Part 218

Columba araucana, LESS. Voy. de la Coq. Ois. t. 40. Columba denisea, TEMM. Pl. Col. 502. C. meridionalis, KING.

Columba caribæa, GMELIN, S. N. 1788, 773.—GOSSE, B. Jam. 291.—MARCH, P. A. N. S. Philad. 1863, 301. Patagiœnas c. SCL. P. Z. S. 1861, 80.—REICH. Handb. 65, tab. 230, b, f. 3362.

Columba rufina, (TEMM.) REICH. Handb. 62, tab. 222, f. 2583, 2584.—LAWR. Ann. N. Y. Lyc. 1861, VII, 333, No. 281 (Panama).—SCL. & SALV. P. Z. S. 1866, 198 (Amazon).—IB. 1867, 590.—SCL. Ibis, I, 222 (Guatemala).—SALV. P. Z. S. 1867, 159 (Veragua).—IB. 1870, 115 (Costa Rica).—REINH. Vid. Med. Nat. For. 1870, 59 (Brazil).

Columba corensis, GMEL. S. N. I, 1878, 783.—SALLÉ, P. Z. S. 1857, 235 (Santo Domingo).—NEWTON, Ibis I, 252 (Santa Cruz).—CAB. J. IV, 108 (Cuba).—TAYLOR, Ibis, 1864, 171 (St. Thomas). Patagiænas c. REICHENB. Handb. tab. 222, f. 2581.

Columba inornata, VIGORS, Pr. Zoöl. Soc. 1847, 37.—DE LA SAGRA, Voy. l’Ile de Cuba, Ois. t. 28.—CAB. J. IV, 106 (Cuba).—SCL. P. Z. S. 1861, 80.—REICHENB. Handb. 62, tab. 222, f. 2582.—GUNDL. Repert. Cub. I, 1866, 298.—MARCH, P. A. N. S. 1863, 301 (Jamaica). C. rufina, GOSSE, B. Jam. (not C. rufina of TEMMINCK!).

Columba solitaria, MCCALL, Pr. A. N. Sc. Phila. III, July, 1847, 233. “Length, 13 inches 9 lines, etc. Alar extent, 23 inches. Wing, from the flexure, 7 inches 5 lines. Tarsus, 1 inch; middle toe, 1 inch 2 lines; first toe, 9 lines, and longer than the third; nails light flesh-color; feet and legs deep red. Iris dark orange. Bill above, 1 inch 1 line, but feathered to within 5 lines of the tip; reddish near the base, whitish near the tip. Head chocolate-blue. Throat chocolate-white. Neck and breast bluish-chocolate with brilliant reflections. Back, belly, flanks, under wing-coverts, and greater exterior wing-coverts, light red color, the last faintly bordered with white. Lesser wing-coverts chocolate-red, forming a bright shoulder-spot of elliptical shape. Quill-feathers dusky, tinged with lead-color on the outer vanes. Third primary longest. Upper and under tail-coverts bluish lead-color. Tail, 5 inches, slightly rounded, of twelve feathers; dusky.”

Zenaida hypoleuca, “GRAY,” BONAP. Consp. II, 1857, 83.

Zenaidura yucatanensis, LAWR. Ann. N. Y. IX, 1869. This bird is so exactly intermediate between the Z. carolinensis and Zenaida amabilis, as to lead us to strongly suspect it is a hybrid between the two. With the Z. carolinensis it agrees only in possessing fourteen tail-feathers; the coloration and size and shape of the bill being exactly those of Z. amabilis, while the tail-feathers are intermediate in length and shape between those of the two species. The colors differ from those of Z. amabilis only in being of a just appreciably lighter shade, there being the same broad white tip to the secondaries, brilliant steel-blue sub-auricular spot, and deep reddish crissum, characterizing the Z. amabilis, as distinguished from Z. carolinensis.

Zenaidura graysoni, LAWR. Ann. N. Y. Lyc. February, 1871, 17. A very distinct species, remarkable for its large, very long, and much depressed bill, and deep ferruginous, instead of pinkish-vinaceous, lower parts. The specimens are unfortunately all young birds, though they are fully grown.

Scardafella squamosa. Columba squamosa, TEMM. Pig. et Gal. I, 59. A specimen of this species from Venezuela has the black bars everywhere twice as broad as in Brazilian examples.

Chamæpelia griseola, SPIX, Av. Bras. t. 75, a, f. 2.—REINH. Vid. Med. Nat. For. 1870, 56 (Brazil).

Oreopeleia montana. Columba montana, LINN. S. N. 1758.

Messrs. Sclater and Salvin distinguish the allied species as follows:—

O. poliocephala, Wagler. Brownish-olive; the head plumbeous, lighter beneath; the feathers of the throat darker, and marked with gray; middle of belly milky-white; the flanks and crissum tinged with rufous; tail bronzed-green, the five lateral feathers broadly tipped with buff. Length, 24.00; wing, 10.50; tail, 11.50; tarsus, 3.20. Hab. Table-land of Mexico to west coast (Manzanillo, etc.).

O. vetula, Wagler. Brownish-olive; the head plumbeous, lighter beneath; the middle of the belly tinged with ochraceous or rusty; tail, bronzed green; the five lateral feathers tipped with white or buff. Length, 21.00; wing, 7.70; tail, 9.00; tarsus, 2.50. Hab. Texas to Honduras, on east side of Mexico.

A near ally to O. vetula is the O. leucogastra, Gould (S. & S. p. 539) from Pacific coast of Central America. This differs in pure white of under parts. The size also is considerably less.

Meleagris ocellatus, TEMM., CABOT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. I, 73.

As with nearly all the animals which have been brought under domestication by man, the true origin of the common barnyard Turkey was for a long time a matter of uncertainty. As a well-known writer (Martin) observes: “So involved in obscurity is the early history of the Turkey, and so ignorant do the writers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries appear to have been about it, that they have regarded it as a bird known to the ancients by the name of Meleagris (really the Guinea-fowl or Pintado), a mistake which was not cleared up till the middle of the eighteenth century. The appellation of “turkey,” which this bird bears in England, arose from the supposition that it came originally from the country of that name,—an idea entirely erroneous, as it owes its origin to the New World. Mexico was first discovered by Grigalva in 1518. Oviedo speaks of the Turkey as a kind of Peacock abounding in New Spain, which had already in 1526 been transported in a domestic state to the West India Islands and the Spanish Main, where it was kept by the Christian colonists.”

It is reported to have been introduced into England in 1541. In 1573 it had become the Christmas fare of the farmer.

Among the luxuries belonging to the high condition of civilization exhibited by the Mexican nation at the time of the Spanish conquest was the possession by Montezuma of one of the most extensive zoölogical gardens on record, numbering nearly all the animals of that country, with others brought at much expense from great distances, and it is stated that Turkeys were supplied as food in large numbers daily to the beasts of prey in the menagerie of the Mexican emperor. No idea can be formed at the present day of the date when this bird was first reclaimed in Mexico from its wild condition, although probably it had been known in a domestic state for many centuries. There can, however, be no question of the fact that it was habitually reared by the Mexicans at the time of the conquest, and introduced from Mexico or New Spain into Europe early in the sixteenth century, either directly or from the West India Islands, into which it had been previously carried.

It has, however, always been a matter of surprise that the Wild Turkey of eastern North America did not assimilate more closely to the domestic bird in color, habits, and by interbreeding, although until recently no suspicion was entertained that they might belong to different species. Such, however, now appears to be the fact, as I will endeavor to show.

The proposition I present is, that there are two species, or at least races, of Wild Turkey in North America,—one confined to the more eastern and southern United States, the other to the southern Rocky Mountains and adjacent part of Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Arizona; that the latter extends along Eastern Mexico as far south at least as Orizaba, and that it is from this Mexican species, and not from that of eastern North America, that this domestic Turkey is derived.

In the Proceedings of the Zoölogical Society of London for 1856 (page 61), Mr. Gould characterizes as new a Wild Turkey from the mines of Real del Norte, in Mexico, under the name of Meleagris mexicana, and is the first to suggest that it is derived from the domesticated bird, and not from the common Wild Turkey of eastern North America, on which he retains the name of M. gallopavo, of Linnæus. He stated that the peculiarities of the new species consist chiefly in the creamy-white tips of the tail-feathers and of the upper tail-coverts, with some other points of minor importance. I suggest that the Wild Turkey of New Mexico, as referred to by various writers, belongs to this new species, and not to the M. gallopavo.

In 1858, in the Report on the birds collected by the Pacific Railroad Expedition (Vol. IX, p. 618, of the series of Pacific Railroad Reports), I referred to this subject, and established the existence in North America of two species of Wild Turkey,—one belonging to eastern, the other to middle, North America. Much additional material has since corroborated this view, and while the M. gallopavo is found along the Missouri River and eastward, and extends into Eastern Texas, the other is now known to belong to the Llano Estacado and other parts of Western Texas, to New Mexico, and to Arizona.

The recent acquisition of a fine male Turkey by the Smithsonian Institution from the vicinity of Mount Orizaba, in Mexico, and its comparison with a skin from Santa Fé, enables me to assert the positive identity of our Western and the Mexican species, and one readily separable from the better known wild bird of the eastern United States. There is now little reason to doubt that the true origin of the barnyard Turkey is to be sought for in the Mexican species, and not in the North American,—an hypothesis which explains the fact of the difficulty in establishing a cross between our wild and tame birds.

The presumed differences between the two species may be briefly indicated as consisting principally in the creamy or fulvous white of the tips of the tail-feathers and of the feathers overlying the base of the tail and of the hinder part of the back of the Mexican and typical barnyard birds, as compared with the decided chestnut-brown of the same parts in the eastern Wild Turkey. There are other differences, but they are less evident, and those indicated will readily serve to distinguish the two species.

The true wild bird of eastern North America always has the tips of the tail-feathers and upper tail-covert of a chestnut-brown color; the Mexican species and its descendant of the barnyard never exhibit this feature.

Sometimes this domesticated bird is exactly like its wild original, differing only in rather greater development of the fatty lobes of the head and neck; and of this an example may be seen in the Museum of the Smithsonian Institution.