210 



THE YOUNG NATURALIST. 



which an insect is first looked upon as 

 a " good species," and then falls to the 

 lower rank. A question is sometimes 

 asked — which is the species, and which 

 is the varie'ty ? In this case the an- j 

 swer is easy. Medon, or, as it was 

 long called in England, Agestis, was 

 named first ; and without any reference 

 to which is really the type, and which 

 the diverging form, the distinction is 

 all that is required. The species is 

 called Meclon, and the form it assumes 

 in Scotland is "Medon, var. Artaxerxes." 

 There are many other insects that 

 have varieties formerly believed to be 

 distinct species, but that are now known 

 only to be local forms, or specimens of 

 occasional occurrence. Such are 0. 

 Suffumata, var. piceata, X. rurea, var. 

 combusta, II. velleda, var. carnus, and 

 many others. On the other hand 

 their are a few cases, where what was 

 supposed to be a variety, is now raised 

 to specific rank, as Eupethecia sub- 

 fulvata, formerly believed to be a 

 variety of succenturiata, but now 

 known to be distinct and having a 

 variety (cognata) of its own. It some- 

 times happened that a solitary speci- 

 men peculiarly marked was named 

 and described as a new species, and 

 though this may have sometimes been 

 done in the belief that a new species 

 was discovered ; names have often 

 been given when the specimen was 

 known to be quite abnormal, not likely 

 to occur again, or at any rate not often. 

 Dr. Staudinger in the last edition of 

 his catalogue attempts to distinguish 

 between two classes of varieties, and it 



would be well if such distinctions were 

 recognized. Those forms that occur 

 with some degree of regularity, either 

 with the type or by themselves in 

 certain places, he calls varieties. 

 These should always have names, and 

 we believe that when their names are 

 properly understood and in general 

 use, they will greatly assist us in 

 our studies. Such specimens as vary 

 in a recognizable manner from the 

 type, but of which single specimens 

 only are found, are called aberrations. 

 An abnormal form does not appear to 

 deserve a distinctive name. It can 

 serve no good end, help no one to a 

 better understanding of the species, or 

 do anything else beyond gratifying the 

 vanity of the writer who adds his own 

 name after that suggested. A third 

 class of departures from the type might 

 be called monstrosities. Such speci- 

 mens as have one side differing from 

 the other, hermaphrodites, imagines 

 with the head of the larva, &c, would 

 belong to this class. These, in our 

 opinion, should never be named. We 

 would also distinguish by distinctive 

 names the first and second generation 

 when they differ in even a slight 

 degree, if such difference be constant. 

 One advantage that would result, if 

 some system were adopted in naming 

 varieties, is that collectors could en- 

 deavour to have a series, or at least 

 representations of all named forms, but 

 when a name is given to a unique 

 variety, it is no use leaving a blank 

 for it, as only one person can have the 

 specimen. 



