April 1895.] 



PSYCHE. 



225 



as those first under view, — au assump- 

 tion contrar\' to analogy ; second, as 

 involving tlie assumption that a degree 

 of redness is a definitive eliaracter. 

 Color ditierence, particularly a mere 

 difierence in degree of the same color, 

 though a valuable descriptive character, 

 is in Colias far from definitive or demon- 

 strative. It is a character which itself 

 requires examination before it can serve 

 as an interpreter. Used blindly it may 

 ciivide one species as readih' as it 

 separates two. After discovery of the 

 fact that two species present, as to 

 ground color, a dilVerence which 

 although not universal is general and 

 consistent, this color diflbrence becomes 

 a valid descriptive character in con- 

 trasting the two as species, but it 

 cannot be used definitively. Nor is it 

 necessarilv effective in assorting indi- 

 viduals. Indivitluals usually do not 

 represent the species as to every detail 

 of the species' character. It is indeed 

 probably true that an inclividn.-d need 

 not represent in obvious degree any 

 element or quality peculiar to the 

 species. Its participation in the 

 species' character may be limited to 

 biological identity. But as previously 

 suggested, for all the significant char- 

 acters to lapse in one individual must 

 be an extremely rare incident. Latterly, 

 Mr. Edwards has lost confidence in 

 Aleadii. Having in the first instance 

 adopted it as a good species partly on 

 the merits of a considerable catch of 

 well-behaved examples cons[)icuously 

 redder than Hecla, he lately inclines to 

 consider .'[feadi/ identical with Hccla 



because some few admittedly excep- 

 tional examples have been fovmd which 

 are not of a redder orange than that 

 Hecla wears in its northern summer 

 resorts. The later opinion rests upon 

 an assimiption as untenable as that 

 involved in the earlier view. If Meadii 

 ami Ilecla coidd be shown to be 

 absolutely lacking in color-difi'erence 

 as species, — that is to say, if in like 

 conditions like color effects invariably 

 resulted, — it would not prove the two 

 identical, but would merely show the 

 stated cohjr etlect to be without value 

 as a means of distinguishing the two 

 species. As an undeniable matter of 

 fact, the ground color in the species 

 Meadii is not the same as in the species 

 Hccla, but tiie diflerence occurs as a 

 general chromatic average, applying to 

 Aleadii as a species, under usual con- 

 ditions, and not necessarilv eBective in 

 inilividuals subjected to exceptional 

 environments. If all ^leadil were 

 //fc/(Z- colored, or if all Heclas were of 

 the degree of redness customary in 

 Alcadii, the loss of the chromatic 

 contrast would render the two species 

 less readily distinguishable. But the 

 permanent elements of figure-pattern, 

 which have resulted from the loner 



o 



continued biological estrangement of 

 the two species, and which are reliable 

 evidences of the sjjecies' diversity, are 

 efficient not only to define but also to 

 distinguish the two species. The sci- 

 entific comparison between JMeadii and 

 Hecla as to color does not consist in 

 bringing two or three exceptionally 

 pale Afeadii into direct contrast with a 



