150 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXV. No. 630 



not a task a novice should meddle with.' This 

 is another great objection to the method, since 

 ■we never know when we have exhausted the 

 literature and so never know when we have 

 our types definitely fi:sed, while the worker who 

 has not an enormous library at his command 

 is unable to attempt to settle the application 

 of his genera. 



In the Yultur case, Dr. Allen, whose knowl- 

 edge of ornithological literature is equaled 

 by few, has overlooked two genera, Rhinogry- 

 phus, 1874, and Torgos, 1828, which, respect- 

 ively, antedate (Enops and Otogyps. Fortu- 

 nately for his eliminations these are both 

 monotypic and their dates are such that they 

 do not alter the results. If they had been pro- 

 posed some years earlier, however, they would 

 not only have replaced the above genera, 

 which they do in any case, but by removing 

 their species from other genera at earlier dates 

 they would have altered the results of several 

 of Dr. Allen's eliminations. 



If Torgos, for instance, had been 1815 it 

 would have left gryphus as the type of Sarco- 

 rhamphus instead of auric ularis, while Bhi- 

 nogyphus at 1815 would have left papa as the 

 type of Cathartes instead of aura, and by Dr. 

 Allen's method the type of VuUur would then 

 hpve been harpy ja. In other words, the dis- 

 covery of two overlooked genera would not 

 only replace two current genera by reason of 

 priority, but would hy elimination alter the 

 types of three other genera. With the types 

 fixed by the first species rule the only effect 

 of the resurrection of the old names would be 

 their substitution for the two current names 

 having the same types.'' 



The Vultur text invites one more comment. 

 Dr. Allen states that by ignoring ' the fixing 

 of a type by a later author ' I have ' needlessly 

 increased the number of open cases by from 

 probably 50 to 75 per cent.' Now as a matter 

 of fact the fixing of a type by a later author 



' In spite of what Dr. Allen says on p. 777, the 

 first species rule will give the same relief in 

 cases where the type of one genus depends on 

 whether or not two other groups are regarded as 

 congeneric or not. Cf. Jordan, Science, 1901, 

 Vol. XIII., p. 500, where the first species rule as 

 advocated in my paper is formally proposed. 



has no status whatever in the eyes of those 

 who practise elimination unless it agrees with 

 the action of revisers up to the time that the 

 type was so fixed. Therefore the cases are 

 more open under the operation of elimination 

 than if we settled them once for all by taking 

 the first species of the original publication as 

 the type. For example, the types of Cathartes, 

 Sarcorhamphus and Gypagxis, the three genera 

 most involved in this Vulturine muddle, were 

 definitely fixed by Mr. Ridgway in 1874, and 

 independently by Dr. Bowdler Sharpe in the 

 same year, each selecting the same species, 

 as follows : 



Sarcorhamphus, type gryphus. 

 Cathartes, type papa. 

 Oypagus, type papa.* 



We might infer from Dr. Allen's state- 

 ments that this settled the cases of these 

 genera for all time, for he says : " There are 

 four conditions, any one of which when present 

 determines the type of a genus beyond appeal 

 [italics mine] under current usage " and as 

 the fourth condition he gives "4. When some 

 subsequent author has selected one of its [i. e., 

 the original genus] species as its type." 



Nevertheless, he ignores absolutely the ac- 

 tion of these two eminent type-fixers and 

 opens all these genera to elimination with the 

 following results : 



Sarcorhamphus, type aurioularis. 

 Cathartes, type aura. 

 Gypagus, type papa. 



It seems, therefore, that the action of a 

 later author in fixing the type of a genus is 

 not ' beyond appeal ' and ' condition 4 ' needs 

 an important amendment. Further examples 

 of the unsatisfactory nature of elimination 

 might be drawn from this case of Vultur, but 

 I fear I shall be charged with rivaling the 

 combined vision of Romulus and Remus on 



* It is interesting to note that both Mr. Ridg- 

 way and Dr. Sharp have in each instance 

 selected the first species as the type and one 

 would be inclined to suspect that they were fol- 

 lowing, consciously or unconsciously, the first 

 species rule, though it may have been merely a 

 ' coincidence ' as Dr. Allen suggests in another 

 connection. 



