No. 530] RELATIVE CONSPICUOUSNESS OF FOWLS 117 



sense of smell," the "bird of dull colors which har- 

 monized with the background," et id gams onutc, have 

 been made to do valiant service. 



Ever since the first description, made by the Nurem- 

 berg miniature painter Rosel in 1746, 5 of a case of pre- 

 sumably protective coloration, we have been prone to 

 argue that because an organism was colored or formed in 

 such a way as to be inconspicuous it was, therefore, nec- 

 essarily protected from attack by its enemies to a greater 

 or less degree. The logic of such reasoning is flawless. 

 It ought to be protected. But a conclusion may be per- 

 fectly logical and still not true. In the study of pro- 

 tective coloration, including mimicry, it is essential that a 

 discovery that an organism is to human eyes inconspicu- 

 ous or not readily distinguishable from some other or- 

 ganism shall not be considered the final goal. Rather let 

 such a discovery always be supplemented by an experi- 

 mental or observational determination of whether this 

 inconspicuousness really helps the organism, in actual 

 practise, in avoiding elimination by natural enemies. It 

 is worth noting that more than one recent critical stu- 

 dent of these problems who has applied this method has 

 brought to light results essentially similar in their gen- 

 eral import to those set forth here. 6 



5 Cf. Miiller, EL, "Schiitzende Aehnlichkeit eiiiheimischer Insekten," 

 Kosmos, Jahrg. Ill, Heft 8, p. 114, 1879. 



•Cf. for example the chapter on "Colouration of Organisms" in Dewar 

 and Finn's "The Making of Speeies" (New York, 1909), and still more 

 recently the thorough critical study by Punnett on "Mimicry in Ceylon 



Zeylonica, Vol. VIT, Part XXV, September, 1910, pp. 1-24, 2 plates)/ 



