﻿OF THE STATE ENTOMOLOGIST. 115 



the term is conventional — an abstract conception. Yet it is the cus- 

 tom, in entomology and botany more particularly, to separate by 

 names, under this term species, forms that are separable and show 

 constant diiferences ; and the separation of such by the study of large 

 material, and their life-histories is of far more weight and value than 

 that by the examination and description, however detailed, of one or 

 two individuals. In giving my opinion that " the future orthopterist, as 

 he studies material from all parts of the country, will very likely 

 write: Caloptenus femur-rulru7n^ DeGeer., var. s^re^ws Thomas, var. 

 Atlaiiis Riley; but the broad fact will remain that these three forms 

 — call them races, varieties, species, or what we will — are separable, 

 and that they each have their own peculiar habits and destiny," (Rep. 7, 

 p. 171,) I have, I think, indicated how very immaterial it is what rank in 

 a system of classification they hold ; but nothing is more certain than 

 that typical specimens of each are at once distinguishable, and far 

 more readily than the majority of species described in Entomology — 

 and, let me add, than many of the species described by Mr. Scudder 

 himself in the same Family and genus. If I should say that my friend 

 *' gives no characters of importance to distinguish" many of his spe- 

 cies, I might be deemed rash ; the following opinion, therefore, of 

 Prof. Thomas, which 1 am permitted to publish, will have more weight. 

 Prof. T. writes me : " Although the descriptions of species estab- 

 lished by Scudder may be ample and sufficient in other orders; in 

 Acridiil have, as a general rule, found them quite unsatisfactory. The 

 <5haracters chosen are those most liable to variation, and hence insuf- 

 ficient in describing species. As a natural consequence, a number of 

 his species are in fact but varieties." As Prof. Thomas himself has 

 confessedly, in his Synopsis of the Acrididoe, described several varie- 

 ties as species,* it would seem that even if Mr. Scudder's opinion of 

 Ailanis were just, I should simply be in the same boat with himself 

 ■and the other authorities. Not to waste words, however, on what 



•I am fully convinced that this has occun-ed even more often than he imagines; for unfortunately 

 lie rarely states the number of specimens described from, and although he relies more on structural 

 •than colorational characters as of more value and less variable, even they lose their value if founded on 

 slight variation, when large material is examined. Duriug the past year I have collected very largely 

 ot the commoner species in this Family, and I unhesitatingly assert that, with few exceptions, minute 

 relative measurements of parts or minute colorational descriptions from a few individuals are of little 

 value; and that in Calopteui particularly, specimens taken from the same locality show such variation, 

 and so connect with otliersiiecies through these variations, that there is no proper way of defining except 

 by tlie average diflerences of large numbers. Not only would many supposed species vanish by this 

 method, but many genera also; for I have good evidence to show that in several cases, species described 

 under the genus Pesotettix, are but sliort-winged forms of Calopteni. In submitting some material for 

 •determination to Prof. Thomas, he writes : ' ' You have assigned me a very dillicult task in submitting 

 to me for determination these erratic Caloptenoid forms. * * Stal's attempt to systematize, if carried 

 out will give us a genus for nearly every species; and Scudder seems disposed to make a distinct spe- 

 ■cies for each variation in color." 



