316 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XIV. No. 348. 



eral biology ' there has begun to crystal- 

 lize out a number of well-defined sub- 

 sciences. 



Looking broadly at the progress made 

 during the past century, we see that zool- 

 ogy has become immensely more complex, 

 due to its developing in many lines, and 

 that the new lines are largely interpolated 

 between the old and serve to connect them. 

 The descriptive method has developed into 

 a higher type — the comparative ; and of 

 late years still a new method has been in- 

 troduced for the study of processes — the 

 experimental. The search for mechanisms 

 and causes has been added to the search 

 for the more evident phenomena. The 

 zoologist is no longer content to collect 

 data; he must interpret them. 



In view of the past history of our sci- 

 ence, what can we say of its probable fu- 

 ture? We may be sure that zoology will 

 develop in all these three directions : (1) 

 The continued study of old subjects by old 

 methods ; (2) the introduction of new 

 methods of studying old subjects ; and (3) 

 the development of new subjects. 



I am not of those who would belittle the 

 old subjects, even when pursued in the old 

 way. There is only one class of zoologist 

 that I would wish to blot out, and that is 

 the class whose reckless naming of new ' spe- 

 cies ' and ' varieties ' serves only to extend 

 the work and the tables of the conscien- 

 tious synonomy hunter. Other than this 

 all classes will contribute to the advance- 

 ment of the science. ISTo doubt there are 

 unlabeled species, and no doubt they must, 

 as things are, be named. And no doubt 

 genera and families must be ' revised ' and 

 some groups split up and others lumped. 

 So welcome to the old-fashioned systemat- 

 ist, though his day be short, and may he 

 treat established genera gently. No doubt 

 there are types of animals of whose struc- 

 ture we are woefully ignorant ; no doubt 

 we need to know their internal anatomy in 



great detail. So welcome to the zootomist 

 in this new century, and may he invent 

 fewer long names for new organs. No 

 doubt there are groups of whose relation- 

 ships we know little and which have been 

 bu£feted about from one class to another in 

 a bewildering way. "We need to have them 

 stay fixed. So welcome to the comparative 

 anatomist and the embryologist, and may 

 their judgment as to the relative value of 

 the criteria of homology grow clearer. No 

 doubt our knowledge of inheritance and de- 

 velopment will be immensely advanced by 

 the further study of centrosomes, asters and 

 chromosomes. Welcome, therefore, to the 

 cytologist, and may he learn to distinguish 

 coagulation products and plasmolytic 

 changes from natural structures. All these 

 subjects have victories in store for them in 

 the new century. To neglect them is to 

 neglect the foundations of zoology. 



But the coming centurj' will. I predict, 

 see a change in the methods of studying 

 many of these subjects. In systematic 

 zoology fine distinctions will no longer be 

 expressed by the rough language of ad- 

 jectives, but quantitatively, as a result of 

 measurement. There is every reason to 

 expect, indeed, that the future systematic 

 work will look less like a dictionary and 

 more like a table of logarithms. Our sys- 

 tem of nomenclature, meanwhile, will prob- 

 ably break down from its own weight. 

 Now that the binomial system of nomen- 

 clature has been replaced by a trinomial, 

 there is no reason why we should not have 

 a quadrinomial nomenclature or even worse. 

 It seems as if the Linnsean system of no- 

 menclature is doomed. What will take its 

 place can hardly be predicted. The new 

 system should recognize the facts of place- 

 modes and color varieties. We might es- 

 tablish certain categories of variation such 

 as those of geographical regions, of habitat, 

 of color. A decimal system of numbers 

 might be applied to the parts of the coun- 



