RECORD OF PHENOIiOGTCAL PHENOMENA. 15 



OBSERVATIONS ON THE EECOED OF PHENOLOGTCAL 

 PHENOMENA.* 



There are many who have shewn themselves, by their observations 

 during the past year, willing to devote some portion of their time to 

 the accumulation of accurate data concerning tbe time of occurrence 

 of natural phenomena, and it seems to be desirable that their energies 

 should be directed into the channel in which tbey will be capable of 

 utilisation. Now before any such record as those to which we refer 

 can be of real scientific value, certain conditions must be fulfilled, which, 

 we are sorry to say, are not sufficiently regarded by some members of 

 our volunteer staff of observers ; and it is in the hope that tbey may 

 themselves perceive this necessity that these remarks are penned. 



Firstly, it is absolutely essential that the species to which the 

 observation refers should be unmistakable ; without this it is so much 

 labour thrown away. The scientific name must be given acccurately, 

 and, in doubtful cases, with the " authority " appended. The observer 

 may know in what sense he himself uses the English name, but 

 he will be a bold man if he assumes that all others use it in the same 

 sense as he does. The possibility of misidentification sometimes 

 exists, indeed, even with the scientific name, but it is immensely 

 increased by the misplaced use of the ••popular*' name in cases like 

 these, where there is, perhaps, no clue to what is meant except the 

 name itself. 



It is probably even more important that the scientific name should 

 be applied to the right object. This is by no means a thing to be taken 

 for granted ; it is astonishing what mistakes will be made by really good 

 observers. The only hope of reducing these errors to a minimum lies 

 in subjecting the specimens, where possible, to the observation of more 

 than one pair of eyes. This is easy to do with plants, and no records 

 of these can be trusted which are not certified by the independent 

 corroboration of some competent botanist. Plants have been sent for 

 record in the " Midland Naturalist'* which simply cannot and do not 

 grow in the places to which they were assigned unless they were 

 planted there ; and one who is behind the scenes could say how often 

 Papaver Argemone is mistaken for P. Plum*. Malva rotundifolia for M. 

 sylvestris, Poly gala depressa for P. vulgaris, and so on. In relation to 

 the last two, for instance, the time of beginniug to flower is quite 

 distinct, and, leaving out of question the specific distinction of the 

 plants, it is obvious that a mixed record of the times of flowering of 

 the two varieties can convey no useful information whatever. The 

 same remark applies to the records of all those variable plants which 

 have in recent times been divided into numerous "species;" and 

 observers, who are not competent to distinguish between the forms 

 which these species assume, will be well advised if they leave them 



* Read at the Meeting of the Birmingham Natural History and Microscopical 

 Society, December 14th, 1S80. 



