166 
JOURNAL OF MAMMALOGY 
the labels are not correct. The tails of the skins of shatiucki were meas- 
ured with calipers and found to be from 6.1 to 17.8 mm. shorter than 
the recorded measurements. Of course it is impossible to say anything 
about the dimensions of an animal in the flesh from measurements of 
the dried skin, but as a rule the technique of skinning causes the tail to 
be stretched if an 5 d:hing. To test this the tails of 80 skins made up 
by a number of different collectors were measured and compared with 
the measurements of the same animals taken in the flesh. In 50 per 
cent of the cases the tails were from 0.5 to 13 mm. longer than the lengths 
recorded and in 12 per cent they were the same. It does not seem 
probable that the tails of the shattucki series would have shrunken so 
consistently. 
CONCLUSION 
The comparison described above showed no essential differences be- 
tween the Penobscot field mouse and the common meadow mouse of 
the mainland. In all of the characters mentioned in the description 
as being subspecific, the specimens of the shattucki series lie within 
the range for Microtus pennsylvanicus. In view of the constantly 
increasing complexity of the classification of mammals it would seem 
well to exclude the subspecies shattucki from a revised list of species in 
the genus Microtus, 
Boston, Mass, 
