[Pg ii]

University of Kansas Publications

MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY

VOLUME 3 · 1951

EDITORS

E. Raymond Hall, Chairman
A. Byron Leonard
Edward H. Taylor
Robert W. Wilson

Museum of Natural History
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS
LAWRENCE 1951

[Pg iii]

Museum of Natural History
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS
LAWRENCE

PRINTED BY
FERD VOILAND, JR., STATE PRINTER
TOPEKA, KANSAS
1951

24-1811

[Pg iv]

CONTENTS

[Pg vi]

The Avifauna of Micronesia,
Its Origin, Evolution, and Distribution

BY

ROLLIN H. BAKER

University of Kansas Publications
Museum of Natural History

Volume 3, No. 1, pp. 1-359, 16 figures in text
June 12, 1951

University of Kansas
LAWRENCE
1951

[Pg 1]

The Avifauna of Micronesia,
Its Origin, Evolution, and Distribution

BY

ROLLIN H. BAKER

University of Kansas Publications
Museum of Natural History

Volume 3, No. 1, pp. 1-359, 16 figures in text
June 12, 1951

University of Kansas
LAWRENCE
1951

[Pg 2]

University of Kansas Publications, Museum of Natural History

Editors: E. Raymond Hall, Chairman, A. Byron Leonard,
Edward H. Taylor, Robert W. Wilson

Volume 3, No. 1, pp. 1-359, 16 figures in text
Published June 12, 1951

University of Kansas
Lawrence, Kansas

PRINTED BY
FERD VOILAND, JR., STATE PRINTER
TOPEKA, KANSAS
1951

24-1811

[Pg 3]

The Avifauna of Micronesia,
Its Origin, Evolution, and Distribution

By

ROLLIN H. BAKER

CONTENTS

FIGURES IN TEXT

[Pg 5]

INTRODUCTION

Birds in Micronesia comprise the most outstanding animal life of the islands, as far as vertebrates are concerned. No fewer than 206 kinds, belonging to 37 families and 91 genera have been found there. Although this number upon first consideration may seem large, actually any large land mass in the same latitude has many more kinds of birds than does Micronesia. In this connection it is pertinent to recall that the islands of Micronesia are oceanic and have apparently been formed independently of any continental land mass. Thus, animal life found on these islands has reached them by overseas migration, either by some passive means or by individual effort. Zoogeographers have had some difficulty in explaining the presence of snails and other nonflying animals on isolated oceanic islands. Crampton, in his studies of the land snails of the genus Partula at Guam and Saipan (1925:10), writes, "Despite the geological difficulties, the biological findings strongly support the view that the dominant process in this part of Oceania has been one of subsidence and of insular dissection." Although there exists today some question as to how certain forms of life have reached these remote dots of land, the ornithologist has not been much in doubt as to the actual means of arrival of birds. With the exception of six kinds of birds which are definitely known to have been introduced by man, the birds have apparently reached these islands by flying there from somewhere else. The ornithologist is, therefore, concerned with learning from where, by what route, when, and why the various species of birds came and how they have become established on these islands of Micronesia. These birds exist in small populations; often less than 100 individuals of one kind may be found on a small island. How have such small numbers had the ability to survive and what environmental adaptations have occurred, are two additional questions which confront the student of Micronesian birds.

DESCRIPTION OF MICRONESIA

The vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean is dotted with numerous islands, most of which are concentrated in the central and western part and are known collectively as Oceania. Within Oceania three divisions are popularly recognized: Melanesia, Polynesia, and Micronesia. According to Krieger (1943:6), the Micronesia islands include the Mariana, Palau, Caroline, Marshall, and Gilbert islands; they may take in also the Volcano, Bonin, and Ellice islands (from [Pg 6] the standpoint of anthropology). Zoogeographically, according to Wallace (1876), Micronesia is to be included in the Polynesian Subregion of the Australian Region. Mayr (1941a:193), on the basis of the distribution of birds, ranks Micronesia as one of the four subdivisions of the Polynesian Subregion, and includes within Micronesia the Palau, Caroline, Mariana, Marshall, and Gilbert islands. Except in the discussion of distribution, this report does not treat of the avifauna of the Gilbert Islands, which straddle the equator south of the Marshall Islands. This report is concerned only with the birds in the Mariana, Palau, Caroline, and Marshall islands formerly mandated to Japan, and with the birds of the island of Guam, which is a possession of the United States.

Fig. 1. The Islands of Micronesia.

The word Micronesia is, of course, derived from the Greek words mikros meaning small and nesos meaning island, and, as shown in figure 1 , this term is appropriate, for the islands of this area are small. For the most part they are too small even for inclusion on standard-sized maps of the world. There are thousands of these islands in an area some 2,400 miles long from east to west and some 1,200 miles broad from north to south. All of the islands of Micronesia are oceanic islands; that is to say, they have never been connected to the Asiatic continent or to other land masses by means of land bridges.

Geologists and oceanographers have shown (see descriptions by Hobbs, 1945), that islands of Micronesia are of two general types: arcuate and strewn. The Pacific Ocean is surrounded by rising mountain ranges which are arranged in elongated, near-circular arcs, [Pg 7] which form an extended series of scallops. In the western Pacific these sweeping arcs extend into the ocean, where the mountain ranges project upward from the bottom of the sea with only the crests showing above the waves to point out, in dotted outline, the position of the mountains. The easternmost of these arcs is marked by the islands of the Aleutians, Kuriles, Japan, Izo, Bonins, Volcanoes, Marianas, Yap, Palaus, and others continuing southward into Melanesia. These are characterized by igneous rocks of andesitic nature.

To the eastward of the arcuate islands in Micronesia, are numerous and irregularly distributed islands, making up all of the central and eastern Carolines and the Marshalls, which are known as strewn islands. Strewn islands mark the places of former volcanoes or volcanic peaks. If these volcanic peaks have been completely drowned and are now marked by a series of low islands edged by a protecting reef formed by coral growth enclosing a lagoon and with all exposures consisting of coral rock, the island is known as a coral atoll (example, Ulithi Atoll). Some of the coral exposures lack lagoons; they are known merely as coral islands (example, East Fayu). Some atolls become elevated by geologic activity and the lagoons may dry out or drain. The accumulation of guano of oceanic birds and the residue of fish and other organisms in the area of the lagoon remains as a rich phosphate deposit; these raised atolls have been called phosphate islands (example, Fais). Other strewn islands consist of igneous rocks which are exposed above the surface of the ocean. These are known as "high" or volcanic islands and may occur as a single mountain rising out of the ocean (example, Kusaie), or be partly drowned and surrounded by a coral reef (example, Truk). The igneous rocks found on these strewn islands are basaltic in nature.

The Mariana Islands consist of a chain of volcanic islands approximately 450 miles long. As shown in figure 2, there are 14 single islands and one group of three islands (Maug), from Uracas in the north to Guam in the south. The Palau Islands which are situated in the easternmost part of Micronesia have often been considered from a political standpoint as part of the Caroline Islands. As shown in figure 3, the Palau Islands are a chain of islands approximately 120 miles long from north to south. Sonsorol, Tobi, Merir, Pulo Anna, and Helen Island occur to the southward of the Palaus and may be considered as part of the Carolines or as part of the Palaus. The Palaus together with the Carolines, to the eastward, extend in an east-west direction for approximately 1,700 [Pg 8] miles. The Palaus and Carolines include (as shown in figures 3 and 4) 37 atolls, 34 banks, 11 coral islands without lagoons, 2 uplifted phosphate islands, 4 volcanic islands, and the Palau chain. The Marshall Islands to the extreme eastward extend approximately 700 miles from north to south and, as shown in figure 5, contain 29 atolls and five coral islands without lagoons. No volcanic exposures occur in the Marshall Islands.

There is a total land surface of approximately 846 square miles in the islands of Micronesia. The Palaus and Carolines have 525 square miles, the Marianas 247 square miles, and the Marshalls 74 square miles of land surface. Guam has the largest land surface of any of the islands of Micronesia with 225 square miles, Ponapé has 145 square miles, and Babelthuap has 143 square miles. Asuncion, in the northern Marianas, has the highest elevation, rising as an almost perfect cone to a height of 2,923 feet; Ponapé reaches a height of 2,579 feet above the sea level. The volcanic islands are known as "high" islands, and the coral atolls are known as "low" islands. The coral islands usually rise but a few feet above sea level.

Climate

In Micronesia there are two seasons: a wet summer and a dryer winter. Temperatures rarely go above 90° F. and rarely below 70° F. Rainfall in the Marianas averages approximately 85 inches per year, in the Palaus approximately 150 inches, in the Carolines it ranges from 129 to 185 inches, and in the Marshalls it goes up to 160 inches. The humidity is excessive, the average annual mean of relative humidity for selected islands in Micronesia being between 82 and 86 percent. The relative humidity is lower in the western Carolines and the Palaus, than in other parts of Micronesia.

The Mariana Islands lie between the area of the Asiatic monsoon and the belt of the northeast trade winds. At Saipan from November until March or April, winds usually are easterly or northeasterly and are strong and steady since the northeast trades and the winter monsoon reinforce each other. In April and May the directions of the winds shift toward the southeast, and they become weaker and more variable. In this period there may be some easterly winds in addition to the predominating southeasterly winds. Detailed information is not available on the winds which occur in the Marianas north of Saipan, but at Pagan easterly winds probably prevail from May to July and westerly winds prevail in the remainder of the year. The Carolines lie in the belt of alternating northeast trade winds and southwest monsoons. The northeast trades begin in October [Pg 9] and prevail until May or June. The southwest monsoon occurs from May to October and may be felt as far east as Truk. To the eastward, the winds of the summer are usually light and variable. In the Marshall Islands, the northeast trade winds predominate from about December to April, especially in the northern part of the Marshalls. In summer, winds are variable and weak; periods of calm may occur. Typhoons and squalls occur most frequently in the spring and summer in Micronesia. Some of the severe typhoons are known to engulf entire islands, as did the one at Woleai in 1907.

Soils

The soils of the islands of Micronesia have been derived from volcanic materials or from depositions of coralline limestone. Volcanic soils occur on the "high" islands of Micronesia. In many places, especially on the islands of the northern Marianas there is little soil; there are large areas of bare igneous rock, because the islands are geologically of relatively recent origin and little erosion has occurred. On islands where volcanic rocks have decomposed, the resulting soil may have a top layer of humus. The richest soils of the islands are along drainage areas and in alluvial deposits.

Coralline soils result from the decomposition of limestone, coral fragments, shells, and sand, and are overlain by some humus. Where the layer of humus is deep, the fertility is greatest. Coralline-volcanic soils occur on some "high" islands where coral rock and volcanic rock have become mixed in the decomposition process which forms soil. In parts of the Marianas and elsewhere, unwise practices of burning and overgrazing have allowed extensive erosion to occur, resulting in reduced fertility of the soil. On the island of Yap certain sedimentary rocks are exposed which are thought to have been elevated from the ocean bottom. Soils at Yap which have developed from this rock are considered more fertile than soils of coralline origin, although the fertility there also is dependent on the depth of the layer of humus.

Surface Water

There is little fresh water on the coral atolls, but brackish marshes are present on some islands, and many of these marshes are used for the cultivation of taro by the natives. Some volcanic islands, on the other hand, possess small streams and fresh water lakes, producing suitable habitat for certain rails, gallinules and ducks. On the "low" islands in the Marshalls, natural surface pools are rare.

[Pg 10]

Vegetation

The "high" islands of Micronesia support a heavy cover of vegetation. Typically the lowlands and stream courses are covered with dense jungle vegetation, and the slopes and higher hills are covered with grasses and brush. The vegetation of the "low" coral atolls and islands is, by comparison, much less dense. Many shorelines are covered with scant grasses and shrubs and the interior in many places is dominated by coconut, betel palms, breadfruit, papaya, and pandanus. References to papers dealing with plants in the islands of the Pacific may be obtained in Merrill (1945), who (1945:207) writes, "Botanically, the low islands are very uninteresting and monotonous. The flora of one is usually quite the same as that of another, although these islands and islets may be separated by many hundred and in some cases several thousand miles. The native vegetation may be scanty or reasonably well developed, depending on the size of the island, the quality of its soil, and whether or not it is permanently inhabitated." Of the vegetation on the "high" islands of the Pacific area, Merrill (1945:209) comments that the vegetation "is well developed, particularly within the forested areas, but for these high islands within the Pacific basin as a whole, the number of endemic genera is relatively small and most of them have definite relationships with those of Malaysia." Concerning the "high" islands of Micronesia, Merrill (1945:210) remarks that these islands are smaller and more isolated than some of the others in Oceania and have fewer individual species "as compared with what one finds on islands of a similar size located within limits of the Malay Archipelago. Thus with all of the islands under Japanese mandate, and including a number of high, but at the same time relatively small islands, less than 1,300 different species are known, of which 230 manifestly represent purposely or accidentally introduced ones. This relatively small flora includes representatives of approximately 620 genera in 192 families.... Specific endemism is relatively high, for approximately 460 species are confined to the islands within the area under consideration. The generic endemism is very low; about seven endemic genera only are involved for the whole group." The figures for endemism of plants are comparable to those for birds. Of endemic birds there are 5 genera, 35 species, and 73 subspecies. The total number of species of birds known from Micronesia is only 206 as compared with 1,300 plants. Yamada (1926:966) writes that the number of species of plants that Micronesia has in common with Japan may be due to the influence of the "Japan Stream."

[Pg 11]

Many land birds in Micronesia depend directly on the plant life for food. Possibly the soil (including its mineral content), upon which the plants themselves depend for development of fruits and other edible parts, may offer a limiting factor to the distribution of birds in Micronesia. Possibly the fruits and other edible parts of plants do not provide the necessary amounts of proteins, carbohydrates, minerals, vitamins, and other essential food items for species of plant-eating birds, which have not become established in Micronesia. Possibly some species of plant-eating birds have reached Micronesia but have failed to establish themselves because of some dietary deficiency caused by poverty of the soils on which the plants grow. If a comparison were made of soils and of the food values of fruits of plants in both the islands of Micronesia and similarly sized islands in the Malay region, a difference might be revealed which would partly explain why some plant-eating birds have not become established in Micronesia.

GAZETTEER OF ISLANDS OF MICRONESIA

In the following list the name in current usage for each island or island group in Micronesia is followed by other names which have been used. There is no attempt made to list the names of the small islands of each atoll or those of the myriads of small islets that lie offshore from the larger volcanic islands. Collections have not been made on most of the smaller islands. For the few on which a species has been collected, the islet is adequately described in the account of the particular species concerned. The reader may refer to Brigham (1900) for a listing of the islands of the Pacific Ocean. Most of the islands included in the following list may be located on the map of Micronesia as shown in figures 2, 3, 4, and 5. These listings follow in order of arrangement those in the Civil Affairs Handbooks, published by the United States Navy Department (1943, 1944a, 1944b, and 1944c).

Mariana Islands

The Mariana Islands (also called Ladrone, Marianne, Marian) consist of 14 single islands and one group of three islands. The Marianas are all "high" or volcanic islands. The islands, shown in figure 2, are listed as follows:

Agrihan (also called Agrigan, Arijan, Francisco Xavier, Granger, Gregus, Grigan, San Francisco Javier).

Agiguan (also called Agaigan, Agiigan, Agiguan, Agigwan, Aguigan, Aguijan, Aguyan, Guigan, Saint Ange, Santa Angel).

Alamagan (also called Almagan, Aramagan, Concepcion).

Anatahan (also called Anatagen, Anatajen, Anataxan, San Joaquin).

[Pg 12]

Asuncion (also called Asonson, Assongsong, Assumption).

Guam (also called Guaham, Guahan).

Guguan (also called Guguwan, Guugwan, Piedras, San Felipe, St. Philippe).

Maug (also called Mang, Mangs, Mauga, Monjas, Mougu, Saint Laurent, San Lorenzo, Tunas).

Medinilla (also called Bade, Bird, Farallon de Medinilla, Rocher).

Pagan (also called Pagon, Paygan, St. Ignace, San Ignacio).

Rota (also called Luta, St. Anne, Santa Ana, Sarpan, Satpana, Suta, Zarpane).

Saipan (also called (Saepan, St. Joseph, San José, Saypan, Siepan, Serpan, Seypan).

Sarigan (also called St. Charles, San Carlos, Sariguan, Sarigwan).

Tinian (also called Bona Vista, Buenavista, Temean, Tenian, Tiniamou).

Uracas (also called Guy Rock, Farallon de Pájaros, Pájaros, Urakasu).

Fig. 2. The Mariana Islands.

[Pg 13]

Palau Islands

Fig. 3. The Palau Islands.

The Palau Islands (also called Arrecifos, Palaos, Paleu, Pally, Paloc, Pannog, Parao, Pelew) consist of 8 large islands, 18 smaller islands, and a large number of minute islets, all enclosed in a single reef system. The northern islands (Babelthuap and Koror) are of volcanic origin; the southern islands (Peleliu and others) are of coralline formation. Angaur, to the south of Peleliu, [Pg 14] may be included with the Palau Archipelago. From the standpoint of the avian zoogeography, the coral islands or atolls of Kayangel, Merir, Pulo Anna, Sonsorol, and Tobi are also included. The principal islands, shown in figure 3, are listed below:

Arakabesan (also called Ngarekobasang).

Aurapushekaru (also called Aburashokoru, Auluptagel, Oluksakel, Oropu-shakaru).

Babelthuap (also called Babeldzuap, Babel Taob, Babelthouap, Baberthaob, Baberudaobu, Babldaob).

Eil Malk (also called Amototi, Cogeal, Irakong, Makarakaru).

Garakayo

Koror (also called Coror, Goreor, Kororu).

Malakal (also called Amalakell, Malaccan, Marakaru, Nanalake).

Ngabad

Ngesebus (also called Guadokusu).

Peleliu (also called Pelelew, Periryu, Pililer, Peliliu, Uler).

Urukthapel (also called Cape, Kuapasungasu, Ngurukdapel, Ulugeang, Uruk-taaburu, Uruktapi).

Included with the Palau group because of proximity and relationships of the avifauna are the following:

Angaur (also called Angauru, Angyaur, Ngaur, Ngeour, N'Yaur).

Kayangel (also called Kadjangle, Kajanguru, Kazyanguru, Kianguel, Kreiangel, Moore, Ngajangel, Ngeiangel).

Merir (also called Marir, Meliel, Meriel, Meriru, Pulo Marier, Warren Hastings).

Pulo Anna (also called Anna, Bul, Bur, Current, Paola, Pul, Puru, Wull).

Sonsorol (also called St. Andrew, San Andreas, Sonesor, Songosor, Sonseron, Sonsol, Sonsoru, Tschontil).

Tobi (also called Codopuei, Johnstone, Kadogubi, Lectobis, Lord North, Nevil, Togobei, Tokobei).

Caroline Islands

The Caroline Islands consist of 41 island clusters or isolated islands (exclusive of submerged coral reefs). These are of coral formation. They are atolls or single islands except for Yap, which is of sedimentary rock, and Kusaie, Ponapé, and Truk, which are of volcanic rock. The principal islands are shown in figure 4 and are listed as follows:

East Fayu (also called Fajo, Faliao, Lutké, Rukutee).

Eauripik (also called Aurepik, Eourpyg, Iuripik, Kama, Low, Yorupikku, Yuripik).

Fais (also called Astrolabe, Feis, Feys, Fuhaesu, Huhaesu, Tromelin, Woaje).

Faraulep (also called Faraulip, Faroilap, Fattoilap, Foroilap, Furaarappu, Gardner, Huraarappu).

Ifalik (also called Evalook, Faloc, Furukku, Hurukku, Ifalouk, Ifelug, Two Sisters, Wilson).

Kapingamarangi (also called Bakiramarang, Constantine, Greenwich, Guriinitchi, Kabeneylon, Kapenmailang, Makarama, Pikiram, Tenuv).

Kusaie (also called Arao, Armstrong, Experiment, Hope, Kusai, Kuschai, Kushai, Kuthiu, Oualan, Quollen, Strong, Teyoa, Ualan, Walang).

[Pg 15]

Lamotrek (also called Lamorsu, Lamureck, Lamutrik, Low, Namotik, Namotikku, Manochikku, Namurrek, Swede).

Lukunor (also called Lemarafat, Lougoullos, Lougounor, Luganor, Lugunor, Lugunoz, Mortlock, Namonefeng, Rukunoru, Youngwilliam).

Namonuito (also called Anonyma, Baxos de San Bartolomeo, Bunkey, Las Hermanas, Livingstone, Lost Jardines, Lutké, Namenwita, Olol, Omun, Onon, Ororu, Remp, Ueito, Ulul).

Ngulu (also called Angegul, Anolul, Goulou, Kurru, Lamoliao, Lamoliork, Lamuliur, Lamuniur, Matelotas, Ngilu, Ngoli, Ngolog, Spencer Keys, Ulu).

Nukuoro (also called Dunkin, Matakema, Menteverde, Nugoru, Nukor, Nukuor).

Pikelot (also called Bigali, Biguela, Coquille, Lydia, Pigela, Pigerotto, Pigouelao, Pik, Pyghella).

Pingelap (also called Macaskill, Musgrave, Pelelap, Piigerappu, Punlap, Sailrocks, Tucks Reef).

Ponapé (also called Ascension, Bonabee, Bonybay, Faloupet, Faounoupei, Funopet, Niponpei, Painipete, Ponapi, Piunipet, Puynipet, Quirosa, Seniavin, William IV). Ponapé is the largest island of the Senyavin Islands.

Truk (also called Djuk, Hogoleu, Hogolu, Hoguleu, Lugulus, Ola, Rough, Ruck, Ruk, Torakku, Tuck, Ugulut). The Truk group includes approximately 100 islands.

Ulithi (also called Mackenzie, Mogmog, Mogumogu, Mokomok, Ouluthy, Uluthi, Uluti, Urushi).

West Fayu (also called Faiyao, Fajahu, Faliau, Huiyao, West Faiu).

Woleai (also called Anagai, Mereyon, Oleai, Ouleyai, Thirteen Islands, Uala, Ulea, Uola, Ulie, Wolea).

Yap (also called Eap, Guap, Heap, Jap, Ouap, Uap, Wuap, Yappu).

Fig. 4. The Caroline Islands.

Marshall Islands

The Marshall Islands consist of 29 atolls and 5 coral islands without lagoons arranged in two chains, the Ralik and the Radak chains, which extend in a northwesterly to southeasterly direction. No volcanic rocks are exposed in these islands. The principal islands shown in figure 5 are as follows:

Ailuk (also called Ailu, Fisher, Krusenstern, Tindall, Watts).

[Pg 16]

Arhno (also called Arno, Aruno, Auru).

Bikar

Bikini

Ebon (also called Boston Atoll).

Elmore (also called Ailinglap, Ailinglapalap, Iringlob).

Eniwetok

Jaluit (also called Bonham, Taluit).

Kwajalein

Likieb (also called Likiep).

Majuro (also called Arrowsmith, Mezyuro).

Mejit

Maloelab

Mille (also called Mulgrave).

Namorik

Namu (also called Musquillo, Namo).

Rongelap

Wotje (also called Romanzov, Wotze, Wozzie).

Fig. 5. The Marshall Islands.

ORNITHOLOGICAL EXPLORATION IN MICRONESIA

The Micronesian islands were first explored and colonized by a a people who came from Malaysia. It is thought that these people spread into the Palau, Caroline, Mariana, Marshall, and Gilbert islands as a single wave of migration. Following this occupation, the people apparently underwent a normal process of cultural evolution [Pg 17] and differentiation. Remains of stone walls, dikes, fences, pillars, graves, and other structures which may be found today at various islands in Micronesia were constructed by the ancestors of the islanders of the present day. It is thought by archeologists that the Polynesians moved eastward into the Pacific islands by way of Micronesia. The date of this wave of migration is thought to have been approximately 1200 A. D. What kinds of birds may have been exterminated by this earliest of human colonization cannot be ascertained. Edible species, particularly megapodes, rails, and pigeons, probably were eliminated or reduced in numbers, as is indicated by later discussions.

The first Europeans to visit Micronesia, as far as the present writer can ascertain, left no accounts of the birds significant for the study here reported upon. Magellan, on his trip around the world, was the leader of the first party of Europeans who touched at Guam; this was on March 6, 1521. Rota, Agiguan, Saipan, and Tinian were also discovered by this Portuguese sea captain in the service of the king of Spain. Eltano, one of Magellan's lieutenants, revisited the Pacific and stopped at Rota in 1524. After the voyage of Magellan, other seafarers, mostly in the service of Spain, visited the Micronesian islands. The Caroline Islands were apparently first observed by the Portuguese captain, Diego de Rocha, in 1526. Loyasa and Saavdera, both Spaniards, visited the Marshall Islands in 1526 and 1529, respectively.

One of the first travelers to record observations on the bird life was Henry Wilson. Wilson was captain of the schooner "Antelope" which became grounded on a reef in the Palau Islands in August, 1783. He lived with the islanders while the ship was being repaired and kept a journal of his observations (Wilson, 1788). Wilson also visited several other islands in western Micronesia. Adelbert von Chamisso (1821), as naturalist with the Russian expedition in the ship "Rurick," made observations of the animal life in Micronesia in 1817 and 1818. Under the command of Otto von Kotzebue, this Russian expedition made the first detailed exploration of the Marshall Islands; visits were made also to Guam and Rota and to Yap, Fais, Ulithi, Palau, and other island groups in western Micronesia. Freycinet's famous expedition in the ships "Uranie" and "Physicienne," visited Guam, Rota, and Tinian in 1819. Quoy and Gaimard, the naturalists of the expedition, obtained birds, which were among the first to be described from Micronesia. These two naturalists revisited the Marianas in 1829 on board the ship "Astrolabe." [Pg 18] Scientific results of both of these expeditions (Quoy and Gaimard, 1824-'26 and 1830-'35) include texts and plates dealing with the birds obtained.

The French expedition in the corvette "La Coquille" visited Kusaie in June, 1824. Lesson (1829) wrote the zoology of this trip. Kittlitz (1836) of the expedition which sailed in the corvette "Le Seniavine" commanded by Lutké obtained birds at Kusaie in December and January, 1827-'28, at Guam in March, 1828, and at Lukunor and other islands of the Carolines. At Kusaie, Kittlitz found a rail (Aphanolimnas monasa) and a starling (Aplonis corvinus) which have not been obtained since his time. His specimens were deposited in St. Petersburg. He was one of the most competent of the early naturalists; his writings contain accounts of habits as well as descriptions and are accompanied by colored plates. The expedition which sailed on the "Astrolabe" and the "Zélée" in 1827-'40 under the command of Dumont d'Urville visited the Caroline Islands. The naturalists, Hombron and Jacquinot, obtained birds at Truk, including the interesting flycatcher, Metabolus rugensis, which they described (1841). The "Novara," in the course of its voyage around the world (1857-'59) visited the Caroline Islands in 1858. Birds were recorded from Ponapé, Lukunor and other islands by Pelzeln in his account of the birds of the expedition (1865).

In the years following the middle of the Nineteenth Century, Godeffroy and Sons, of Hamburg, opened branches of its trading firm in Micronesia. Representatives of the company including Heinsohn and Peters, who were ship captains, obtained collections of birds at Palau and Yap. These were deposited in the Godeffroy Museum at Hamburg and reported on by Hartlaub and Finsch (Hartlaub, 1868; Hartlaub and Finsch, 1868a and 1872). Tetens became representative of Godeffroy and Sons at Yap in 1869 and obtained birds. Perhaps the most famous collector in this period was Johann Kubary. He went to Ponapé at the age of nineteen and traveled in Micronesia for many years for Godeffroy and Sons. He obtained birds at many of the islands of the Carolines, spending fourteen months at Truk. In 1873, one of his collections of some 200 birds was lost in a shipwreck. Hartlaub and Finsch, (Hartlaub and Finsch, 1872; Finsch, 1876a) described much of his material; Nehrkorn (1879) reported on nests and eggs which he obtained. Hartlaub and Finsch (1868b) also reported on birds obtained at Palau by Doctor Semper, which were deposited in the museum at Altona. Otto Finsch (1880b, 1880d, 1881b, 1881c) traveled in Micronesia about 1880, observing birds in the eastern Carolines and in the Marshalls.

[Pg 19]

One of the largest collections from Micronesia was made by Alfred Marche in the Marianas. He arrived there on April 22, 1887, and stayed until May, 1889. He obtained approximately 732 specimens of birds, nests, and eggs at Guam, Rota, Tinian, Saipan, Pagan, and Alamagan, which were deposited in the Paris Museum and reported on by Oustalet (1895-'96). Shortly after Marche's visit, Japanese collectors in the hire of Alan Owston, a professional collector of Yokahama, obtained birds in the Marianas and at Truk in the years 1894-'97. These went to the Rothschild collection at Tring and were reported on by Hartert in 1898 and 1900.

At the turn of the Twentieth Century, several ornithologists were visiting Micronesia. Alvin Seale (1901) obtained a collection of birds at Guam in the summer of 1900 which was deposited in the Bernice P. Bishop Museum in Honolulu. The U. S. Fish Commission steamer "Albatross" visited Micronesia from August, 1899, to March, 1900; birds obtained by the expedition were reported on by Townsend and Wetmore (1919). Paul Schnee (1901) spent approximately one year, 1899-1900, at Jaluit in the Marshalls and obtained records of birds. In 1899, Brandeis, on board the German ship "Kaiserland" visited many of the islands in the Marshalls and recorded birds. William Safford (1905) resided at Guam in the early part of this century and reported on the bird life in the course of his studies of the botany and native life. Bartsch (Mearns, 1909) also obtained a small collection of birds at Guam, this is in the United States National Museum.

In the first World War when the Japanese gained a mandated control over the islands of Micronesia, the Japanese ornithologists promptly visited the area, obtained collections, and published works concerning the birds. In 1922, Momiyama and Kuroda prepared a list of the birds of Micronesia. The work was published under the auspices of the Ornithological Society of Japan. Subsequent editions appeared in 1932 and 1942.

The Whitney South Sea Expedition of the American Museum of Natural History visited Micronesia from October, 1930, to December, 1931, with William F. Coultas as collector. Although experiencing some difficulty and being restricted somewhat in his travels by the Japanese officials, he managed to obtain collections at Ponapé (October 26, 1930, to January 1, 1931), Kusaie (January 15 to June 11, 1931), Guam (June 24 to August 30, 1931), Saipan and Tinian (September 1 to 26, 1931), and Palau (October 2 to December, 1931). Many of the species which he obtained are represented by [Pg 20] large series of fine skins. Only part of his collections have been reported on by Mayr and his associates.

Other than the work of Coultas and that of the Japanese, there was little ornithological work done in the period between the two world wars, probably, at least in part, because of the "iron curtain," which Japan had thrown about her mandate. Bryan (1936) did visit Guam in the middle 1930's and published an account of the birds in the newspaper, Guam Recorder.

When the Micronesian islands were taken by the American forces in 1944, personnel attached to various units made observations on the bird life. The first reports, published or unpublished, were from the Marshalls, which were taken at the beginning of the campaign. Gleise, Genelly, Wallace, and others made contributions. In the Marianas considerably more observing and collecting were done by service personnel including Marshall, Stott, Borror, Strophlet, Buss, Watson, Arvey, Downs, and others. Marshall (1949) obtained also a collection of birds in the Palaus in 1945. The Laboratory of Mammalogy, United States Naval Medical Research No. 2, to which I was attached, collected at Guam (January to October, 1945), at Rota (October 17 to November 2, 1945), at Ulithi (August 11 to 23, 1945), at Palau (August 24 to September 24, 1945), and at Truk (November 24 to December 18, 1945). Following the end of the war, Harvey I. Fisher visited Micronesia and obtained a collection of birds at Yap, which is to be reported on in the near future. Larry P. Richards obtained 33 birds at Ponapé and 4 at Truk in the period from August 28, 1947, to February 10, 1948.

Descriptions of birds in Micronesia began with the naming of Halcyon c. cinnamomina in 1821; the most recent description is that of Rhipidura rufifrons mariae in 1946. In all, 131 descriptions have designated type localities in Micronesia. Table 1 lists the dates (on the basis of ten-year intervals) when names of birds (synonyms or otherwise) were proposed. In the period from 1821 to 1860, twenty-five birds were made known to science by the earliest workers, including Kittlitz, Lesson, Bonaparte, and Pelzeln. In the period from 1861 to 1880, thirty-four birds were newly named, mostly by Hartlaub and Finsch, from the collections which the Godeffroy Museum obtained through the efforts of Kubary, Tetens, Peters, and Heinsohn. Nineteen original descriptions were published from 1881 to 1900, principally by Oustalet and Hartert, who studied the material of Marche and Owston, respectively. From 1901 to 1910, only four birds were described, but from 1911 to 1940, forty-seven descriptions were published, mostly by the Japanese following World War I. [Pg 21] From 1931 to 1940, the number of known birds was increased by the efforts of Mayr, who studied the material of the Whitney South Sea Expedition. From 1941 to date only two original descriptions have appeared—only one was postwar. Except for possible undescribed subspecies in the northern Marianas, I think that the heyday of the taxonomist in ornithology in Micronesia is over. The field of avian ecology in Micronesia has barely been scratched.

Table 1. Compilation of the Dates (on the Basis of Ten-year Intervals) When Original Descriptions of Birds of Micronesia Appeared.

CHECK-LIST OF THE BIRDS OF MICRONESIA

The 206 kinds of birds of 150 full species known to occur in Micronesia belong to 91 genera of 37 families of 13 orders. In the following list, nonresident birds are marked with an *; birds introduced by man are marked with a ^[+].

DISCUSSION OF THE BIRDS OF MICRONESIA

Of the 206 kinds of birds found in Micronesia, 30 kinds are classed as sea birds, 29 kinds as migratory shore birds, and 147 kinds are classed as land and fresh-water birds. For purposes of discussion these birds are arranged in these three categories, following the system used by Mayr (1945a).

Oceanic Birds

Oceanic birds found in Micronesia belong to the following families: Diomedeidae, Procellariidae, Phaëthontidae, Pelecanidae, [Pg 29] Fregatidae, and Laridae. Following Wynne-Edwards (1935:240) and Murphy (1936:326), these birds may be grouped as inshore birds (Laridae and others), offshore birds (Pelecanidae, Fregatidae and others), and pelagic birds (Diomedeidae, Procellariidae, Phaëthontidae). As shown in table 2 there are 30 kinds of oceanic birds in Micronesia, 18 kinds that are resident and 12 kinds that are regarded as visitors to the area. Records of nestings are few; field work in the future probably will yield evidence that more kinds of oceanic birds are actually resident in the Micronesian islands.

Table 2. List of Resident and Nonresident Oceanic Birds of Micronesia

Inshore Oceanic Birds

The inshore zone, according to Wynne-Edwards (1935:240), "extends from high-water mark to a maximum of four or five miles out to sea, including islands and reefs within sight of shore." In Micronesia the majority of the Laridae occur in this zone including such residents as Sterna sumatrana, S. anaetheta, Thalasseus bergii, Anoüs stolidus, A. tenuirostris, Gygis alba. These birds, especially S. anaetheta, Thalasseus, and Anoüs, may venture into the offshore zone. Visitors to Micronesia include several terns which probably [Pg 30] normally range in the inshore (as well as in offshore) zones, such as Childonias leucopterus and Sterna hirundo. These birds feed to a considerable extent inside the outer reefs surrounding the lagoons, coming to shore frequently in small or large groups. Gygis alba probably spends considerable time on shore; stomachs examined contained fish, crustaceans and insects, indicating that they obtain some of their food ashore.

Offshore and Pelagic Oceanic Birds

Wynne-Edwards (1935:241) defines the offshore zone as extending to the continental edge; however, in Micronesia where small islands rise abruptly out of the ocean's depths, there is no useful way to separate the offshore zone from the pelagic zone. Since certain species go farther from the land than others, the two zones may be combined as a single zone extending beyond the sight of land. Birds which frequent this area beyond the inshore zone but may not range extensively at sea include Fregata, Sula, Sterna fuscata, S. hirundo, S. anaetheta, and others. The Herring Gull (Larus argentatus), which has been taken in the northern Marianas, may be classed with this group although it probably ranges widely in the open sea. Birds which spend considerable time at sea and may seldom approach land include Diomedea nigripes, the petrels (Puffinus and Pterodroma), and possibly the tropic birds (Phaëthon).

In numbers of individuals the birds inhabiting the inshore zones are relatively more numerous than those preferring the offshore and pelagic zones, although 12 of the 18 resident kinds of oceanic birds apparently prefer the offshore zone, while only 6 kinds appear to be restricted primarily to the inshore areas.

Faunal Components

The oceanic birds were probably among the earliest birds to reach the islands of Micronesia. The presence of phosphate deposits on islands (Fais, Angaur), denoting deposition of guano by oceanic birds (possibly boobies, noddies, sooty terns), indicates long time residence by these birds. A person is prone to think that these deposits must have been made by larger concentrations of oceanic birds than are found in these islands today. Whether there were actually more individuals present during the period of deposition of phosphate in the lagoons of these islands is not known, although the elevation of the lagoons (forming the raised islands of Fais and Angaur) with the resulting freshening of the water probably was a great attraction to oceanic birds, especially to those which prefer to drink fresh water. According to Leonard P. Schultz (in litt.), [Pg 31] the abundance of fish in the areas about these Pacific islands has been approximately the same since Pleistocene times, so that there was apparently no greater concentration of fish near these islands to attract large populations of fish-eating sea birds. Probably the time element is of sufficient magnitude to account for such deposition by birds with a population similar to that found there today.

The oceanic avifauna of Micronesia contains birds which are apparently from ancestral homes in the Palearctic Region, in the North and Central Pacific, in Polynesia, in Melanesia and Malaysia, and from homes the positions of which are uncertain because of the widespread circumtropical occurrence of the birds. There are no sea birds that are endemic in Micronesia.

Oceanic birds whose range is in the Northern Hemisphere (especially Palearctica) reach the northern and western edges of Micronesia as winter visitors. These include Larus argentatus, Chlidonias leucopterus, and Sterna hirundo. Another northern gull, Larus ridibundus, has been reported in the Marianas.

One bird of the North and Northcentral Pacific, Diomedea nigripes, reaches the northern Marianas where it has been taken at Agrihan. It is not unlikely that other birds of the North Pacific reach northern Micronesia as occasional visitors.

Species of oceanic birds which are restricted in their distribution to Polynesia and some adjacent islands and which range to Micronesia, either as visitors or residents, include Puffinus tenuirostris, P. nativitatis, Pterodroma rostrata, P. hypoleuca, Sterna lunata, and Procelsterna cerulea. The islands of the vast Pacific basin offer havens for many kinds of oceanic birds. Apparently there has been considerable speciation among sea birds in Polynesia, especially in its marginal areas. Micronesia has received only a small part of this avifauna.

Two terns, Sterna sumatrana and Thalasseus bergii, have reached Micronesia, either directly or indirectly, each from a dispersion point somewhere in the Melanesian or the Malayan area. These two birds are restricted in their ranges to the western Pacific and the Indian oceans.

Many of the species of oceanic birds found in Micronesia have circumtropical ranges. These include Puffinus pacificus, P. lherminieri, Phaëthon, Sula, Fregata, Sterna anaethetus, S. fuscata, Anoüs stolidus, A. tenuirostris, and Gygis alba. Some of these kinds range along continental shores as well as in island archipelagoes. Others, like Gygis alba, are rarely found along the shores of continents or even at coastal islands.

[Pg 32]

Migratory Shore Birds

Twenty-eight species of shore birds of the families Charadriidae and Scolopacidae have been recorded from Micronesia, and one other of the family Phalaropodidae apparently occurs in the area, making a total of 29 kinds. From the entire Southwest Pacific, Mayr (1945a:28-47) lists 31 species and subspecies of shore birds and mentions six other species which may occur there. Thus, of a possible 37 kinds of shore birds in this large area (which includes Micronesia), 29 are present in the islands of Micronesia. For purposes of discussion, shore birds are here placed in one of two groups: regular visitors or uncommon visitors. A regular visitor is one which has been recorded in the literature or in unpublished field accounts as being frequently observed in Micronesia in periods of migration. An uncommon visitor is one which has been infrequently observed in Micronesia. Of the 28 kinds of shore birds recorded from Micronesia, 17 are classed as regular visitors and 11 are classed as uncommon visitors.

Original Homes of the Shore Birds that Visit Micronesia

Table 3. Breeding and Wintering Grounds of the Species of Migratory Shore Birds in Micronesia

Part A. Location of breeding grounds

Part B. Location of wintering grounds

^[A] Denotes birds which breed on both American and Asiatic sides of the Pacific Ocean.

The shore birds which are known to visit Micronesia breed in the Northern Hemisphere. Table 3 summarizes the data concerning the [Pg 33] breeding and wintering areas of these birds. As shown in part A of table 3, 18 of the 28 species which visit Micronesia come from Asiatic breeding grounds. Seven have circumpolar breeding ranges and three (two are regular visitors) come from American breeding grounds. As shown in part B of table 3, 21 of the 28 waders have their winter ranges on the Asiatic side of the Pacific with eastern extensions to Micronesia and other parts of Oceania. Of the 7 remaining species, the winter ranges of three are circumtropical; the winter range of a fourth is restricted to Oceania; and the winter ranges of the remaining three (two classed as uncommon visitors) are American.

Bryan and Greenway (1944:109-115) record 14 species of shore birds from the Hawaiian Islands. One of these, Himantopus himantopus knudsoni, is a resident, probably of New World origin, according to Mayr (1943:56). The others, listed in table 7, include three species unknown in Micronesia. One of these, Phalaropus fulicarus, apparently winters at sea off the west coast of South America. The other two species (Charadrius vociferus vociferus and Gallinago delicata) are classified by Bryan and Greenway as "accidental" and "occasional" visitors from North America. The ten species common to both the Hawaiian Islands and Micronesia include seven whose breeding grounds are circumpolar, two whose breeding grounds are in Arctic America and one whose breeding ground is in Arctic Asia. The winter ranges of these ten species include four which are circumtropical, three which are Asiatic, one which is restricted to Oceania, and only two which are American.

The ability of the shore birds to migrate almost as well over water as over land may explain their spread into Oceania. The likelihood that shore birds, when migrating may have ventured to Micronesia and Polynesia initially from the Asiatic side of the Pacific is strongly suggested by the data given in the paragraph above. Also, on the Asiatic side of the Pacific there are large numbers of islands, which form several archipelagoes extending from Kamchatka south to Malaysia. Once accustomed to migrating along these chains of islands from the Arctic to Australia, birds would probably have to make only minor adjustments to extend the breadth of their migratory routes eastward into the islands of the Pacific Ocean. In contrast, on the Pacific coast of North America there are few coastal or offshore islands and there is a vast area of open water separating the Hawaiian Islands from the American mainland. Probably the vastness of this area of water offers little stimulus to birds to expand [Pg 34] their migratory ranges westward, and in part accounts for the small North American contingent in the population of shore birds of the Central Pacific. Some North American shore birds do visit the Pacific. The brisk trade winds from the northeast might be an aid to the birds in their flights from Nearctica to Hawaii.

The long flight now made by shore birds going from the Aleutians to the Hawaiian Islands may have commenced as a gradual expansion from the west, or perhaps such a route was initiated by birds flying northward through the Hawaiian Chain to the Arctic in migrating to their breeding grounds, and then later returning via the same route to reach their wintering grounds.

Routes of Migration

Fig. 6. Routes of migration used by shore birds in the Pacific area. From west to east these are: The Asiatic-Palauan Flyway, the Japanese-Marianan Flyway, the Nearctic-Hawaiian Flyway.

The small and isolated islands of Oceania might, upon first inspection, seem to offer but little attraction to shore birds. Hesse, Allee and Schmidt (1937:172, 173) point out that the "open southeastern Pacific" being least supplied with water from land sources, which is an important means of fertility, is known to have one of the poorest faunas found anywhere in the oceans. However, there are extensive tidal flats, especially on the leeward sides of the islands, and these [Pg 35] flats apparently afford extensive feeding grounds for these birds. Also, the absence of competition from resident birds as well as the virtual absence of predatory animals (native man and his domesticated animals excepted) are other factors which may help to make the islands attractive wintering grounds for shore birds.

Only a few birds have been banded in the Pacific, and the knowledge which comes from the recovery of banded birds gives but little aid to the student of movements of birds in the Pacific. The probable flyways for migratory shore birds there have to be deduced from sight records, data from specimens collected, known stations of breeding and wintering (summarized by Peters, 1934:234-293), and from a study of maps of the region. Analysis of information from the above-mentioned sources indicates that there are three routes taken by shore birds which migrate from Micronesia to and from their northern breeding grounds (see figure 6): (1) Asiatic-Palauan Flyway; (2) Japanese-Marianan Flyway; (3) Nearctic-Hawaiian Flyway.

1. Asiatic-Palauan Flyway. For shore birds, there appears to be a migration route extending almost due south from the Riu Kiu and the Japanese islands to the Palau Islands. Some birds may migrate via the Philippines and others may pass to the east of the Philippines. This route is considered to be distinct from that used by birds which follow the Asiatic Coast and coastal islands, because the Palau Islands are situated approximately 600 miles east of the Philippines. Moreover, there are fewer species—only 20 recorded from the Palaus as compared with the number recorded from islands closer to the mainland of Asia. Delacour and Mayr (1946:68-74) list 46 species of shore birds from the Philippines; the Hand-list of Japanese Birds (Hachisuka et al, 1942) lists 34 species from the Riu Kiu Islands.

The information available indicates that migrant shore birds which utilize this flyway move east into the Carolines (examples, Tringa nebularia, Charadrius leschenaultii); however, the recording of 20 species from the Palaus as compared with only 12 species in the western Carolines (table 4) indicates that this spread eastward may not be very pronounced. Migrants in autumn probably move from the Palaus in a southerly direction toward the New Guinea area. Eight species of shore birds which reach the Palaus (and adjacent islands in the western Carolines), are not recorded from other parts of Micronesia. Species which apparently utilize the Asiatic-Palauan Flyway are listed in table 5.

[Pg 36]

2. Japanese-Marianan Flyway. Shore birds from Asiatic, and probably Aleutian and Alaskan, breeding grounds may follow the Asiatic Coast or the adjacent island chains southeast to the Japanese Archipelago. From there some of the birds apparently fly south through the Bonin and Volcano islands to the Marianas, from where they may spread in fanlike fashion to the southeast, south and southwest, even reaching to the Palau Islands (example, Heteroscelus incanus). The number of species of shore birds recorded from the Marianas (see table 4) is greater than that found in the Carolines, but it must be remembered that more intensive investigations have been made by ornithologists in the Marianas, which might account for the recording of more species (especially stragglers, such as Gallinago gallinago). Species which apparently use this flyway are named in table 6.

3. Nearctic-Hawaiian Flyway. Shore birds from breeding grounds in western Canada, Alaska, the Aleutians, the Bering Sea area, and probably northeastern Asia may fly in a southerly direction along a broad front to the Hawaiian Islands. This flyway is probably the one which supplies to central and eastern Oceania the largest wintering populations of shore birds. From the Hawaiian Islands birds may fly directly south through the scattered islands to southern Polynesia, or they may fly in a southwesterly direction and reach the Marshall Islands. The shore birds which visit the Marshall Islands apparently move south through the Gilbert, Ellice and other more southern island groups rather than west into the Carolines as exemplified by the fact that Numenius tahitiensis, a characteristic migrant through the Marshalls from the Hawaiian Islands, is rarely found west of the Marshall Islands in Micronesia. Species which apparently use this flyway are listed in table 7.

Flyways additional to the three suggested above may be utilized by some shore birds on their southward (and northward) migrations. Species reaching Wake and the Marcus Islands may fly directly south from the islands of the North Pacific. Bryan (1903:115, 116) lists four species of shore birds from Marcus (Erolia acuminata, Heteroscelus incanus, Pluvialis dominica, Arenaria interpres).

Table 4. List of Species of Shore Birds Known From Five Geographical Areas of Micronesia

[Pg 37]

Table 5. Shore Birds Which May Use the Asiatic-Palauan Flyway

Table 6. Shore Birds Which May Use the Japanese-Marianan Flyway

Table 7. Shore Birds Which May Use the Nearctic-Hawaiian Flyway

^* Indicates species which are found in Micronesia.

^[+] Indicates species not recorded from the Hawaiian Islands; see Bryan and Greenway (1944:109-115).

Populations of Shore Birds in Micronesia

Although shore birds have been observed in Micronesia on many occasions, actual counts of numbers of individuals of the different birds have rarely been made. Kubary, Finsch, Marche, Seale and other early collectors and observers record some data of this kind [Pg 38] as have the Japanese investigators in later times. William Coultas of the Whitney South Sea Expedition obtained considerable information of this nature at Guam, Saipan, Kusiae, Ponapé, and the Palaus, but it is unpublished. His records were made in fall, winter and spring, when migrants were present in large numbers and these observations offer evidence that many of the migrants are comparatively numerous, especially in the Carolines, throughout the winter months. McElroy's observations made on his trip for NAMRU2 to Truk in December, 1945, offer further evidence of this.

Table 8. Populations of Migratory Shore Birds Seen at Guam in 1945

^*  Observations made on beach at Agfayan Bay area.

x  Observed but numbers not recorded.

^[+]  Figures based on identified skins.

[Pg 39]

None of the above workers, however, obtained very much information on comparative numbers of species.

Tables 8, 9, and 10 present the writer's findings on populations of migratory shore birds in Micronesia in 1945. At Guam, as shown in table 8, the records for March, April and early May are few, owing to a limited amount of field observation. Beginning in late May and until October 24 a greater amount of time was spent in the field and more regular records were obtained. No observations were made by the author at Guam in the period from August 11 to September 25. The dates marked with an asterisk are those on which observations were made on the extensive tidal flats at Agfayan Bay and vicinity. These flats, at low tide, present excellent feeding grounds for waders and in 1945 were undisturbed by parties of service personnel, because the area was "off-limits."

Table 8 shows that Pluvialis dominica, Numenius phaeopus, and Heteroscelus spp. were the shore birds most frequently found at Guam in this period. Pluvialis dominica was the most numerous of the three species. Of Heteroscelus there was approximately equal representation of H. incanus and H. brevipes as indicated by specimens collected. These birds were not identified to species in the field.

Although records were made only infrequently in the spring migration, such information as was obtained indicates that the populations were largest in March and early April. On April 24, Pluvialis dominica was the only bird observed on beaches and in upland openings. On April 26, a single Limosa lapponica was recorded. On May 15, no shore bird was seen on a trip along several beaches. In late May and early June, single individuals of Heteroscelus were found. Of this genus, those collected in May were in nuptial plumage, and those collected in June were in winter plumage and probably should be classed as non-migrants. Numenius phaeopus was occasionally recorded beginning in early June, but waders were totally absent from beaches at Agfayan Bay and vicinity on June 18 and 19. Few shore birds were seen in early August. In late September, birds, especially Pluvialis dominica, Numenius phaeopus, and Heteroscelus spp., were numerous. These species were numerous until October 24, when observations were discontinued.

Of the 17 species of migratory shore birds recorded from the Mariana Islands, eight were identified. Of these eight, three species, Limosa lapponica, Actitis hypoleucos, and Charadrius mongolus, were found on only one occasion. Never more than four species [Pg 40] were identified on a single field trip. These data give an idea of the lack of variety of species that may be observed on Micronesian islands.

Table 9. Populations of Migratory Shore Birds Seen at Ulithi Atoll in 1945

^*  Figures based on identified skins.

x  Observed but numbers not recorded.

Table 9 lists the shore birds seen at Ulithi Atoll, Caroline Islands, on eight field excursions in the period from August 14 to August 22, 1945. Of seven species of shore birds known to visit the atoll, six were taken in this period. As observed at Guam, Pluvialis dominica and Numenius phaeopus were the species most frequently found. Heteroscelus was seen on three occasions; those collected were identified as H. incanus. Most of the shore birds were seen at Pau and Losiep, islands unoccupied by man. Similar tidal flats are present at most of the other small islands in the atoll, but these islands (Asor, Fallalop, Potangeras, Fassarai and Mangejang were visited) were occupied by small detachments of service personnel or by natives, which may have tended to keep many of the shore birds away. At the more populated islands of Asor and Fallalop, no shore birds [Pg 41] were seen. Almost as many species were recorded at Ulithi on the eight field trips as were found by the author at Guam in eight months of observations.

Table 10. Populations of Migratory Shore Birds Seen at the Palau Islands in 194

^*  Observations made on beaches at Akarakoro Point, Peleliu.

x  Observed but numbers not recorded.

^[+]  Observations made at fresh water ponds.

^[++]  Figures based on identified skins.

Table 10 presents field counts at the Palau Islands in the period from August 24 to September 21, 1945. Of 20 species of shore birds known from the Palaus, 17 species were collected or identified on this trip. It was apparent that the fall migration was at its height at this time. Birds were numerous at inland openings and ponds, air field strips, and on the extensive tidal flats at Akarakoro Point. The latter area is between Peleliu and the adjacent island of Ngesebus to the north. Several observations were made at this area (as indicated by the dates marked with asterisks in the table); on September 8, 271+ shore birds were counted; on September 16, [Pg 42] 129+ were counted. Six species were observed to be abundant. The majority of the birds found at these beaches were in small flocks which consisted of several birds of one or more species.

The birds observed at Angaur on September 21 were seen at several fresh and brackish ponds. Four species (Tringa glareola, Erolia acuminata, Limicola falcinellus, Gallinago megala), which were not taken on the tidal flats or elsewhere at Peleliu, were found at these ponds.

The abundance, and more especially the variety, of shore birds at the Palau Islands during this period was in marked contrast to the smaller and less diversified populations of shore birds in rather similar insular environments at Ulithi and Guam. These differences offer support for the supposition that the Asiatic-Palauan Migratory Shore Bird Flyway is distinct from the Japanese-Marianan Migratory Shore Bird Flyway.

Land and Fresh-water Birds

The land and fresh-water avifauna of Micronesia consists of 147 kinds of birds. Of these, 37 kinds are non-residents, 104 kinds are residents, and 6 kinds have been introduced by man. The 104 resident birds include 98 kinds (94 percent) which are found only within the confines of Micronesia. Included in these 98 kinds which are restricted to Micronesia are 5 endemic genera, 31 endemic species and 76 endemic subspecies.

Gulick (1932: 407, 413) stresses that the fauna and flora of the oceanic islands may be "disharmonic" (he uses Easter Island as his example) and says, "It is evident that mature groups of islands will attain an internal harmony, from the standpoint of the systematist. But this harmony, instead of reflecting the pre-existing harmony of some continental source (as in the case of the continental islands or land-bridge remnants) will be recognizably derivable by descent from a quite limited number of original importations, at the start distinctly miscellaneous and 'disharmonic'." Analysis of the land and fresh-water avifauna of Micronesia supports Gulick's view.

Fig. 7. Divisions of the islands of part of the Pacific Basin from the standpoint of the distribution of land birds and fresh-water birds: (1) Micronesia; (2) Hawaii; (3) Central Polynesia; (4) Eastern Polynesia; (5) Southern Melanesia; (6) Melanesia.

As mentioned previously, the islands of Micronesia, from the zoogeographical viewpoint, have been regarded as a part of the Polynesian Subregion of the Australian Region. Mayr (1941a: 192) defines the Polynesian Subregion as comprising "all the tropical and subtropical islands of the Pacific Basin which indicate by their impoverished fauna that they have had no recent continental connection (after early Tertiary) and which derived the major part of [Pg 43] their fauna directly or indirectly from the Papuan Region or jointly from Australia and the Papuan Region." As based on the distribution of the resident avifauna, Mayr (1941a:193) subdivides the Polynesian Subregion into the following districts: Micronesia ("including Palau, the Marianne, Caroline, Marshall, and Gilbert islands"); Central Polynesia ("including Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Phoenix, Ellice, Union islands, and a number of small islands, such as Rotuma, Fotuna, Keppel, Niue, Niouafu, and Uvea"); Eastern Polynesia ("all the islands east of 165° W"); and Southern Melanesia ("including the Santa Cruz group, Banks Islands, New Hebrides, Loyalty Islands, and New Caledonia"). He considers that the Hawaiian Islands, Solomon Islands, and possibly New Caledonia are bordering districts to the Polynesian Subregion. Figure 7 shows the divisions of the islands of the Pacific Basin from the standpoint of the distribution of the land and fresh-water birds. I have placed the Gilbert and Marshall islands in the Central Polynesian rather than in the Micronesian District. For purposes of discussion in this report, however, I am considering the Marshalls to be a part of Micronesia. The birdlife of the Bonin and Volcano islands northward of the Marianas is regarded as having its closest affinities to the Japanese avifauna. The Papuan or Melanesian Subregion of the Australian Region includes the districts of New Guinea and [Pg 44] Northern Melanesia, including the Bismarck Archipelago, the Admiralty Islands, and the Solomon Islands.

The resident land and fresh-water birds of Micronesia have been derived from several sources. Studies of these birds and their closest relatives in adjacent areas indicate that the avifauna has been derived from five different sources: Polynesia, Melanesia, the Moluccas and Celebes, Philippines, and Palearctica.

Polynesian Component

Aphanolimnas monasa (extinct?), Ptilinopus porphyraceus, and Ducula oceanica are the only species of birds which have reached Micronesia directly from Polynesia. There are in Micronesia, as Mayr (1941b: 204) points out, eight species "which are members of typically Polynesian species or genera" and six species which are either Papuan or Polynesian. The relationships between Polynesian and Micronesian birds is evident, but insofar as the pathways of colonization are concerned the majority of these Micronesian species listed by Mayr have come from elsewhere than Polynesia and the birds of these two areas are thought to have arisen from common ancestors. Aphanolimnas, Ptilinopus, and Ducula apparently invaded Micronesia from Central Polynesia via the Marshall Islands through a rather continuous chain of islands and atolls. Aphanolimnas is known only from Kusaie in the extreme eastern part of the Carolines while Ptilinopus and Ducula are known from the Marshalls, Carolines, and Palaus.

Melanesian Component

The Papuan or Melanesian Region (New Guinea, Bismarck Archipelago, Solomon Islands) has supplied to Micronesia its greatest number of endemic land and fresh-water residents. Fifty kinds of birds belonging to the following species reached Micronesia from Melanesia: Nycticorax caledonicus, Megapodius lapérouse, Ptilinopus roseicapillus, Gallicolumba xanthonura, G. canifrons, Caloenas nicobarica, Halcyon cinnamomina, Trichoglossus rubiginosus, Collocalia inquieta, Edolisoma tenuirostre, Rhipidura rufifrons, Metabolus regensis, Monarcha godeffroyi, M. takatsukasae, Colluricincla tenebrosa, Aplonis opacus, A. pelzelni, A. corvinus (extinct?), Cleptornis marchei, Myzomela cardinalis (probably by way of Southern Melanesia), Rukia palauensis, R. oleaginea, R. ruki, R. sanfordi, Erythrura trichroa. The colonization of Micronesia by these species has probably extended over a considerable period of time. Megapodius, Trichoglossus, and Aplonis corvinus may represent older [Pg 45] colonizations which have become well differentiated from the ancestral forms; Nycticorax, Myzomela, and Erythrura may have become established later and have had "less time" to become modified from the ancestral forms. Birds from Melanesia have reached Micronesia probably by direct flight to the Caroline Islands. Aided by favorable winds which blow from the southwest, south and southeast during the period from May to November, birds, particularly the young of the year, might conceivably be blown in the direction of the Carolines, where 57 percent of the birds derived from Melanesia reside. The Palaus are populated with 15 percent, the Marianas with 28 percent, and the Marshalls (lacking "high" islands) with none; these may be secondary colonizations from the Carolinas excepting Ptilinopus, Megapodius, Gallicolumba canifrons, Cleptornis, and Colluricincla. The Marshall Islands have received no avian components from Melanesia. The absence of "high" islands in the Marshalls and the possible inability of birds accustomed to life on the luxuriant islands of Melanesia to become established on relatively barren atolls are logical reasons for this. Instead of New Guinea itself, the outlying islands of Melanesia (Bismarck Archipelago, Solomons, Southern Melanesia) probably have been the principal "taking-off" places for birds invading Micronesia.

Moluccan and Celebesian Components

Birds which reached Micronesia by way of the islands of Celebes and the Moluccas may have been derived originally from Melanesia. The following birds appear to have used this route: Porphyrio porphyrio, probably Halcyon chloris, Rhipidura lepida, Myiagra oceanica, Zosterops conspicillata, and Z. cinerea. These birds apparently became established initially in the Palaus; Porphyrio and Rhipidura lepida have not been recorded elsewhere in Micronesia, but Myiagra and the two species of Zosterops have spread to the Carolines and Marianas, although not into the Marshall Islands. Wind from the southeast in summer and fall has probably been a factor aiding these colonizations. The population of Gallinula chloropus resident at Palau may also have arrived by this route.

Philippine Component

Ten of the kinds of birds of Micronesia have come from or by way of the Philippine area. These are known principally from the Palaus and the Marianas and include: Rallus philippinus, R. owstoni, Poliolimnas cinereus, Caprimulgus indicus, Corvus kubaryi, Psamathia annae, Artamus leucorhynchus, possibly Lonchura nigerrima, and [Pg 46] Collocalia inexpectata. The Philippines may have been the actual point of dispersal of the birds (example, Psamathia), or may have been used as a stepping stone to Micronesia by birds coming from Melanesia (examples, Rallus and Artamus), by birds from Malaysia (example, Collocalia), and by birds from Asia (example, Caprimulgus). Two birds of this component have reached the islands of eastern Micronesia. A subspecies of Lonchura nigerrima is endemic at Ponapé, and a subspecies of Poliolimnas cinereus occurs on several islands in the Carolines and has even been recorded at Bikini in the Marshall Islands. Three species are known only from the Palaus; two are known only from the Marianas.

Palearctic Component

Fig. 8. Faunal areas from which the resident land birds and fresh-water birds of Micronesia have been derived. (1) Palearctica; (2) Philippines; (3) Moluccas and Celebes (Malaysia); (4) Melanesia (New Guinea and northern Melanesia); (5) Polynesia.

Birds of Micronesia which have been derived directly from Palearctica are Gallinula chloropus guami, Otus podarginus, Asio flammeus, Acrocephalus luscinia and Anas oustaleti. Apparently Gallinula, Asio, and Acrocephalus arrived in Micronesia by way of the chain of islands from Japan southward to the Bonins, Volcanoes, and Marianas. Otus reached Palau from Asia, possibly by way of the Philippines. The smallness of the representation of this component may result partly from lesser ability of the northern birds [Pg 47] to adapt themselves to, and to establish themselves on, the semi-tropical and tropical islands of Micronesia as compared with birds from Melanesia where the climate and ecologic conditions resemble more closely those found in Micronesia. Evidence supporting this possibility is the large number of Palearctic residents in the Bonin and Volcano islands as compared with fewer in the Marianas; the Bonins and Volcanoes are less tropical and more temperate in climate.

Table 11 lists the birds concerned, by faunal areas from which the birds have been derived and shows the number of kinds of birds which are present as a result of these colonizations. There is some overlap in the numbers since some endemics may be found in more than one area in Micronesia. Figure 8 shows the faunal areas from which the endemic land and fresh-water birds of Micronesia have been derived. Melanesia (Papua) supplied 52 percent of this population. Birds reaching Micronesia by way of the Moluccas and Celebes include 21 percent of the total population. The Philippines have supplied 10 percent; Polynesia, 9 percent; and Palearctica, 8 percent. This population of endemic land birds and fresh-water birds has seemingly evolved from 46 colonizations, of which 27 have been derived from Melanesia, 6 from the Philippines, 5 from the Moluccan and Celebean areas, 5 from Palearctica, and 3 from Polynesia.

The Palaus have received a large part of their avifauna from the west (Moluccas, Philippines, Palearctica). Their Melanesian component is mostly the result of secondary colonization from the Carolines. The Carolines have received a greater share of their land birds and fresh-water birds from Melanesia and a smaller share from Polynesia. The Marshalls are definitely associated with the Polynesian element. The Marianas exhibit a considerable amount of secondary colonization from other Micronesian islands, as well as some unique components from the Philippines, Melanesia, and Palearctica. Thus, the number of endemics in Micronesia provides little information concerning the actual number of successful colonizations by birds from other areas. Many of the endemics probably have resulted in this way: Individuals of an endemic subspecies flew to another island and there underwent further differentiation, producing another endemic subspecies. Such secondary colonization probably is going on now.

This analysis of the avifauna shows that Micronesia, with the exception of the Marshall Islands (and the Gilbert Islands), has [Pg 48] but little affinity to Polynesia. It has greater affinity, from the zoogeographical standpoint, with the Papuan Region (Melanesia).

Table 11. Avifaunal Components Which Make Up the Endemic Resident Land and Fresh-water Bird Population of Micronesia

Speciation

Of the 104 native fresh-water birds and land birds which are resident in Micronesia, only 7 kinds or 6.5 percent remain undifferentiated from populations elsewhere. These birds are Phalacrocorax melanoleucus, Pandion haliaetus, Demigretta sacra, Ixobrychus sinensis, Anas poecilorhyncha, and possibly Lonchura punctulata (may be an introduction by man). Another bird, Gallinula chloropus, a resident at Palau, may or may not be distinct from the gallinule of Malaysia, G. c. orientalis. Of the 104 resident birds, 97 kinds or 93.5 percent have become differentiated and can be separated taxonomically from populations elsewhere. Of the kinds of birds which are found only in Micronesia, there are 5 endemic genera (16 percent), 31 endemic species (32 percent) and 76 endemic subspecies (75 percent). If we consider the avifauna of Micronesia as a single element, the endemism is high as compared with that on larger and less isolated islands. For example, Mayr (1944a:174) found 137 resident birds on Timor including 22 endemic species (16 percent) and 67 endemic subspecies (47.5 percent). Stresemann (1939b:313) found 220 species including 84 endemic species (38.2 percent) on Celebes. Mayr (1944a:174) also writes that on Java, of 337 breeding species, 16 (4.8 percent) are endemic, and on New Caledonia, of 68 species 19 (27.9 percent) are endemic. Speciation in Micronesia has not progressed much farther than that at New [Pg 49] Caledonia and not so far as at Celebes, but subspeciation has progressed considerably more than at the island of Timor. The avifauna of the Hawaiian Islands, as recorded by Bryan and Greenway (1944), has 73 resident land birds and fresh-water birds, all of which are endemic, including one family, 23 genera and 36 species. The North American night heron, Nycticorax n. hoactli, may be included in this list as the only resident which is undifferentiated. The development of full specific differentiation within the resident avifauna is greater in the more isolated Hawaiian chain where 49 percent of these birds are regarded as endemic species, while in Micronesia, which is less remote from other bodies of land, the specific endemism is only 32 percent.

Table 12. Endemism in Families of Native Land and Fresh-water Birds in Micronesia

^*  Aphanolimonasa is included but may be extinct.

^[+]  Aplonis corvinus is included but may be extinct.

Table 12 lists the families of land birds and fresh-water birds which have resident members as part of the avifauna of Micronesia. It can be observed from the table that only two families are represented by no endemic kinds, several families are represented by one or two endemic kinds, and others are represented by as many as 14 [Pg 50] endemic kinds. Endemism has reached its greatest development in the families Rallidae (6), Columbidae (13), Apodidae (5), Alcedinidae (7), Sylviidae (5), Muscicapidae (14), Sturnidae (9), Meliphagidae (7), and Zosteropidae (14). Generic endemism is greatest in the Sylviidae where one endemic genus occurs among 5 endemic species and subspecies (20 percent), in Rallidae one in 6 (17 percent), in Meliphagidae one in 7 (14 percent). Specific endemism is greatest in Psittacidae and Corvidae where the single representative of each family in Micronesia is considered specifically distinct (100 percent), in Megapodidae and Strigidae one in 2 (50 percent), in Muscicapidae and Zosteropidae 6 in 14 (43 percent) in Sylviidae 2 in 5 (40 percent), in Rallidae 2 in 6 (33 percent), in Sturnidae 3 in 9 (33 percent) in Columbidae 4 in 13 (31 percent). Subspeciation within species which are endemic in Micronesia has occurred in 8 families, occurring within two species in each of the families Columbidae and Zosteropidae and once in each of the families Megapodidae, Apodidae, Alcedinidae, Sylviidae, Muscicapidae, and Sturnidae.

In summary, the families of land and fresh-water birds found in Micronesia which have the greatest number of endemic forms are Muscicapidae (14), Zosteropidae (14), Columbidae (13), and Sturnidae (9). Speciation has occurred in the single representative of the families Psittacidae (Trichoglossus rubiginosus) and Corvidae (Corvus kubaryi). Where family representation is large, speciation has occurred most frequently, as in the Muscicapidae (6 in 14 = 43 percent), in the Zosteropidae (6 in 14 = 43 percent), and in the Columbidae (4 in 13 = 31 percent). Subspeciation has occurred in 8 families, in two species in the Columbidae and Zosteropidae and in one species in each of 6 other families.

Time of Colonization

Previously (and in the accounts of the species to follow), comments are made concerning the subjects of from where and by what route the various kinds of birds have arrived at Micronesia. The problem of when these birds arrived is a difficult and usually unanswerable one. Although geology provides some evidence on the relative age of the islands, and although deposits of bird guano on now elevated coral islands show that oceanic birds have inhabited these islands for a long time, there is no evidence to show the time of the first colonization by land birds. No fossil remains of land birds or fresh-water birds have been found in Micronesia. The relative extent of differentiation in color and structure, which has [Pg 51] taken place between different birds, offers one means for estimating the relative length of residence in the area, provided all other factors are equivalent. Concerning the birds of the Galapagos, Lack (1947:113) writes "That Darwin's finches are so highly differentiated suggests that they colonized the Galapagos considerably ahead of the other land birds." Evidence from this source actually is of little value, because the speed of evolution is unknown and its rate may be different in different species, even though they live under the same circumstances. Dobzhansky (1941) says that evolution is a modification of the genetic equilibrium, which, if true, may not result in similar manifestations in different kinds of birds living under the same conditions of life. Relative antiquity of the birds might be ascertained by measuring their ecologic adaptations. The Guam Rail (Rallus owstoni) and the Micronesian White-browed Rail (Poliolimnas) can be examined in this way. R. owstoni has the ability to live in both brackish and fresh water swamps, as well as in the scrub and grass of the uplands and in the virtually barren, rocky areas in the dense jungles. Poliolimnas, on the other hand, appears to be restricted to swampy areas in Micronesia. If the swampy areas were removed this rail probably would become extinct. R. owstoni appears to have been resident in Micronesia longer than Poliolimnas. However, ability to live in a variety of habitats might be acquired by R. owstoni in a relatively short time.

Another possibility is that the birds, which are less differentiated from their ancestral stocks, may be less differentiated because of suppression of newly evolved characters by dilutions, which result from interbreeding with new birds, which may be arriving at irregular intervals from the ancestral home. Interbreeding of the resident population with newcomers may overshadow any modifications which might have appeared as a result of insular isolation, especially modifications which have little adaptive significance. One would suspect, from their modifications, that Rallus owstoni, Metabolus rugensis, Corvus kubaryi, and other endemic forms have experienced less of this "dilution," than such birds as Rallus philippensis pelewensis, Artamus leucorhynchus pelewensis, Myzomela cardinalis, and others. Murphy (1938) mentions this "dilution" effect in his discussion of "strong" and "weak" subspecies among warblers of the Marquesas. He writes that "strong" subspecies may develop if the birds are present on islands which are upwind from islands containing related subspecies. The wind acts to block interisland migration in these weak-flyers. On the other hand, "weak" subspecies may show the effect of "dilution," being situated on islands [Pg 52] downwind from islands containing related subspecies. The direction of the wind acts to aid the weak flyers to move to the downwind islands and continually "dilute" the resident subspecies. Similar examples can be cited for Micronesian birds. Hesse, Allee, and Schmidt (1937:87) write, "Endemism on islands is most frequent in forms for which the difficulty of reaching the island is most extreme, so that new increments of the parent form are unlikely to follow."

Employing the criteria mentioned above, the birds of Micronesia can be tentatively divided into four groups as regards the relative time when they arrived at the islands:

1. Birds of ancient colonizations which reached certain individual islands, became modified, and dispersed no farther. Examples are Aphanolimnas, Rallus owstoni, Aplonis corvinus, Metabolus rugensis, and Corvus kubaryi.

2. Birds of ancient colonizations which reached or dispersed through a number of islands but are now restricted to relatively few islands. Examples are Ducula oceanica, Ptilinopus porphyraceus, Megapodius lapérouse, Asio flammeus, and Acrocephalus luscinia.

3. Birds of ancient, or possibly more recent, colonizations which initially reached or subsequently dispersed to many of the islands of Micronesia possessing habitat suitable for them. Examples are Myzomela cardinalis, the two species of Halcyon, Aplonis opacus, and Zosterops conspicillata.

4. Birds of rather recent colonizations, which may have reached only a few islands and are relatively unmodified from their parental stocks. Examples are Artamus leucorhynchus, Caprimulgus indicus, Poliolimnas cinereus, and Nycticorax caledonicus.

Factors Causing Dispersal

Darlington (1938:274) in discussing the origin of the fauna of the Greater Antilles uses the term "over-water dispersal" in referring to the spread of terrestrial animals across water. He is against the use of the term "accidental dispersal" since many factors besides accident are involved. He contends, as do others, that certain forms of organisms, owing to their "nature and behavior" cross water barriers more successfully than others. These observations may be applied to the "over-water dispersal" of birdlife to the islands of Micronesia. Certain groups of birds are more evident in Micronesia than others. Certain groups of birds which are found on other islands of the Pacific basin are found in Micronesia only in small [Pg 53] numbers or may not be represented; Mayr (1945a:284) writes, "Remarkable is the almost complete absence of parrots and honey-eaters, the small number of pigeons and the absence of such widespread genera as Lalage, Turdus, and Pachycephala." The absence of some species and the presence of others produces the characteristic insular effect termed "disharmonic" by Gulick (1932:407), as compared with the continental area or island which derived its avifauna by way of a land bridge. One would think from looking at table 12 that members of the families Rallidae, Columbidae, Muscicapidae, Sturnidae, and Zosteropidae were the most successful colonizers in Micronesia on the basis of the number of successful colonizations (not necessarily on the number of endemics developed from a single colonization). Of these families, Sturnidae and Zosteropidae and possibly Columbidae contain species which often move in flocks. Furthermore, these families as well as the Muscicapidae feed on either fruits, seeds, or insects, any one of which is a type of food which might "give out" suddenly, stimulating a migratory behavior within the birds. From a flock embarking seaward in "search" of more food, a part or even all of the birds might survive in a chance flight to an isolated island in Micronesia. If a flock containing both males and females reaches an island, the species has a good chance of becoming established. Evidence that such a rapid colonization by flocks of birds can take place is found in the remarkable colonization of New Zealand by Zosterops lateralis from the Australian area. The bird was first seen as a winter migrant in New Zealand in 1856 and records of nestings were obtained at North Island in 1862, according to Oliver (1930:489). In the case of rails there is no evidence that they move in flocks; however, they are among the most successful colonizers and are on many of the oceanic islands in the tropical and subtropical oceans. Representatives of several species of the family Rallidae have invaded Micronesia and have successfully established 6, or possibly 7, "colonies."

Darlington (1938:274) further writes that "it is no accident that some islands, because of their nature and position, the direction of winds and currents, and the nature of the neighboring land, receive more organisms than other islands do." Semper (1881:294) writes that the distribution of flying creatures "must be in a great degree dependent on the direction and strength of atmospheric currents." These statements are applicable to the history of the avifauna of Micronesia. The Caroline Islands, for example, present a "broad front" for wanderers from the Melanesian islands. As mentioned [Pg 54] previously, the prevailing winds in the late spring, summer, and early fall are from the south, southwest, and southeast and would favor bird flight to the northward towards the Carolines. In addition, the breeding season of many of the birds in Melanesia is from November to February, and in the spring and summer, restless young birds seeking living space might fly seaward and aided by the winds fly northward towards Micronesia. Adults, which may have well-established home territories, may be less likely to attempt such a movement.

One could conclude from the above discussion that the Micronesian islands, especially the Carolines, might be well populated with a large variety of birds from Melanesia, a scant 500 or more miles away. As it turns out, there are only a few islands in this extensive archipelago possessing proper vegetation, fresh water, and other qualities which make them capable of supporting the land and fresh-water birds of Melanesia. The few islands which have these qualities are the so-called "high" islands, including the entire Mariana chain, the Palaus, and four widely separated islands in the Carolines: Yap, Truk, Ponapé, and Kusaie. The other islands of Micronesia are "low" coral islands, which often lack fresh water and have a meager variety of fruits, insects and other foods. Thus, if birds do reach Micronesia but arrive at the atolls instead of the "high" islands, these birds may be doomed. It is noteworthy that the Micronesian islands are small compared with the Solomons, Fijis, and others. The smaller the island, the fewer the number of ecologic niches and the fewer the kinds of birds present.

Mayr (1941b:215) writes that the distance from the nearest land mass and the climatic conditions are important factors controlling dispersal. With regard to the degree of remoteness of the islands, table 13 lists the number of resident land and fresh-water birds present in the Palaus and the "high" islands of the Carolines. Also, the approximate distance from the nearest large land mass and the area in square miles are given. There is some correlation between the distance from the nearest land mass and the number of resident land birds and fresh-water birds. For example, Palau, with 32 resident birds, is only 410 miles from the nearest land mass whereas Kusaie, with only 11 resident birds, is 720 miles from the nearest land mass. The comparative size of the land mass must also be taken into account, as shown by the fact that the large island of Ponapé contains more kinds of birds but is more remote from large land masses than either Yap or Truk.

[Pg 55]

Table 13. Correlation Between Number of Resident Land and Fresh-water Birds and Distance From Large Land Masses of "High" Islands of Micronesia

Climatic factors are important in the dispersal of bird life; Micronesia, where the climate is tropical to subtropical, is better suited for colonization by birds from the tropics (Melanesia) than by birds from the temperate or cold climates (Palearctica). The climatic factor may be one of the principal reasons why birds from Palearctica make up only a small part of the avifauna of Micronesia.

Analysis of Speciation

The process of speciation within insular populations has been discussed by many authors. Hesse, Allee, and Schmidt (1937:517) list the motives for differentiation as, "Special character of insular faunae rests on the conditions common to all islands—isolation, freedom from competition, space restriction, and special insular climates." This combination of characteristics is seldom found elsewhere in nature, and as Murphy (1938:357) points out, an island is the nearest approach to a "man-controlled laboratory." Isolation of small populations is probably the most influential factor in the process of speciation in insular organisms. Lack (1947:134) writes that "in all organisms the isolation of populations is an essential preliminary to the origin of new species." Buxton (1938:265) also stresses this point with regard to the formation of species of insects in Samoa and emphasizes that evolution may occur more quickly in small populations. When mutations appear in such small and isolated populations, they have a greater chance to become fixed than do mutations in less restricted populations in a larger land mass, where such a mutation might be lost by the swamping effects [Pg 56] of outbreedings. In addition, Wright (1931 and elsewhere) suggests the possibility of change by accidental elimination and recombination of hereditary characters in micropopulations. This mechanism could well be a factor in Micronesian bird populations, many of which possess no more than a few hundred individuals. Huxley (1938:256) emphasizes that "accidental" mutations may be perpetuated in small, isolated groups. It might be added that such changes might be either advantageous or disadvantageous to the organism concerned. Huxley (1938:263) states also that geographic isolation may promote nonadaptive differentiation, which may be caused by "colonization by a random sample" or by subsequent "preservation of nonadaptive mutations in numerically small isolated groups." Mayr (1942b:237) cites the importance of the "founder" principal for reduced variability in small populations. He points out that if the "founders" of the population carried with them only "a very small proportion of the variability of the parent population," one would expect to see divergence from the ancestral stock.

Freedom from competition, especially interspecific strife, is an important factor in differentiation; this is especially true in the early period of colonization. Lack (1947:113) points to the absence of food competitors, especially in the initial period of colonization, as an important influence in the evolution of Darwin's finches at the Galapagos Islands. Once a population has become established and "adjusted" to a given environment on a small island, intraspecific competition might bring about adaptative selection. Subsequent colonists might be eliminated by the competition brought about by these previously adapted organisms, especially if both organisms were adapted for life in the same ecologic niche. Space restriction may be important in such Micronesian birds as Rhipidura and Myiagra, which appear to possess recognizable territories. A new colonist entering the territory of one of these birds might be forced out. This competition might not play such an important part among birds, which live in flocks and do not range in closely guarded territories; birds in this group include some pigeons, starlings, and white-eyes.

Freedom from the pressure of predation probably exerts a direct influence on formation of species. Aside from a few migrant hawks and two kinds of resident owls, most of the avifauna feeds on vegetable and invertebrate foods. The large lizard Varanus may be classed as the only native predator on many of the islands. Man has been responsible for the introduction of rats, house cats, and other [Pg 57] mammals, which may be destructive to birds. Thus, before the advent of man the factor of predation may not have been of great consequence. As mentioned previously, nonadaptive modifications may be perpetuated where the "weeding-out" process by predation is not an influence. Flightless rails have apparently developed in the absence of predation.

The absence of the pressure of predation should remove a certain amount of control on the population turn-over. As Hesse, Allee, and Schmidt (1937:521) write, a characteristic of the faunas of oceanic islands is the fact that they are distinguished by the occurrence of "disproportionately developed taxonomic groups in which one or a few basic types have undergone adaptative radiation and come to fill unduly large proportions of the population as compared with conditions that obtain on neighboring continents." Lack (1947:114) writes, "that the absence of predators may well have accelerated the adaptative radiation" in the Galapagos finches. In Micronesia, the starling (Aplonis opacus) dominates much of the available habitat on some of the Caroline atolls, and even on "high" islands, where other land birds are present. There appears to be no tendency towards selective adaptations occurring, or towards ecologic isolation.

Available data indicate that the life spans of individual birds in Micronesia may be short. For example, it was obvious on many of the islands visited by the NAMRU2 party that starlings (Aplonis opacus) in immature plumage outnumbered starlings in adult plumage, although it is possible that immature plumages are retained longer in these island birds than in others. Similar observations were made by Coultas, who noted the ratio of birds in immature plumage to birds in adult plumage at Kusaie to be 5 to 1. If the life span is shorter in these insular forms as compared with that of the ancestral stocks, the higher annual population turn-over would allow for the speed of genetic changes to be accelerated.

The origin of species by hybridization between different kinds of organisms has been a subject of frequent discussion. Lack (1947:100) concludes that it is improbable that hybridization has played an important part in the origin of new kinds of birds. Nevertheless, the absence of sufficient mates in the confines of a small island probably stimulates the crossbreeding between two species of birds. Fertile offspring of such a cross might conceivably account for some of the populations, the origins of which are puzzles to present day taxonomists. Such Micronesian forms as Metabolus and Cleptornis could conceivably have been derived in such a manner. Yamashina (1948) has described the origin of Anas oustaleti as a result of [Pg 58] hybridization between A. platyrhynchos and A. poecilorhyncha. It might be difficult to explain every case of the formation of other insular species on the basis of the effects of isolation and paucity alone. However, Mayr (1942b:236) includes the development of questionable and unusual kinds of insular forms in a general statement: "The potentiality for rapid divergent evolution in small populations explains also why we have on islands so many dwarf or giant races, or races with peculiar color characters (albinism, melanism), or with peculiar structure (long bills in birds), or other peculiar characters (loss of male plumage in birds)."

Nutrition may be also a factor influencing speciation in bird life. The types of food plants (coconut, papaya, breadfruit, pandanus, etc.) might be similar on a Micronesian island and on a continental island in the Philippine region; however, the value of these plants as foods might vary and might reflect differences in mineral content of the soils. For example, if the soils on an island lack, or by leaching out have lost, sufficient amounts of potassium and other elements, plants may store foods, not as proteins, but possibly as carbohydrates, simple sugars, or alkaloids. Whether nutritional influences might have a selective effect on the bird populations, has not been ascertained.

In summary, it may be said that genetic change altering the phenotypic expression of avian characteristics is no more apt to happen in insular populations than in continental populations but genetic change may have a greater chance of being perpetuated in small insular populations where isolation, limited competition, freedom from the selective influences of predation, and other factors exert influences.

CONSERVATION OF THE AVIFAUNA OF MICRONESIA

The islands of Micronesia are small and their occupation by man often produces serious effects on the endemic animal life of the islands. The vulnerability of insular bird populations is well attested by the fact that the majority of birds, which have become extinct in the past two hundred years, have been insular forms. Two birds in Micronesia, the Kusaie Rail (Aphanolimnas) and the Kusaie Mountain Starling (Aplonis corvinus), are known to be either extinct or so rare that they have not been taken since the time of Kittlitz, who visited the island of Kusaie in December, 1827, and January, 1828. Other birds (Anas oustaleti, Caloenas nicobarica, Megapodius l. lapérouse, and Metabolus rugensis) have become reduced in numbers and may be threatened with extermination.

[Pg 59]

Nelson (1921:270-274) has described the following agencies destructive to island life of the Pacific: fire, volcanic eruptions, tidal waves, hurricanes, clearing of the land, introduction of domestic animals and grazing, introduction of wild animals and birds. Mayr (1945c) also presents a discussion of conservation problems in these islands.

Fire is a serious hazard to island life, especially to the land birds. It destroys both food and cover, these two habitat requirements being most essential to the birds. The firing of open lands to improve grazing conditions was a practice which persisted in the Marianas during the time of the Spanish. This practice has declined, but the resultant vegetational changes and erosion have adversely affected the avifauna. Tidal waves and hurricanes (typhoons) are occasionally of such intensity as to flood low coral atolls. Such events are damaging to, or might even exterminate populations of land birds (Aplonis, Acrocephalus and others), and prevent colonizations which might otherwise occur. Clearing of the land for agricultural use probably has affected the avifauna, especially on the island of Tinian where much of the island has been placed in cultivation. The occurrence of domestic stock, especially feral hogs and cats, has affected the birds. Hogs, apparently, have been in the islands for a long time. The English privateer, Lord Anson, visited Tinian in October, 1742, and noted a large number of hogs present at that time. At Guam, in 1945, the NAMRU2 party found both hogs and cats moving freely in all parts of the island. Stomachs of cats examined showed that they had been feeding principally on rodents.

Introduction of wild animals and plants have not been so extensive as in the Hawaiians or other islands. There have been at least five importations of land birds to Micronesia as well as several mammals, other vertebrates and invertebrates. The effect of these established colonies on the native bird life has not been studied.

The late world war has brought changes to the population of bird life in Micronesia. The author (1946b) has elsewhere described some of the effects of the bombing, invasion, and occupation of small islands. Some islands, like Peleliu, suffered severely from bombing and invasion operations. Some islands, especially smaller ones like Kwajalein and Ulithi, were partly or almostly entirely cleared of vegetation by occupation forces. Other effects were caused by "recreational" shooting of birds by garrison forces; introductions of pests in materials unloaded; and pest control by clearing, draining, and spraying with DDT and other insecticides to the detriment of inoffensive species.

[Pg 60]

It is obvious that a well-planned program of conservation should be placed in operation to insure survival of the endemic avifauna of Micronesia.

THE FUTURE OF ORNITHOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN MICRONESIA

Collections of birds have been made at most of the major islands of Micronesia, and it is thought that there are but few if any unnamed birds in the region. The distribution of several species has not been completely investigated, especially those land birds (Ducula, Ptilinopus, and Aplonis) which inhabit coral atolls in the Carolines and Marshalls. The bird life of the northern Marianas is also incompletely known. Continued observations in the Micronesian islands will increase our knowledge of the kinds of migratory shore birds and migratory land birds which reach the island as winter visitors. Further information is needed concerning the breeding activities of sea birds in Micronesia, especially in the Marshalls and Carolines.

The systematic status of most of the birds in Micronesia is already established. It is hoped that the present account advances our knowledge of the methods of colonization. Although these fundamental investigations have been nearly completed in Micronesia the field of avian ecology has been relatively untouched. In the past, expeditions have visited Micronesia with the aim of obtaining within a short time collections of the animal life as large and as representative as possible. Many of the collectors made few or no field notes on the bird life; some, like Finsch, Kubary, Marche, and Coultas, made valuable observations on the habits of the birds. Intensive ecological researches may be accomplished more thoroughly by resident investigators, who can devote full time to such pursuits.

METHODS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My own opportunity to study the bird life of Micronesia came as a member of the scientific staff of the Laboratory of Mammalogy of United States Naval Medical Research Unit No. 2 (NAMRU2) in the late war. The primary duty of this laboratory was to obtain examples of the vertebrate fauna for examination for ectoparasites by the Laboratory of Acarology and to preserve specimens for identification. As a result sizeable collections of mammals, birds, and other vertebrates were obtained. In addition, ecological data were obtained (as time permitted), especially as an aid in studying the distribution of ectoparasites which affected man. In 1945, I spent [Pg 61] eleven months in Micronesia; for most of this time I was stationed at Guam, the headquarters of the Unit, although one month was spent in the Palau Islands, two weeks were spent at Ulithi Atoll, and short stop-overs were made at Eniwetok and Kwajalein atolls. Other members of the laboratory staff visited Rota and Truk islands.

Subsequent to the field studies in the Pacific, I was sent to Washington and spent approximately eight months at the United States National Museum studying the collections of birds and preparing several reports for publication. In this period other material was studied, both in the United States National Museum and at the American Museum of Natural History, New York, and the literature dealing with the birds of Micronesia was explored and a bibliography of Micronesian birds was prepared. At the University of Kansas, I continued the bibliographic work, borrowed and studied some specimens, and completed accounts of the avifauna of Micronesia.

Under the account of each bird, all known references in the literature, which mention the scientific name of the bird and its distribution in Micronesia, are listed. The references are arranged as follows: (1) citation to the original description, and (2) citations to names in literature in the order of their first appearance. When a name is a pure synonym, it may be recognized as such by the fact that the type locality is given immediately following the citation. In compiling these references the writer made use of the invaluable work by Wiglesworth (1891) and of Utinomi's "Bibliographica Micronesia," made available through the translation by Fisher (1947). The arrangement of the families follows that of Peters (1931-1945) and Wetmore (1940).

Specimens examined are designated as to collection in which catalogued by the following abbreviations: USNM, the United States National Museum; AMNH, the American Museum of Natural History; MCZ, the Museum of Comparative Zoölogy; and KMNH, the University of Kansas Museum of Natural History. Average and extreme measurements of specimens are usually listed in tables; unless otherwise indicated, measurements are in millimeters, and are of adult specimens. The wings have been measured by flattening them on a ruler. Weights are in grams. Unless otherwise indicated, descriptions of the birds have been written by the author. Descriptions of shore birds are not given; for these the reader may refer to Mayr (1945a:28-47) where characters useful for identification of the birds in the field also are given. The writer is especially [Pg 62] indebted to Dr. Ernst Mayr for making available the descriptions of Micronesian birds made by Miss Cardine Bogert, especially those dealing with color of the irides, feet, and bill. Color terms in quotation marks refer to those in Ridgway (1912).

In dealing with insular forms the criterion of intergradation as indicative of subspecies cannot be applied as it can in kinds of birds on the mainland which have geographically continuous distributions. Instead, degree of difference in combination with geographic position plus other factors such as degree of variation in the geographic races of the same species or a related species on continental areas are used in deciding whether two closely related kinds are subspecies or full species. Many kinds of birds in the islands are modified but little from island to island (examples, Rhipidura rufifrons, Aplonis opacus, Ducula oceanica, and Myzomela cardinalis), and can be treated as subspecies. Others show much variability from island to island and it is uncertain whether they should be treated as subspecies or as separate species (examples, Myiagra oceanica, Zosterops cinerea, Rukia, and possibly Acrocephalus luscinia). Decisions on generic status are equally difficult to make. In many cases the experience and judgment of the taxonomist may be the only criteria by which he can decide whether a bird is different enough to be considered as a distinct genus. This "human element" has caused some disagreement. Knowing whether the bird is to be considered as a distinct genus or instead merely as a species may not be as important as knowing its correct phylogenetic relationship. The circumstance that variation in these insular birds is in general less predictable than in mainland birds adds, I think, to the pleasure inherent in the classification of the variations.

First, I thank Commodore Thomas N. Rivers (MC) USNR, then commanding officer of NAMRU2, for the opportunity to join the Unit, for his interested cooperation in seeing that the plans for field trips were successful, and for his thoughtfulness in obtaining for me the orders for duty at the United States National Museum subsequent to our field investigations. Greatly appreciated also is the help rendered by my former colleagues of NAMRU2, including Dr. David H. Johnson, Dr. George W. Wharton, Dr. Aaron B. Hardcastle, Mr. Odis A. Muennik, Mr. L. P. McElroy, Mr. Charles O. Davison, Mr. Merle H. Markley, Mr. Walter L. Necker, Dr. Wilbur G. Downs, Dr. Bernard V. Travis, and Mr. E. W. Coleman. Other personnel, then stationed in Micronesia, who contributed data used in this report include: Dr. Joe T. Marshall, Jr., (who generously [Pg 63] loaned some of the specimens taken by him in Micronesia), Dr. C. K. Dorsey, Dr. George Hensel, Mr. Tom Murray, Dr. Irwin O. Buss, Mr. James O. Stevenson, Dr. Wilfred D. Crabb, Mr. Herbert Wallace, and Dr. M. Dale Arvey. Authorities of the United States National Museum provided generously for using the collections there, and I am especially grateful to Dr. Alexander Wetmore, Dr. Herbert Friedman, and Mr. Herbert G. Deignan for their cooperation and assistance. Doctor Wetmore kindly made available many of the birds collected at Bikini during the atomic bomb experiments. Dr. Robert Cushman Murphy, Dr. Ernst Mayr, and Dr. Dean Amadon of the American Museum of Natural History made available the collections in their charge. Doctor Murphy allowed me to examine some of the heretofore unstudied collections of sea birds of the Whitney South Sea Expedition. Doctor Mayr generously helped me with taxonomic and evolutionary problems and made available to me some of his own unpublished taxonomic notes, the unpublished field accounts of Mr. William F. Coultas and a partly completed manuscript on the birds of Micronesia by Miss Cardine Bogert. Mr. James L. Peters generously loaned specimens from the Museum of Comparative Zoölogy. The use of unpublished field notes made by Mr. Larry P. Richards at Ponapé and Truk in 1947 and 1948 is also gratefully acknowledged. I am grateful also to my colleagues at the Museum of Natural History of the University of Kansas and would single out for special mention Dr. E. Raymond Hall who gave critical assistance with the manuscript, Drs. Edward H. Taylor and Herbert B. Hungerford who made helpful suggestions, and Mrs. Virginia Cassell Unruh who drew the distributional maps.

ACCOUNTS OF THE KINDS OF BIRDS OF MICRONESIA

Diomedea nigripes   Audubon

Black-footed Albatross

Geographic range.—North Pacific Ocean. Breeds on islands northwest of Hawaii. In Micronesia: Mariana Islands—Agrigan.

[Pg 64]

Characters.—A large oceanic bird with sooty-brown coloration; darker on nape, wings and tail; lighter on forehead, sides of head, and abdomen; area surrounding bill whitish; tail whitish at base; bill dark reddish-brown; feet black.

Remarks.—This albatross has been recorded from waters near the Mariana Islands. Quoy and Gaimard (1824:145) observed "albatross" between the Mariana and the Hawaiian Islands. The only actual specimens obtained from the islands were reported on by Oustalet (1896:51). These were eight Black-footed Albatrosses which were taken on the coast of Agrigan by Marche in December, 1888, and January, 1889. Oustalet gives the following measurements: total length, 680-785; wing, 485-525; tail, 180-225; tarsus, 80-90; culmen, 108-125. The specimens are apparently in the Paris Museum.

Peters (1931:43) lists the Marshall Islands as part of the range of D. nigripes.

In the period of the late war Gleise (1945:221) observed eight Short-tailed Albatrosses (D. albatrus Pallas) "off Saipan." Specimens of D. albatrus have not been taken in Micronesia. According to Austin (1948b:32) this albatross "is now virtually extinct," and this record may be questioned.

Puffinus pacificus chlororhynchus   Lesson

Wedge-tailed Shearwater

Geographic range.—Breeds at the Seychelles, Australia, Lord Howe, Norfolk, and other islands in the Australian area. Ranges throughout most of the warmer parts of the Indian and Pacific oceans. In Micronesia: Mariana Islands—Guam; Caroline Islands—Lukunor or Truk?, Kusaie.

Characters.—A large shearwater with long wedge-shaped tail; upper parts sooty-brown with crown, neck, and wings darker and forehead paler; under parts paler than upper parts; bill dark; feet flesh-colored.

Remarks.—This shearwater was taken by Kubary either at Lukunor or at Truk in the Caroline Islands. At a later date, apparently between 1922 and 1932, the Japanese recorded the bird at Kusaie. In using this subspecific name, I am following the Hand-list of Japanese Birds (Hachisuka et al., 1932:187).

[Pg 65]

At Guam on August 10, 1931, Coultas obtained a male shearwater, which is tentatively placed in this subspecies. Its measurements are as follows: wing, 290; tail, 128; exposed culmen, 39; tarsus, 47. Coultas (field notes) writes that he was told by natives that petrels nest and roost on the high cliffs behind the city of Agaña on Guam. At sea south of the eastern Caroline islands, Coultas obtained five other birds which appear to be the same as the bird from Guam. All specimens are in the collections of the American Museum of Natural History.

Puffinus pacificus cuneatus   Salvin

Wedge-tailed Shearwater

Geographic range.—Pescadores east to the Hawaiian Islands and south to eastern Micronesia. In Micronesia: Marshall Islands—Ailuk.

Remarks.—Osbert Salvin received two specimens of this shearwater from H. J. Snow, who got them at the Krusenstern Islands in 1883. In describing them, Salvin (1888:353) comments that the locality is seemingly in the Marshall Islands at approximately 10°17´ N. and 190° W. This locality was confusing to Seebohm (1891:191) who thought it was between the Hawaiians and the Marshalls, while Hartert (1926:352) decided it was really Krusenstern Rocks in the Hawaiian Group. To clear the matter up, Fisher (1946:587-588) writes that Salvin was correct and suggests that the name of the island should be the better established one, Ailuk, rather than the little used one, Krusenstern.

P. p. cuneatus resembles P. p. chlororhynchus but is whiter on the underparts, especially the breast. These two subspecies are inseparable according to the twenty-fourth supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds (Auk, vol. 66, 1949:281).

[Pg 66]

Puffinus tenuirostris   (Temminck)

Short-tailed Shearwater

Geographic range.—Breeds in Tasmania, southeastern Australia, islands in Bass Straits, and Bounty Islands. Ranges north to the Bering Sea. In Micronesia: Mariana Islands—Guam?; Marshall Islands—Kinajon.

Character.—A rather large shearwater with short, rounded tail; upper parts sooty brown; underparts paler and more grayish than back; throat may be occasionally whitish; bill lead-gray; feet grayish, browner on outer side.

Remarks.—On migration this shearwater probably reaches most parts of Micronesia. It has been recently recorded by the Japanese at Kinajon in the Marshall Islands. Bryan (1936:15) includes this species as a "chance arrival" in his list of the birds of Guam.

Puffinus nativitatis   Streets

Christmas Shearwater

Geographic range.—Breeds at Wake and Laysan Islands south to Christmas, Phoenix, Marquesas, Tuamotu, and Austral Islands. In Micronesia: Marshall Islands—Ailuk.

Characters.—Upper parts chocolate brown; underparts resemble upper parts but throat may be slightly grayer; bill and feet black. P. nativitatis resembles P. pacificus but is similar with black feet.

Remarks.—The only specimens of this bird known from Micronesia, are those taken in the spring of 1883 by H. J. Snow at Krusenstern (Ailuk) in the Marshall Islands. For two birds from this island in the collections of the British Museum, Godman (1908:154) gives the following measurements: wing, 9.6 and 10.0; tail, 3.35 and 3.4; culmen, 1.15 and 1.2; tarsus, 1.7 and 1.8; middle toe and claw, 2.0 and 2.1.

Puffinus lherminieri dichrous   Finsch and Hartlaub

Dusky Shearwater

[Pg 67]

Geographic range.—Known from Phoenix, Nauru, Micronesia, and south to the Samoan, Society, Tuamotu, and Marquesas islands. In Micronesia: Mariana Islands—Guam, Rota, Saipan; Palau Islands—Babelthuap, Koror, Arakabesan; Caroline Islands—Truk, Ponapé, Kusaie.

Characters.—A small shearwater with upper parts sooty-black; under parts white except for sides of breast grayish and under tail-coverts blackish; bill blackish; feet yellowish, outer toe black.

Measurements.—Measurements of 17 adult birds (9 males, 7 females, 1 unsexed) from Micronesia (Palau, Truk, Ponapé, Kusaie) and 10 adult birds (6 males, 4 females) from the Phoenix Group (Enderbury, Canton) are listed in table 14.

Table 14. Measurements of Puffinus lherminieri dichrous

[Pg 68]

Specimens examined.—Total number, 72 (44 males, 19 females, 9 unsexed), as follows: Palau Islands, AMNH—exact locality not given, 64 (Oct., Nov., Dec.); Caroline Islands, AMNH—Truk, 4 (June 15, 16)—Ponapé, 3 (undated)—Kusaie, 1 (April 25).

Nesting.—The Dusky Shearwater in Micronesia nests in holes on high, and usually isolated, coral cliffs. Owston's collectors, according to Hartert (1900:10), found a nest with one egg at Truk on June 16. The nest was in a hole four feet deep in the side of a cliff. The egg is white and measures 42 × 35. Yamashina (1932a:408) records the taking of one egg at Arakabesan, Palau Islands, on May 26. Coultas (field notes) gives an interesting account of nesting activities of this shearwater at the Palau Islands. He found the bird nesting on small islands of the group from October to December, 1931; however, he states that the natives told him that the bird nests throughout the year. Land crabs and shearwaters were often found together in the same burrow. Apparently the adult birds did not remain in the burrow with the young during the day. At Kusaie, Coultas was told by the natives that the adult birds were caught by tying the mandibles of the young together. When the parent birds approached and hovered over the young birds expecting their mouths to open, the natives had the opportunity to strike them down with clubs. Coultas collected six downy nestlings at Palau in November and December.

Remarks.—The first published account of this shearwater in Micronesia was apparently by Kittlitz (1858, pt. 1:358) when he recorded his "Schwärzlicher Sturmvogel" at Kusaie, according to Wiglesworth (1891a:79). Finsch (1875:44 and 1881b:113, 115) studied specimens taken by Tetens, Heinsohn, and Kubary at the Palau Islands and those taken by Kubary at Ponapé. Earlier, Hartlaub (1868:832) used some of these specimens from the Palau Islands to describe his Puffinus opisthomelas var. minor, which was destined to be placed in synonymy (Murphy, 1927:10). Oustalet (1896:54, 55) recorded specimens taken by Marche at Saipan in May, 1887, and at Rota in July, 1888. Oustalet referred to them as P. obscuras and P. tenebrosus, respectively. T. W. Gulick obtained undated skins at Ponapé. Hartert (1900:10) reported on specimens taken by Owston's collectors at Truk. In 1931, Coultas with the Whitney South Sea Expedition took one shearwater at Kusaie and a series of 64 skins at the Palau Islands. He failed to find birds at Ponapé and wrote that their scarcity there may have been due to persistent hunting of them by the inhabitants of the island. The NAMRU2 party obtained no information concerning the birds at Guam, Rota, or Truk, but at the Palau Islands observed shearwaters at sea approximately 6 miles east of Babelthuap Island on September 2, 1945.

Murphy (1927:6-15) revised the shearwaters of the Puffinus lherminieri group, and recognized several subspecies. P. l. dichrous was assigned a range consisting of Micronesia, the Phoenix Islands, and Nauru Island. The breeding range of P. l. polynesiae was given [Pg 69] as the Samoan, Society, Tuamotu and Marquesas islands. Color differences between the two subspecies are very slight, and he separated them on the basis of the length of the exposed culmen as follows: P. l. dichrous 22.6-27 (26) in P. l. polynesiae 25.5-30 (28.9). In other measurements they closely resembled one another. At the time of his study, Murphy did not have the shearwaters from Micronesia collected by Coultas and actually did not have a large series from these islands. On studying this new material, I find the length of the exposed culmen of 17 adult birds from Micronesia (including 12 from the Palaus) to be 26-30 (27.9). In comparison with Murphy's findings, my measurements of Micronesian birds fall almost midway between the measurements which he recorded as characteristic of P. l. dichrous (from the Phoenix Islands) and P. l. polynesiae. The intermediate position of the measurements of the Micronesian birds, together with the absence of other distinguishing characters, suggests that these shearwaters belong to only one subspecies which consists of a group of isolated and variable populations. Unless the old specific name, obscuras of Gmelin, is revived, the name for the entire group in Micronesia and Polynesia would be P. l. dichrous. I agree with Murphy that the Bonin form, P. l. bannermani, is a well-defined subspecies.

Pterodroma rostrata rostrata   (Peale)

Tahiti Petrel