Chapter II: Part 2

The measurements of the lengths and widths of the skulls are given in Table 9. The relative length of the bill and relative width of the skull are given in Table 10. These relative measurements are calculated by using the actual measurements in Table 9 as numerators, the length of the skull from the lacrimal bone to the posteriormost end of the skull being used as the denominator. The data indicate that _Phainoptila_ has a slightly narrower cranium.

_Humerus._--Certain families of passerine birds have a noticeable variation in the characteristics of the humerus; the bone varies in length, in diameter, and in the complexity of the processes at either end. In the Bombycillids, however, the amount of variation is relatively small, and the diaphysis of the bone is somewhat twisted, especially so in _Dulus_. The deltoid tuberosity is variable, being shorter but more elevated in _Bombycilla_ than it is in the Ptilogonatinae and in the Dulinae. The tendon from the pectoralis major muscle, which inserts on this process, probably finds better insertion on a higher process than on a lower but longer one.

22. _Phainoptila m. melanoxantha_, sex?, MNH no. 26493, 15 mi.
SE Cartago, Costa Rica.

23. _Ptilogonys caudatus_, male, MNH no. 24492, 15 mi. SE Cartago,
Costa Rica.

24. _Phainopepla nitens_, male, MNH no. 24754, Pima Co., Arizona.

25. _Ptilogonys cinereus_, female, Louisiana State University
no. 297, Xilitla Region, San Luis Potosi, Mexico.

26. _Dulus dominicus_, female, USNM no. 292652, Don Don, Haiti.

27. _Bombycilla cedrorum_, male, MNH no. 15331, Bexar Co., Texas.

28. _Bombycilla garrula_, sex?, USNM no. 223895, Bozeman, Montana.]

Distally, the two major condyles and the intercondylar groove or olecranon fossa that make efficient articulation with the ulnar process, are not variable. The external condyle, however, is significantly variable in the family. This condyle is longest and most pronounced in birds in which the humerus is short in relation to the trunk, as for example in _Tachycineta_. In the Bombycillidae the condyle is smallest in _Phainoptila_, where it is a mere suggestion of a process. In the remainder of the Ptilogonatinae, the condyle is larger but rounded, and shows a double process in _Ptilogonys caudatus_, and a slightly pointed process in _P. cinereus_. The external condyle in _Dulus_ is not specialized, being low and rounded, but in _Bombycilla_, it is noticeably elongated, indicating a better attachment distally for the deltoid muscle. (No measurements are tabulated for this condyle, as the percentage of error in measuring this small structure is great.) Table 1 gives lengths of humeri, and Table 2 gives lengths of the humeri expressed as percentages of the length of the trunk, a standard measurement.

The area of insertion of the deltoid muscle is elongated in those birds with shortened humeri; these birds have also greater flight power than do birds with longer humeri and therefore a shorter external condyle.

Table 1. Lengths of Arm Bones in cm.

=========================+=========+========+======+=======
Species | Humerus | Radius | Ulna | Manus
-------------------------+---------+--------+------+-------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 2.39 | 2.57 | 2.79 | 2.25
Ptilogonys cinereus | 2.24 | 2.48 | 2.78 | 2.38
Phainopepla nitens | 2.21 | 2.59 | 2.82 | 2.39
Phainoptila melanoxantha | 2.40 | 2.51 | 2.70 | 2.25
Dulus dominicus | 2.23 | 2.38 | 2.63 | 2.31
Bombycilla garrula | 2.35 | 2.58 | 2.88 | 2.67
Bombycilla cedrorum | 2.06 | 2.34 | 2.60 | 2.38
-------------------------+---------+--------+------+-------

Table 2. Arm-trunk Ratios (in percent)

=========================+=========+========+======+=======+=======
Species | Humerus | Radius | Ulna | Manus | Total
-------------------------+---------+--------+------+-------+-------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 85 | 92 | 93 | 80 | 2.58
Ptilogonys cinereus | 84 | 90 | 103 | 89 | 2.76
Phainopepla nitens | 84 | 98 | 107 | 91 | 2.82
Phainoptila melanoxantha | 73 | 77 | 82 | 69 | 2.31
Dulus dominicus | 78 | 83 | 92 | 81 | 2.51
Bombycilla garrula | 69 | 75 | 87 | 78 | 2.34
Bombycilla cedrorum | 67 | 76 | 85 | 77 | 2.29
-------------------------+---------+--------+------+-------+-------

Table 3. Arm-trunk Ratios (in percent)

=========================+=========+========+======+=======+=======
Species | Humerus | Radius | Ulna | Manus | Total
-------------------------+---------+--------+------+-------+-------
Corvus brachyrynchos | 90 | 101 | 111 | 106 | 307
Dendroica audubonii | 68 | 82 | 90 | 77 | 237
Setophaga ruticilla | 69 | 82 | 91 | 75 | 235
Myadestes townsendi | 71 | 84 | 96 | 81 | 248
Sialia sialis | 72 | 84 | 98 | 86 | 256
Hylocichla mustelina | 75 | 81 | 92 | 80 | 247
Parus atricapillus | 85 | 90 | 106 | 81 | 272
Tachycineta thalassina | 71 | 95 | 107 | 128 | 306
Myiarchus crinitus | 83 | 105 | 115 | 92 | 290
Dumetella carolinensis | 76 | 75 | 89 | 78 | 243
Polioptila caerulea | 85 | 93 | 105 | 71 | 261
Eremophila alpestris | 91 | 99 | 110 | 95 | 296
Muscivora forficata | 85 | 111 | 120 | 108 | 313
-------------------------+---------+--------+------+-------+-------

_Pygostyle._--This part of the skeletal system is variable in the species dealt with, not so much in size as in complexity. It reflects, of course, the character of the caudal muscles and their size, as well as the length of the rectrices and the corresponding force necessary to hold these feathers upright and in a useful position. Firm attachment is important even in flight, because the tail is used as a rudder, and in the Ptilogonatinae as a brake. The pygostyle is most modified in this subfamily.

In lateral aspect, the pygostyles of the species of the Ptilogonatinae are similar. The crest of the bone is flattened dorsally, and has a broad anterior surface that is thin and bladelike. This is widest in _Ptilogonys caudatus_, and narrowest in _Phainoptila_, in which genus, however, the entire bone is of small size. The centrum is widest in _Ptilogonys caudatus_, and is progressively narrower in _P. cinereus_, _Phainopepla_, and _Phainoptila_. Greater width provides a larger area of attachment for the larger rectrices and also more area for insertion of the lateralis caudae muscle, the size of which varies more than that of the other caudal muscles in the different species of the Bombycillidae.

29. _Phainoptila m. melanoxantha_, sex?, MNH no. 26493, 15 mi.
SE Cartago, Costa Rica.

30. _Ptilogonys caudatus_, male, MNH no. 24492, 15 mi. SE Cartago,
Costa Rica.

31. _Phainopepla nitens_, male, MNH no. 24754, Pima Co., Arizona.

32. _Ptilogonys cinereus_, female, Louisiana State University
no. 297, Xilitla Region, San Luis Potosi, Mexico.

33. _Dulus dominicus_, female, USNM no. 292652, Don Don, Haiti.

34. _Bombycilla cedrorum_, male, MNH no. 15331, Bexar Co., Texas.

35. _Bombycilla garrula_, sex?, USNM no. 223895, Bozeman, Montana.]

In proportionate size (see Table 7), the pygostyle of _Bombycilla_ is the smallest in the family. The dorsal spinous portion is acutely pointed instead of flattened as in the Ptilogonatinae. In _Dulus_, the spinous portion is extremely thin, and shows a decided curve dorsad from the centrum, and there is no flattened area anterior to the spinous portion as is seen in _Ptilogonys_.

The centrum in cross section varies considerably. In _Bombycilla_ the walls are indented, with definite terminal knobs; both knobs and indentations are more pronounced in _B. garrula_ than in _cedrorum_, however. The spinous portion is enlarged in both species, and the rest of the neck region is constricted (Figs. 29-35).

The centrum of _Dulus_ in posterior aspect presents the appearance of a simple shield; little of the indentation seen in _Bombycilla_ is present. The spinous portion is plain, with no constriction nor terminal enlargement in the neck. The centrum in _Phainopepla_ is similar to that in _Dulus_, but has a small expansion at the base of the spine, the entire centrum being wider in proportion to its over-all size than in any of the other species mentioned previously. The centrum in _Ptilogonys_ shows great width, and the spine is in a large expanded tip as in _Bombycilla_. The lateral edges of the centrum in _P. cinereus_ are "winged" and in two separate halves; whereas the centrum of _P. caudatus_ is fairly plain, its specialization being reflected primarily in breadth and flatness. In cross section of the centrum, _Phainoptila_ is similar to _Phainopepla_, although, in the former, the bone is smaller in proportion to the size of the animal, and the lateral wings are more angular than in _Phainopepla_.

36. _Phainoptila m. melanoxantha_, sex?, MNH no. 26493, 15 mi.
SE Cartago, Costa Rica.

37. _Ptilogonys caudatus_, male, MNH no. 24492, 15 mi. SE Cartago,
Costa Rica.

38. _Phainoptila nitens_, male, MNH no. 24754, Pima Co., Arizona.

39. _Ptilogonys cinereus_, female, Louisiana State University
no. 297, Xilitla Region, San Luis Potosi, Mexico.

40. _Dulus dominicus_, female, USNM no. 292652, Don Don, Haiti.

41. _Bombycilla cedrorum_, male, MNH no. 15331, Bexar Co., Texas.

42. _Bombycilla garrula_, sex?, USNM no. 223895, Bozeman, Montana.]

In specialization for muscle attachment, the centra of the pygostyles of the Ptilogonatinae have more area for muscle attachment than do the centra in the Bombycillinae and Dulinae; the centrum is wide, the spinous portion is long, and the bone is flattened anteriorly. The most generalized pygostyle is in _Phainoptila_, and that of _Dulus_ differs only slightly. In _Bombycilla_ the pygostyle is proportionately small, but is complex in shape; there is seemingly not the need for greatly expanded areas since the caudal muscles are less specialized in this genus.

_Sternum._--The sternum in Bombycillids is typically passerine in general shape and in having a long and deep carina or sternal crest. The caudal process of the bone is broad, with the terminal ends flattened, forming dorsally a graceful V-shaped outline, whereas the outline of the posterior end of the sternum is broad and convex.

In lateral aspect, the carina is deeper in _Bombycilla_ than in other genera of the family, and is deepest in _B. garrula_. In this species, the manubrium is more extended and comparatively larger than in the other species of the family. The anterior edge of the keel forms the sharpest angle in _B. cedrorum_. In _Dulus_, the keel is moderately deep, the manubrium short, and there is a distinct indented curve between the manubrium and the anterior angle of the keel.

In ventral aspect the lateral processes of the sternum tend to flare outwards in adult Ptilogonatines on almost the same plane as the rest of the bone, whereas in _Bombycilla_ and _Dulus_ the same process is closer to the body of the sternum. In _Bombycilla_ the xiphoid process is more dorsal in position than in other species in the family, and in _Dulus_ an upward curve is very noticeable. The process in these two genera is narrower than in the Ptilogonatinae, and lacks the heavy distal terminal enlargement which is apparent in _Ptilogonys_.

_Relative Lengths of Bones._--In instances where the animals being compared are obviously different in over-all size, it is useful to express the size of a given part in relation to some other part of the same individual organism if the aim is to obtain clues as to differences in functions of the parts being compared. Differences in actual lengths of corresponding bones in two kinds of animals often, of course, reflect only the difference in over-all size of the animals. Consequently, the relative size of the part is expressed as a percentage in this paper. In computing a percentage it is well, of course, to select some relatively stable part of the animal to use as a denominator in the mathematical expression that yields the percentage. The thoracic region of the vertebral column is thought to be such a part. For example, the length of the humerus divided by the length of the thoracic region yields, in _Phainopepla_ and _Ptilogonys_, respective percentages of .84 and .85. These are roughly the same, whereas the actual lengths of the humeri are 2.21 and 2.39 cm.

Table 4. Lengths of Leg Bones in cm.

=========================+=======+=============+=================
Species | Femur | Tibiotarsus | Tarsometatarsus
-------------------------+-------+-------------+-----------------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 2.04 | 3.10 | 1.94
Ptilogonys cinereus | 1.89 | 2.90 | 1.77
Phainopepla nitens | 1.76 | 2.78 | 1.72
Phainoptila melanoxantha | 2.43 | 3.77 | 2.58
Dulus dominicus | 2.09 | 3.34 | 2.09
Bombycilla garrula | 2.32 | 3.46 | 1.99
Bombycilla cedrorum | 1.92 | 2.95 | 1.64
-------------------------+-------+-------------+-----------------

Table 5. Leg-trunk Ratios (in percent)

====================+=======+=============+=================+=======
Species | Femur | Tibiotarsus | Tarsometatarsus | Total
--------------------+-------+-------------+-----------------+-------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 73 | 110 | 69 | 252
Ptilogonys cinereus | 71 | 109 | 66 | 246
Phainopepla nitens | 69 | 106 | 65 | 240
Phainoptila | 74 | 115 | 60 | 249
melanoxantha | | | |
Dulus dominicus | 73 | 119 | 73 | 265
Bombycilla garrula | 68 | 101 | 59 | 228
Bombycilla cedrorum | 63 | 96 | 53 | 212
--------------------+-------+-------------+-----------------+-------

Table 6. Leg-trunk Ratios (in percent)

=======================+=======+=============+=================+======
Species | Femur | Tibiotarsus | Tarsometatarsus | Total
-----------------------+-------+-------------+-----------------+------
Corvus brachyrynchos | 71 | 120 | 77 | 268
Corvus corax | 73 | 139 | 78 | 290
Dendroica audubonii | 62 | 109 | 81 | 252
Setophaga ruticilla | 66 | 127 | 94 | 287
Myadestes townsendi | 61 | 99 | 60 | 220
Sialia sialis | 66 | 111 | 72 | 249
Hylocichla mustelina | 75 | 133 | 97 | 305
Parus atricapillus | 78 | 138 | 99 | 315
Tachycineta thalassina | 61 | 97 | 56 | 214
Myiarchus crinitus | 68 | 106 | 74 | 248
Dumetella carolinensis | 73 | 136 | 94 | 303
Polioptila caerulea | 75 | 144 | 113 | 332
Eremophila alpestris | 73 | 113 | 115 | 301
Muscivora forficata | 62 | 98 | 61 | 221
-----------------------+-------+-------------+-----------------+------

Table 7. Actual Length and Width in mm. of Pygostyle and Proportionate
Length and Width of Pygostyle in percent of Lacrimal Length

=========================+========+=======+=========+=========
| | | Length, | Width,
Species | Length | Width | percent | percent
-------------------------+--------+-------+---------+---------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 9.8 | 3.9 | 45 | 18
Ptilogonys cinereus | 8.8 | 4.1 | 41 | 19
Phainopepla nitens | 8.4 | 3.9 | 41 | 19
Phainoptila melanoxantha | 8.5 | 3.5 | 35 | 14
Dulus dominicus | 8.5 | 2.9 | 38 | 13
Bombycilla garrula | 7.0 | 3.5 | 31 | 15
Bombycilla cedrorum | 7.1 | 2.9 | 35 | 14
-------------------------+--------+-------+---------+---------

Table 8. Length of Sternum and Depth of Carina expressed as
percentages of the Length of the Trunk

=========================+=========+========
Species | Sternum | Carina
-------------------------+---------+--------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 85 | 28
Ptilogonys cinereus | 91 | 32
Phainopepla nitens | 81 | 26
Phainoptila melanoxantha | 76 | 25
Dulus dominicus | 107 | 28
Bombycilla garrula | 88 | 33
Bombycilla cedrorum | 82 | 31
-------------------------+---------+--------

Table 9. Skull and Sternum, Length and Width in mm.

=========================+========+=======+=========+=========
| Length | Width | Length | Width
Species | of | of | of | of
| Skull | Skull | Sternum | Sternum
-------------------------+--------+-------+---------+---------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 34.9 | 15.6 | 23.9 | 7.8
Ptilogonys cinereus | 33.4 | 14.7 | 24.3 | 8.5
Phainopepla nitens | 33.3 | 15.1 | 21.3 | 6.9
Phainoptila melanoxantha | 39.7 | 16.0 | 24.8 | 8.2
Dulus dominicus | 36.4 | 16.6 | 30.5 | 8.0
Bombycilla garrula | 37.0 | 16.8 | 30.0 | 11.2
Bombycilla cedrorum | 34.0 | 15.5 | 25.3 | 9.6
-------------------------+--------+-------+---------+---------

The length of the trunk was taken as the distance from the anterior tip of the neural crest of the last cervical vertebra to the anterior edge of an acetabulum. The number of free thoracic vertebra was five in each specimen; consequently, there was no error from this source. In the cranium, a measurement was taken from the anterior edge of the lacrimal bone to the posteriormost end of the cranium, and the resultant figure was employed for a constant in cases in which small bones were compared.

Table 10. Relative Length and Width of Skull (in percent)

=========================+========+=======
| Length | Width
Species | of | of
| Skull | Skull
-------------------------+--------+-------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 160 | 72
Ptilogonys cinereus | 158 | 69
Phainopepla nitens | 162 | 73
Phainoptila melanoxantha | 161 | 65
Dulus dominicus | 164 | 75
Bombycilla garrula | 164 | 74
Bombycilla cedrorum | 162 | 74
-------------------------+--------+-------

_Leg-trunk Percentages._--Table 4 shows the relative lengths of the legs and of the separate bones in the legs of the different species of the Bombycillids. Table 5 shows corresponding lengths for other passerine birds. The total length of the leg was computed by adding the figures obtained for the lengths of the femur, tibiotarsus and tarsometatarsus. The lengths of the toes were disregarded. Length of leg was recorded in this same way by Richardson (1942:333), who thought that only in swimming and running birds do the toes contribute to the functional length of the hind limb.

Table 4 shows that of the birds compared in this paper, _Dulus_ has the longest legs. In order of decreasing length the others are the Ptilogonatinae, and finally the Bombycillinae, which have the shortest legs of all. In Waxwings the length of the legs, expressed as percentages of the body-lengths, are identical with those birds that are similar in habits, that is to say, birds which do not use the hind limb except in perching. It can be noted by reference to Table 5 that _Tachycineta_ and _Myadestes_ fall into this category. This shortness of limb is obviously adaptive, and each of the segments of the limb has been correspondingly shortened, with no element reduced at the expense of the other two. The short leg can be more easily folded against the body while the bird is in flight, than can a long leg which is more unwieldy. It may be noted from tables 4 and 5 that birds which spend much time on the ground, or that hop a great deal in the underbrush, have longer legs than do birds which spend much time in flight. Two birds with noticeably long legs are _Hylocichla mustelina_, a typical ground dweller, and _Parus atricapillus_, which hops about in the trees and underbrush.

Insofar as the lengths of the legs show, _Dulus_ and _Phainoptila_ are the most generalized of the Bombycillidae, since the relative length of leg is approximately the same as that of more generalized birds such as warblers, crows and thrushes of similar locomotory habits. In other words, _Dulus_ and _Phainoptila_ have remained unspecialized, in contrast to the waxwings in which adaptive changes fitting them for a perching habit have taken place. _Ptilogonys_ and _Phainopepla_ are intermediate in length of leg between _Phainoptila_ and _Bombycilla_, and _Ptilogonys_ and _Phainopepla_ have progressed from life on the ground toward the perching habit. _Bombycilla cedrorum_ is more specialized than is _B. garrula_ in shortness of leg, and the reduction is comparable, as is noted above, to that in the legs of _Tachycineta_.

In birds which have the legs much modified for walking or for hopping in the brush, such as _Polioptila_ and _Eremophila_, it is noteworthy that the distal segment, the tarsometatarsus, is the longest, whereas in birds such as _Myiarchus_ and _Tachycineta_, that do not utilize the limbs in this manner, the tibiotarsus, the middle segment, is the longest. Mammals much modified for walking or hopping likewise have the proximal segment, the femur, short, and the distal segment long (Howell, 1944). The waxwings have all of the segments short; these birds are modified for strong and sustained flight. Their hind limbs are used principally for landing devices and for perching. No one element of the leg has been shortened much, if any, more than any other.

A. _Bombycilla cedrorum_; B. _Bombycilla garrula_;
C. _Dulus dominicus_; D. _Phainoptila melanoxantha_;
E. _Phainopepla nitens_; F. _Ptilogonys cinereus_;
G. _Ptilogonys caudatus_.
a. femur; b. tibiotarsus; c. tarsometatarsus; d. total.]

_Arm-trunk Percentages._--Tables 1 and 2 show the total length of the arm, and lengths of the separate arm elements, relative to the trunk. Table 3 gives the corresponding lengths for birds other than the Bombycillidae. Total length of arm was obtained by adding together the lengths of the humerus, ulna, and manus, and by dividing the figure thus obtained by the length of the trunk as was done for leg lengths in tables 4 and 5. The method of adding together the component parts does not give the entire length of the wing, since the length of the feathers, which add effectively to the total length, as well as do the lengths of the small carpal elements, is lacking.

45. _Ptilogonys caudatus_, showing relation of outline of wing
to bones of arm.

46. _Bombycilla cedrorum_, showing relation of outline of wing
to bones of arm.]

It may be noted that _Phainoptila_ and _Bombycilla_ have the shortest arm in the family Bombycillidae. The humerus, radius and ulna are comparable to the same elements in thrushes and the catbird, and it is only the extremely short manus in _Phainoptila_ that affects the total. The manus in _Phainoptila_ is comparatively smaller than in any other genus of the family Bombycillidae, and this indicates poor flight power. _Bombycilla_ has a total length corresponding closely to that in warblers, but the lengths of the distal elements correspond closely to those in the catbird and thrushes. Of the three segments, the humerus is, relatively, the most shortened. Next in order of increasing length of arm is _Dulus_; measurements for it are roughly the same as those of _Myadestes_. The wing bones of the Ptilogonatinae, other than _Phainoptila_, are the longest in this series, and they most nearly resemble the same bones in flycatchers, Parids, and gnatcatchers.

A. _Bombycilla cedrorum_; B. _Bombycilla garrula_;
C. _Dulus dominicus_; D. _Phainoptila melanoxantha_;
E. _Phainopepla nitens_; F. _Ptilogonys cinereus_;
G._ Ptilogonys caudatus_.
a. humerus; b. radius; c. ulna; d. manus; e. total.]

It is notable that, in general, birds with long and narrow wings appear to have relatively the shortest humeri, with the distal bones, especially the manus, variable in length and seemingly correlated with the manner of feather attachment. Those birds with rounded and short wings have the longest humeri. In swallows, for example, the humerus is short, whereas the other arm bones are long, and the manus is unusually large and heavy. A short humerus gives better lever action in the flight stroke than a long humerus does.

MUSCULATURE

Dissections showed the same muscles to be present in all genera of the Bombycillidae. There are, nevertheless, differences in the size of the muscles in the various species, and these differences have been investigated primarily as a check on differences noted in the structure of the bones. Even slight differences in mass can be important functionally, but the difficulty in accurately measuring the mass prevents wholly reliable conclusions. The method first used in the attempt to determine the mass of a given muscle was that of immersing the muscle in a liquid-filled graduated tube, and then measuring the amount of liquid displaced. This method, although adequate for large muscles, was subject to a great amount of error in the case of small muscles, and consequently was abandoned. The technique eventually used was that previously employed by Richardson (1942). It consisted of dissecting out the muscle, placing it in embalming solution, leaving it there until a later period, and finally, weighing the muscle on scales, accurate to a milligram, after the muscle had been out of the liquid for a period of one minute. After being weighed, the muscle was measured by the displacement method in a graduated tube, as a check. The results indicate that, although the two methods give the same general results, weighing is accurate to one-hundredth of a gram, whereas the displacement method was accurate to only a tenth of a gram.

In determining the percentage of the weight of a muscle in relation to the total weight of the bird, the weight of the muscle was used as the numerator, and the weight of the preserved specimen was used as the denominator. Before weights were taken, all specimens were plucked in identical fashion.

_Caudal Muscles._--The muscles of the caudal area that were used for comparison were the levator caudae and the lateralis caudae. These muscles are used by the living bird to maintain the position of the pygostyle and therefore the rectrices; these muscles are especially important to those birds that utilize the tail as a rudder in flight and as a brake. As may be seen by reference to Table 11, the two muscles are largest in proportion to body weight in the Ptilogonatinae, in which subfamily the species have long rectrices and must have correspondingly well-developed muscles in order to utilize the rectrices to best advantage in flight. The lateralis caudae differs more according to species than does the levator caudae, showing that rudder action of the tail is of primary importance in the adaptation for capturing insects. It will be remembered that the pygostyle in this subfamily has a flattened lateral surface for attachment of the levator caudae muscle, and it is therefore to be expected that this muscle will be larger in the Ptilogonatinae than it is in either the Bombycillinae or the Dulinae. The levator coccygis, together with the two muscles mentioned above, is responsible for elevation of the tail. The levator coccygis is less altered in different species of the family than is the lateralis caudae. It may be noted that the caudal muscles of _Dulus_ and _Bombycilla_ constitute a smaller percentage of the total weight of the bird than in any of the genera in the subfamily Ptilogonatinae.

a. Levator coccygis; b. Levator caudae; c. Lateralis caudae;
d. Lateralis coccygis; e. oil gland; f. dorsal tip of pygostyle.]

Table 11. Caudal Muscles (Actual and Relative Weights)

=============================================
Species | Levator | Lateralis
------------------------+---------+----------
Ptilogonys caudatus | .145g. | .022g.
| .092% | .045%
| |
Ptilogonys cinereus | .030g. | .010g.
| .076% | .026%
| |
Phainopepla nitens | .025g. | .008g.
| .096% | .029%
| |
Phainoptila melanoxantha| .040g. | .015g.
| .063% | .014%
| |
Dulus dominicus | .028g. | .006g.
| .063% | .014%
| |
Bombycilla garrula | .034g. | .010g.
| .048% | .014%
| |
Bombycilla cedrorum | .026g. | .008g.
| .050% | .014%
---------------------------------------------

Table 12. Weights of Muscles (These percentages expressed in terms
of weights of the body)

Key to Table
A) Deltoid
B) Thigh
C) Peronus
D) Gastrocnemius

====================================================================
Species |P. major|P. minor| A | B | C | D
---------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------
Ptilogonys | 2.42g. | .29g. | .55g. | | |
caudatus | 4.94% | .59 | 1.12% | .43g. | .15g. |
| | | | .88% | .31% | .96%
Ptilogonys | 2.19g. | .28g. | .53g. | | |
cinereus | 5.57% | .71% | 1.35% | .30g. | .08g. |
| | | .71% | .21% | 1.02%
Phainopepla | 1.30g. | .20g. | .30g. | | |
nitens | 4.99% | .77% | 1.15% | .28g. | .10g. |
| | | | 1.12% | .40% | 1.42%
Phainoptila | 3.93g. | .44g. | .92g. | | |
melanoxantha | 6.18% | .69% | 1.45% | 1.09g. | .48g. |
| | | | 1.61% | .75% | 2.97%
Dulus | 2.09g. | .22g. | .50g. | | |
dominicus | 4.81% | .50% | 1.15% | .73g. | .18g. |
| | | | 1.68% | .41% | 1.01%
Bombycilla | 3.85g. | .45g. | .55g. | | |
garrula | 5.31% | .62% | .76% | .50g. | .15g. |
| | | | .69% | .18% | .59%
Bombycilla | 2.58g. | .35g. | .50g. | | |
cedrorum | 5.00% | .68% | .97% | .37g. | .10g. |
| | | | .73% | .19% | .83%
---------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------

_Pectoral Muscles._--The pectoral set of muscles varies but little in the family; flight power is seemingly not dependent upon size of either the pectoralis major or pectoralis minor. The data indicate that the insertion on the humerus, with consequent changes in the relative length of that bone, is more significant in type of flight and over-all flight power than is the actual size of the muscle mass. The deltoid muscle, for example, is smaller in _Bombycilla_ than in members of the other two subfamilies. The humerus in _Bombycilla_ is shortened, and the muscle therefore does not need to be large to accomplish the same powerful stroke that would be accomplished by a longer humerus and a larger, more powerful deltoid muscle. In the case of the deltoid, the shortening of the humerus and the more complex arrangement of the points of insertion have obviated the necessity of enlarging the muscle.

_Leg Musculature._--The muscles of the thigh are noticeably larger in birds that have long leg bones. (See Table 12 for size of muscles.) On the tibiotarsus, the peroneus and gastrocnemius muscles were measured. When expressed as a percentage of the weight of the bird, the peroneus has much the same relative weight in all but one of the species, whereas the gastrocnemius varies much. The peroneus is proportionately large only in _Phainoptila_, in which genus all the leg muscles are well developed, but the gastrocnemius is larger in all the Ptilogonatinae and in _Dulus_ than it is in the specialized _Bombycilla_, in which it has probably been reduced as the leg bones and other muscles have been reduced.

The volume of the muscles of the hind limb changes more readily in response to saltation and running than do the muscles of the forelimb to flying.

DIGESTIVE TRACT

The digestive tract is relatively uniform in all genera of the family; there are only slight differences between the species. The degree of compactness of the visceral mass varies, _Phainoptila_ and _Ptilogonys caudatus_ having the folds of the digestive tract loosely arranged, whereas _Ptilogonys cinereus_ and _Phainopepla_ have folds which adhere more tightly to the ventriculus and liver. In _Dulus_ and _Bombycilla_, as compared with the Ptilogonatinae, the visceral mass (primarily liver and ventriculus) is situated more posteriorly in the body cavity, and is more compact, and the intestine is more tightly coiled.

The coiling of the intestine, if its degree of compactness is disregarded, is nearly identical in the birds of the family; there are four major loops between the ventriculus and the anus. The length of this section of the tract is, however, somewhat variable, as can be seen by reference to Table 13, in which the actual and relative lengths of the intestine are given. It may be seen that in _Bombycilla_ and in _Phainopepla_, the tracts are much shortened. This is notable, since these are frugivorous birds, and in many frugivorous birds, the tract is lengthened for better extraction of edible portions of the food. Possibly the action of the digestive juices is correspondingly more rapid in _Bombycilla_ and _Phainopepla_, thereby permitting the necessary nutriment to be extracted by a short digestive tract.

In a migratory bird, or one that depends on flight power to find food and escape capture by predators, as in the case of the waxwings, the compacted and shortened visceral mass would seem to be advantageous, because of the consequent reduction in weight. I consider the longer intestine to be the ancestral condition, and that the intestine has become shorter to meet new environmental conditions.

Table 13. Digestive Tract: Actual Length, and Length Relative to
Thoracic Length

=========================+========+==============
| | Relative
Species | Length | length
| in mm. | (in percent)
-------------------------+--------+--------------
Ptilogonys caudatus | 134 | 476.9
Ptilogonys cinereus | 111 | 415.6
Phainopepla nitens | 94 | 357.5
Phainoptila melanoxantha | 150 | 457.1
Dulus dominicus | 130 | 451.0
Bombycilla garrula | 102 | 298.2
Bombycilla cedrorum | 95 | 309.5
-------------------------+--------+--------------

Beddard (1898:30) states that caecae in the tract may be highly variable in a single family of birds. The Bombycillidae is no exception in this regard. At the junction of the cloaca and the large intestine, there are two small caecae, the function of which is unknown to me. The caecae are largest in the Ptilogonatinae, smaller in the Bombycillinae, and smallest in the Dulinae. There may be a correlation between large caecae and more insectivorous diet and small caecae and frugivorous diet; however, the data are not conclusive in this regard.

ORIGIN OF THE SPECIES

It is here postulated that the center of origin for the ancestral stock of the Bombycillidae was in a region of North America, which at the time concerned was temperate or possibly even semi-tropical in climate. Probably Northern Mexico was the place and probably the climate was temperate. It is reasonably certain, because of the distribution of the species of the family, that they originated in the Americas. In the absence of paleontological data (_Bombycilla_ alone is reported, in essentially its modern form, from the late Pleistocene--Wetmore, 1940a), the place and time of origin cannot certainly be determined.

The distribution of the family is such that the more primitive groups are in the south. These are the Ptilogonatinae in Central America and Mexico, and the isolated Dulinae in Haiti and the Dominican Republic. This distribution would support the view that the origin was in the south. However, the Holarctic Bombycillinae are so typically birds of northern latitudes that, were it not for such close relatives south of their range, it would appear logical to infer a northerly origin with a subsequent shifting of populations both southward and northward. The phyletic age of the family is probably great, however, as evidenced by the spotty distribution of the birds.

In the evolution of this family, population pressure possibly played the initial role in forcing members of the primitive, southern stock to seek habitable areas on the periphery of the range. Some birds also, being possessed of the "adventuresome spirit", aided the northerly movement, thus effecting an extension of the breeding ranges to the north. So far as is now known, this family did not seek living space in South America. By extending its range, a species might find more abundant food and nesting sites. This process of extending the range probably would be costly to the species concerned, because only those individuals best able to adapt themselves to the new environmental conditions would be able to survive long enough to reproduce their kind.

The return flight to the south could, in time, be dispensed with, except in the coldest weather or when the local berry- and fruit-crop failed. Birds such as waxwings are, of course, able to subsist on dried fruits and berries in the critical winter season when strictly insectivorous birds, not so catholic in their food habits, must return south. It appears that waxwings are descendants of migratory birds that have adjusted themselves to a life in the north; and they are judged not to have evolved from year-round residents of the north.

Even a short migratory journey in spring by part of a population of birds, while the other part remained in the original range, would quickly isolate one breeding population from the other, resulting in the formation of different genetic strains that lead to subspecies, species, and finally to genera and families. Any variation away from the ancestral, "sedentary" stock would become established more quickly because of such isolation at the breeding period. By the same token, the parental stock can, and no doubt does, become modified to suit its environment more perfectly, thus accelerating the tempo of this type of divergent evolution.

The original "split" of the Bombycillines is thought then to have been the result of migration on the part of some of the ancestral stock, with subsequent loss of regular migration because the need to return south was lost. Early in development, and before the migrational tendency was entirely lost, an isolated population, which later became sedentary, as it was an island population, diverged to give rise to the Dulinae. The Dulinae are a homogeneous group since on the islands now inhabited by the birds, they have not been isolated sufficiently long to produce even well-marked subspecies.

The present day _Phainoptila_ is most nearly like the ancestral group, and the remainder of the Ptilogonatinae have diverged to fit conditions similar to those to which the Tyrannid flycatchers, which parallel them, are also fitted.

In comparatively recent geological time, two basic lines developed from the Bombycilline stock, the future _B. garrula_ and _B. cedrorum_. Possibly _garrula_ originally was isolated in Europe and Asia, and later came into contact with _B. cedrorum_, following the time at which the two species were genetically well differentiated. It appears certain that _B. japonica_ was an offshoot of the Bombycilline stock at an early time, since it has characteristics that seem relatively unspecialized. It possibly was isolated in the Orient.

Structural affinities of _Dulus_ and _Bombycilla_ are more pronounced than are those of _Dulus_ and _Ptilogonys_, for example. Many of the structural features of _Dulus_ parallel those of _Phainoptila_, and it seems likely that the Dulinae were separated early in the history of the family, perhaps as an isolated offshoot of the early migratory Bombycillinae.

CONCLUSIONS

Nomenclature, as used by a taxonomist, should of course indicate affinities as well as apply a name, and the rank of the family should be applied to a structural unit based on common anatomical characters that are more fundamental than, in my opinion, are those used by Ridgway (1904) in proposing family status for the silky flycatchers and the palm-chats. The characters in the diagnosis (page 478) of the family Bombycillidae are common features regarded as warranting a single family unit for the waxwings, silky flycatchers, and palm-chats. The differences in morphology used by previous workers to characterize each of these groups: (1) the silky flycatchers; (2) waxwings and; (3) palm-chats are regarded as more properly characters of only subfamily rank.

The existing coloration of the species of the Bombycillidae appears to have been acquired relatively late, geologically speaking. The three subfamilies responded to ecological stimuli in three different ways, and the resulting color patterns are unlike in the three groups. Dulinae to this day have a color pattern that is most like the ancestral color pattern, and this is recapitulated in the juvenal plumage of the Bombycillinae before they attain their adult plumage.

Consideration of the geographic distribution of the species of the family indicates that the center of origin of the family Bombycillidae was south of the present range of the waxwings (subfamily Bombycillinae). Waxwings probably are the descendants of a migratory population that diverged from the primitive population at an early time in the history of the family. Owing to their adaptations to survive in the north, waxwings no longer return south in the autumn. Palm-chats (subfamily Dulinae) are descendants of an isolated population of the family stock that developed communal living habits as one specialization. Silky Flycatchers (subfamily Ptilogonatinae) became modified to catch insects, and have specializations that roughly parallel those of the Tyrannid flycatchers.

Osteologically, the various species of the Bombycillidae are remarkably similar. Small variations do exist, but these are primarily differences in relative size. The modifications of the beak enable palm-chats to feed on parts of plants, and the beak of _Phainoptila_ shows some similarity in this respect. Rounded wings, which cause a bird to fly by means of short, relatively weak strokes, are correlated with a comparatively long humerus, whereas long and pointed wings, which enable a bird to fly with more powerful strokes of the wing, are correlated with a relatively short humerus. There is a positive correlation between a short humerus and a long external condyle, and between a long humerus and the absence or smallness of the external condyle.

In the Bombycillidae short bones of the leg are adaptive, and long bones of the leg are the generalized condition. Although all passerine birds were differentiated relatively late in geologic time, long hind limbs still could have been present in the immediate ancestors of passerine birds. As adaptive radiation took place in the class Aves, some birds, the Bombycillidae included, became more and more adapted for an arboreal, and eventually an aerial habitat, with consequent loss of saltatorial and running ability.

Birds, like mammals, have a short femur, the most proximal element in the leg, if the species is adapted to run fast. If the species is not adapted to run fast, birds, unlike mammals, have the tibiotarsus longer than any of the other elements; in mammals that are not adapted to run fast, the femur and tibia are approximately the same length. In non-running birds as compared with running birds, the leg element distal to the tibiotarsus, and the one proximal to it, are considerably shortened. In waxwings, all three elements of the hind limb are shortened, indicating that the reduction in length has been, evolutionarily speaking, a rapid process, in order to reduce the limbs to a convenient size as soon as possible.

The shape of the pygostyle varies in the Bombycillidae, but the simple shieldlike bone of _Phainoptila_ is judged to resemble closely the ancestral type. In _Ptilogonys_ there is a tall dorsal spine, coupled with a wide and heavy centrum and flattened lateral areas, for support of the long rectrices. In _Bombycilla_ the bone is small with knobs on the centrum that have been developed for muscle attachment.

The muscles were carefully dissected in each genus and in most of the species. The same homologous muscles are present in all species. Significant differences were found only in the relative size of certain muscles. No satisfactorily accurate method of measuring these differences was found. Consequently, less use was made of the results of the dissections than was originally planned.

The set of pectoral muscles varies but slightly in relative mass, and the variation is not considered significant. The deltoid muscle was selected for measurement since its point of insertion is unusually variable, while the mass of the muscle varies little. We can conclude that the extent of the area of insertion of the tendon of a muscle can determine that muscle's relative efficiency, while the muscle itself remains the same in bulk.

The muscles of the hind limb are notably larger in species that have long legs, and a good index of the hopping ability may be gained by study of certain of these muscles. In the Bombycillidae, and in those Ptilogonatinae that do not use the hind limbs for hopping, the bones are shortened, and the associated muscles are correspondingly smaller.

The gross anatomy of the digestive tract is practically identical in the members of the family. The variability noted is mainly in the degree of compactness of the visceral mass in _Bombycilla_ and in _Phainopepla_. Also there is a tendency for the Bombycillinae and the Dulinae to have the mass situated more posteriorly than it is in the Ptilogonatinae. Moreover, _Bombycilla_ has a shorter intestine than do the other genera. All of this indicates that the waxwings (Bombycillinae) have the center of gravity situated more advantageously for flight than do the birds of the two other subfamilies.

SUMMARY

1. The silky flycatchers, waxwings, and palm-chats are included in the family Bombycillidae; the Ptilogonatidae and Dulidae are reduced to subfamily rank.

2. The coloration of the birds of each subfamily is different because the ecological needs are different.

3. Waxwings were at one time regularly migratory, but are now nomadic, since they are adapted to live in northern latitudes for the entire year.

4. The corresponding bones in different members of the family closely resemble one another, and the differences which do exist are the results of responses within relatively recent times to changes in habits.

5. In the Bombycillidae a rounded wing is judged to be the primitive condition. As the wing becomes more pointed, the humerus becomes shorter and its external condyle longer.

6. The hind limbs are short in birds that depend most on flight power, but are longer and the distal elements are disproportionately longer in birds that depend on saltation or on running.

7. The pygostyle varies in shape and size between genera and even between some species.

8. The pectoral muscles differ in size only slightly in the different members of the family, but the insertions are more extensive for these muscles in birds that fly a great deal.

9. The muscles of the hind limb vary in mass, but not in kind, in the members of the family Bombycillidae.

10. In the Bombycillidae that depend on flight power, rather than on saltation or on running power, there is a tendency for the digestive tract to become shorter and for the whole visceral mass to become more compact.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ANDERSON, E. M.

1915. Nesting of the Bohemian Waxwing in northern British
Columbia. Condor, 17(4):145-148, 1915.

ANDERSON, M. P.

1907. A collecting trip in Korea. Condor, 9(5):146-147, 1907.

ANDERSON, R. M.

1909. Nesting of the Bohemian Waxwing (_Bombycilla garrulus_).
Auk, 26(1):10-12, 1909.

ARMSTRONG, E. A.

1942. Bird display. Cambridge Univ. Press, xvi + 381 pp.,
22 plates, 1942.

BAIRD, S. F.

1860. The birds of North America. J. B. Lippincott Co., lvi
+ 1003 pp., 1860.

BEDDARD, F. E.

1898. The structure and classification of birds. Longmans, Green
& Co., xx + 548 pp., 252 figs., 1898.

BERGTOLD, W. H.

1917a. A study of the incubation period of birds. Kendrick-Bellamy
Co., 109 pp., 1917.

1917b. Regurgitation in the Bohemian Waxwing. Auk, 34(3):341-342,
1917.

1924. A summer occurrence of the Bohemian Waxwing in Colorado.
Auk, 41(4):614, 1924.

BOULTON, R.

1926. Remarks on the origin and distribution of the Zonotrichiae.
Auk, 18(3):326-332, 1926.

BURLEIGH, T. D.

1921. Breeding birds of Warland, Lincoln County, Montana. Auk,
38(4):552-565, 1921.

BURT, W. H.

1930. Adaptive modifications in the woodpeckers. Univ. California
Publ. Zool., 32(8):455-524, 29 figs. in text, 1930.

CARRIKER, M. A., JR.

1909-1912. An annotated list of the birds of Costa Rica including
Cocos Island. Ann. Carnegie Mus., 6(1):314-915, 1909-1912.

CORY, C. B.

1886. The birds of the West Indies, etc. Auk, 3(2):187-245, 1886.

CROUCH, J. E.

1936. Nesting habits of the Cedar Waxwing. Auk, 53(1):1-8, 1936.

1943. Distribution and habitat relationships of the Phainopepla.
Auk, 60(3):319-333, 1943.

ENGELS, W. L.

1938. Cursorial adaptations in birds--limb proportions in the
skeleton of _Geococcyx_. Jour. Morph., 63:207-217, 3 figs.
in text, 1938.

1940. Structural adaptations in Thrashers (Mimidae: Genus
_Toxostoma_) with comments on interspecific relationships.
Univ. California Publ. Zool., 42(7):341-400, 24 figs.
in text, 1940.

FARLEY, J. A.

1924. Abnormal Cedar Waxwing. Auk, 41(1):160, 1924.

FISHER, H. I.

1946. Adaptations and comparative anatomy of the locomotor
apparatus of New World Vultures. Amer. Midl. Nat.,
35:545-727, 14 plates, 42 tables, 28 figs. in text, 1946.

FRANK, F.

1939. Die Faerbung der Vogelfeder durch Pigment und Struktur.
Jour. fuer Orn., 87:426-523, 1939.

GARROD, A. H.

1876. On some anatomical peculiarities which bear upon the major
divisions of the passerine birds, Pt. I. Proc. Zool. Soc.
London, 626-647, 1876.

GERONDET, P.

1948. Le jaseur boreal en Suisse pendant l'hiver 1946-1947. Der
Orn. Beob., 45(1):1-5, 1948.

GOULD, J.

1862. The birds of Great Britain. London, published by the author,
5 vols., text unpaged, 367 plates, 1862.

GRINNEL, J.

1901. The status of the Cedar Waxwing in California. Condor,
3(6):146-147, 1901.

1909. A new cowbird of the genus _Molothrus_. Univ. California
Publ. Zool., 5:275-281, 6 figs. in text, 1909.

GRISCOM, L.

1934. The ornithology of Guerrero, Mexico. Mus. Comp. Zool. Bull.
75:367-422, 1934.

HAMILTON, W. J., JR.

1933. A late nesting waxwing in central New York. Auk,
50(2):114-115, 1933.

HANNA, W. C.

1931. Nesting of the Bohemian Waxwing in British Columbia. Condor,
33(6):253-254, 1 fig., 1931.

HEINROTH, O.

1924. Die Voegel Mitteleuropas. Berlin, Huge Bermuehler, 1:51-58,
1924.

HELLMAYR, C. E.

1935. Catalogue of the birds of the Americas. Field Mus. Nat.
Hist. Mus. Publ. 347, 8(pt. 8):vi + 541 pp., 1935.

HOWELL, A. B.

1938. Muscles of the avian hip and thigh. Auk, 55(1):71-81,
2 figs. in text, 1938.

1944. Speed in animals, their specialization for running and
leaping. Univ. Chicago Press, xi + 270 pp., 55 figs. 1944.

HUDSON, G. E.

1937. Studies on the muscles of the pelvic appendage in birds.
Amer. Midl. Nat., 18:1-108, 26 plates, 1937.

1948. Studies on the muscles of the pelvic appendages in birds
II, the heterogeneous order Falconiformes. Amer. Midl. Nat.,
39(1):102-127, 1948.

KNOWLTON, F. H.

1909. Birds of the world. Henry Holt & Co., Ltd., xi + 873 pp.,
15 plates, 233 figs. in text, 1909.

KONODA, N.

1943. A dictionary of animals. Tokyo, 3 + 767 + 50 pp., profusely
illustrated, 1943.

KOSHANTSCHIKOV, I.

1930. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Okologie, Biologie, und
Geographie des Zobels (_Martes zibellina_ L.). Zeits. fuer
Okol. der Tierre, 19(2):291-320, 2 maps, 1930.

LINSDALE, J. M.

1928. Variations in the Fox Sparrow (_Passerella iliaca_) with
reference to natural history and osteology. Univ. California
Publ. Zool., 30(12):251-392, 4 plates, 38 figs. in text,
1928.

LITTLEFIELD, M. J., and LEMKAN, F.

1928. History of a Cedar Waxwing family. Bull. NE Bird-Band.
Assoc., 4:85-89, 1928.

LUCAS, F. A.

1897. The tongues of birds. U. S. Nat. Mus. Report for 1895,
1001-1019 pp., 2 plates, 1897.

MCGREGOR, R. C.

1906. Notes on birds observed while traveling from Yokohama to
Manila. Condor, 8(4):98-100, 1906.

MATTHEW, W. D.

1939. Climate and evolution. N. Y. Acad. Sci., Spec. Publ.,
1:xi + 223 pp., 1939.

MAYR, E.

1942. Systematics and the origin of species. Columbia Univ. Press,
xiv + 334 pp., 29 figs. in text, 1942.

1947. Ecological factors in speciation. Evolution, 1(4):263-288,
1947.

MERRIAM, F. A.

1896. Nesting habits of _Phainopepla nitens_ in California. Auk,
8(1):38-43, 1896.

MILLER, A. H.

1933. Postjuvenal molt and the appearance of sexual characters of
plumage in _Phainopepla nitens_. Univ. California Publ.
Zool., 38(13):425-444 pp., 8 pls., 1 fig. in text, 1933.

1937. Structural modifications in the Hawaiian Goose (_Nesochen
sandvicensis_). A study in adaptive evolution. Univ.
California Publ. Zool., 42(1):1-80, 6 plates, 12 figs. in
text, 1937.

1941. Speciation in the avian genus Junco. Univ. California Publ.
Zool., 44(3):173-434, 33 figs. in text, 1941.

MULLER, C. S.

1915. A northern winter record of the Phainopepla. Condor,
17(3):129, 1915.

MYERS, H. W.

1907. Nesting habits of _Phainopepla nitens_. Condor, 9(4):101-103,
1907.

1908. Observations on the nesting habits of _Phainopepla_.
Condor, 10(2):72-75, 1908.

1909. Notes on the habits of _Phainopepla nitens_. Condor,
11(1):22-23, 1909.

NEWTON, A., and GADOW, H.

1893-1896. A dictionary of birds. Adams and Charles Black,
xii + 1086 pp., 1893-1896.

NICE, M. M.

1940. Observations on the behavior of a young Cedar Waxwing.
Condor, 43(1):58-64, 1940.

OBERHOLSER, H. C.

1917. A synopsis of the races of _Bombycilla garrula_ (Linnaeus).
Auk, 34(3):330-333, 1917.

PEMBERTON, J. R.

1908. Northern range of the _Phainopepla_. Condor, 10(6):238, 1908.

PLATH, K.

1933. Molt of the Nonpareil. Auk, 50(2):121, 1933.

POST, K. C.

1916. The Cedar Waxwing (_Bombycilla cedrorum_) during July and
August, 1916. Wilson Bull., 28:175-193, 1916.

RAND, A. L., and RAND, R. M.

1943. Breeding notes on _Phainopepla_. Auk, 60(3):333-341, 1943.

RICHARDSON, F.

1942. Adaptive modifications for trunk foraging in birds. Univ.
California Pub. Zool., 46(4):317-368, 2 plates, 16 figs.
in text, 1942.

RIDGWAY, R.

1904. The birds of North and Middle America, Part III. U. S. Nat.
Mus. Bull. 50:xx + 801 pp., 19 plates, 1904.

SAUNDERS, A. A.

1911. A study of the nesting of the Cedar Waxwing. Auk,
28(3):323-329, 1911.

1912. The probable breeding of the Bohemian Waxwing in Montana.
Condor, 14(6):224, 1912.

SHARPE, R. B.

1885. Catalogue of the birds in the British Museum, Vol. 10,
British Mus., xiii + 682 pp., 12 plates, 1885.

SHAW, W. T., and CULBERTSON, A. E.

1944. A flock of Cedar Waxwings meets tragedy. Condor,
46(4):205-206, 1944.

SHUFELDT, R. W.

1887. A review of the muscles used in the classification of birds.
Jour. Comp. Med. and Sur., 8(4):321-344, 1887.

1889a. Comparative osteology of the families of North American
birds. Jour. Morph., 3(1):81-114, 6 plates, 1889.

1889b. Studies on the Macrochires, morphological and otherwise,
with the view of indicating their relationships and
defining their several positions in the system. Linn. Soc.
London, Jour., 20(122):299-394, 1889.

1890. The myology of the Raven. Macmillan & Co., x + 344 pp.,
76 figs., 1890.

1909. Osteology of birds. New York State Mus. Bull., 130:381 pp.,
1909.

SKUTCH, A.

Manuscript--unpublished notes and personal correspondence.

STEVENSON, H.

1882. On the plumage of the waxwing, _Ampelis garrulus_, Linnaeus,
from the examination and comparison of a large series of
specimens killed, in Norfolk, in the winter of 1866-'67.
Trans. Norfolk and Norwick Naturalists' Soc., 3:326-344,
2 figs. in text, 1882.

SUTTON, G. M., and BURLEIGH, T. D.

1940. Birds of Las Vigas, Veracruz. Auk, 57(2):234-243, 1940.

1942. Birds recorded in the Federal District and States of Puebla
and Mexico by the 1939 Semple Expedition. Auk,
59(3):418-423, 1942.

SWARTH, H. S.

1922. Birds and mammals of the Stikine River region of northern
British Columbia and southeastern Alaska. Univ. California
Publ. Zool., 24(2):125-314, 8 plates, 34 figs. in text, 1922.

TAYLOR, W. P.

1918. Bohemian Waxwing (_Bombycilla garrulus_) breeding within
the United States. Auk, 35(2):226-227, 1918.

TAVERNER, P. A.

1934. Birds of Canada. Nat. Mus. Canada Bull., 72, series 19,
445 pp., 77 plates, 488 figs. in text, 1934.

WAYNE, A. T.

1924. A remarkable Cedar Waxwing. Auk, 41(3):485, 1924.

WETMORE, A.

1926. The migrations of birds. Cambridge, Harvard Univ. Press,
vii + 217 pp., 1926.

1932. Notes from Dr. R. Ciferri on the birds of Hispaniola. Auk,
49(1):101-108, 1931.

1940a. A check-list of the fossil birds of North America. Smithson.
Misc. Coll., 99(4):1-88 pp., 1940.

1940b. A systematic classification of the birds of the world.
Smithson. Misc. Coll., 99(7):1-11 pp., 1940.

WETMORE, A., and SWALES, B. H.

1931. The birds of Haiti and the Dominican Republic. U. S. Nat.
Mus. Bull. 155:iv + 482 pp., 26 plates, 1931.

WHEELOCK, I. G.