,'8 g 6 J LUCAS on the Tongues of Buds. in 



All Hummingbirds examined by me, or those whose tongues have 

 been described by others, have identically the same style of 

 tongue, and the members of this wonderfully homogeneous group, 

 so far as I am aware, feed on the same kind of food and take it 

 in the same manner. If any Hummingbird is known to depart 

 widely from his brethren in the character of his food or method 

 of taking it, I venture to say that his tongue will also be found 

 to have some peculiarity. 



The facts herein noted are few in number and our knowledge 

 of the tongues and food of birds is far from complete, but, to sum 

 up, what conclusions do we seem justified in drawing from the 

 evidence so far advanced ? 



If we were to be guided by the tongues as they are found in 

 our North American Woodpeckers, we might say that while they 

 are clearly modified according to food or habits, yet they have a 

 certain taxonomic value, since, in spite of their varied adaptations, 

 it is still possible to recognize each and every one as the tongue 

 of a Woodpecker. If, on the other hand, we based our conclusions 

 on the Swifts and Swallows we would be justified in saying that 

 the tongue is of no value since birds belonging to totally differ- 

 ent orders may have precisely the same kind of tongue. Noting 

 the differences that exist between the tongues of Spin us tristis, 

 Passer domesticus, Loxia, ffabia, and Melospiza, we would be 

 forced to conclude that the tongue gives no hint even of family 

 affinities, while a study of Melospiza would cast doubts even on its 

 generic value. 



But if we find that differences in the tongues of closely related 

 birds are correlated with differences of food, and that birds widely 

 separated by structure, but of similar habits, have similar tongues, 

 and if we find that many tongues of peculiar form seem to bear a 

 direct relation to the nature of the food, I think we are warranted 

 in concluding that the evidence favors the view that modifications 

 of the tongue are directly related to the character of the food and 

 are not of value for classification. 



