HARD WICKE' S SCIENCE-GOSSIP. 



1S3 



42. How much does var. sicula (Rossm.) of Hyalina 

 cellaria differ from the type ? 



Doubtless there are many other questions of 

 nomenclature which require to be settled, but I hope 

 the few I have mentioned will be well sifted by 

 conchologists, and that my paper is but an earnest of 

 a future uniform nomenclature between this and 

 other countries. The question of priority is a vital 

 one, and it is hoped that shell-workers in this country 

 will accord to it more than a passing notice. No 

 less vital — i.e, if we are going to have a varietal 

 nomenclature of latinised terms — is a settlement of 

 the priority of varietal names, and the bringing down 

 of them to an exactness of meaning. The rendering 

 of those things unto Caesar which are Caesar's is as 

 fast and as true a duty to-day as it was nineteen 

 hundred years ago, no less so in scientific nomen- 

 clature than in morals. As the present system exists 

 -in our country, the state of affairs is well shown in a 

 slightly varied line from the fourth book of Ovid's 

 Fasti, "Dum sibi quisque placet credula turba 

 sumus," which being translated runs thus : "While 

 each pleases himself we are a credulous crowd." 



RECOGNITION OF ANTS. 



IT has been shown that with ants, as well as bees, 

 while the utmost harmony reigns among those 

 of the same community, all others are enemies. 

 I have already given ample proof that a stranger is 

 not allowed among them. This of course implies 

 that all the bees and ants have power to recognise 

 each other. It is calculated that in a single beehive 

 there will be as many as fifty thousand bees, and in 

 the case of ants the number is greater. It is probable 

 there may be as many as four hundred thousand, and 

 in some cases even larger numbers. If, however, 

 a stranger is put among the ants of another nest, she 

 is immediately attacked. On this point I have 

 satisfied myself, as will be seen in the following pages, 

 that the statements of Huber and others are correct. 

 If, for instance, I introduced a stranger into one 

 of my nests, she was at once attacked ; one ant would 

 seize her by the antenna, another by the legs, and 

 she was cither killed or dragged out of the nest. 

 Moreover, we have not only to deal .with the fact that 

 they know their friends, but they recognise them 

 after a lengthened absence. Huber mentioned that 

 some ants that he had kept in captivity, having 

 accidentally escaped, met and recognised their former 

 acquaintances, fell to mutual caresses by their 

 antennae, took them up by their mandables, and took 

 them to their own nests. They came presently to 

 seek the fugitives in a crowd under and above the 

 artificial ant-hill, and even ventured to reach the 

 bell-glass, where they effected a complete desertion 

 by carrying away all the ants they found there. In a 

 few days the rack was completely depopulated. These 



ants remained four months without any communica- 

 tion. Fovel regards the movements mentioned by 

 Huber, as having indicated fear and surprise, rather 

 than affection, though he is disposed to believe by his 

 own observation that ants recognise each other after 

 months' absence. The, observation made by Huber 

 was made casually, and he did not take any steps 

 to test it by subsequent experiments. But I myself 

 by experiments proved the accuracy. When we 

 consider their immense numbers, this is actually 

 surprising, but that they should recognise one 

 another after a space of several months, as stated by 

 Huber, is more so. Ants, after a separation of 

 fifteen months, have recognised each other. This 

 experiment was tried on the Formic fitsla, or dark- 

 coloured ant, but perhaps other species might act 

 differently. 



To further prove recognition I put an ant, at 

 9 a.m., August 13, on a spot where a number of the 

 Lassins lasius-jlavus, or yellow ant (belongingito one 

 of my nests of domesticated ants), had been feeding 

 some hours previously, though none were there, nor, 

 indeed, out at all at the moment. The entrance to 

 the nest was about eight inches off, but she made 

 straight for it, and went into the nest. A second 

 one wandered about for four or five minutes, and 

 then went in. A third, on the contrary, took a 

 wrong direction, at any rate for about three-quarters 

 of an hour did not find the entrance. 



Burmeister says that bees can communicate signs 

 to each other after the fashion of ,'men. Each bee 

 has a different language, that is, each class, similar 

 to " homo genus." Mr. McCook says that ants 

 recognise each other by smell, and if you wash 

 one in water he cannot be recognised by the com- 

 panions or relations. Ants removed from a nest in 

 the condition of pupae, but tended by friends, if re- 

 introduced into the parent nest are recognised and 

 treated as friends. If ants are ill they are brought 

 out of the nest, perhaps to prevent infection, and 

 some think they are left to die. An ant nursing the 

 young in a state of larvae, recognises the same when 

 arrived to the state of pupa, also afterwards. It 

 seems by those experiments that the recognition of 

 ants is not personal, that their harmony is not due to 

 the fact that each ant is personally acquainted with 

 each member of the community. At the same 

 time, that they recognise their] friends even when 

 intoxicated, and that they know the young born in 

 their own nest, even when they have been brought 

 out in a chrysalis state by strangers, this seems to 

 show that the recognition is not brought about 

 by any sign or password, but somehow by smell, 

 colour, form, by sound, as in language, by their 

 physiognomy, by their actions in motion ; also by 

 their mental qualifications, ; the same as you would 

 recognise an Englishman in a foreign country, or by 

 the language an educated person uses at all times, 

 etc. ; or by any evidence of a genealogical character, 



