﻿July, 1896.] 



HISTORY OF CLASSIFICATIONS. 



23 



sections of liis typical subgenus Arvicola. Dr. Cones points out 

 Baird's error in the application of the name Eemiotomys Do Selys 

 I.ongcLamps, and substitutes for tlie latter the equally untenable 

 2Iynomes Eafinesque. 



In 1881 Bhinford proi)osed, in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of 

 Bengal (Vol. L, Pt. II, pp. 88-117), a classification of the voles of the 

 Himalayas, Tibet, and Afghanistan. The species occurring in this 

 region he arranges in three sections, thus:^ 



Genus Arvicola : 



Section Paludicola, {hhjilii, mandrianus). 



Section AlticoJa {sloliczkaniis, strachey'i, roylei, hlanfordi, wynnei). 

 Section Neodon (sikkimensis, mclanog aster). 



Blanford's 'sections' Pa??(i?4co?« and Keodon are excellent instances 

 of unnatural classifications based on single characters. Microtus hJytlii 

 and M. mandrianus are species of FhaiomySj a subgenus which differs 

 from the water rats or from Microtus [Microtus) nivalis and M. (J/.) rat- 

 ticeps (all of which were included by Blasius in Faludicola) in many 

 important characters. Because there is a general likeness in the pat- 

 tern of enamel folding they are united under one superspecific name. 

 Again, Blanford places in the section l^eodon the sx)ecies Microtus siMi- 

 we^zm, which is a slightly abnornml member of the subgenus Microtus, 

 and Microtus meJanogaster, a species with the bony palate formed exactly 

 as in the red-backed mice (Evotomijs). These members of widely dif- 

 ferent groups are brought together on account of a very superficial 

 likeness in enamel pattern. Blanford's section AlticoJa is probably 

 equal to the subgenera Alticola and Hyper acrius of the present paper, 

 though it is still a matter of doubt whether it actually included any 

 members of the latter. 



The most recent classification of the subgenera of Microtus is that 

 proposed by Lataste. This author has published two important papers 

 on the subject, the first in Le ]Sraturaliste (Tome II, pp. 323, 324, 332- 

 331, 312, 343, 347-349, 1883), and the second in the Annali del Museo 

 Oivico di Storia Naturale di Genova (Serie 2«, Yol. IV, pp. 259-274, 

 1887). While recognizing the unsatisfactory nature of the artificial 

 classification adopted by Blasius, Lataste subdivides the voles in 

 accordance with a system fully as arbitrary as that followed by any of 

 his predecessors. According to Lataste the characters derived from 

 the teeth of the voles are of no value except in distinguishing between 

 genera.2 The subgenera he arranges according to the number of mani- 



^ Blanford adopted Blasius's classification of tlie voles at large (pp. 91, 92). Except 

 in tlie case of Paludicola, however, be snjiposed that none of the European sec- 

 tions of the genus Microtus are represented in the region with which he deals, 



'^^'Chez les Eongeurs du uioins, sinon chez tons les Mammiferes, les characteres de 

 la denture me semblent d'ordre generique quand ils sont suffisamment nets et 

 tranches, mais sans aucune importance taxonomique quand ils sont aussi minimes 

 que ceux que Eon invoque d'ordinaire, {\ la suite de Blasius, chez les Campagnols, et 



