318 WILLIAM MORTON WHEELER 
standpoint of parasitology. That the four types of queens and 
their offspring are directly comparable with entoparasitic persons 
is not so remarkable as the fact that in ants the host and para- 
site form a mixed organism which could only be obtained 
with persons by jumbling together the component cells of host 
and parasite like two kinds of peas shaken in a bottle. Notwith- 
standing this mixture the parasitic colony not only retains its 
identity and the anticipatory character of its behavior but cas- 
trates the host colony and constrains its soma either to codperate 
in many of its activities or to specialize as a purely nutritive or 
nest-building auxiliary. The host is thus reduced to the status 
of a nourishing or protective organ of the parasite. This behavior 
has many striking analogies among persons. Guard long ago 
called attention to the fact that when the cirriped Sacculina 
settles under the abdomen of a male crab and sends its rootlike 
haustoria into the tissues of its host, the latter undergoes cas- 
tration, and its narrow abdomen expands to form a protection 
for the soft-bodied parasite. In other words, the parasite acts 
as if it were a mass of crabs’ eggs and the male crab behaves as 
if it had changed its sex and develops an abdomen of the female 
type. 
Not only are there ants, like those already considered, that may 
be regarded as colonial entoparasites, but there are also a number 
of species that may be called colonial ectoparasites. These form 
the so-called ‘compound nests,’ in which two or more species 
live amicably side by side, or may even mingle freely with one 
another, but rear their broods in separate nests, thus indicating 
in the clearest manner the integrity of the colonial organism. This 
is also shown by the vast number of myrmecophilous insects, 
which are, of course, ento- or ectoparasitic persons, and behave 
towards the ant colony as if it were a rather incoherent and there- 
fore more vulnerable, or exploitable personal organism. 
Finally we come to what the neovitalists regard as the most 
striking autonomic manifestations of the organism, namely the 
regulations and restitutions, and face the question as to whether 
these, too, have their counterpart in the colonial organism. I 
believe that the following facts compel us to answer this ques- 
