August 8, 1902.] 



SCIENCE. 



229 



Hydra viridis during Regeneration ' stating 

 that it seems probable that the new cells are 

 formed by division of the old cells throughout 

 the entire piece. There are numerous good 

 reviews of recent biological literature. 



The Plant World for June contains ' How 

 Shall our Wild Flowers be Preserved?' by A. 

 J. Grout, being the third of the prize essays on 

 that subject ; ' The Yellow Water Lily of 

 Florida,' by A. H. Curtiss who notes that this 

 rare species is likely to be extirpated by the 

 water hyacinth ; and ' Habits of the Deep-set 

 Bulbs of Erythronium ' by Grace Stoddard 

 Niles. Among the briefer articles is the re- 

 port of the Secretary of the Wild Flower Pres- 

 ervation Society. The Supplement on the 

 Families of Flowering Plants concludes the 

 treatment of the order Gentianales and com- 

 mences that of the Polemoniales. 



The Wilson Bulletin for June contains a 

 good article by Lynds Jones on the winter 

 birds of Lorain Co., Ohio, and the same writer 

 notes Mareca penelope, taken on the Licking 

 Reservoir in March as ' A Bird New to Ohio.' 

 Besides other articles the number contains a 

 ' List of the Birds of Tokima County, Wash- 

 ington,' by Wm. Leon Dawson. 



DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE. 



SO-CALLED SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES.* 



Perhaps no discussions in zoology are as 

 uninteresting and apparently profitless, to per- 

 sons not engaged directly in them, as are those 

 concerning the status of so-called species and 

 subspecies. But a discussion may be uninter- 

 esting and apparently unprofitable, and still 

 involve questions of great import, and these 



* ' A Review of the Larks of the Genus Otocoris.' 

 By Harry C. Oberholser, Assistant Ornithologist, 

 Department of Agriculture. From the Proceed- 

 ings of the United States National Museum, Vol. 

 XXIV., pp. 801-884 (with Plates XLIII.-XLIX.) 

 [No. 1271]. Washington, Government Printing 

 Office. 1902. 



' Descriptions of Three New Birds from the 

 Southern United States.' By Edgar A. Mearns, 

 Major and Surgeon, U. S. Army. From the Pro- 

 ceedings of the United States National Museum, 

 Vol. XXIV., pp. 915-926 [No. 1274]. Washing- 

 ton, Government Printing Office. 1902. 



two ornithological papers which have just ap- 

 peared from the Government press, cannot fail 

 to raise serious questions in the mind of the 

 average reader. Both papers deal with diversi- 

 ties of size and color in some of our common 

 birds, and ten new trinomial names are added 

 to our already overburdened nomenclature. 

 For what do these names stand ? Do they rep- 

 resent anything real and tangible? Is the 

 phase of systematic ornithology exploited by 

 these authors contributing anything of value 

 to science, or is it simply making ' confusion 

 worse confounded ' ? 



Mr. Oberholser's pamphlet represents a very 

 large amount of painstaking work, as 2,150 

 specimens of horned larks were carefully ex- 

 amined and compared in the attempt to make 

 as complete and satisfactory a revision of the 

 genus Otocoris as possible. The results are 

 worth examination, but not so much for their 

 intrinsic value, as for the revelation to an 

 unusual degree of a zoological tendency, char- 

 acteristic of the present day, and especially 

 marked among ornithologists, the worth of 

 which demands careful estimation. The 

 author divides the horned larks into six 

 species, although he admits that possibly two 

 of these may be reduced to subspecific rank, 

 ultimately. Of these six species, one well- 

 marked form, of which little is known, comes 

 from South Africa, while the others are con- 

 fined to the northern hemisphere. Only one of 

 the five species occurs in North America, but 

 as 2,122 of the specimens examined represented 

 that species, it will not be unfair to confine 

 our attention to it, Otocoris alpestris. Al- 

 though originally described by Catesby from 

 the coast of the Carolinas, it is found not 

 only throughout North America (except the 

 extreme southeast) and southward into Colom- 

 bia, but also in northern Europe and Asia. It 

 therefore inhabits a wide range of greatly 

 diversified country, and would naturally be 

 expected to exhibit considerable variety in 

 color and size. The important question which 

 this monograph raises is how far is it desirable 

 to recognize these varieties by name ? Or better, 

 are the diversities of size and color in a speci- 

 fied geographical area, sufficiently constant to 

 warrant recognition as subspecies? 



