NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 13 



appear to represent the extremes of structure in the family; particularly in 

 regard to the bill, cultriform in one, subulate in the other The two types are 

 by most authors placed at opposite ends of the generic chain, and separated 

 by all the Starikis. Attentive consideration of all the bearings of the case 

 may verj- likely result in the opinion, hold by tlie present v.'riter, that the dif- 

 ference between the views of Prof. Brandt and other writers is rather apparent 

 than real. It should be borne in mind tliat the Alcidie are a family very rigid- 

 ly circumscribed, and one sliowiug no tendency to aberration, or to connect 

 itself intimately with the families standing next to it on either side. Whether as 

 cause or consequence of this, the fact is indisputable, that the genera of Alcidie 

 are not strung along in a chain whose ends seem as it were to be linked with 

 the genera of other families ; they tend, on the contrary, to aggregation in a 

 circle about a common centre. We may take any genus — -it matters not 

 which — we shall find its closest ally to the right and to the left; and the cir- 

 cuit shall be complete when all the genera have been considered. To illustrate 

 this point : Prof Brandt, like all other writers, takes the typical Alc.a as his 

 starting point. With the feathering of the nostrils as a fundamental feature, 

 Uria and its subdivisions must come next, tlien Brach;/rhamphus ; this leading 

 through Mergulis into the true Phaleridines, hy means of Plychoramphiis. Be- 

 ginning with those Phaleridines with the simplest bills, he progresses to those 

 with more complex bills, ending with Ombria^ which last, through Cerorhimt^ 

 conducts to Fraie/-cula, which ends the series. There is nothing strained or 

 forced in this ; the succession of the genera is perfectly natural. But it so 

 happens that Fratercula is as closely, or even more closely, allied to Alca pro- 

 per than Uria is. We cannot disturb in any essential degree the generic series 

 of Prof. Brandt, but we could with entire propriety go directly from Alcn to 

 Fratercula, and thence backwards over the same track, ending with Uria, 

 which would then be at the opposite extreme of the scries. It is asserted, 

 without fear of reasonable contradiction, that to begin anywhere in tiiis natural 

 series of genera and progress through it, is to be brought back to tlic starting 

 point 



It is not, perhaps, possible to divide this generic circle witliout the exercise 

 of some arbitrary jurisdiction. If there be included in it two or more sub- 

 families capable of precise definition, the fact has eluded the writer's research. 

 There are, however, in the series two places where a dividing line may be 

 drawn. Prof Brandt drew but one, relying u])on the single character which he 

 found to apply so well, albeit it may be an arbitrary one. Other writers have 

 made likewise but two subfamilies, difFerently framed however; the Alcinie, in- 

 cluding the true Auks, together with the Phaleridine forms, united because of 

 their short, stout, high bills ; and the Urinx, separated on the ground of their 

 long, slender subulate bills. Others again, particularly Mr. G. R. Gray and 

 Prince Bonaparte, have drawn two lines, recognizing three subfamilies : and 

 this course appears to be the one that holds closest to nature, provided the 

 family be really susceptible of subdivisions higher than generic. By simply 

 reducing Prof Brandt's fundamental character to the level of one drawn from 

 the general structure of the bill, three subfamilies stand forth with tolerable 

 distinctness. The Alcinie have feathered nostrils and cultriform bills ; the 

 Phaleridinee, naked nostrils and cultriform bills; the Urinaa, feathered nostrils 

 and subulate bills. This certainly appears to be a distinction with a difference, 

 and will be so held in the present paper. 



The arrangement of the Alcidos here submitted is a modification of Professor 

 Brandt's, providing for the recognition of three in place of two subfamilies. 

 In this particular it is substantially the same as Mr. Gray's, but the sequence 

 of the genera is entirely different, and is nearly that of the first mentioned 

 author. Beginning with typical Alca it passes to Fratercula, and ends with 

 Lomvia, instead of passing to Lomvia and ending with Fratercula. But in 

 either case the collocation of the genera is essentially the same. It is believed 



1868.] 



