Apeu, 5, 1907] 



SCIENCE 



5i9 



generic ' to mean congeneric from the stand- 

 point of the original author, and not from 

 that of the eliminator." Nothing, however, 

 was further from my thought or intention, 

 for I do not admit the possibility of such an 

 interpretation of the term ' congeneric ' in 

 connection with its use in elimination. It was 

 an ' unconscious ' slip, which most of us have 

 now and then to regret. In reality Sarco- 

 rhamphus, by the method of elimination is a 

 Bynonym of Vultur, as it is by the first species 

 rule. If I had put the case in my usual 

 manner of formulating elimination cases, it 

 could not have happened. It leaves, however, 

 the cases of Vuliur and all of the other in- 

 volved genera without change. They may be 

 more clearly restated as follows : 



Genus Vultur, 1758 

 6 noncongeneric species, representing 6 modem 

 genera and two modern families, aS' follows: 



1. gryphus, type of Oryphus Dumfiril, 1854. 



2. harpyia, type of Earpyia Illiger, 1816. 



3. papa, type of Gypagus Vieillot, 1816. 



4. aura, type of Cathartes Illiger, 1811. 



5. barbatus, type of Qypaetus Storr, 1784. 



6. percnopterus, type of Neophron Savigny, 



1808. 

 Type, by elimination, Vultur gryphus Linn., the 

 last species to become the type of a later genus. 



Genus Sarcorhamphus, 1806 

 3 ncmcongeneric species: 



1. gryphus, type of Gryphus Dumfiril, 1854. 



2. papa, type of Gypagus Vieillot, 1816. 



3. auricularis, type of Otogyps Gray, 1841. 

 Type, by elimination, Vultur gryphus Linn. 



Sarcorhamphus is thus a synonym of Vultur. 



Genus Cathartes, 1811 

 ? noncongeneric species : 



1. papa, type of Gypagus, 1816. 



2. oMra. 



lype, by elimination, Vultur aura Linn. 



Genus Gypagus, 1816. 

 2 noncongeneric species: 



1. papa, 



2. gryphus, type of Gryphus Dumgril, 1854. 

 Type, by elimination, Vultur papa Linn. 



6. Mr. Stone emphasizes the difficulties of 

 elimination by calling attention to two genera 

 I have overlooked, namely, " Rhino gryphus. 



1874, and Torgos, 1828, which, respectively, 

 antedate CEnops and Otogyps," but which, he 

 adds, fortunately do not alter the results of 

 my eliminations. Space for a few words must 

 be taken to place these ' sins of omission ' in 

 their true light. As to Torgos, he fails to 

 give the author or place of publication. 

 Torgos is not in ' Scudder's JSTomenclator 

 Zoologicus' (1882-1884), nor in Waterhouse's 

 'Index Generum Avium' (1889), nor in 

 Richmond's " List of Generic Terms proposed 

 for Birds during the years 1890 to 1900, in- 

 elusive, to which are added Names omitted by 

 Waterhouse in his ' Index Generum Avium,' '" 

 nor does it appear to have been before cited 

 since its original publication. It is one of the 

 recent discoveries of overlooked names that 

 have rewarded the commendable zeal of some 

 persistent name-hunter who has not yet im- 

 parted to the public the latest results of his 

 labors.' As to Bhinogryphus and CEnops, they 

 were both published in the same year, and for 

 the incidental use I made of (Enops it did not 

 occur to me to find out which has priority, as 

 neither is at present in current use. 



At this point (p. 150), Mr. Stone devotes a 

 paragraph to what might have happened 'if 

 the dates of certain genera had been earlier 

 than they really were. He raises the hypo- 

 thetical possibility that "the discovery of two 

 overlooked genera would not only replace two 

 current genera by reason of priority, but 

 would hy elimination alter the tyiy?s of three 

 other genera. With the types fixed by the 

 first species rule the only effect of the resur- 

 rection of the old names would be their sub- 



'ProG. U. 8. Nat. Mus., XXIV., pp. 663-729, 

 May 2, 1902. 



' Since writing the above I have discovered by 

 accident the place and manner of publication of 

 Torgos, which it seems worth while to make 

 public. It occurs in Isis von Oken, Bd. XXI, 

 Heft 11, p. 1143, Nov., 1828, in a paper by Kaup 

 entitled, ' Ueber Hyaena, Uromastix, Corythaeolus, 

 Acontias, von Kaup.' Under the ' Gattung Hywna 

 Cuv.' is the remark : " Diese Gattung reprasentiert 

 die Gattung Torgos {Vultur auricularis) mihi." 

 So here is Torgos, a monotypic genus, with Vultur 

 auricularis Daudin as type, in a paper devoted 

 mainly to reptiles, in a journal with a nonalpha- 

 betic ' Inhalt ' and no index. 



