ANATID.K— THE SWANS, CIEESE, AND DUCK8. 163 



Aythya affinis (Eyt.) 



LESSER SCAUP BUCK. 



Popular synonyms, Littlo Blnck-hoad; Littli^ Blun-bill: Ilivni- Blue-bill: Mnrcli Blue- 

 bill: Muil Blue-bill: Broad-bill; Creek BroailblU (Long Islaud); pato boludo de 

 cabezacafe (Mexico); Uiver Shuffler. 

 /"ufiffu/atnnri/aAUD. Orn. Biog. iii. 183.^).aM; v. 1839. CI4. pi. 229; Synop. 1839,280; B. Am. 



vi, 1843. 31(i, pi. .S97. 

 Fi(«(;«/n«^»usEYTON,Mon.Anat. 1838, 157— CouES, Key. 1S72. 289; Check Li.<it, 1873, No. 

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

 Fulix affinis Baird, B. N. Am. 183S. 791 ; Cat. N. Am. B. 1859, No. 589.— BiDow. Oru. 40th 



Par. 18T7, fi25; Nom. N. Am. B. 1881, No. 015.— B. B. & E. Water B. N. Am. ii, 1884, 22. 



Aythya nXfinis Ste.in. Orn. Expl. Kamtsch. 188.5. 161.— A. O. U. Check List. 188ti, No. 149.— 



KiDOw. Man. N. Am. 11. 1887, 103. 



Fuligida minor Beli,, Proe. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil.a. i, 18t2, 141.— Gibaud. B. Long. i. 1844, 323. 



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



chlelly north of the United States. 



Sp. Char. Similar to A. marila nearcti'cre, but oonsiderablv smaller; adult male with 

 the head less glossy and the gloss usually purplish instead of greon; flanks waved or zig- 

 zagged with bla<jkish. Total length, about 15.00-17.00 inches: extent, 28.00-27.7.5; 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 .tKt-.78 (.09); tarsus, 1.15-1.50; middle toe, 2.00-2.25. 



In addition to tlie characters of color.ation nieiitioiiod al»ovc, 

 the lower part of the neck is usually dull brownish and (]uite 

 lustreless, in many examples forming as distinct a collar 

 as in some specimens of K ro//</r/x, though the color is never «o 

 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. nKirila neorctiiui), 

 though, as Dr. Brewer has 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 tlieir 

 history resulting from the great similarity of their appearance. 

 Dr. Brewer further states that so far as his own ob.ser vat ions 

 go, he is inclined to agree with Dr. Cooper in regarding the 

 jiresent species as a iiuicb more decided fre()ueiiter of the laud 

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

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

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

 reference only t(j this species." "A careful examination," says 

 he, "of Audubon's awount of the habits of the Scaup Duck 

 clearly indicates lii it ni-arly all lie says of it belongs in reality 

 to this species; an 1 this supposition is strengthened by the fact 



