SOME QUESTIONS re NOMENCLATURE.
The Editors of The Emu
Sirs The mention of Calamanthus montanellus in my paper[1] leads' me to refer to the President's address read at the last Hobart Congress of the Australasian Ornithologists' Union. Speaking of the new species described by me for the year, he said that Calamanthus montanellus appeared to be a sub-species of C. fuliginosus "altered by climatic and topographical conditions." As Col. Legge has not had the opportunity of comparing the two forms, nothing further need be said. In the same address the speaker said:—
"Not a few Western Australian Passerines are so closely allied to Eastern forms that they can scarcely rank beyond sub-species. My own impression with regard to these close allies is that, originally, and perhaps prior to the evolution of desert areas, consequent on a change of climate in the southern region of Australia, these forms were one and the same; that the results of complete isolation from their fellows in Eastern Australia has led to the creation of those differences in plumage, and even structure as regards bills and legs, which now elevate them to the position of sub-species."
I must confess that I have not the same masterful grip of such a comprehensive and recondite subject as our retiring President has, but as many of the new species I have lately described and a new one described in this issue are and will be necessarily affected by the President's pregnant remarks, I shall be glad to receive information on the following points:—
(a.) When, approximately, did desert areas evolve consequent on a change in climate in the southern region of Australia; and from what trustworthy data did the President receive the impression that the Eastern and Western forms were at one time identical?
(b.) Since the "identity" period mentioned, have or have not the Eastern forms, or is it probable that they have, undergone any modification? If they have, how is it now possible to make a true comparison between the two forms?
(c.) Why is it that the Western forms alone (as suggested) have undergone modification; and why should not " complete isolation " be just as referable to Eastern Australia as to Western Australia, and just as effective in producing in the Eastern forms a departure from the hypothetical original species?
(d.) What difference exists at present in climate and rainfall between the relative and corresponding parts of the southern parts of Eastern and Western Australia?
(e.) Do not the desert areas impinge as well on Eastern Australia as on Western Australia?
In the same address the President warns members of the Union against creating new species on minor differences. If species are not to be created on minor differences, then I ask upon what
- ↑ See page 217.
