ANATID.E— THE SWANS, GEESE, AND DUCKS. 163 



Aythya affinis (Eyt.) 



. LESSER SCAUP DUCK. 



Popular synonyms. Littlo Black-head; Little Blue-bill; River Blue-bill; March Blue- 



bill; Mud Blue-bill; Broad-bill; Creek Broad-bill (Long Island); pato boludode 



cabezacafe (Mexico); River Shuffler. 

 Fuligula marila Aud. Orn. Biog. iii, 1835, 226.; v. 1839, 61 1, pi. 229; Synop. 1839, 286; B. Am. 



vi, 1843. 31G. pi. 397. 

 Fuligula affinis Evton, Ion. Anat. 1838, 157 -Coues, Key, 1872. 280; Check List, 1873, No. 



501; 2d ed. 1882. No. 721; B. N. W. 1874, 573. 

 Fulix affinis Uaird, B. N. Am. 1858, 7'M : Cat. X. Am. B. 1859, No. 589-Ridgw. Orn. 40th 



Par. 1877, 625; Norn. N. Am. B. 1881, No. 615.-B. B. & R. Water B. N. Am. ii, 1884. 22. 

 Aythya affi7iis Stejn. Orn. Expl. Kamtseh. 1885, 161.— A. O. U. Check List. 188C, No. 149- 



Ridgw. Man. N. Am. Jl. 1887, 103. 

 Fuligula minor Bell, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. i, 1842, 141— Gibaub, B. Long, i, 1844. 323. 



Hab. The whole of North America, south to Guatemala and the West Indies; breeds 

 chiefly north of the United States. 



Sp. Chae. Similar to A. marila nearctica, but considerably smaller; adult male with 

 the head less glossy and the gloss usually purplish instead of green; Hanks waved or zig- 

 zagged with blackish. Total length, about 15.0n-17.00 inches: extent, 26.00-27.75; wing. 7.50- 

 8.25 (average 7.81).; culmen, 1.58-1.90 (1.75); greatest width of bill, .80-.95 (.89); least width of 

 bill .tlO-78 (.69); tarsus, 1.15-1.50; middle toe, 2.00-2.25. 



In addition to the characters of coloration mentioned above, 

 the lower part of the neck is usually dull brownish and quite 

 lustreless, in many examples forming as distinct a collar 

 as in some specimens of F. collwris, though the color is never so 

 rufescent as in the latter species. 



The Little Black-head has much the same range and essen- 

 tially the same habits as its larger relative {A. marila nearctica), 

 though, as Dr. Brewer lias truly said, it is extremely difficult, 

 if not at present quite impossible, to state just wherein the two 

 differ in these respects, in consequence of the confusion of their 

 history resulting from the greal similarity of their appearance 

 Dr. Brewer further states th.it so Ear as his own observations 

 go, he is inclined t<> agree with Dr. Uoopei in regarding the 

 |, resent species ns a much more decided frequenter of the land 

 than the other, and adds that "i1 is quite probable thai much 

 that has been written by Audubon and others in regard to the 

 Scaup Duck, ns seen on our rivers and lakes, may have had 

 reference only to this species." "A careful examination," Bays 

 he, "of A-udubon's accounl of the babits of the Scaup Duck 

 dearly indicate, i n nearly all he says of it belongs in reality 

 in this species; auJ this supposition is strengthe 1 bythefacl 



