2 
Transactions Texas Academy of Science. 
[ 18 ] 
features of the ant’s body,* and passes without a word over the import- 
ant, distinctive characters. His conception of generic characters is even 
more nebulous than his appreciation of specific differences. Sometimes 
he mistakes the sex of the form he is describing, and at other times con- 
founds several very distinct forms in a single description. 
No wonder, therefore, that Prof. Forel wrote, in 1884: “Quant aux 
descriptions de Buckley, elles sont telles que je suis oblige d’en faire 
absolument abstraction, vu qu’elles ne permettent pas de reconnaitre 
une seule espece, ni meme les genres.” Dr. G-ustav Mayr and Prof. 
Emery, however, who have occupied themselves somewhat more exten- 
sively with the ants of the United States, have gone to considerable pains 
to determine the species described by the Texan geologist. They have, 
indeed, succeeded in identifying some of the forms more or less accu- 
rately, hut the great bulk of Buckley’s names still clogs our taxonomy 
and exasperates the student. 
To some, the wisest course would seem to he to follow Forel and 
ignore Buckley’s work en bloc; and certainly the writer of these pages 
would be the last to drag these names from their well-merited neglect, 
were it not that the Formicidse, for the following reasons, occupy a 
somewhat peculiar position among insects : First, the number of species 
representing the family in a given portion of the United States, or, 
in fact, in the whole country, is not very large. This greatly facilitates 
identification by elimination. Second, in any locality as circumscribed 
as that from which Buckley obtained more than half of his species, 
certain forms are always very abundant and cannot fail to arrest the 
attention of the most superficial observer and collector. Third, the 
habits of the species are often more characteristic than their morpho- 
logical traits, so that when the former are recorded they are a great aid 
in recognizing species. 
Now these considerations have some bearing on Buckley’s work. As 
I have devoted my leisure hours during the past three years to studying 
and collecting the ants of Texas, especially in the very spot which for 
many years was Buckley’s home, I am naturally in a better position to 
judge of his Texan species than those who have had to study the ant- 
fauna of this region at long range. It is clear that Buckley must have 
left us descriptions of the more striking and ubiquitous ants of Central 
Texas, and this is borne out by a study of his work. Moreover, in 
several cases the ethological notes appended to his descriptions leave no 
doubt as to the species he had in hand. 
*Such, e. g., as the distance (sometimes measured to within one or two hun- 
dredths of an inch!) to which the wing tips of the female project beyond the 
abdomen as if, forsooth, the abdomen of these insects were incapable of expansion 
or contraction. 
