﻿THE USE AND AfcUSE OF THE TRINOMIAL SYSTEM. 149 



represents the range of a species variation, it is rare to find a 

 form that cannot be linked up with the type by intermediate 

 aberrations. Any such exceptions are, perhaps, most likely to 

 occur among the representatives of a species from isolated 

 localities. When dealing, therefore, with the forms of a variable 

 species, it would surely be supererogatory to name all those indivi- 

 duals which deviated more or less from the typical form of that 

 species ; but less than this we cannot do, if we essay anything in 

 the way of varietal nomenclature, and desire at the same time to 

 be consistent. Haworth and Stephens, among others of the older 

 entomologists, described and named several forms of A. tritici as 

 distinct species, but these have long ago been deposed. It would 

 be interesting if twenty lepidopterists of the present day would 

 select specimens which they considered to agree with the 

 descriptions of— say, for example — lineolata, Haw., albilineata, 

 Haw., cuneigera, Steph., and ocellina, Steph., and submit these to 

 some competent authority for adjudication. Such an experiment 

 would be valuable, as it would illustrate individual appreciation 

 of varietal differences, and possibly furnish a startling exposition 

 of the general inutility, from a practical point of view, of endea- 

 vouring to permanently fix that which is unstable. 



Charceas graminis has been divided up into twelve named 

 forms, and at the same time we are told that there are numbers 

 of intermediate forms. It would seem, then, that anyone 

 desiring to work out the varieties of this species correctly, 

 i. e., according to the oracle, must be a clairvoyant, or he will 

 probably go astray. 



The absurdity of variety naming of the hair-splitting order 

 attains its maximum when the nomenclator takes a coloured 

 figure for his type, and dubs as var. intermedia a specimen which 

 is not so highly tinted with a particular colour as such figure. 



Suppose we have four specimens of a species, which in the 

 matters of colour and markings are fairly constant within certain 

 limits : — A, agrees with the description of the type of the species 

 in every respect. B, however, differs from A, and of course from 

 the type, in having a paler tint, but the markings are identical in 

 both specimens; we therefore name this var. 'pallida. C, has the 

 colour of the type, but the markings are not well defined ; so we 

 will call this var. obsoleta. D, is rather darker in colour than the 

 type, but the markings are similar to those of C ; as this specimen 

 does not agree exactly with either B or C, and as it is still further 

 removed from the type, we must name it also, say, var. obscura. 

 So far, well ; but someone has a fifth specimen, which in tint is 

 the same as B, but the markings are less clearly defined than 

 in C. This example cannot be referred to obsoleta, because that 

 var. has typical coloration ; and, although it agrees in tint with 

 var. pallida, the markings won't do, as they are far from typical. 



