8 p. ; 24 cm.Includes bibliographical references (p. 7-8)

Vaurie, Charles.

American Museum of Natural History Scientific Publications

jovitatesPUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORYCENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET, NEW YORK 24, N.Y.NUMBER 2 I 97 SEPTEMBER 29, I 964Systematic Notes on the Bird FamilyCracidae. No. 1Geographical Variation of Ortalis canicollisand Penelope marailBY CHARLES VAURIE1In the spring of 1963 I started to study the family Cracidae for thepurpose of preparing a complete revision. The results will be publishedin a report in which the emphasis will be placed on the relations of thegenera and species and on an analysis of their characters. The distribu-tion will necessarily be fully outlined and the geographical variationcommented upon, but, as it is not my intention to dwell on the latter indetail in the contemplated report, it seems desirable to discuss the geo-graphical variation of some species in a few preliminary papers.My study is based on the collection of the American Museum ofNatural History, but I have also examined the collections of the Academyof Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, British Museum (Natural History),Carnegie Museum, Chicago Natural History Museum, NaturhistoriskaRiksmuseum of Stockholm, and the United States National Museum,Smithsonian Institution, and it is a pleasure to acknowledge the cordialhospitality and help that I have received in these museums. I am in-debted also to Dr. Douglas A. Lancaster for information concerning theregion of Tucuman in Argentina.1 Associate Curator, Department of Ornithology, the American Museum of NaturalHistory.2 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2197Ortalis canicollisThe Gray-headed Chachalaca (Ortalis canicollis) has an extensiverange which extenids from southeastern Bolivia and southwestern MatoGrosso south to the regions of C6rdoba and Santa Fe in northern Argen-tina. It varies geographically, and this variation has been briefly dis-cussed by Cherrie and Reichenberger (1921) in a paper in which theyrecognized three subspecies and proposed two of these as new. Theirmaterial, however, consisted of only six specimens, and the validity ofone of the two new forms has been questioned. This form (grisea) wasbased on a single specimen taken at Suncho Corral, province of Santiagodel Estero, Argentina. The other new form (pantanalensis) was based ontwo specimens from the swamps of the Mato Grosso and is very distinct,as was shown by other specimens collected subsequently. The other threespecimens were two from Paraguay, the type locality of nominate cani-collis Wagler, 1830, and one from the province of Salta in northwesternArgentina.Hellmayr and Conover (1942, pp. 181-182) commented briefly on thegeographical variation and synonymized grisea with nominate canicollis,a decision that had already been taken by Peters (1934, p. 21). In recentyears, Steinbacher (1962, p. 25) proposed a new subspecies from Para-guay which he named ungeri. He seems to have examined 16 specimens,and Hellmayr and Conover reported that they had seen a total of 28.I have examined 65 specimens, including the specimens of Cherrieand Reichenberger, nearly all those reported by Hellmayr and Conover,and three topotypes of ungeri, and I believe that only two subspeciesshould be recognized. These are pantanalensis, and nominate canicolliswith which I synonymize grisea and ungeri.Pantanalensis is very distinct from nominate canicollis, as already noted.It is distinctly larger and much darker, being browner and more rufescentthroughout, and less gray. Some of these characters were mentioned byCherrie and Reichenberger (loc. cit.) but, unfortunately, Mrs. Naumburg(nee Reichenberger) stated later (1930, p. 64) that pantanalensis differsfrom nominate canicollis "only" by having the third to the fourth outerpairs of rectrices tipped with rufous, as against only the two outermostpairs in the latter, a misleading statement that was paraphrased byHellmayr and Conover (loc. cit.). The rufous tips vary individually inboth pantanalensis and nominate canicollis, a variation discussed below.The habitat of pantanalensis is implied by its scientific name, and it isknown so far only from the lowlands of southwestern Mato Grosso, thegreater part of which is swampy or consists of partially submerged plains1964 VAURIE: CRACIDAE 3along the Paraguay River. I believe that it probably also inhabits theswampy regions of neighboring Bolivia and Paraguay.It seems to me that all the other populations of this species should bereferred to nominate canicollis, but it is interesting to note that, in thespecimens that I have seen, those from the western limits of the range arepaler than specimens from central Paraguay, the Chaco in Paraguay andArgentina, and central Santiago del Estero and Mocovi in northernSanta Fe. These paler birds were collected not far from the Andes in theregions of Oran, Salta, Tucuman, Rio Hondo in Santiago del Estero butvery near the border of Tucuman, at Fort Guachalla in extreme westernParaguay, and at Villa Montes in Bolivia. These specimens are moregrayish above, less brownish and olive, on the back, rump, and uppertail coverts, paler gray on the head, nape, and throat, and show also atendency to be paler on the rest of the under parts, including the undertail coverts, than the specimens from the other regions mentioned.This paler coloration is probably not fortuitous but correlated insteadwith climatic conditions because, as is well known, precipitation de-creases and the dry season becomes longer as one proceeds westwardacross the Chaco from the Paraguay River to the foothills of the Andes.One would be tempted to separate this paler population nomencla-turally, were it not for the fact that it does not seem to be sufficientlyconstant. For instance, one bird that was taken at Tapia, Tucuman, isvery pale and gray. It is the palest specimen that I have seen, but anotherat Tafi Viejo, only about 16 kilometers south of Tapia, is darker andonly very slightly paler and more grayish than specimens collected inParaguay on the Rio Negro and in the region not far to the west of PuertoPinasco on the Paraguay River.These two specimens suggest that the coloration of this species maybe correlated with local variations in aridity and habitat, because, ac-cording to Douglas A. Lancaster, who has recently collected birds inTucuman, the region around Tapia is considerably more arid than thataround Tafi Viejo, the vegetation consisting of scrub and low thornwoods. This consideration brings up the question of the validity of grisea.Hellmayr and Conover (loc. cit.) state that the type of grisea seems ab-normal. They believe it represents "an- individual mutant" because it isdarker and grayer than is normal for the species and is bluish on the topof the central rectrices. But the bluish coloration of the top of the tail iscertainly not abnormal, as all individuals of nominate canicollis are bluishon the top of the tail when in very fresh plumage, and the dark graycoloration may very well represent a population character, not an ab-normality. More specimens should be collected in the region of Suncho4 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2197TABLE 1VARIATION IN THE RUFOUS AREA AT THE TiP OF THE FOUR OUTER PAIRS OFTAIL FEATHERS IN Ortalis canicollis(The numbers in the column heads refer to the pair of tail featherscounted from the outermost; those in the body of the table,to the number of specimens.)On Wth n Iand OnlIand2,O2, On 1,2, 3,Region On 1a on 2 2Onlld With Trace 3 On1, With TraceTracen2 2 Only on3 3 Ony on4Mato Grosso 5 6 1Paraguay 1 10 10 4Argentine Chacoa 3 3Northwestern Argentina b 8 9 1a The specimens are from Comandante Fontana, eastern Formosa; Suncho Corral,central Santiago del Estero; and Mocovi, northern Santa F6.b Includes one specimen from Villa Montes in Bolivia, and two from Fort Guachalla inextreme western Paraguay. See text.Corral before this question is settled. Until such time it seems best notto recognize grisea.VARIATION i RUFOUs AREA OF TAIL: The rufous tips of the tail varyindividually and geographically (table 1). On some specimens they arewell indicated on the third outer pairs, and a trace of chestnut may befound also on the fourth pair. In others only the first and second pairs aretipped with chestnut, and a trace of rufous may be found on the thirdpair in some individuals. In one specimen that I examined it is restrictedto the first pair, with a slight trace of rufous on the second. The decreasein the rufous area seems to be clinal from the Mato Grosso southward,but I have not seen specimens from the southern end of the range inArgentina which presumably represents the extreme of the cline. Thedecrease in the rufous area seems to be accompanied also by a decreasein size, as shown below by the measurements of the wing and tail. Thepaler birds from Bolivia, extreme western Paraguay, and northwesternArgentina, mentioned above, are similar to those of Paraguay and donot seem to form part of the cline.In Paraguay, which is the type locality of nominate canicollis, therufous markings vary very widely, and I therefore cannot agree withHellmayr and Conover (loc. cit.) when they state, "In typical canicollisonly the two outermost pairs of rectrices are tipped with rufous." Thisemphasis on only the two outer pairs was unfortunate, because it seemsto have misled Steinbacher (1962), in describing ungeri, when he found1964 VAURIE: CRACIDAE 5that his four specimens from Paraguay had well-indicated rufous tips onthe three outer pairs of rectrices.Steinbacher's specimens of ungeri were taken at Orloff (a locality inthe Mennonite Colony in the Chaco). On these the rufous tips are ap-parently well developed on the first, second, and third pairs in threebirds and present but less well developed on the third pair in the fourthbird. In my three specimens from Orloff, the rufous tips are well indicatedonly on the first and second pairs, and in two of the three specimens aslight trace of rufous is present on the third pair. We see that the extentof the rufous area varies individually at Orloff, as it does throughoutParaguay and neighboring northern Argentina, and that a new sub-species based on its geographical variation cannot be named from theseregions.We are faced also with the complication that nominate canicollis isbased on specimens from Paraguay where two additional forms probablyoccur, the dark and large pantanalensis in the north near the Mato Grosso,and the pale form discussed above in the extreme northwest. It seemsdesirable therefore to restrict the type locality of nominate canicollis, andI do so here, to the region of Asunci6n. Wagler (1830) based his descrip-tion of canicollis on Azara's number 336, the "Yacu'-Caraguata," butWagler indicated no locality other than Paraguay. Azara did not mentiona definite locality but reported (1904) that he made a number of tripssouth and north of Asunci6n during his long stay in Paraguay, where hewas stationed for about 20 years. In his work on the birds of Paraguay(1805, p. 77) he wrote that he did not know the bird south of latitude27° S. Wetmore (1926, p. 118) suggested "southern Paraguay or theadjacent provinces ofArgentina" as the type locality of nominate canicollis.MEASUREMENTS: Mato Grosso (pantanalensis), six males, wing 245-257(252.3), tail 248-270 (254), tarsus 63-68 (65.5); six females, 227-247(240), 235-250 (243.5), 56-64 (60). Villa Montes, Fort Guachalla, andnorthwestern Argentina (nominate canicollis), 11 males, wing 223-246(232.8), tail 233-252 (245.8), tarsus 49-58 (53.1); seven females, 218-236(225), 225-241 (232.7), 50-57 (52.5). Paraguay (nominate canicollis),12 males, wing 215-240 (231), tail 230-260 (245.6), tarsus 50-59 (55);nine females, 213-232 (224), 222-253 (237.7), 49-54 (51.2). ArgentineChaco (nominate canicollis), five females, wing 206-219 (214.2), tail213-233 (222.2), tarsus 50-55 (53).Penelope marailThe Cayenne Guan (Penelope marail) is distributed from the Guianas6 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2197west to the Rio Caura in Venezuela and south to the north bank of theAmazon River. The westernmost locality on the Amazon from whichit has been reported is the region of Itacoatiara, or about longitude580 30' W., from where I have seen one specimen.The specimens that I have seen from Brazil were all taken along theAmazon and differ from birds taken in French Guiana (the type localityof P. marail P. L. S. Muller, 1776), eastern Surinam, and eastern BritishGuiana by being paler below and by averaging smaller, and thus suggestthat this species varies geographically although hitherto considered to bemonotypic.These birds from Brazil are paler, more grayish brown, less rufescentbrown, on the abdomen, flanks, "thighs," and under tail coverts thanthe specimens from the Guianas. Their dark olive-brown plastron is lessextensive and does not extend so far down on the breast, and the groundcolor of its feathers is somewhat paler, with the result that the whiteedges of the feathers are less conspicuous than those in birds from theGuianas. The latter are not uniform, as three or four, chiefly from Suri-nam, are less dark than others, but, nevertheless, these paler specimensare distinguishable from the birds of Brazil. In well-prepared skins, thedifference in the size of the dark plastron between the specimens fromthe Guianas and those from Brazil is quite clear cut.The material that I have seen is insufficient for the range of the palerform to be outlined, but the range probably consists of northern Brazil,at least along the north bank of the Amazon, and perhaps also of south-eastern Venezuela, because a specimen that I have examined from theupper Rio Caura is similar to the birds of the Amazon; it is the only oneavailable to me from Venezuela. Typical nominate marail may be re-stricted only to the Guianas where, on an annual average, the precipita-tion appears to be considerably greater than on the Amazon and insoutheastern Venezuela. It may, however, range also to neighboringnortheastern Para where no specimens have been reported but wherethe species probably occurs.The name jacupeba Spix (1825, p. 54, pl. 71), type locality, "in sylvisParae," is probably available for the birds of the Amazon, althoughHellmayr (1906, p. 689) may not be correct when he states categoricallythat a specimen in the Munich Museum is the type ofjacupeba. The speci-men discussed by Hellmayr seems to have been collected by Spix andwas catalogued with the birds he brought back from Brazil, but thereis no indication that this specimen, which lacks data of any kind, is thetype or was the only specimen available to Spix. It really cannot agreefully ("vdllig") with the plate of jacupeba, as Hellmayr says, because theplate is very crude.1964 VAURIE: CRACIDAE 7The plate is quite useless for subspecific identification, but, when oneconsiders that two races are probably found in the state of Para, it be-comes desirable to restrict definitely the type locality of jacupeba Spix.I do so here to the region of Obidos where Spix collected in October,1819.The differences in size between nominate marail and jacupeba from theAmazon are best shown by the lengths of the wing and tail. There seemsto be only a very slight difference in the lengths of the bill and crest, andthere is apparently none in the length of the tarsus.MEASUREMENTS: Guianas (nominate marail), 20 males, wing 276-305(288.5), tail 245-285 (262), bill 26-32 (29.4), crest 26-39 (33.4), tarsus48-60 (56.5); 11 females, respectively, 266-290 (275.5), 230-265 (248.5),24-31 (27.9), 27-38 (35), 51-61 (55.5). Brazil on the Amazon (jacupeba),seven males, wing 262-288 (277), tail 235-260 (249), bill 26-31 (28.7),crest 26-33 (30), tarsus 53-62 (57); seven females, 241-280 (269), 235-265(246), 26-28 (25.5), 25-33 (29), 54-58 (56).The material used in this study of Penelope marail consists of 32 speci-mens from the Guianas (seven from French Guiana, six from Surinam,and 19 from British Guiana), of one from Venezuela, and of 16 fromBrazil (one from Cavari Island, one from Rio Counany, seven from theregion of Obidos, six from the region of Faro, and one from Igarap6Arriba near Itacoatiara).LITERATURE CITEDAZARA, FELIX DE1805. Apuntamientos para la historia natural de los paxaros del Paraguay yRio de la Plata. Madrid, Donfa Manuela Ibarra, vol. 3.1904. Geografia fisica y esfer[ic]a de las provincias del Paraguay, y misionesGuaranis, Asunci6n 1790. An. Mus. Nac. Montevideo, sec. hist.-fil.,vol. 1. A reprint of Azara's book dated 1790.CHERRIE, GEORGE K., AND ELSIE M. B. REICHENBERGER1921. Descriptions of proposed new birds from Brazil, Paraguay, and Argen-tina. Amer. Mus. Novitates, no. 27.HELLMAYR, CHARLES1906. Revision der Spix'schen Typen brasilianischer Vogel. Abhandl. K.Bayerischen Akad. Wiss., Math.-Phys. KI., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 563-726.HELLMAYR, CHARLES, AND BOARDMAN CONOVER1942. Catalogue of birds of the Americas, pt. 1, no. 1. Publ. Field Mus.Nat. Hist., zool. ser., vol. 13, pt. 1, no. 1.NAUMBURG, ELSIE M. B.1930. The birds of Matto Grosso, Brazil. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. 60.PETERS, JAMES LEE1934. Check-list of birds of the world. Cambridge, Harvard UniversityPress, vol. 2.8 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 2197Spix, J. B. DE1825. Avium species novae ... itinere per Brasiliam. Munich, Hubschmann,vol. 2.STEINBACHER, JOACHIM1962. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Vogel von Paraguay. Abhandl. Sencken-bergischen Naturf. Gesell., no. 502.WAGLER, I.1830. Revisio generis Penelope. Isis von Oken, vol. 23, cols. 1109-1112.WETMORE, ALEXANDER1926. Observations on the birds of Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, andChile. Bull. U. S. Natl. Mus., no. 133.

Geographical variation of Ortalis canicollis and Penelope marail

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

American Museum of Natural History Scientific Publications