402 BULLETIN UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SUEVEY. [Yol.Y. 



72. Mtiaechus crinittjs erytheoceecus (Scl. & Salv.) Coues. — 

 Texas Great-crested Fhjcatelier. 



Most abundant of the genus, and witli the exception possibly of the 

 Swallow-tailed, M. forficatus^ of the wholefamily, Tyramiidw, on the Lower 

 Eio Grande. I have called this the Texas Great-crested Flycatcher, be- 

 cause, thus far, in that State only, within our limits, has it been observed. 

 For full description of this variety, see Bulletin of the Geological and 

 Geographical Survey of the Territories, vol. iv, ISTo. 1, p. 32, where 

 occurs Dr. Coues's identification of the single specimen I obtained at 

 Hidalgo, Texas, May 9, 1877. 



Although found in the chaparral and low, stunted growth of mesquite, 

 yet its home is emphatically in the heavier growths of timber, such as 

 exist above Hidalgo. Its habits are very like those of its near relative, 

 the Great-crested Flycatcher, 31. crinitus. I can only account for my 

 failure to discover more specimens of this bird on my former trip by my 

 ignorance of its hal5its and my attention not being particularly directed 

 to it, as it was on this trip, for it is quite common. 



This bird belongs to a group the individuals of which resemble each 

 other so closely that identification becomes rather i)uzzling, and this 

 special variety has given great trouble both in Europe and America as 

 to its classification. In my notes, as referred to above, Dr. Coues gave 

 such a clear treatise on this species that I suiDposed it would be accepted 

 as final. "When, however. Dr. Merrill's "List of Birds observed in the 

 Vicinity of Fort Brown, Texas,"* appeared, Mr. Eidgway, as editor, went 

 again over the ground, comparing the one or two specimens the doctor 

 secured with the large series of skins in the Smithsonian collection, and 

 dissented from Dr. Coues's opinion, already referred to, classifying this 

 prevailing form on the Lower Eio Graiide as var. cooperi instead of var. 

 erytliroGercus. 



Prior to the recording of my specimen of 1877 this bird had not been 

 known even in Mexico, though it was a well-known form of Central and 

 South America, while var. cooperi was known only in Southern and 

 Western Mexico and the contiguous portions of Central America. It is 

 difficult to believe that the same form would be found in Yucatan and 

 Venezuela, and again in the United States, yet pass entirely over so 

 large an intervening country. 



In giving his reasons for his opinions, Mr. Eidgway concludes as fol- 



* Proceedings of U. S. Nat. Mus. 1878. 



[So far from finding myself obliged to modify in any respect tte remarks I made on 

 this subject in Mr. Sennett's former paper, I am more than ever satisfied of the ten- 

 ability of the position I there took, aud which Mr. Sennett's i^resent observations tend 

 further to strengthen. I beg, nevertheless, that those who may be interested in the 

 Myiarchus enigma will carefully consider Mr. Eidgway's counter-argument before coin- 

 ciding with my view. In no event, however, can Mr. Eidgway's proposed combina- 

 tion of names, ^' ei'ythrocei'cus yav. cooperi," stand; for cooperi was named in 1851 by 

 Kaup, while erythrocercus was not described by Sclatcr and Salvin until 1868. 



— E. C] 



