LESTRIDIN^ JAEGERS. 603 



Suhgcnus BuPHAGUS, {Moeh.) Coues. 



= Buphagiis* Moeh., Gen. Av. 1752, No. 71 ; typus Larus catarractes, Linn. — Coues, Rev. 



Lestridiim, in Pr. A. N. S. Phila. May 1863, p. 120. 

 <; Stercorarius, " Briss. ; " ViEiix., Nouv. Diet. d'Hist. Nat. 1817, 153 ; typus idem, (Sed 



nou verus Stercorarius, Briss. ; cnjns typus Larus jnirasiticus, Liuu.). — Gkay, 



Gen. of B. iii, 1849, 6r>l.— Degl., Oru. Eur. 1849, ii, 287.— Bp., Cousp. Av. 1850, 



206.— Laavr., Baird's Birds N. A. 1858, 838. 

 •< Catharacta, Brunx., Orn. Bor. 1764, 32 ; typus Catharacta skua, Brtinu. 

 < Cataracta, Br., Comp. List, 1838, 63. 

 <^Larus (partira), Linn., Syst. Nat. i, 1766. — Gmel., Syst. Nat. 1788. — Lath., lud. Orn. 



1790 — Mey. & Wolf, Tascb. 1810. 

 <] Catarractes, Palt„, Zooo-. Rosso-As. ii, 1811, 308 ; typus C. skua. — Steph., Sbaw's Gen. 



Zool. xiii, 1825, 214. 

 K^Lestris, "III.;" Temm, Man. Orn. 1820-'40 ; typus L. caiarracics (Sed uon verus 



Lestrls, 111. ; cujus tvpus L. parasitica, Liun.). — Faber, Pr. Isl. Orn. 1822. — 



Less., Trait6 d'Ornith. 1831.— Keys. & Blas., Wirb. Eur. i, 1840, 239 ; et auct. al. 

 :^ Megalesiris, Bp., Cousp. Av. ii, 1856, p. 206 ; typus Larus catarractes, Linu. 



Gen, char. Bill sborter tbau tbe middle toe witbout tbe claw ; exceedingly robust; 

 width at base about equal to tbe beigbt, wblcb is a tbird of tbe leugtb of culmen. 

 Striai and sulci numerous and well marked, Encroacbmeut of featbers ou bill moder- 

 ate, and nearly tbe same on botb mandibles. Occiput scarcely crested. Wings only 

 moderately long for tbis subfamily ; tbe primaries very broad, and rounded at tbeir 

 tips. Tail very sbort, broad, nearly even, tbe featbers truncated ; central pair project- 

 ing but little, and broad to tbeir very tips, wbicb are also truncated. Feet large 

 aud stout ; tarsi sborter tbau tbe middle toe and claw. Size large ; form robust and 

 heavy; general organization very powerful. Colors mucb tbe same over tbe whole 

 body ; not subject to any very remarkable changes with age, sex, or season. 



The essential characters lie iu the large size and strong form, exceedingly robust 

 bill and feet, tbe middle toe of which latter is longer than the tarsus ; and in the very 

 short truncated tail, the broad central rectrices of which project but slightly beyond 

 tbe tips of tbe others, A discrepancy between it and Stercorarius is found in the changes 

 of plumage to which it is subject. These are slight, being chiefly of intensity, and have 

 little in common with the widely varying stages for wbicb the species of Stercorarius 

 are noted. Its species when adult are of nearly uuiform colors, presenting no indica- 

 tions of the trenchant lines of division of light and dark areas which are found in 

 Stercorarius. North America contains a single representative of the genus, B. skua, 

 referred by most authors to Stercorarius. 



Tbe synonyms of this subgenus require to be considered at length and with care, to 

 avoid confounding them with those of the succeeding, with which they always have beeu 

 to a greater or less degree mingled. The lirst distinctive appellation of tbe genus iu ques- 

 tion appears to be Buphaejus, Moeh, 1752. This is unquestionably based upon tbe Larus 

 catarractes of Linnaeus, aud the diagnosis of the genus (vide infra t) is as delinite and 

 pertinent as jjcrbaps any one throughout Moehring's work. This being th-e case, it is 

 a little slugnlar that the name has not conui into general employ, along with such gen- 

 era as I'hilomachus, CoUyrio, Tro<ion, &c., which have, by Gray, Baird, Cassin, Bryant, 

 aud other authors, been accorde<l that precedence to which their early date entitles 

 them. The rule generally acknowledged by authors, which would cause tbe adoption 

 of tbe genera of Moehring and other pre-Linn;ean writers, jirovided they art; ideutiiieil 

 and do not conflict with Linna'us' titles, does not appear to have been adhered to iu 

 this instance. But if we are to be guided by the law of 2)rioriti/, and are to accord jus- 

 tice to a i>re-Linna'an writer, we cannot avoid the adoption of Moehring's name ; since 

 there is no Linna-an appellation with which it conflicts, as the latter author ranged all 

 the Jaegers known to liim un<ler Larus. Moehring's not being a binomalist, or rather 

 his not dealing at all with species, can have no weiglit in the question of the adoption 



* In the synonymy of this article I use tbe convenient signs introduced by Strick- 

 land to indicate tbe relative value of the various geueiic names (luoted. Being not iu 

 general use, they will re(|uire expl.ination. 'J'he sign of eiiuaiity signifies that tbo 

 Avord before which it stands was originally employed in the same sense as here meant; 

 thus, liupliiKjus and Megalcstris are based upon the sanu* ^'P^ sis Buphagus of the pres- 

 ent jiajxr, an<l are therefore eoe(Huil with it. The sign <^ indicates that tht» name be- 

 fore which it staiuls was origiiiHlly used in a more extended sense than is here meant, 

 and wuist conscfiucntly be restricted to l)ecoiue comi)letely synonymous 'I'bus, <\jth- 

 aracld of Biuunieh, iiieliided, Ijcsides ('. skua, ponuirinus aud parasiticus. The >iign ]> 

 is tile converse of the last. 



t Moeliriiiii, driKra arium, r/.52, page 66, No. 71. " liostrum postice rectum, nienibrana 

 callo.sa a«l nares usipie tiictum, versus apicein inciirvuui, lateribus compressis. Femora 

 extra abdouieu, Digiti autici tresmembrana intermedia toti coba-routes, posticus liber," 



