passerculus savanna_ Bp.).”

187. _Ornithologische Beobachtungen aus Texas._ II. Von H. Nehrling. _Ibid._, VI, No. 5, Mai, 1881, pp. 111–121. (See this Bulletin, VI, p. 109.)

188. _Nordamerikanische Vögel im Freileben geschildert._ Von H. Nehrling. _Die gefiederte Welt. Zeitschrift für Vogelliebhaber, -Zuchter und -Händler_, X Jahrg., 1881.—Under this title Dr. Nehrling contributes a series of well-written popular articles on various North American birds. In the present volume are the following: (1) Das Rubingoldhähnchen (_Regulus calendula_ Lichtst.), _l. c._ pp. 14–16, 24–26. (2) Der blauköpfige oder Brewer’s Stärling, _Scolecophagus Breweri_, Nehrl. (_S. cyanocephalus_ Cab....) pp. 44–46, 57, 58. (3) Der Kentuckysänger oder Buschsänger (_Sylvia-Opornis_ [sic.]—_formosa_ Wils. ...), pp. 100–102. (4) Die Einfiedlerdrossel (_Turdus Pallasi_ Cab. ...), pp. 173, 174. (5) Der Gold- oder Kukukspecht (_Colaptes auratus_ Swns. ...), pp. 228–230, 240, 241, 251–253, 265, 266. (6) Der Scherentyrann, Scheren- oder Gabelschwanz (_Milvulus forficatus_, Swains. ...), pp. 325, 326, 333–335. (7) Der blaugraue Fliegenfänger oder Mückenfänger (_Polioptila cærulea_ Scl.), pp. 368–370, 380, 381, 393. (8) Der Satrap oder das Gelbkrongoldhähnchen (_Regulus satrapa_, Lichsts. ...), pp. 435, 436. (9) Die Bergdrossel (_Oreoscoptes montanus_ Brd. ...), pp. 528–530.

189. _Rocky Mountains-Hüttensänger oder Steinschmätzer_ (... _Sialia arctica_ Swns.) _Eine Vogelstudie aus den Felsingebergen_. Von Fr. Trefz. _Ibid._, p. 81.

=General Notes.=

DESCRIPTION OF A NEST OF THE WATER OUZEL.—The nest of the Water Ouzel (_Cinclus mexicanus_) is perhaps not so well known as to make the following description of one wholly uninteresting. The nest when found was in good condition, and had evidently been used the past season. It was built under a slightly overhanging wall of limestone, on a ledge projecting seven or eight inches from the wall, and about four feet above low-water mark, the deepest part of a swift mountain stream flowing directly beneath. The material of construction was a bright green moss, forming a rather conspicuous object for some distance along the opposite bank. The nest has a nearly spherical interior seven inches in diameter. The entrance is triangular, one side of the triangle forming the top and being three and one-half inches across and three inches above the lower angle. The most exposed side of the nest varies from three to four inches in thickness, the top and remainder being only an inch and a half through. At time of finding, the interior of the nest was perfectly clean, but outside, just below the opening, the rock was discolored for some distance by excrement of the birds. Side by side with this nest was an older one partially destroyed, and I fancied I could see traces of still another on the same ledge not far off. The birds had evidently lived in the locality for some time.—R. S. WILLIAMS, _Gold Run, Montana_.

THE SHORT-BILLED MARSH WREN IN NEW HAMPSHIRE.—On the 24th of August, 1881, while investigating the recesses of a fresh water marsh at Rye Beach, N. H., I found a colony of Short-billed Marsh Wrens (_Cistothorus stellaris_) in a small meadow about a mile from the sea. One bird was shot, and five or six others seen and heard.

Mr. Wm. Brewster in 1872 found this bird in the same vicinity, but in a locality about five miles farther inland.

These two records extend the northern range of the Short-billed Marsh Wren, and give it a place among the birds of New Hampshire.—HENRY M. SPELMAN, _Cambridge, Mass._

EARLY ARRIVAL OF THE YELLOW-RUMP IN SOUTHERN MAINE.—This morning—March 21, 1882—I found a solitary Yellow-rumped Warbler (_Dendræca coronata_) flitting about in a straggling growth of spruces, on Cape Elizabeth. His arrival is unprecedentedly early for this vicinity. The Yellow-rumps usually reach Portland in the last week of April, sometimes not until after May 1, and up to to-day I have never seen one before April 21, which was the date of their appearance in 1879. My little friend of this morning was probably only an accidental and temporary visitor. Snow still lies from two to three feet deep in the woods, and much blustering, wintry weather must be expected, before the earliest Warblers come to us in earnest.—NATHAN CLIFFORD BROWN, _Portland, Maine_.

LATE STAY (PROBABLE WINTERING) OF DENDRŒCA PINUS IN MASSACHUSETTS.—A few individuals of the Pine-creeping Warbler remained so late with us the last season, that their courage deserves a record. I found four of them on December 5, 1881, in company with Chickadees, in a rocky run thickly set with maples and alders. There were no pines, but a small bunch of them not far away. I shot one, according to rule, to make sure of the species. Being desirous of ascertaining if they proposed to spend the winter in that cheerful company, on January 1, 1882, I sent a young friend, who is well posted and a good observer, to the locality, and he reported seeing two of the Warblers so near at hand, perhaps twenty feet, as to make the identification positive. I intended to look for them again in February, but was unable to do so.—F. C. BROWNE, _Framingham, Mass._

THE HOODED WARBLER IN WESTERN NEW YORK.—From various points in the dense forest, on the balmy days of May, comes the common and familiar song of the Hooded Warbler,—_che-reek, che-reek, che-reek, chi-dì-eê_, the first three notes with a loud bell-like ring, and the rest in very much accelerated time, and with the falling inflection. Arriving early in May, this is one of our common summer residents throughout the dense upland forests, occupying the lower story of the woodland home, while the Cœrulean Warbler occupies the upper. Here let me say that in addition to its alarm note, a sharp whistling or metallic _chip_ which is very clearly characterized, the Hooded Warbler has two distinct songs, as different as if coming from different species. Never shall I forget how I was once puzzled by this trick. I was strolling in a thick forest, near the corner of a slashing, in an evening twilight in June, when I was surprised by a strange whistling melody.—_whee-reeh, whee-ree-eeh_—with a marked emphasis on the second syllable, and a still more marked one on the last. Part of the time this utterance was somewhat varied, a few notes being sometimes added, and again a few being dropped. My curiosity was greatly excited, for I had supposed myself familiar with the voices of all the birds in the neighborhood; but it became too dark to identify the bird. For nearly a week I went to that spot every day, always hearing the song, but never being able to get a clear sight of the bird. It seemed exceedingly shy. In vain did I crawl on hands and knees among the undergrowth to get near to it; for just as I would seem about to gain a good view of it the song would cease at the point under observation and come from one more distant. Just as I was about to give the matter up one evening, down came the singer, stage by stage through the thick foliage, and alighting within a few feet of me and in clear sight, gave the full effect of his whistling song. I have since heard the same song a number of times and in different places from the Hooded Warbler. So I conclude that in the case of this species there are, occasionally at least, two distinct and altogether different songs.

The Hooded Warbler is one of those which make their home on or near the ground. Here it keeps itself for the most part well concealed among the foliage of the thick undergrowth, having a rather slow and dignified movement for a bird of its kind.