Article XV. NOTE ON THE GENERIC NAMES 

 DIDELPHIS AND PHILANDER. 



By J. A. ALLEN. 



Mr. James A. G. Rehn, in the ' American Naturalist ' for July, 

 1900 (Vol. XXIV, pp. 575-578), discusses the standing of the 

 Linnaean genera Myrmecophaga and Didelphis. While I agree 

 with his conclusions in respect to the former, I cannot share his 

 view with regard to the latter. In the case of Didelphis, he claims 

 with Alston (Biolog. Centr.-Amer., Vol. I, p. 196, footnote) and 

 the present writer (Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. IX, 1897, p. 

 43) that D. marsupialis " is unrecognizable." Mr. Alston adopted 

 the name D. virginiana Kerr for the North American Opossum 

 as being " the earliest name which can be clearly and certainly 

 identified with this species " ; he adding : " Linnaeus's D. mar- 

 supialis (Syst. Nat. [ed. 12], I, p. 71) is evidently founded on a 

 confusion of the North American Opossum with some of the 

 South American forms, probably D. cancrivora Gmelin ; and 

 the same remark applies to descriptions of his earlier followers. 

 In such a case it seems advisable to relinquish the uncertain title 

 altogether." In 1897 (/. c.,} I said : " The name marsupialis is 

 here recognized only provisionally, and in the belief that it should 

 be discarded as indeterminable, in view of the fact that several 

 quite distinct forms have been included under it. The original 

 Linnaean species marsupialis was intricately composite. ... If 

 we take Linnaeus's diagnosis (Syst. Nat., ed. 10, 1758, p. 55) 

 as the basis of the name, it seems to point to D. aurita rather 

 than to Z>. virginiana to an animal with a tail as long as the 

 body and the ears black, tipped with white. It is clearly not 

 D. karkinophaga" 



As the above quotations show, Mr. Rehn is perhaps fairly 

 justified in citing Alston and myself in support of his side of the 

 question. But since, through Mr. Rehn's action in the matter, 

 the case has become more serious, it seems desirable to go once 

 more over the subject, for his position, if really tenable, involves 

 a most serious overturn of names long currently accepted. As 

 stated by Mr. Rehn, three of Linnaeus's four valid species were 



[185] 



