516 RECORD OF SCIENCE FOR 1886. 



A new check-list of North American birds. — When the "ADierican Or- 

 nithologists' Union" was organized, in September, 1883, a resolution was 

 passed " that the chairman appoint a committee of five, including him- 

 self, to which shall be referred the question of a revision of the classifi- 

 cation and nomenclature of the birds of North America." The gentle- 

 men appointed on this committee were Dr. Elliot Coues, Mr. J. A. Allen, 

 Mr. Robert Eidgway, Mr. William Brewster, and Mr. H. W. Henshaw. 

 These were also materially assisted by Mr. Leonhard Stejneger. Tlie 

 result of the deliberations of the committee was published in 1886 un- 

 der the title of " The Code of Nomenclature and Check-list of North 

 American Birds, adopted by the American Ornithologists' Union." The 

 work thus published differs considerably from its predecessors. The 

 "principles, canons, and recommendations" for nomenclature were con- 

 sidered at length and have been published as a portion of the volume. 

 Those most essential are three. " Canon 13" premises that "zoological 

 nomenclature begins at 1758, the date of the tenth edition of the ' Systema 

 naturfe' of Linnjeus ; " " Canon 42 '^ provides tha t '' the basis of a generic or 

 subgeueric name is either (1) a designated, recognizably described spe- 

 cies, or (2) a designated, recognizable plate or figure, or (3) published di- 

 agnosis;" '• Canon 43 " further proclaims that " the basis of a specific or 

 subspecific name is either (1) an identifiable published description, or 

 (2) a recognizable published figure or plate, or (3) the original type, 

 specimen, or specimens absolutely identified as the type or types of the 

 species or subspecies in question." 



It was likewise provided that a system of trinomial nomenclature 

 should be adopted, where such was required, under the regulation of 

 canon 11. That canon states "Trinomial nomenclature consists in ap- 

 plying to every ijidividual organism, and to the aggregate of such or- 

 ganisms known now to undergrade in physical characteristics, three 

 names, one of which expresses the subspecific distinctness of the organ- 

 isms from all other organisms, and the other two of which express re- 

 spectively its specific indistinctness from or generic identity with certain 

 other organisms; the first of these names being the subspecific, the 

 second the specific, and the third the generic designation ; the three, 

 written consecutively, without the intervention of any other word, term, 

 or sign, constituting the technical name of any subspecifically distinct 

 organism." 



The names adopted in consonance with these several canons are ar- 

 ranged in a different sequence from any previous list, and in fact the 

 lists previou§ly published by the Smithsonian Institution and Dr. Coues 

 are practically inverted, the intention being to commence with the gen- 

 eralized types, and proceed to the more si)ecialized and highly devel- 

 oped ones. It has for this purpose been assumed that the previously 

 recognized relations were ai)i)roximately correct, and that only an in- 

 version was needed to present the system in its new phase. It will 

 probably be found heieafter, however, that the exigencies of classifica- 



