HARDWICKE'S SCIENCE-GOSSIP. 



89 



mound for their nests, to be able the better to watch 

 those who would attack them. Their young were 

 also coloured to resemble the soil, and therefore could 

 not be easily seen by persons standing up. The 

 young, too, seemed to know that their greatest chance 

 of safety was in lying still. The fourth method was j 

 that the parent bird was coloured to simulate the 

 surrounding herbage, and would not move from its j 

 nest very often until forcibly pushed. The second ! 

 great form of protection was by situations in- 

 accessible to animals without wings. Those who 

 could drive off intruders singly built solitary nests, 

 such as the birds of prey, the larger gulls, and 

 swans. Others, such as rooks and herons, live in 

 colonies, and, when attacked, unite to repel the 

 enemy. Among small passerine birds adopting this 

 method were sand-martins, but in tropical countries 

 the smaller class used it more extensively. The most 

 remarkable examples were seen in the weaver-birds. 

 Captain Drayson had given an interesting description 

 of the habits of this class in countries infested by 

 monkeys and snakes, which of course could climb 

 trees. The nests were therefore so constructed that 

 these animals could enter only from below, and only 

 by passing along a branch which their weight would 

 cause to dip in water, making both snake and monkey 

 beat a speedy retreat. Although some had said that 

 there was an architectural principle regulating the 

 construction of birds' nests, and though similarity 

 of structure of different groups was adduced in proof 

 of this, Dr. M'Aldowie ventured to assert that there 

 was no such principle involved. The similarity of 

 structure might be explained by the fact that the 

 habits and surroundings of most birds of the same 

 genus are nearly alike, and their enemies almost 

 identical. But many differed remarkably in their nest 

 formation. The swallow family and the martin built 

 nests of mud and clay, the sand-martin tunnelled in 

 gravelly pits, while the swift deposited her eggs in 

 the hole of some old tower. Here there was no 

 architectural type. Neither would such a theory 

 explain the facts that the wren always built its nest of 

 material precisely the same as that which surrounded 

 it, making it, as it were, a part of the material ; that 

 the sparrow when it built in trees erected a large- 

 domed edifice, and when depositing its eggs in the 

 walls of houses merely lined the bottom of the cavity 

 with straw and feathers ; and that the hawk often 

 laid in the forsaken nests of crows and magpies. 

 Milne-Edwards said "birds' nests which vary with 

 the species are yet, as it were, identical as regards 

 any species, and are uniformly constructed in the way 

 best fitting the young of that species." In the last 

 sentence was the key of the position ; it was a law 

 in ornithology, and demanded much attention at the 

 hands of the naturalist. These were Dr. M'Aldowie's 

 views, and they were the outcome of some years of 

 study of nests and eggs in a northern district where 

 birds of almost every class abounded. No scientific 



authority that he knew of had treated the subject in 

 a systematic manner. That some plan or design 

 regulated the nidification of birds was certain. 



Sir John Lubbock's "Ants." — This indefatigable 

 naturalist has been communicating additional papers 

 on his insect-pets to the Linnean Society. In his 

 two last communications, one of which was devoted 

 to their anatomy, and the other to their habits, he 

 stated that, instead of using water as a means of 

 isolation, fur arranged with the hair points down- 

 wards answered the purpose better. He recommended 

 this plan to people who live in hot countries where 

 ants are troublesome. Sir John finds that, contrary 

 to what has been stated, the workers (besides the 

 queen) occasionally lay eggs, and these always pro- 

 duce males. Ants possess domestic servants ; a 

 curious blind beetle (Claviger) residing in some com- 

 munities, though the ants are not all on a level of^ 

 intelligence sufficient to keep clavigers. Sir John 

 said he had two queens of Formica fusca five years 

 old, and in good health, and also workers of different 

 species, some four years in his possession. Though 

 previously he has shown instances of ants using then- 

 friends badly, yet to their credit it may be said that 

 ants of the same nest never quarrel or are ill-tempered 

 among themselves. An instance was given of an ant 

 without antennae losing her way, and being attacked 

 by an enemy, and afterwards tenderly relieved by a 

 good Samaritan. From the experiments recorded, it 

 would seem that ants recognise fellows of the same 

 nest, but where, as in some cases, there are one 

 hundred thousand individuals, it appears incredible 

 that they should recognise each other at sight ; nor is 

 it likely that peculiarities pertain to those of each nest. 

 Have they signs or pass words ? Sir John Lubbock 

 has endeavoured to throw light on this subject by 

 experimenting on the pupae. Although certain species 

 of ants are deadly enemies, yet their larvae if trans- 

 ferred to one another's nests, will be taken care of as 

 if their own. In ant warfare, sex is no protection ; 

 but the young are spared. Now, if recognition were 

 effected by signal or password, the larvre or pupae 

 would not be intelligent enough to appreciate and 

 remember this, and afterwards in being returned to 

 the former nest, when full grown would carry the 

 signal of the wrong nest to their detriment. The 

 results of several experiments on Formica fusca and 

 Lasius nigcr were, among others, that thirty-two ants 

 transferred from their nests as puppe, and again when 

 older returned to their own nests, were all amiably 

 received, from which Sir John infers that they have 

 no pass words. 



The late Mr. Frederick Smith, F.L.S.— 

 Entomologists throughout the world will hear with 

 regret of the death of this celebrated naturalist. He 

 was one of the assistant-keepers of the zoological 

 department of the British Museum, and our great 

 authority on matters appertaining to the.Hymenoptera. 



