^ } 



im 





P 



;^ill 



dili ^INl ^ 



*!» , ' I Mill 



1:1 :tS 



r)92 



MONOORAPnS OP NOUTn AMERICAN RODRXTIA. 



cllel, slioiild he retuincd; for, however IhuUy the cliaracterization of the 

 genus may have been, this in no way invnlidiites (he specific designation. 

 The name rufa, in fact, lias been adopted by at least two writers, Harlan, in 

 1825, and Griffith (1827), who transferred the animal to the genus Arctoinys. 

 Professor Baird* uses the following language respecting this matter: — 



" It is j)orhaps a question whether the true name of ihis species be not 

 Aplodontia rufa, after Ilafinesquc. Although his description is incorrect, it 

 was based on the Sewellel of Lewis and Clarke, wliich is unquestionably thfl 

 Aplodontia leporitta of Richardson. As, however, Rafinesque asserts posi- 

 tively that certain characters apply to liis Anisomjx rufa, which really do not 

 exist in Aplodontia kporina, we may be warranted in avoiding the use of \m 

 specific name for Richardson's animal. It may, perhaps, be well to repeat 

 that Rafinesque bases his description entirely upon a partly erroneous inter- 

 pretation of the article of Lewis and Clarke." 



Although this is perfectly just criticism, it should neverthelesft be borne 

 in mind that Anisonyx rufa has a definite and well known basis, whatever the 

 inapplicability, insufficiency, or other fault of the accompanying diagnosis may 

 be ; and, consequently, a rigid constructionist cannot well avoid the use of 

 the specific term rvfa. Naturalists constantly adopt and retain scientific 

 names given upon a known basis, even when such names are unqualified 

 by diagnosis ; and it seems to me that the admitted flaws of Rafinesque's 

 description are scarcely valid cause for the rejection of his name. Anisonyx 

 itself is to be thrown out rather upon consideration of the fact that it is 

 chiefly a synonym of the same author's Cynomys than on account of its own 

 intrinsic demerits. 



The second period in the history of the species began in 1829, upon the 

 introduction of the Aplodontia leporine of Richardson, characterized in the 

 Zoological Journal, and the same year more fully described, with figures of 

 the skull and teeth, in the Fauna Boreali-Americana. These were the first 

 full and accurate accounts of the genus and species under a scientific designa- 

 tion, and long remained the source of inspiration to the cortipilers and other 

 second-hand writers. Sir John Richardson's material was received, like 

 mtmy other specimens of mammals and birds described by him, from Mr. 

 David Douglass (or Douglas — I find the name thus diflcrently spelled), and 

 is supposed to be that upon which Audubon's subsequent description and 



* Mamm. N. Ainer. 1857, 354. 



!«.■ 



