in the bibliography are reciprocally cross 

 referenced. 



Primate genera. A species index was consid- 

 ered carefully but finally abandoned on the 

 grounds of expense as well as serviceability in 

 favor of a codified indication of the genera of 

 primates on which each study is based. The 

 practice followed, we believe, enables the user 

 of the bibliography to determine, by a few min- 

 utes spent in scanning the brackets, all of the 

 papers in which a given genera, family, or 

 larger taxonomic group has been studied with 

 reference to any given topic. A user wishing to 

 isolate all of the items dealing with a given 

 genera for all subjects or for a wide range of 

 subjects will encounter more difficulty, but a 

 certain effort may be expected from one of such 

 catholic interests. The scheme adopted seems 

 to present some real advantages. The animals 

 studied can be learned at the same time the 

 title is read, so that the Hsting of animals further 

 annotates the entry. The needs of the user who 

 wishes to enter the bibliography with a genus, 

 a family, a division or a suborder are equally 

 well served, whereas an index by genera would 

 involve considerable (repetitive) searching to 

 get out the items dealing with groups larger 

 than genera. In a species index the subject head- 

 ings are necessarily coarser than those used in 

 the text unless the equivalent of our table of 

 contents be reprinted for each of the genera. 

 Finally, many indexes ignore the subsidiary 

 topics, owing to the numbers of index entries 

 required. For example, a study of the bones, 

 muscles and nerves of the fore and hind limbs in 

 ten genera of animals would require sixty en- 

 tries in the index. This problem does not arise 

 with our arrangement because the subject cross 

 references lead back to the main entry where 

 the animals studied can be discovered. 



The nomenclature of the primates is notori- 

 ously confusing; the use of names varies con- 

 siderably between countries and in different 

 epochs and the occasional exclusive use of com- 

 mon names is a further problem. The materials 

 studied by anatomists and physiologists have 

 often been incorrectly or loosely diagnosed. 

 We have attempted to translate the names as 

 used into a reasonably modern terminology, but 

 in handling such a vast amount of detail errors 

 of all sorts have certainly been made, and we 

 can only hope that these are not sufficiently 

 grave and frequent to be troublesome. The 

 determination of the correct name apart from 



purely terminological considerations is, we feel, 

 a matter for special research on the part of 

 specialists and not properly a part of such a 

 work as this. 



The abbreviations and contractions of the 

 names of animals are designed to be mnemonic 

 and self-evident to anyone acquainted with the 

 currently favored name of the animal in which 

 he is interested. They are based upon Flower's 

 well considered list, built out from various 

 sources for genera not included in his list. 



It will be noted that the contractions are 

 coined by leaving out vowels and that for short 

 names, especially for the South American mon- 

 keys, an abbreviation is used. To obtain a brief, 

 distinctive contraction of long, compound 

 names, the first part of the name is represented 

 by a single letter or contraction and the second 

 part by a single letter, preceded by a hyphen, 

 "-p" standing always for "-pithecus," "-c" for 

 "-cebus," "-1" for "-lemur," "-m" for "-midas," 

 and "-mc" for "-mico." Contractions for the 

 names of families or suborders have been used 

 in a few instances. 



The contractions are expanded in the follow- 

 ing list, which gives first the name on which the 

 contraction is based and in parentheses Elliot's 

 equivalent where that differs by more than a 

 simple variation in spelling. 



Gr Gorilla 



Pn Pan 



Png Pongo 



Hyl Hylobates 

 Symph Symphalangus 



|xx] 



