470 THE ZOOLOGIST. 



" The advent of the naorphologist into the particular sphere of 

 systematics or the metamorphosis of the systematist into a mor- 

 phologist (it matters not how we put this desirable event) will result 

 in the annexation not only of classification, but also of questions of 

 geographical distribution, by anatomy and morphology. How many 

 pretty theories in geographical distribution have collapsed because 

 they were built on the sands of an incorrect classification? The 

 similarity between the faunas of South America and Madagascar is 

 supported by many facts, but the value of Solenodon in Cuba and 

 Centetes in Madagascar has been lessened by the recognition that 

 the two genera resemble each other by convergence, and should now 

 be classified in different families. 



"The Dendrobatinae also are considered by Dr. Gadow as an un- 

 natural group, the two divisions — South American and Mascarene — 

 having, according to him, lost their teeth independently. Again, 

 Dr. Gadow refers to the Ratitae as a heterogeneous assemblage of 

 birds which is ' absolutely worthless ' for the zoogeographer. There 

 are scores of such artificial groupings — the work of the systematist 

 — which have led zoogeographers astray. 



" The result is that systematic work as at present pursued is of 

 very little use to us in the study of geographical distribution. It is 

 hopeless nowadays for a zoologist to sit down with a list of species 

 and their range and trusting implicitly in systematic work to make 

 maps of distribution and, as he so often does, to draw deductions 

 therefrom, for the validity of such deductions must ultimately depend 

 upon the anatomical and morphological data. Moreover, the study 

 of geographical distribution is developing new methods of tackling 

 its problems. 



" We do not consider it necessary to touch on the other remedies 

 tbat might be applied with a view to redeeming zoological taxonomy 

 from its present artificial state and to bringing it into line with the 

 rest of biology. 



" Such remedies — for instance, testing the validity of species by 

 genetic experiment and the intensive study of variation — have been 

 advocated many times before, although with little success. We 

 believe, however, that the reforms in descriptive zoology we have 

 advocated above are the more urgent." 



Most zoologists will agree with the general drift of these 

 criticisms, but we now await, with much interest, the publication 

 of some faunistic paper by "X," showing us how the work should be 

 done. 



