216 



SCIENCE. 



[N. iS. Vol. IV. No. 86. 



successive processes of coordination being 

 in the chick much more quickly perfected. 



The process in the kingbird as above de- 

 tailed gives at least an opportunity for the 

 more definite limitations of those actions 

 which Prof. Baldwin has, perhaps unfortu- 

 nately, called half-congenital. 



The action of the callow bird in degluti- 

 tion is probably performed as a reflex on 

 the stimulation of the presence of food in the 

 pharynx. Small fragments upon the beak 

 and in the anterior portion of the mouth 

 are not perceived and do not quiet the al- 

 most irritating clamor of the gaping young. 

 The enormous size of the mouth, the thick- 

 ened * lips ' and the bright colored concen- 

 tric markings of the oral walls make a tar- 

 get, the sensitive center of which (the 

 opening of the oesophagus) only a most 

 awkward parent could fail to hit. We 

 might argue that the young nestling 

 has not, at first, a definite sense of taste, 

 and actual experiment on the kingbird 

 shows that most unsavory morsels when 

 placed in the mouth are swallowed, though 

 not without subsequent signs of surprise, if 

 not of disgust. It is not , then , difiicult to per- 

 ceive that the young bird while still within 

 the nest acquires, as a result of the selective 

 activity of the parent, a taste for certain 

 food. The discriminative exercise of the 

 sense of taste is thus a result of direct tuition . 

 The young cow-bird whose foster parent has 

 been a vireo will doubtless acquire a relish 

 for food very different from that enjoyed by, 

 perchance its own brother, but, the ward 

 of a graminivorous finch. 



It may be objected that the orphan chick 

 selecting food without the discriminative 

 direction of a parent, is not a parallel case 

 with the young kingbird : The bird in my 

 poseession was so tame that when it reached 

 an age comparable with the newly-hatched 

 chick, I could take it into the fields and ob- 

 serve it as it foraged, chick- fashion, for itself, 

 I think that I saw it capture its first insect ; 



I, at least, observed its ability as an insect 

 catcher develop from almost nil to expert- 

 ness. During these excursions observations 

 were made and data collected for the deter- 

 mination of the following questions : Is 

 there an inherited discrimination in favor 

 of the capture of certain edible insects in 

 preference to others ? If unsavory insects 

 are unwittingly taken into the mouth are 

 they swallowed ? If ejected from the mouth 

 are there signs of disgust? When unsavory 

 examples are met a second time are they 

 avoided ? 



To the first question I can reply that, at 

 first, all insects were indiscriminately seized. 

 A vile-smelling Hemipteron was as tempt- 

 ing as a luscious grasshopper or cricket. 

 Distinctly unsavory insects ( Tetraopes, Coc- 

 cinella) were not touched a second time, 

 except with the greatest caution ; though 

 species which were only moderately dis- 

 tasteful {Lema) might be taken and de- 

 voured, but without relish. In one case a 

 large brown ant, the first found, was seized, 

 mulled and vigorously ejected. The next 

 day the bird was taken to the same tree and, 

 on perceiving a second ant of the same spe- 

 cies, eyed it closely and deliberately, and 

 then shook its head and vigorously wiped 

 its beak with unmistakable signs of recol- 

 lection. I mention this particular case^ 

 though it is not the only one, to illustrate 

 how quickly the bird was self-taught, for 

 the ant was only one of a dozen different 

 species of insects which were met, and it 

 was so instantly seized that a prolonged 

 visual image was not gained. I might add 

 that the kingbird subsequently refused 

 even to try the edible qualities of a large 

 black ant of a different species, though the 

 bird watched the insect's movements with 

 much interest. Profiting by mistakes it 

 soon learned to examine critically all 

 strange food before the tongue should force 

 the contents of the mouth on towards the 

 pharynx. 



I 



