( 456 ) 



to avoid grave mistakes it is necessary that we insert liel'ore the aberrational name 

 some sign to indicate tliat the name is meant for an aberration. For, in species 

 wbicli do not vary according to locality we often have important individual variation, 

 and therefore have to designate individnals with aberrant characters, besides by the 

 generic name, by a specific and an aberrational name only, thus : Papilio gambrisius 

 ab. abbreviatus ; P. gambrisius abb/'cviatiis would have au entirely difl'ercnt and 

 erroneous meaning. The abbreviations employed as a sign may be ab. for the 

 usual individual aberration, ab. loc. for localised individual aberration, i-ab. 

 and 9-a6. for aberrations occurring only in one sex, ?-/. for a constantly 

 appearing form of polymorphic species, ^-/. loc. when the form is localised, 

 gen. vern. and ^en. aest. for seasonal forms. In this way the various kinds of 

 individual variation can be distinguished by the special sign employed, which 

 would not be possible if the aberrational name were simply annexed to the sub- 

 sjjecific or specific name. 



Since the diagnosticist when describing a form very often docs not know 

 whether this form will ultimately turn out to be cospccitic with other forms, or 

 whether it is actually specifically distinct, and as, further, a great many forms have 

 been diagnosticated as species which now are known to be subspecies (and the 

 reverse), the question arises how the above system of nomenclature must be carried 

 out. For the sake of simplicity we shall take into account solely a species with its 

 subspecies ; then we have the following possible cases : — 



1 . The first diagnosis and description are so general that they apply very well 

 to a certain species A, but do not give any character from which we could see which 

 one of the subspecies (i?', B-, B') of ^4 the author has had before him. In this case 

 the name given by the author must be kept for the species A, and each subspecies 

 requires another name. 



2. The first diagnosis and description apply to two or more forms (but not to 

 all) which are now known to be subspecies of a certain sjiecies, and are so general 

 that we do not know whether the author had one or more forms before him. In this 

 case again the first name must be employed for the species, and each subspecies 

 requires another name. 



3. The diagnosis applies not to one entire species A, but to one particular 

 subspecies B^ of A ; the other subspecies B- and B^ of A either were not known to 

 the respective author, or their specific identity with iJ' was not recognised by him. 

 £' may be the first described of the three forms. Which name must be used for the 

 species A ? Illustration : Linni^ described the Amboina form of a beautiful insect 

 under the name of Papilio ■priamus ; we know now that this Amboiua form is a 

 subspecies of a species which ranges over nearly the whole of the Papuan region and 

 has developed into several subspecies. Linux's name of priamus was given, not to 

 the entire species, but to one particular subspecies, and there is not the least doubt 

 that this name must be kept to designate that particular subspecies. Now, how 

 have we to call the entire species ? A short consideration of what a name is meant 

 for and how systematists employ a name will give a satisfactory answer. A 

 diagnosticist describes a species x from a number of individnals ; further researches 

 show that the characters in the original description a])ply only to a certain number 

 of specimens ; aberrant specimens are found, and the result is that the original 

 description of the species has to be largely modified ; but, in sjjite of this, the 

 original name is kept for the species. Illustration : Linnd's description of Papilio 

 poclalirius does not apply to certain aberrations which occasionall}' occur among the 



