SUMMARY The 37 species in the subfamily Charadriinae are compared and possible functions of the head and breast patterns are reviewed. It appears that these patterns disrupt the body and eye outlines, which is especially important for the nesting bird. In some species the patterns may enhance sex recognition and may serve as reinforcers for aggressive displays. It is proposed that the primitive Charadrius stock had breast bands and nested on shingle and that as this genus radiated the markings took on social signal functions and were modified by new selective pressures in new habitats. It appears doubtful that the black lore lines have any value as feeding sight lines among the Charadriinae species.

OTT (1966) proposed that many of the markings of shorebirds function as disruptive coloration. Tinbergen (1953) and many other authors suggest that many avian plumage patterns have signal function and reinforce display movements. Ficken and Wilmot (1968) and Ficken, Matthiae, and Horwich (1971) suggested that eye lines in many vertebrates may enhance their vision and enable predaceous species to locate and capture prey more effectively. The latter authors further suggest that the head markings of the Semipalmated Plover (Cha.radrius semipalmatus) probably serve mainly a disruptive coloration function, although they point out that a given pattern may serve several functions. Bock (1958) tentatively speculated that in Charadriinae the breast bands and head markings act as disruptive marks, especially for the nesting bird, and some of the markings also reinforce aggressive and courtship displays. I have examined the literature concerning the Charadriinae in search of correlations that might provide suggestions on the relative importance of these possible functions in the subfamily as a whole, since many members of this group have complicated head and breast patterns and many have black lore lines. I have given special attention to (1) nest-site characteristics and (2) seasonal, sex, and age differences in coloration. I have also relied upon my 1969-72 observations on the Mountain Plover (C. montanus) in eastern Colorado for part of my conclusions. Jehl (1968) lists 37 species in the subfamily Charadriinae in his system of shorebird taxonomy and I have followed his scheme. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A variety of head and breast markings is found in Charadriinae with 24 basic patterns (Fig. 1) representing the 37 species in this subfamily. All species except the Hooded Dotterel (C. rubricollis) have an interrupted, i.e. non-uniform, head pattern (Table 1). Within the genus Charadrius there is a high incidence of a black lore line and a black crown patch and within the entire subfamily 21 species have distinct breast bands (Table 1). Breast bands when present usually consist of dark bands on light backgrounds, but in two cases light bands are against a dark background (Fig. 1). Cott (op. cit.) states that the round shape of the eye is a conspicuous feature that needs to be concealed in many species and that eye lines com- monly serve this function. Of the 37 species considered here, 27 have the 60 Walter D. Graul CHARADRIINAE HEAD AND BREAST MARKINGS 61 Fig. 1. Breeding adult head and breast patterns in Charadriinae. (A) Charadrlus hiaticula; similar patterns = C. collaris, C. dubius, C. placidus, C. semipalmatus, C. thoracicus, C. wilsonia. (B) C. voci[erus; similar patterns = C. trico#aris. (C) C. melodus. (D) C. pecuarius; similar pattern = C. sanctaehelenae. tE) C. alexandrinus; similar pattern = C. marginatus, C. peronli. (F) C. venustus. (G) C. bicnctus. (H) C. [alklandicus. (I) C. leschenaultii; similar pattern = C. mongolus. {J) C. asiaticus; similar pattern = C. veredus. (K) C. modestus. (L) C. montanus. (M) C. melanops. (N) C. cinctus. (0) C. rubricollis. (P) C. novaeseelandiae. (Q) Anarhynchus [ron- talis. (R) Phegornis mitchelli. (S) Pluvialis dominica; similar pattern = P. apricaria. (T) P. squatarola. (U) P. obscura. (V) Eudromias morinellus. (W) Oreopholus ru#collis. (X) Pluvianellus socialis. eye outline interrupted by a black line and six additional species have the dark eye against a uniform dark background (Table 1). Either of these two strategies would tend to conceal the eye. The fact that several of these species have colored eye rings does not detract from this function, since the colors cannot be seen at a distance. In at least 24 of the species the head and breast colors are either absent or subdued in the non-breeding season as compared to the breeding plumage (Appendix I). In addition, immatures in at least 35 species differ from their respective adult breeding plumages (Appendix I). These data support the hypothesis that the patterns are mainly functional for adults during the nesting season. March 1973 62 THE WILSON BULLETIN Vo. as, No. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF BREEDING ADULT HEAD AND BREAST MARKINGS IN CHARADRIINAE Other Charadrius Charadriinae Totals Number Species in Group 28 Lore-line Present 19 Black Crown Patch Present 21 Uniform Dark Face 3 Breast Band Present 18 Eye Outline Interrupted by Black Line 24 Interrupted Head Pattern 27 9 37 2 21 0 21 3 6 3 21 3 27 9 36 Support for the theory that these patterns function as disruptive coloration during nesting comes from the correlation between the presence of breast bands and characteristics of the nest site. Table 2 shows that those species that nest on a discontinuous substrate (Appendix II) tend to have breast bands while those that nest on uniform substrates (Appendix II) tend to lack breast bands. Discontinuous substrates are defined as having many con- trasts between light and dark colors (shingle, disturbed areas, stony areas) whereas uniform substrates have no great contrast between light and dark colors (sand expanses, uniform grasslands, holes). A Chi-square Test of Independence shows that the difference is significant (P < 0.025). Two species were omitted from Table 2 because of a lack of good nest-site infor- mation and six species were omitted because they cannot be placed into one of the two substrate classifications, since they commonly nest near conspicuous dark objects (pebbles, sea drift, shrubs) on an otherwise uniform substrate such as fine sand (Appendix II). This correlation tends to support Huxley's (1958) suggestion that the breast bands in the Killdeer (C. voci/erus) have a disruptive function. Indirect evidence supports the hypothesis that some of the head and breast TABLE 2 PRESENCE OF BREAST HANDS VS. NEST SITE LOCATION* Discontinuous Uniform Nest Substrate Nest Substrate Subtotals Breast Band Present 13 4 17 Breast Band Absent 4 8 12 Subtotals 17 12 29 * Compiled from data in Appendix II. Waiter CHARADRIINAE HEAD AND BREAST MARKINGS 63 D. Graul FIG. 2. Horizontal threat display given by the Mountain Plover. markings in this group also have social signal functions. For instance, in those cases where both sexes incubate (the normal situation in this group) identical head and breast markings would be expected if their sole function is disruptive coloration. In at least 27 cases where both sexes are reported to incubate, however, the male has brighter head and/or breast markings than the female (Appendix I). In the Dotterel (Eudromias morinellus) the male usually incubates alone (Pulliainen, 1970) and the female has brighter markings. Since sexual differences do exist it is likely that the differences enhance sexual recognition. In at least the Killdeer and the Banded Dotterel (Charadrius bicinctus) the breast bands appear to reinforce aggressive displays, since in both species the bands are enlarged in threat postures (R. E. Phillips, pers. comm.). In the Mountain Plover the facial markings seem to serve as reinforcers for threat displays. Males are more aggressive than females and males have brighter facial and breast markings. The most common threat display in this species (the Horizontal Threat--Fig. 2) presents a bold black and white image to the threatened bird. Another aggressive posture in this species (the Upright Threat), whereby two opponents stand close together and face each other with the bodies nearly vertical, also presents the bold facial mark- ings to both participants. Both of these displays, or similar versions, have been described for the following additional species: the Kentish Plover (C. alexandrinus) (Rittinghaus, 1961), the Little Ringed Plover (C. dubius) (Simmons, 1953a), the Ringed Plover (C. hiaticula) (Simmons, 1953b), the Killdeer (Bunni, 1959), and the European Golden Plover (Pluvialis apricaria) (Bannerman, 1961). At least the Horizontal Threat, or a similar version, occurs in the Double-banded Plover (C. bicinctus) (R. E. Phillips, pers. comm.), the Black-fronted Dotterel (C. melanops) (R. E. Phillips, pers. comm.), the American Golden Plover (P. dominica) (Drury, 1961), the New 64 THE WILSON BULLETIN March 1973 Vol. 85, No. 1 Zealand Dotterel (P. obscura) (R. E. Phillips, pers. comm.), and the Black- bellied Plover (P. squatarola) (Drury, op cit.). I suspect that future research will demonstrate that most of the Charadriinae species have aggressive dis- plays in which a frontal view is presented to the opponent. It is perhaps significant that the black crown patch in 21 of the species of Charadrius is restricted to the front edge of the crown--the maximum black and white con- trast is apparent only in a frontal view. In the Mountain Plover the social signal function of the facial markings may be more important than the disruptive coloration function. The black lore line and black crown patch are conspicuous during the courtship period, but a molt of the head feathers begins soon after incubation starts and many individuals lack the bold markings before the end of incubation. Bock (op. cit.) proposes that the Little Ringed Plover, the Ussuri Sand Plover (C. placidus), the Wilson's Plover (C. wilsonia) and the Killdeer currently represent the basic Charadrius stock from which the other species of Charadrius have radiated. Maclean's (1972) suggestion that species of Charadrii with reduced clutches have evolved from four egg species does not conflict with Bock's scheme. Bock's proposal would suggest that the primitive Charadrius stock had breast bands, black lore lines and crown patches, since all living members of his basic stock have these features (Fig. 1). Thus, as species evolved in habitats with uniform, light colored substrates, selection would have favored the reduction or complete loss of the breast bands and dark facial marks. This would explain why the Piping Plover (C. melodus) has only a faint lore line and sometimes lacks a breast band and why the Kentish Plover, the White- fronted Plover (C. marginatus), and the Malay Sand Plover (C. peronii) have an incomplete breast band (Fig. 1)--all nest on light colored substrates. Since the facial markings of many adults are bright only during the breeding season and in many species the immatures lack the markings, I doubt that the lore lines in these species of Charadriinae can serve as sight lines for capturing prey (Ficken and Wilmot, op. cit.; Ficken et al., op. cit.). It is hard to conceive that these species require sight lines for feeding only during the breeding season, especially since other functions appear to exist for the lore lines at this time. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My Mountain Plover observations were supported by an NIH Training Grant (No. 5 T01 GMO1779) from the National Institutes of General Medical Sciences, a Chapman Fund Grant, and a Sigma Xi Grant-in-Aid. I thank R. Ryder for making numerous facilities available to me at Colorado State University and I express my thanks to S. Derrickson and F. McKinney for critically reading the manuscript. I also thank C. A. Fleming, J. A. Goodall, M. Howe, G. L. Maclean, and A. R. McGill for allowing me to use unpublished data. Finally, I thank R. E. Phillips for allowing me to use unpublished data and for reviewing the manuscript. LITERATURE CITED BANNERMAN, D. A. (Ed.). 1961. The birds of the British Isles. Vol. 10, Oliver & Boyd, London. BENT, A. C. 1927. Life histories of North American shorebirds. Part 2. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull., 142. BLAKER, D. 1966. Notes on the sandplovers (Charadrius) in southern Africa. Ostrich, 37:95-102. BOCK, W.J. 1958. A generic review of the plovers (Charadriinae: Aves). Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., 118:27-97. BUNNI, n. K. 1959. The Killdeer, Charadrius v. voci]erus Linnaeus, in the breeding season: ecology, behavior, and the development of homiothermism. Unpubl. Sc.D. Thesis, Univ. of Michigan Ann Arbor. CAWKELL, E. M. AND J. E. HAMILTON. 1961. The birds of the Falkland Islands. Ibis, 103a: 1-27. CONWAY, W. G. AND J. BELL. 1968. Observation on the behavior of Kittlitz's Sand- plovers at the New York Zoological Park. Living Bird, 7:57-70. COTT, H. a. 1966. Adaptive coloration in animals. Methuen & Co. Ltd., London. DEMENT'EV, G. P., N. A. GLADKOV, AND E. P. SPANGENBERG. 1969. Birds of the Soviet Union. Israel Prog. Sci. Trans., Jerusalem (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Springfield, Va.). DRURY, W. H., JR. 1961. Breeding biology of shorebirds. Auk, 78:176-219. FIGKEN, R. W., P. E. MATTIIIAE, AND a. HoRwlCtI. 1971. Eye marks in vertebrates: aids to vision. Science, 173:936-938. FIeKEN, R. W. AND L. a. WILMOT. 1968. Do facial eye-stripes function in avian vision? Am. Midi. Nat., 79:522-523. HALL, K. R. L. 1958. Observations on the nesting sites and nesting behavior of the Kittlitz's Sandplover (Charadrius pecuarius). Ostrich, 21:112-125. HILL, R. 1968. Australian birds. Thomas Nelson Ltd., Melbourne. HUXLEY, J. 1958. Why two breast bands on the Killdeer? Auk, 75:98-99. JEHL, R. J., JR. 1968. Relationships in the Charadrii (shorebirds): A taxonomic study based on color patterns of the downy young. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist., Memoir 3. JOHNSON, A. W. 1964. Notes on Mitchell's Plover (Phegornis mitchelli). Ibis, 106: 249-250. JOHNSON, A.W. 1965. The birds of Chile and adjacent regions of Argentina, Bolivia, and Peru. Platt Est. Graffcos, Buenos Aires. 66 THE WILSON BULLETIN March 1973 Vol. 85, No. 1 LITTLEJOHNS, R.T. 1932. Notes on four species of Dotterels. Emu, 31:15-20. MACKWORTH-PRAED, C. W. AND C. H. B. GRANT. 1952. Birds of eastern and northern Africa. African Handbook of Birds, Series I, Vol. 1. Longmans, Green and Co., London. MACKWORTH-PRAED, C. W. AND C. H. B. GRANT. 1962. Birds of the southern third of Africa. African Handbook of Birds, Series If, Vol. 1. Longmans, Green and Co., London. MACLEAN, G. L. 1972. Clutch size and evolution in the Charadrii. Auk, 89:299-324. MACLEAN, G. L., AND V. C. MORAN. 1965. The choice of nest-site in the White-fronted Plover (Charadrius marglnatus Vieillot.). Ostrich, 36:63-72. McGIrn, A.R. 1944. The Red-kneed Dotterel in coastal southeastern Australia. Emu, 43:225-228. McGREGOR, R.C. 1909. A manual of Philippine birds. Part 1. Bureau of Print., Manila. MEYER DE SCHAUENSEE, R. 1970. A guide to the birds of South America. Livingston Publ. Co., Wynnewood, Pennsylvania. OLIVER, W. R.B. 1930. New Zealand birds. Fine Arts Ltd., Wellington. OLIVER, W. R.B. 1937. The Wrybill Plover. Emu, 37:1-4. OLIVER, W. R.B. 1955. New Zealand birds. A.H. and A. W. Reed, Wellington. PARMELEE, D. F., H. A. STEPIIENS, AND R. H. SCHMIDT. 1967. The birds of southeastern Victoria Island and adjacent small islands. Natl. Mus. Canada, Bull. 222. PITMAN, C. R. S. 1965. The eggs and nesting habits of the St. Helena Sandplover or Wirebird, Charadrius pecuarius sanctaehelenae (Harting). Bull. Brit. Ornithol. Club, 85:121-129. PORTENKO, L. A. 1963. The ornithology of the Koryak Highlands (U.S.S.R.). Proc. 13th Intematl. Ornithol. Congr., Ithaca, pp. 114(1146. PULLIAINEN, E. 1970. On the breeding biology of the Dotterel (Charadrius morinellus). Ornis Fennica, 47:69-73. RAND, A. L. 1936. The distribution and habits of Madagascar birds. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 72:143-499. RITTINGItAUS, H. 1961. Der Seeregenpfeifer (Charadrius alexandrinus). A. Ziemsen Verlag, Wittenberg, Lutherstadt, Die Neue Brehm-Bucherei. SERVENTY, D. L. 1943. Hooded Dotterel near Sydney. Emu, 43:72. SHARPE, R.B. 1896. Catalogue of the Limicolae in the collection of the British Museum. Vol. 24. Longroans and Co., London. SIIEWELL, E. L. 1951. Notes on the nesting of the White-fronted Sandplover (Charad- rius marginatus) at Gamtoos River mouth in 1950. Ostrich, 22:117-119. SIMMONS, K. E.L. 1953a. Some studies on the Little Ringed Plover. Aviculture, 59: 191-207. SIMMONS, K. E. L. 1953b. Some aspects of the aggressive behavior of three closely related plovers (Charadriidae): Little Ringed, Kentish, and Ringe& Ibis, 95:115- 127. SUTTON, g. M. AND D. F. PARMELEE. 1955. Breeding of the Semipalmated Plover on Barfin Island. Bird-Banding, 26:137-147. TINBERGEN, N. 1953. Social behaviour in animals. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York. TOMPKINS, I. R. 1944. Wilson's Plover in its stmmer home. Auk, 62:259-269. WETMORE, A. 1965. Water, prey, and game birds of North America. Natl. Geogr. Soc., Washington. Wn. cox, L. 1959. A twenty year banding study of the Piping Plover. Auk, 76:129-152. W.ter CHARADRIINAE HEAD AND BREAST MARKINGS 67 D. Graul WINTERBOTTOM, J. M. 1963. Comments on the ecology and breeding of Sandplovers (Charadrius) in southern Africa. Rev. Zool. Bot. Africaines, 67:11-16. WITHERBY, H. F., F. C. R. JOURDAIN, N. F. TICEtlURST, AND B. W. TUCKER. 1941. The handbook of British birds. Vol. 4. H.F. and G. Witherby Ltd., London. APPENDIX I SEASONAL, SEXUAL, ANI) ACE PLUMACE DIFFERENCE IN CHARADRIINAE Sexual Plumage Immature Plumage Differences Breeding Plumage Different than in Breeding Brighter than Adult Breeding Species Season Non-breeding Plumage References*, ** Charadrius hiaticula Yes No Yes 1, 5 C. semipalmatus Yes Yes Yes 30, 31 C. placidus Yes Yes Yes 5 C. dubius Yes Yes Yes 1, 31 C. wilsonia Yes Yes Yes 2, 30 C. voci]erus No No Yes 2, 30 C. melodus Yes Yes Yes 2, 30 C. thoracicus ? ? ? 3, 27 C. pecuarius No No Yes 4, 16, 17 C. sanctaehelenae No ? Yes 25 C. tricollaris Yes ? Yes 16, 29 C. alexandrinus Yes Yes Yes 28, 30 C. marginatus Yes Yes Yes 15, 29 C. peronii Yes Yes Yes 12, 20, 29 C. venustus Yes ? Yes 16 C. collaris Yes Yes Yes 9, 23 C. bicinctus Yes Yes Yes 8, 23 C. ]alklandicus Yes Yes Yes 9, 12, 13, 29 C. mongolus Yes Yes Yes 5, 26 C. leschenaultii Yes Yes Yes 5, 15 C. asiaticus Yes Yes Yes 1, 5 C. veredus Yes Yes Yes 5, 21 C. modestus No Yes Yes 6, 13, 29 68 THE WILSON BULLETIN March 1973 Vol. 85, No. 1 APPENDIX I--Continue'd Sexual Plmnage hmnature Plmnage Differences Breeding Plmnage Different than in Breeding Brighter than Adult Breeding Species Season Non-breeding Plumage References*, * * C. montanus Yes Yes Yes 10 C. melanops Yes Yes Yes 11, 14, 19, 29 C. cinctus No No Yes 18, 19, 29 C. rubrlcollls No No Yes 14, 19, 29 C. novaseelandiae Yes No Yes 8, 23, 24 Anarhynchus Jrontalis Yes Yes Yes 22, 23 Phegornis mitchelli Yes ? Yes 6, 9, 13, 29 Pluvialis apricaria Yes Yes Yes 1, 31 Phtvialis dominica Yes Yes Yes 2, 7, 30 Pluvialis squatarola Yes Yes Yes 2, 30 Pluvialis obscura Yes Yes Yes 23, 29 Eudromias morlnellus Yes Yes Yes 1, 31 Oreopholus ruficollis No ? ? 6, 9, 13, 17 Pluvianellus socialis No ? Yes 6, 9, 12, 13 * Gooders, J. 19.69. Birds of the world, Vol. 3 (Parts 6 and 7), IPC Magazines Ltd., London. Contains photographs and drawings of most Charadriinae species and is used here as a general reference. ** References listed in Appendix I as follows: 13. Johnson (1965) 22. Oliver (1937) 14. Littlejohns (1932) 23. Oliver (1955) 15. Mackworth-Praed and 24. Phillips, R. E. (pets. comm. ) 1. Bannerman (1961) Bent (1929) 3] Bock (1958) 4. Conway and Bell (1968) 5. Dement'ev et al. (1969) 6. Meyer de Schauensee (1970) 7. Drury (1961) 8. Fleming, C. A. (pers. comm.) 9. Goodall, I. A. (pers. comm.) 10. Graul, W. D. (pers. ohs.) 11. Hill (1968) 12. Howe, M. (pers. comm.) Grant (1952) 16. Mackworth-Praed and 25. Pitman (1965) Grant (1962) 26. Portenko (1963) 17. Maclean, G.L. 27. Rand (1936) 28. Rittinghaus ( 1961 ) (pers. comm. ) 18. McGill (1944) 29. Sharpe (1896) 19. McGill, A. R. (pers. comm.) 30. Wetmore (1965) g0. McGregor (1909) 31. Witherby et al. 21. Oliver (1930) (1941) Walter CHARADRIINAE HEAD AND BREAST MARKINGS 69 D. Graul APPENDIX II BREAST B^ND PaZSZNCE, M^N NEST SITE, AND NEST SITE REFERENCES Breast Band Nest Site Species (X = Present) Main Nest Site* References** Charadrius hiaticula X Shingle (1) 1, 33 C. semipalmatus X Shingle (1) 8, 29 C. placidus X Shingle (1) 6 C. dubius X Shingle (1) 1, 28, 33 C. wilsoaia X Sand (frequently near 2, 30 dark objects) (3) C. voci]erus X Shingle or disturbed areas (1) 4, 8 C. melodus Usually Sand (2) 2, 31 C. thoracicus X Sub-desert ( ? ) 24 C. pecuarius Sand (2) 9, 32 C. saactaeheleaae Grasslands (2) 21 C. tricollaris X Shingle, dried mud (1) 3 C. alexaadriaus incom. Sand, salt flats (2) 12, 25 C. margiaatus incom. Sand (near objects) 14, 27 or shingle (3) C. peroaii incom. Sand (near drift) (3) 17 C. veaustus X Salt pans (2) 3, 13 C. collars X Sand, river beds ( ? ) 7 C. biciactus X Shingle, disturbed 19 areas, sand (1) C. ]alklaadicus X Sand, short grass (2) 5, 15 C. mongolus Stony tundra (1) 6, 22 C. lescheaaultii Stony areas (1) 6 C. asaticus X Arid grasslands (commonly 6, 33 among pieces of clay) (1) C. veredus X Stony areas (1) 6 C. modestus X Arid grasslands (2) 5 C. moataaus Arid grasslands (2) 8 C. melaaops X Shingle, dried mud, sand (1) 12, 19 C. ciactus X Sand (commonly near 16 shrubs) (3) C. rubrlcollis incom. Sand (near sea drift 26 commonly) (3) March 1973 70 THE WILSON BULLETIN Vol. 8a, No. 1 ArrENDIX II---Continued Breast Band Nest Site Species (X ----Present) Main Nest Site* References** C. novaseelandiae Holes or crevices (2) 19 Anarhynchusfrontalis X Shingle (1) 18, 19 Phegornis mitchelli X Shingle or rocky sand areas (1) 10, 11 Pluvialis apricaria Moors (2) 1, 33 Pluvialis dominica Stony tundra (1) 8, 20 Pluvialis squatarola Stony tundra (1) 8, 20 Pluvialis obscura Sand (2) 19 Eudromias morinellus X Arid areas (commonly stony) (1) 1, 23 Oreopholus ruficollis Arid grassland (2) 11 Pluvianellus socialis Sand (sometimes near rocks) (3) 11 * ( 1 ) ---- Nest site considered discontinuous. (2 / ---- Uniform nest site substrates. ( 3 = Nest sites near conspicuous dark objects on an other;vise uniform substrate. ** References in Appendix II: 1. Bannerman (1961) 12. Littlejohns (1932) 22. Portenko (1963) 2. Bent (1929) 13. Mackworth-Praed and 23. Pulliainen (1970) 3. Blaker (1966) Grant (1962) 24. Rand (1936) 4. Bunni (1959) 14. Maclean and Moran 25. Rittinghaus (1961) 5. Cawkell and Hamilton (1965) 26. Serventy (1943) 15. Maclean, G.L. 27. Shewell (1951) (1961) 6. Dement'ev eta]. (1969) (pers. comm.) 28. Simmons (1953a) 7. Meyer de Schauensee 16. McGill ( 1944 ) 29. Sutton and Parmelee (1970) 17. McGregor ( 1909 ) (1955) 8. tra,d, W. D. (pets. obs.) 18. Oliver (1937) 30. Tompkins (1944) 9. Hall (1958) 19. Oliver (1955) 31. Wilcox (1959) 10. Johnson (1964) 20. Parmeleeetal. (1967) 32. Winterbottom (1963) 11. Johnson (1965) 21. Pitman (1965) 33. Witherby et al. (1941) JAMES FORD BELL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55455, 7 SEPTEMBER 1972.