A SINGULAR VIEW 



A number of species were referred to this species [Botrychium 

 tematum] as varieties by Milde, and the practice is still followed 

 by some of his modern admirers. There seems to be no differ- 

 ence of opinion relative to the existence of the groups of indi- 

 viduals as distinct groups, the only difference appearing to be 

 the rank that shall be assigned them. The tematum group repre- 

 sents a closely allied group of forms that appear to have be- 

 come widely scattered from some common centre. There is no 

 rational doubt but that they have had a common origin ; this, of 

 course, is the only possible explanation of their structural and 

 habital relationship. Now, where was the original centre from 

 which they sprung? According to the system that would make 

 them all varieties of B. tematum because that species happened 

 to be the first described, it would seem to follow that that centre 

 was Japan, otherwise they could not be varieties of a Japanese 

 species. The current system of naming varieties is a stupid 

 practice handed down to us from the past, and is wholly at 

 variance with the modern conception of evolution. The original 

 centre, in all probability, was not in Japan, so that the members 

 of the tematum group are not varieties sprung from B. tematum, 

 and it creates a false impression to call them so. They are dis- 

 tinct things, as everyone admits, and we maintain it is more ra- 

 tional and more in accord with our conceptions of evolutionary 

 origin from a common stock to call them species. It is also much 

 simpler and leaves us free to determine the original centre of 

 distribution and relationship without prejudice. The practice of 

 naming varieties on slight environmental characters ought to 

 cease, and botanists should discourage the naming of such triviali- 

 ties. A marked example of how far this reduction of species to 

 varieties can be carried is seen in Dr. Christ's reduction of Dryop- 

 teris Marginalis and D. Goldiena to varieties of D. Hlix-mas. For 

 a European who has never seen either of the species growing in 

 its native habitat to take such liberties with American species is, 

 to say the least, violating the code of international courtesy, 

 and ought to stand as a warning to those who still hold to the 

 ancient heresy that Europeans know more about the American 

 flora than we do ourselves. — Prof. L. M. Underwood in Torrey 

 Bulletin. 



