=============+=========+=========+=========+===========+============ | | | | | Weight in LOCALITY | No. | Wing | Tail | Tarsus | grams -------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+------------ Austin, Texas|17-137[1]| 184.3 | 203.8 | 46.38 | 225.6 June | |(173-200)|(178-232)|(41.8-50.0)| (204-253) | | | | | 202.2 July | | | | | (195-207) | | | | | San Patricio | 5 | 185.2 | 204.2 | 46.74 | 237.6 Co., Texas[2]| |(182-188)|(190-219)|(45.1-50.2)| (228-245) | | | | | Barrier Is., | | | | | Tamps. | 1 | 178 | 185 | 47.1 | 209 | | | | | Victoria, | 4 | 192.2 | 224.2 | 47.77 | 254.3 Tamps.[3] | |(186-200)|(215-232)|(46.0-49.1)| (239-276) | | | | | Tampico, | | | | | Tamps.[4] | 1 | 197 | 214 | 48.3 | 260 | | | | | Catemaco, | | | | | Veracruz[5] | 1 | 193 | 216 | 48.2 | 257 -------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+------------ [Footnote 1: Data from Selander (1958: 370, 373). Sample sizes, as follows: wing, 137; tail, 119; bill length, 20 (June and July); tarsus, 133; weight, 17 for June, 3 for July.] [Footnote 2: June 13, 1961; breeding condition.] [Footnote 3: May 6, 1961; breeding condition.] [Footnote 4: May 7, 1961; breeding condition.] [Footnote 5: November 28, 1959.] Specimens from the barrier island are clearly referable to _C. m. prosopidicola_, showing no approach to the larger and, in the female, darker _C. m. mexicanus_ of Veracruz and San Luis Potosí. In Table 4, measurements of the adult male from the barrier island may be compared with those of specimens of _C. m. prosopidicola_ from Texas and a specimen of _C. m. mexicanus_ from Veracruz; it is apparent that our specimen is assignable to the former. Evidence of intergradation between the two subspecies is shown in a series of birds collected near Ciudad Victoria, Tamaulipas, in May, 1961. The females in the series are highly variable in color individually, but are on the average paler than _C. m. mexicanus_ from Veracruz; the males are distinctly larger than _C. m. prosopidicola_ from Texas. At Miramar, near Tampico, Tamaulipas, a decided approach to _C. m. mexicanus_ is also evident in the dark color of females and in the large size of both males (Table 4) and females.