CORRESPONDENCE. 



THE AUTHORSHIP OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 



The very just note in your December number, pp. 365-367, leads me to ask, 

 Where does the artist come in, supposing he is not the author 1 Walker, years 

 ago, described some Diptera in a more or less unintelligible manner ; but 

 Westwood prepared the illustrations, -which were very excellent, and served for 

 the recognition of the species. Now should these illustrations be credited to 

 Walker? Ashmead, in the Canadian Entomologist, 1898, p. 309, has the 

 following note — " Allomorpha [a genus of saw-flies] may be wrongly placed in 

 my table. Cameron says nothing about the venation of the hind wings. His 

 description reads — 'Alar neuration resembles Strongylogaster {Cingulatus 

 group).' Now, aS'. cingulatus has two discal cells in the hind wings. Kirby, 

 however, who, I believe, examined the type, says — ' Hind wings with one discal 

 cell." The artist, however, employed by Kirby has figured it on Plate X., 

 No. 22, without a cell in the hind wings I In my perplexity I have followed 

 the artist, since I find his figures of saw-flies known to me perfectly accurate." 



Now, if the artist referred to by Ashmead is better authority than Kirby 

 or Cameron, so that when a difficulty arises his figure is assumed to be correct 

 rather than their descriptions, does he not deserve to be quoted as an author 1 

 Of course, the artist does not necessarily possess any technical or critical 

 knowledge of the objects he draws, nor can he be made responsible for the 

 labelling of his figures. At the same time, it is probable that if the scientific 

 artist received more recognition for his work, that work would be better done. 

 I do not think that at present we always treat him fairly. 



T. D. A. COCKERELL. 



Mksilla Park, New Mexico, U.S.A. 



TELEGONY. 



Sir — After a careful study of the facts already ascertained regarding 

 telegony — that peculiar phenomenon of cross-breeding, popularly termed 

 " throw-back " — we see that these can be attributed to reversion with almost as 

 much likelihood as to telegony. Nevertheless, we feel assured that telegonic 

 effects are sometimes shown by the offspring ; and as this question is of the 

 highest importance to any theory of heredity, we seek through your columns 

 to extend our appeal for co-operation in experiment, and suggest the following : — 



A female of a wild species (e.g. the wild rabbit) should first hear young to 

 a male of a domesticated breed of the same species (e.g. the Angora rabbit), and 

 then to a male of her own breed. If, then, the progeny of this union were to 

 show any traces of the first union, they must be due to telegony ; for, of course, 

 no type can revert to one more differentiated than itself. Birds might be 

 experimented on in a similar way, the first crosses being, e.g. — the " barn-door " 

 cock — pheasant hen ; a domesticated drake — wild duck. 



We are ourselves conducting as many experiments as we can, but telegony 

 is without doubt of extreme rarity, and the more trials that are made the 

 greater is the chance of success. Those who will assist are asked if they will 

 kindly send the skins of those parents and young which display telegony : also, 

 in the case of birds, to send an egg out of each batch. — We are, etc., 



Alex. Meek. 



Durham College of Science, Newcastle-on-Tyne. 



G. P. BULMAN. 

 CULL! RCOATS, NORTHUMBERLAND. 



166 



