4 MEMOIRS ON THE COLEOPTERA 



it is related varietally; but, on the other hand, we have instead an 

 unnecessary complication of nomenclature. Both of these forms 

 breed true, they never intermingle and they have nothing in common 

 in their color patterns, except a fancied resemblance due to super- 

 ficial comparative study. 



This case of trisignata and subsuturalis is certainly not parallel 

 to that of our dor sails in its maculate and immaculate stages; in 

 the latter species the variations are due plainly to a mere advancing 

 or contraction of the normal markings. I announced obliviosa as a 

 subspecies of latesignata more as a concession to the assumption of 

 early authors, that, because it was found apparently in company 

 with latesignata, it must be a dimorphic form of that species. 

 But there is no direct evidence of this known to me and, if obliviosa 

 cannot be proved to be a dimorphic form of latesignata, it is un- 

 questionably a distinct species. The markings are conspicuously 

 different and are constant in each case. 



One source of confusion is that the word variation is generally 

 misunderstood and the differences due to environment so attributed. 

 These latter divergencies do not by any means indicate variation 

 in the proper meaning of that word, but the beginnings of separate 

 species, at first as slightly different taxonomic forms and finally as 

 true species. Such forms unless very distinct, as in the case of 

 many Omus and Brennus modifications, can be designated as sub- 

 species for convenience, when it is thought advisable to record them 

 by name; it is not necessary to invent lesser categories in the present 

 lack of full knowledge of the subject. The estimation of actual 

 taxonomic weight of these related forms is of course a matter of 

 individual judgment. In some of the cases above mentioned the 

 specific status should be self-evident and other cases may be decided 

 provisionally, with more or less precision, by any one accustomed 

 to view the processes of nature, in any field, with moderate intelli- 

 gence and discrimination. 



Finally, there is a certain school of systematists, especially de- 

 veloped in Germany at present, that seems to have a very peculiar 

 conception of the meaning and scope of the word synonym. If this 

 particular school persists in its singularly erroneous notions 

 concerning the meaning of this word, including as it does 

 geographic modifications, which, as intimated above, are in 



