250 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XVII. No. 424. 



and the other the orang. The general 

 principle of dichotomy was followed by 

 the author with respect to the entire ani- 

 mal kingdom in a paper before this asso- 

 ciation in 1887, and is believed by him 

 to be equally applicable to the primate 

 order. 



(&) But questions and difficulties arise 

 in connection with all the divisions. For 

 example, the extinct Pithecanthropus is 

 not included, and there is no hint of the 

 possibility of a closer affinity between 

 Tarsius and the tailless apes. As to the 

 latter, the less divergence of the gibbons 

 from the tailed monkeys has been urged 

 by Chapman, but he regards the gibbons 

 and orang as 'closely related,' whereas the 

 present arrangement, mainly on cerebral 

 grounds, places the orang nearer man than 

 either the gorilla or the chimpanzee. 



(c) The author believes that, eventually, 

 all the divisions and subdivisions may be 

 based upon encephalic chai'acters alone, 

 but at present, even where the brains are 

 recognizably different, it is not always 

 possible to formulate the distinctions. 



(d) In order to determine the validity 

 of this belief, it is necessary to compare 

 the brains of all genera and if possible all 

 species, and several of each. One of the 

 author's graduate students, Mr. T. L. 

 Hankinson, spent most of last year in the 

 effort to determine the fissural differences 

 between the Old and New World monkeys, 

 but his appointment to a college position 

 has interrupted the work for the present. 

 Among the genera of which more examples 

 are desired are Hylohates, Nasalis, Sem- 

 nopithecus, Colobus, Brachyteles, Pithecia, 

 Brachyurus, Nyctipithecus and all lemurs. 



Male Preponderance {Androrhopy) in 

 Lepidopterous Insects: A. S. Packard, 

 Brown University. 

 Eimer ('On Orthogenesis,' etc., 1898) 



calls attention to what he calls the 'law of 



male preponderance,' or the fact that the 

 male is ordinarily a step or so in advance 

 of the female in expressing the direction 

 of development, and then transmits in a 

 certain measure his characters to the spe- 

 cies. This, he adds, may occur exception- 

 ally in females, so that there is a law of 

 female preponderance. He takes his ex- 

 amples from the markings of Papilio, of 

 lizards and of birds of prey. 



There are numerous cases among other 

 lepidoptera than butterflies. Male pre- 

 ponderance, as we understand it, is a gen- 

 eral law of animal life. The female is 

 the conservative sex, the male, as is well 

 known, the more variable, the more active 

 and aggressive, and the founder of new 

 structures or markings characterizing new 

 varieties and species. 



For the principle of male preponder- 

 ance we would propose the term andro- 

 rhopy {'a'^dpEiD'Sj male; 'pin^-o, preponder- 

 ance), and when female preponderance 

 exceptionally occurs, it might be called 

 gynerhopy {yu'^TJ, female; V"~'?, prepon- 

 derance). 



Very obvious examples of androrhopy 

 occur in the Saturniidse. In this group 

 the females have aborted mouth-parts, 

 they are very heavy and sluggish, inactive, 

 flying, if at all, but a short distance from 

 their birthplace. On the other hand, the 

 male is more active and energetic, will 

 fly for miles in search of the female, 

 guided by the odor emanating from her 

 body. The male is thus exposed to a 

 greater variety of environmental condi- 

 tions. An example is seen in the genus 

 Saturnia (i. e., 8. pavonia-minor) of male 

 divergence from the form and markings 

 of the female; otherwise gynerhopy pre- 

 vails in this genus. 



In the tailed forms, especially the group 

 represented by Graellsia, Arzema, Actias, 

 and Tropcea, the effects of the inheritance 

 of male characteristics is seen to have af- 



