369 



G. DALGLIESH. Yellow-necked Field-mouse (Mus flavicollis). 



- Nature, August 1910, n. 2128, vol. 84, pag. 180. 



The difficult, if not indeed unanswerable, question as to the 

 limitations of species and races is again raised by Mr G. Dalgliesh 

 in the case of the yellow-necked field-mouse. In this instance the 

 writer maintains that this mouse ought to be regarded as specifi- 

 cally distinct from the ordinary long-tailed field-mouse (Mus sylva- 

 ticus] under the name of M. flavicollis, basing his arguments, not 

 only on the physical differences between the two forms, but likewise 

 on their distribution and their divergence in habits and disposi- 

 tion. It may be remarked in this connection that naturalists are 

 by no means in accord as to the proper name for the yellow- 

 necked form. 



LIONEL E. ADAMS. Moles and Molehills. Nature, vol. 83, 

 March 10, 1910, p. 37. 



Some interesting notes are given on the construction of mole- 

 hills. The senses of smell and hearing must be very acute to 

 enable the mole to locate a pheasant's or partridge's nest above 

 his run. That this is the case is testified by two gamekeepers in 

 different parts of the country, both of whom state that the nests 

 are often entered from below and the eggs eaten. 



BOELTER W. R. The Rat Problem. London, 1909, pp. VIM 65 

 & pis. 2, figs 75. 



The object of this book is to present the case against the rat 

 so completely as to place beyond doubt the passing of a British 

 Rat Law on the lines of the Danish Rat Law. 



The main conclusions arrived at by the author are as follows : 



1) The brown rat (like the black rat) is not an indigenous 

 animal, but invaded Great Britain in 1732 having been brought on 

 ships from India. 



2) It has disturbed the conditions existing previous to its 

 arrival by: 



a) Exterminating the black rat, and, 

 6) Becoming a national pest. 



3) Five factors have contributed to make the rat a nation 

 nal pest: 



24 



