1911] Composition of Taxonomic Papers 197 



age be summarized in twenty lines? Hardly. The ideal descrip- 

 tion will be a careful analysis of all body parts with all their 

 appendages, attributes and characteristics, to be followed by a 

 summary of salient characters of the type and a comparison to 

 related species. I maintain that this cannot be accomplished 

 on less than a page. 



It is terrifying and discouraging to be confronted by a page 

 of solid description, where all characters, whether head, thorax, 

 abdomen, or wings, flow together in a solid phalanx, so that it is 

 impossible to pick out readily any special point desired. Des- 

 criptions should be paragraphed or captioned. This costs no 

 extra labor, and, in fact, presents a much neater appearance 

 when published than the solid, uniform mass of words. Besides 

 it affords greater facility to the student who wishes to look up 

 certain characters for comparison. 



Again, a description should not be isolated. I mean, com- 

 parison to related species and indication of the position of the 

 new species should follow the description. It is reprehensible 

 negligence to describe a new species from a genus already con- 

 taining a dozen or more species and to omit all mention of either 

 relations or position ; such proceeding is indeed worthy of repri- 

 mand. To say the least, the work of the author will be placed 

 in an extremely doubtful light. The thought suggests itself, 

 that the author himself was ignorant of the relations and that 

 he described a species at hap-hazard. 



After all this, why pay any attention to identity, number, 

 and custody of types? Why state the locality from which the 

 types came? Why select a holotype from a series of twenty 

 specimens that show considerable variation? No one is ever 

 expected to express any doubt of the scientific determination of 

 the twenty. No one is ever expected to feel interested in looking 

 up the types for comparison or study after having become famil- 

 iar with the all-sufficient description of ten lines. This seems 

 to be the opinion of some taxonomists. For they very carefully 

 avoid all mention of the number of types, their identity (see 

 nomenclature of types) and only grudgingly designate the locality 

 from which the types came by the remarkably precise state name. 

 The latter, it is supposed, will give the reader all the etiological 

 information he desires; so that if he wishes to capture specimens 

 of the same species, all he need do is to pack his trunks and hie 

 himself to "Texas" or "Nevada" and pick the species from the 



