ALBERT R. MANN LIBRARY Cornett UNiversity Gift of Wiliam E. Davis, Jr. Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924090301874 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY (UA 3 1924 090 301 874 EVOLUTION. OF TI COLORS NORTH AMERICAN LAND BIRDS CHARLES A. KEELER. Committee of Publication: H. W. HARKNESS, H. H. BEHR, T. S. BRANDEGEE. Editor: TOWNSHEND STITH BRANDEGEE. PREFACE. The present paper has been written more with the hope of stimulating thought and inciting research in a new and as yet almost untrodden field of ornithological inquiry, than with the expectation of reaching definite results. The subject is as yet too new and difficult to be reduced to even the semblance of an exact science, and accordingly all the views here set forth are more or less provisional and tentative. I have constantly pro- ceeded upon the assumption that a poor theory is better than no theory, provided it be not considered as final, since it affords an opening wedge for the further study of a subject. Accordingly many of the views here set forth are hardly to be considered as more than guesses, and it is expected that future study will serve to show their fallacy. If they lead to this further study, however, and to more exact and comprehensive work by others, I shall be glad to see them overturned and their places filled by more worthy hypotheses. In the preparation of the work I have received much valuable assistance, which I here take pleasure in ac- knowledging. Much of the examination of specimens was done at the United States National Museum, the authorities of which kindly placed their collection of birds at my disposal. To Mr. Robert Ridgway I am in- debted for innumerable personal favors during my stay in Washington. His Manual of North American Birds has formed the systematic basis for this paper. Dr. L. al PREFACE. Stejneger assisted me very materially by his criticism and suggestions, he having devoted more attention to this subject than any other American ornithologist. Dr. Elliott Coues furnished me with several useful terms (some of them new), as well as many suggestions which have been of value. Mr. F.C. Test of Washington, Mr. Witmer Stone of the Philadelphia Academy of Sciences, and Dr. J. A. Allen and Mr. Frank M. Chapman of the American Museum of Natural History, have aided my work, both by placing their collections at my disposal and by furnishing me with valuable facts and sugges- tions. Dr. Allen’s important contributions to the sub- ject here discussed have been of far more service than the mere quotations indicate. To Mrs. Katharine Bran- degee and Mr. Frank H. Vaslit I desire to return thanks for their kind and painstaking revision of the proof, also to Mr. Walter E. Bryant, who read the proof for scientific terminology. BERKELEY, Cal., December 21, 1892. C. A. K. CONTENTS OUTLINE. I. INTRODUCTION. THE INHERITANCE OF ACQUIRED CHARACTERS............. THEORETICAL ASPECT OF THE SUBJECT. ........ 00.00 cee eee cece tenes Herepity. Introduction; 2; Lamarck, originator of the doctrine of use and disuse, 2; Hilaire, originator of the doctrine of environ- mental influences, 2-3; Darwin, doctrine of pangenesis, 3; Brooks and Galton’s modifications of this, 5; Morgan, criticism of pan- genesis, 5; Spencer, physiological units, 6; bearing of theories of heredity upon transmission of acquired characters, 7; Weis- mann, 7; value of his work, 8; immortality of protozoa, 8; mor- tality of metazoa, 9; Naegeli’s nucleoplasm theory criticised, 10; immortality of germplasm precluding the inheritance of acquired characters, 10; Vines’ criticism of Weismann, 11; Weismann’s reply to Vines, 13; Ryder, theory of heredity opposed to Weis- mann, 17; Morgan on cellular continuity, 19; Himer on same, 20; summary of argument between Weismann and his opponents, 21. Pammixis. Morgan’s criticism of, 22; Cunningham’s criticism, 23; Romanes on cessation of selection, 23; other theories to account for degeneration, reversal of selection (Romanes), economy of energy (Darwin), disuse (Lamarck), retardation (Cope), 24. PRACTICAL ASPECT OF THE SUBJECT. 2... 16. eee cee eee eens CONSEQUENCES OF DISPENSING WITH THE INHERITANCE OF ACQUIRED CHARACTERS. Cunningham, general consequences, 27; inability of accounting for origination of new characters, 27; inheritance of acquired characters by protozoa admitted, 28; Osborn, why should this factor become obsolete?, 28; Romanes, all variations must be. directly acquired, 28. EVIDENCE OF OBSERVED CASES OF TRANSMISSION. ABNORMAL TRANS- MIssIons. Cunningham on why mutilations are not transmitted, 29; Morgan, the transmission of mutilations not a proof of the inheritance of acquired characters, 29; Weismann on mutila- tions, 30; experiments with white mice, 31; Cunningham’s criti- cism of his observations on the feet of Chinese ladies, 31; Eimer, instances of observed cases of transmission of mutilations, 32-34; inheritance of artificially induced epilepsy in guinea pigs, 34. 27 villi CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. NoRMAL TRANSMISSIONS: observed instances of change due to environ- ment, 34; examples of changes in goldfish and brine-shrimp, 34-35; discussion of the validity of these examples as proofs, 35; after effects in plants illustrative of an hereditary rhythm, 36; change in environment not established in one generation, but only the predisposition to change, 37; inheritance of acquired habits, 38; Elliott’s examples, 38; these not proofs of inheritance, 39; Dar- win’s instances criticised by Ball, 40; results which can be best explained by transmission of acquired characters, 41; Romanes’ examples of instinct due to the transmission of acquired charac- ters, 41-42; zsthetic faculties of man, 42; Spencer’s three forms of evidence of transmission, 43; the first and third form untenable, according to Romanes and Ball, 43-44; correlation as a proof, 44; the giraffe as an illustration of correlation, 44; Ball’s criticism of this illustration, 45; further discussion of correlation, 46; Osborn on paleontological proofs of transmission, 46-48; Poulton’s reply to Osborn’s evidencs, 48; summary of discussion, 49-50. VARIATION AND NATURAL SELECTION................ 0.0.24 Scope and meaning of natural selection, 51; not creative (Schur- man), 51; conditioned by variation, 52; variations quantitative rather than qualitative, 52; how are new parts originated?, 53; variations must be advantageous to be favored by selection, 53; Romanes on useless variations favored by selection, 54. THEORIES EXPLAINING VARIATION... 0.0.00... cece eee tee eee Spencer’s physiological units, 55; Weismann on sexual combina- tions, 55; variations according to this view must be within the ex- tremes of ancestral modification, 55; Hartog’s objection, 56; Lloyd Morgan’s theory of organic compounds, 58; objections to this view, 59; Three views of the origin of variations, 59; spontaneous, uninfluenced by environment, 59; due solely to environment, 60; inherent tendency to vary in a specific direction, 60; conservative variations, 61; progressive variations, 61; Brooks’ secondary laws of variation, 62; conclusion concerning variations, 62. LAWS CONDITIONING EVOLUTION LAWS OF DEVELOEMENT pace dwaaacteticiitade Sa sada headiomme ee enee Bathmism, or growth force, 65; law of extent and density; 66; phylogenic extent and density, 67; metabolism, 67; law of sexual intensification, 68; Gulick’s criticism of Brooks’ theory of male progressiveness, 72; acceleration and retardation, 73; cause of ac- celeration, 74; the originator of the fittest, 75; bearing of the law of phylogenic extent and density upon acceleration and retardation, 76; law of concentration, 77. AWS OF ‘STRUCTURES cnc vevne cova cy acne eee HRVEawWeS cee ceeded s Homology, 77; successional relation, 77; parallelism, 78; adapta- tion, 78; geratology, 78; bilateral symmetry, 79; correlation of growth, 79. CONTENTS OUTLINE. Lawes OF HEREDITY cjccidiawe ooaa gaia wine oasis cb aaiswonmmaeteey news Uninterrupted or continuous transmission, 79; interrupted or latent transmission, 79; sexual transmission, 79; mixed or mutual transmission, 79; abridged or simplified transmission, 80. SEXUAL SELECTION GS. c662 seve 22 pases s soy 4 se ewawmary eames 284.0% Law of battle, 81; preferential mating, 81; Darwin’s and ‘Wallace’ 8 views compared, 82; relation of color of male to vitality and vigor, 82; color as related to integumentary expanse and complexity, 83. EVIDENCE OF SELECTION BY THE FEMALE. ............ 000.00 0cee eee Peckham on sexual selection among spiders, 84; Wallace’s ex- planation of sexual display by male birds, 85; the house-finch as an illustration of selection, 86; objection that each bird finds a mate, 87. DIFFICULTIES IN THE THEORY OF SEXUAL SELECTION AND ALTERNATIVE TIN POTHESES::: Saacuateove deste se. tatgam aedanina eae d ine Adaya Beddard on sexual dichromatism without selection, 89; difficulty of believing in a highly developed a«sthetic sense in birds, 90; Stolzman’s view of bright colors and appendages of male birds, 91; Romanes’ reply to Wallace’s objections, 92; Wallace on the esthetic sense in relation to sexual selection, 93; Poulton on the same, 94; Morgan on the esthetic taste of birds, 95; the beautiful in inorganic nature contrasted with the beauty of birds and in- sects, 96; Weismann on novelty as the cause of sexual selection, 97; Romanes on the beautiful among the lower forms of life, 97; coloration viewed from a general standpoint, 98; colors which have been evolved with reference to some percipient being, 99; implications of the theory of sexual selection, 100; Grant Allen on the mechanical explanation of the pleasure derived from color combinations, 100; the pleasure given to birds by color combina- tions is of this lower order, 101; synthesis of factors involved in the production of the sexual character of birds, 102. THE NATURE OF SPECIES. ...cs0ssucwces cuece os puae eee menian de On THE MEANING AND LIMITATIONS OF THE TERM................-5 Natural and artificial modes of classification, 103; the basis of a natural system, 103; relativity of the term species, 104; definition of species as used in science, 105. On THE RELATION OF EVOLUTION TO SPECIES............. 00c ccc eee Species necessary for rationality in evolutionary progression, 106; Romanes on the preservation of the species by natural selection, 106; objections to Romanes’ view, 107; reproduction as growth beyond the individual as an explanation of the origination of altruistic characters and traits, 108; necessity for natural selection to preserve family, and in some instances the tribe, but not the species, 109. 80 84 88 103 103 106 x CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. ISOLATION AS A FACTOR IN THE EVOLUTION OF SPECIES. 110 PHYSIOLOGICAL SELECTION. 20.0.0. 00 0.0 cece ee cece cen ee cee eee ees Romanes’ three difficulties in natural selection considered as a theory of the origin of species, 110; explanation of physiological selection, 111; sterility of species, 111; variations in the repro- ductive system as correlated with other variations, 113; on the swamping effects of interbreeding and the inutility of specific characters, 114; objections to physiological selection by Meldola and Galton, 115; Romanes’ reply to these objections, 116; Wal- lace’s objections, 117; Romanes’ reply to Wallace, 118; Seebohm’s criticisms, 121; Romanes’ answer, 122; Dyer’s criticisms, and Romanes’ refutation of his objections, 123; conclusions concern- physiological selection, 124, — GULLICK ON ASOLATION je. an42 +a ngusedn enn wee esa sens AE RE II. ON Resemblance and difference between the view of Romanes and Gulick, 125; criticism of his views, as ignoring the origin of varia- tions, 126; necessity for isolation established, 127; forms of isola- tion, 128 ef seg. THE COLORS OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. MODES OF PLUMAGE CHANGES............. 0000.0 0ce ee ee By the feather itself becoming altered in color, 133; by the wear- ing off of the lengthened lighter-colored tips of the feather, 135; classification of different modes of plumage change, 137. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF COLOR IN BIRDS................. On the physical and mechanical causes of color effects, 137; state- ment of the theory of bird colors to be elaborated, 139; law of as- sortment of pigments, 140; examples illustrating this law, 140; on generalized and specialized colors, 142. THE PROPORTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE COLORS IN THE PATTERN OF MARKINGS On NORTH AMERICAN GENERA... 2.0.0.0... 00.00.0200 0004 On the general distribution of the fundamental colors among North American genera, 143; the bearing of these facts on the law of the assortment of pigments, 145; the proportion and distribu- tion of black, 146; white, 151; black and white as cognate colors, 152; the proportion and distribution of red, 153; red and yellow as correlative colors, 154; examples showing this interdependence, 155; the proportion and distribution of yellow, 157; blue, 157; generalizations from foregoing facts, 158. FN DIVIDUAT: PWATHERS) 35.000 tec cme aa cae nd + aleden Sem paws GOA Feather markings as affected by the general laws of growth, 159; x Eimer and Kerschner on feather markings, 162; secondary pig- 110 125 132 137 143 159 159 CONTENTS OUTLINE.’ xl mentation to be accounted for by metabolism, 163; examples illus- trating the’ method. of pigment assumption, 163; successional taxology, 164; further examples of successional taxology, 164; study of the pattern of markings on the wing of Falco sparverius, 165; the significance of successional taxology; 169; natural selec- tion as a factor in the origination of feather marks, 170; repeti- tive marks, 171; hybrid feathers, 172; examples of hybrid feathers, 173; classification of the different forms of hybrid feathers, 174; explanation of the different forms of hybrid feathers, 174; pseudo- hybrids, 177. ; $3 , ON THE GENERAL PATTERNS OF Bred COLORS...;... ..... feed eaten caw 17D Eimer’s law of posterior-anterior progression of ‘markings, 179; markings of the primitive plumage, 180; characteristic types of markings, and those which seldom or never occur, 180; Dr. Har- rison Allen on the relation between large masses of muscular and nervous tissue and color patches, 182; on the location of color patches on the most conspicuous parts of the body, 183; the superciliary stripe, 185; on the markings of the head,‘ 186; rela- tion between laws of growth and selection in the production of these markings, 190; wing markings, 190; tail: markings, 191. RECOGNITION MARRS ij ocj carne ye sence gece gE ds oak eyes Gase 193. Markings considered from the standpoint of their utility, 193; Poulton’s classification on this basis, 194; protective colors (pro- cryptic), 195; aggressive colors (anticryptic), 197; false warning colors (pseudosematic), 198; warning colors (aposematic), 200; recognition marks proper (episematic), 200; Wallace on recogni- tion marks, 200; Todd on directive colors, 201; classification of recognition markings, 201; recognition at a distance and at close range, 203; recognition markings among the grouse, pigeons and hawks, 204; tail markings of the Caprimulgids, 207; law of sexual recognition, 209; socialistic markings, 210. VARIATION OF COLOR WITH SEX, AGE AND SEASON........ 211 Individual variation in bird markings, 211; epigamic colors, 211; Darwin’s classification of birds according to the variations in plumage with sex, age, and season, 212; additional classes, 213; revised table of classification, 214; male like female, young like adult, 214; male like female, young differ from adult, 216; re- semblance of sexes differing with the seasons, or both sexes alike and varying with the seasons, 218; male more conspicuously colored, young like female, 221; male more conspicuously col- ored, young with peculiar first plumage, 222; male more con- spicuously colored, young of each sex resembles its respective adult, 223; adult male more conspicuously colored, young male unlike adults of either sex, 224. xii CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. THE DIRECT INFLUENCES OF THE ENVIRONMENT.......... 225 Beddard on the general effects of food on color, 226; Stejneger’s theory of melanism and albinism, 226; Sauermann’s experiments in changing color by food, 227; influence of temperature, moist- ureand sunlight on food, 229; instances where intensifying and bleaching has been the result of the presence or absence of sun- light, 2830; Garman on the bleaching power of sunlight, 231; ob- jections to Garman’s theory, 231; pale colors of the under parts of animals due to the absence of sunlight, 232; reconciliation of this view with the bleaching effect of sunlight, 233. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION AS A FACTOR IN THE EVOLUTION OF COLORS... 2. .cccue cise see sneer eee 234 General survey of the faunal areas of North America, in their relation to extralimital faunas, 234; birds of the Boreal area, 235; absence of brilliantly colored genera among boreal forms, 236; reasons for this lack of specialization among northern forms, 237; brilliancy of tropical species, 238; Beddard on special relations of color to geographical distribution, 238; on the resemblance of the colors of Sturnella and Macronyx, 239; Ridgway on the relation between color and geographical distribution, 241; Spinus psaltria as an instance of melanism as related to distribution, 241; other ex- amples of melanism toward the south, 243; intensification in yellow toward the tropics, 243; intensification of red with change in climate, 244; increase in blue from north to south, 245; Cyano- citta stelleri studied with reference to the connection between color marks and geographical distribution, 245; J. A. Allen on the relation between climate and geographical races, 247; Melospiza Jasciata as an instance of the result of climatic influence, 248; the ice age as a factor in isolation, 249; examples of forms produced by an east and west isolation, 250; examples of north and south isolation, 252; varieties or closely related species whose ranges overlap, 253; particular instances where the different races cannot have been produced solely by climatic influences, 255; Myiarchus as an example of species which have been produced by climatic influences alone, 256. ORDERS, FAMILIES, AND GENERA OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS, CONSIDERED FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THEIR PY OTs WELTON onssocareisiont sited Wei Nah Ro eewteath-o2 s suawle niga niaed: AeA 257 BIBLIOGRA BEY: ccmdea saae wei uens see wate 6 ee’ aaa wh BETO 337 EXPLANATION, OF PARES Gs 45 4 sig Saeaede vadohe 4444 paeawe Manes 345 THE EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF NORTH AMER- ICAN LAND BIRDS. I. Inrropuction. A few words of explanation may be said with regard to the greatly disproportionate length of the introductory portion of this work. To the uninitiated the most perfect harmony is commonly thought to prevail concerning the great problems of evolutionary philosophy, but once within the circle of current scientific thought and the reverse is found to be true. Instead of harmony, discord is discovered. There is hardly one of the important doctrines concerning which a consensus of scientific opinion has been attained. To be sure, all maintain that Darwinism or natural selection is a factor in evolution, but while some hold it to be the only factor, and all-suffi- cient in the creation of species, others believe it to be a very minor agency, and relegate it to the post of inspec- tor-general of the army of life. With regard to sexual se- lection the same diversity of opinion prevails, one school advocating sexual selection as the sole agent in produc- ing the brilliant colors and varied plumes of male birds, etc., the other extreme asserting that sexual selection as a factor in evolution is a myth. Still greater is the di- versity of opinion and more intense the feeling in regard to that momentous question which is at present agitating the troubled sea of scientific thought—the transmission of acquired character. In view of all this disagreement, it is quite impossible to undertake any general scientific investigations in the field of evolution without a tolerably thorough survey of the whole ground. With this end in view, and merely as a preparation for the more particular investigations of the work, these preliminary pages have been written. The tenability’ of the theories here advanced need not 2 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. materially affect the work of the second part, although the theories concerning the special investigations in the evolution of color in birds are largely founded upon the principles laid down in Part I. Although this first part is necessarily of a general character, nothing has been inserted which has not some bearing upon the investiga- tions which follow. An attempt has been made to dis- cuss the general principles of evolution according to a logical system, the subject of the inheritance of acquired characters being treated first, as it is the most funda- mental question in dispute. The doctrine of evolution is by no means modern in its conception, having been dimly foreshadowed from the days of Aristotle; but it was first suggested in a plausible scientific form by Jean Lamarck, who, in 1809, published his Philosophie Zoologique. He attempted to account for the changes in organic forms almost ex- clusively by the principles of the use and disuse of parts of which doctrine he was the originator. His views were hardly noticed at the time they were announced, but a little later Geoffroy St. Hilaire was more successful in calling the attention of the scientific world to his own closely related theory of the action of the environment in producing the changes in organic beings; although his views were not generally accepted by the naturalists of the day The nature and extent of his theory is ex- plained in the following words of Haeckel.* ‘‘ He con- ceives the organism as passive, In regard to the vital conditions of the outer world, while Lamarck, on the contrary, regards it as active. Geoffroy thinks, for ex- ample, that birds originated from lizard-like reptiles, simply by a diminution of the carbonic acid in the at- mosphere, in consequence of which the breathing pro- *History of Creation, I., p. 117. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 3 cess became more animated and energetic through the increased proportion of oxygen in the atmosphere. Thus there arose a higher temperature of the blood, an in- creased activity of the nerves and muscles, and the scales of the reptiles became the feathers of birds,” etc. The principle of use and disuse, and the transmission of acquired characters, are very closely related and stand or fall together. Darwin, in his Origin of Species, and throughout all his subsequent writings, accepted them both as supplementary to his own doctrine of natural selec- tion, in accounting for the origin of species. It was, of course, generally admitted that an individual could, dur- ing the course of its life, acquire characters peculiar to itself, or could modify its parts by use or disuse. More- over, it was commonly held that such modifications could be transmitted by the individual to its offspring. To this view Darwin was committed, and in order to ex- plain it in a rational way he formulated the provisional hypothesis of pangenesis, which he describes in the fol- lowing language: ‘‘ This important distinction between transmission and development will be best kept in mind by the aid of the hypothesis of pangenesis. According to this hypothesis, every unit or cell of the body throws off gemmules or undeveloped atoms, which are trans- mitted to the offspring of both sexes, and are multiplied by self division. They may remain undeveloped dur- ing the early years of life or during successive genera- tions; and their development into units or cells, like those from which they were derived, depends on their -affinity for, and union with other units or cells pre- viously developed in the due order of growth.’’* Mr. Romanes has presented Darwin’s hypothesis of pangenesist in so able and comprehensive a manner *Descent of Man, p. 228. tWeismann’s Theory of Heredity by George J. Romanes. Contempo- rary Review. May 1890, pp. 686-699. 4 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. that in order to convey a proper understanding of the subject I cannot do better than quote his words in full. It is stated in the following seven assumptions: “1. That all the component cells of a multicellular or- ganism throw off inconceivably minute germs or ‘‘ gem- mules,” which are then dispersed throughout the whole system. 2. That these gemmules, when so dispersed and sup- plied with proper nutriment, multiply by self division, and, under suitable conditions, are capable of develop- ing into physiological cells like those from which they were originally and severally derived. 3. That while still in this gemmular condition, these cell seeds have one for another a mutual affinity, which leads to their being collected from all parts of the system by the reproductive glands of the organism; and that, when so collected, they go to constitute the essential material of the sexual elements—ova and spermatozoa being thus nothing more than aggregated packets of gemmules, which have emanated from all the cells of all the tissues of the organism. 4, That the development of a new organism, out of the fusion of two such packets of gemmules, is due to a summation of all the developments of some of the gem- mules which those two packets contain. 5. Thata large proportional number of the gemmules in each packet, however, fail to develop, and are then transmitted in a dormant state to future generations, in any of which they may be developed subsequently—thus giving rise to the phenomena of reversion or atavism. 6. That in all cases the development of gemmules into the form of their parent cells depends on their suit- able union with other partially developed gemmules, which precede them in the regular course of their growth. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 5 7. That gemmules are thrown off by all physiolog- ical cells, not only during the adult state of the organ- ism, but during all stages of development. Or, in other words, that the production of these cell-seeds depends upon the adult condition of parent cells; not upon that of the multicellular organism.” This theory has subsequently been varied in its details by Brooks, Galton, Herdman, and others. According to Brooks the ovary is passive and does not aid in the transmission of acquired characters, but the sperm cells contain gemmules which are thrown off from such parts as are undergoing change. Galton believed to a con- siderable degree in the continuity of the germ plasm, although also holding that acquired characters are in- heritable. For example, he says, ‘‘ From the well- known circumstance that an individual may transmit to his descendents ancestral qualities which he does not himself possess, we are assured that they could not have been altogether destroyed in him, but must have main- tained their existence in a latent form. Therefore each individual may properly be considered as consisting of two parts, one of which is latent and only known to us by its effects on his posterity, while the other is patent, and constitutes the person manifest to our senses.”* These latent characters he considered to be transmitted from generation to generation by means of a portion of the gemmules of the fertilized ovum which remained unde- veloped. Although at first adopting an hypothesis of pangenesis he afterwards abandoned this for a theory of the continuity of the germ-plasin not unlike that of Weismann. Lloyd Morgan criticises the pangenetic hypothesis in the following well chosen words: ‘‘ The existence of * On Blood Relationship, Proc. Roy. Soc., 1872, p. 394. 6 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. gemmules, then, is unproven, and their supposed mode of origin not in altogether satisfactory accordance with organic analogies. Furthermore, the whole machinery of the scheme of heredity is complicated and hyper- hypothetical. It is difficult to read Darwin’s account of reversion, the inheritance of functionally acquired char- acters and the non-inheritance of mutilation, or to fol- low his skillful manipulation of the invisible army of gemmules, without being tempted to exclaim—What cannot be explained, if this be explanation? and to ask whether an honest confession of ignorance, of which we are all so terribly afraid, be not, after all, a more satis- factory position.””* Haeckel’s plastidule theory and Spencer’s theory of physiological units do not differ very essentially from Darwin’s hypothesis of pangenesis, although Spencer’s idea is a much less crude one. He finds that the units of which an organism is composed have the property of arranging themselves in a definite form or sequence, and then proceeds to enquire into the nature of these units. He first shows that they cannot be chemical, for the chemical composition of the various organic bodies which arrange themselves in such diverse shapes is essentially alike in all cases. Neither can morphologi- cal units be accepted as final. The simple cell is the morphological unit, but certain tissues arise directly out of the formative substance without the intervention of acellular stage. Moreover, certain non-cellular or- ganisms, such as Rhizopods, are capable of transmitting peculiar specific characters. From these exceptions it is evident that this formative power does not reside in cells; and consequently both chemical and morphologi- cal units are disposed of. Spencer then argues for = Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 137. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. ve physiological units in the following terms:* ‘If, then, this organic polarity can be possessed neither by the chemical units nor the morphological units, we must conceive it as possessed by certain intermediate units, which we may term physiologicul. There seems no alter- native but to suppose, that the chemical units combine into units immensely more complex than themselves, complex as they are; and that in each organism, the physiological units produced by this further compound- ing of highly compound atoms, have a more or less dis- tinctive character.” Before considering the subject of heredity in further detail, it may be well to pause a moment to consider its bearing upon the question in hand—the inheritance of acquired characters. Obviously the nature of the me- chanical process by which heredity is made possible must most decisively determine what the possibilities of heredity are—just what characters can be inherited, and what characters cannot (if any such exist). Darwin be- gan with the assumption that all characters could be in- herited and framed his theory of heredity upon this assumption. In this he was followed by the various subsequent writers on the subject, with the exception of Spencer, whose theory does not appear to be designed with the express view of accounting for the inheritance of acquired characters, but rather to have been con- structed inductively. Such was the state of the case when, in 1885, Mr. A. E. Shipley in an article in ‘‘ The Nineteenth Century,” called the attention of English and American scientists to the views of Prof. August Weismann, of Freiburg. Since then two editions of an English translation of the collected essays of Prof. Weismann on the subject of *Principles of Biology, I, 183. 5 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. heredity have appeared, the second in 1891. Prof. Weismann’s views, although not entirely original, are stated with such a rigid consistency to all the conse- quences which they involve, are fraught with such un- usual and daring speculations, and so vitally affect many of our scientific dogmas, that they have caused a re- markable revolution in the scientific world. By many English biologists these new views have been received with great favor. Wallace has thrown the weight of his approval with them. With such avidity have they been accepted that one is almost tempted to feel that a reac- tion must ultimately follow. In America the case has been directly the reverse. Instead of meeting with favor they have been passed by in silence, questioned, doubted, denied, and even in some cases treated almost with scorn and ridicule. Against such an extreme as this also, reaction seems inevitable. The chief value of Weismann’s work, regardless of how correct or incorrect it may ultimately prove to be, is the fact that he has attacked the problem of heredity from an entirely new point of view, and has set the sci- entific world to thinking. It will be advisable to con- sider his speculations in some detail, as bearing directly upon the subject under discussion. Weisinann commences his discussion with an inquiry into the nature of death. He asks why mortality should be a necessary consequence of life. In unicellular organ- isms reproduction takes place by fission. The life of one amieba cones to an end by the division of the parent into two equal halves, cach of which forms a new individual. “But,” as Weismann says, ‘this process cannot be truly called death. Where is the dead body’—what is it that dics? Nothing dies; the body of the animal only divides into two similar parts, possessing the same constitution. Each of these parts is exactly like its parent, lives in the EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 9 same manner, and finally also divides into two halves. As far as these organisms are concerned, death can only be spoken of in the most figurative sense.”* From this view of Weismann’s in regard to the immortality of pro- tozoa there has been but little dissent. The most seri- ous objection that has been raised to it is that of Maupas, who has shown that even among amceba conjunction is occasionally necessary to effect rejuvenescence, and who holds that, in consequence of this, even unicellular or- ganisms are mortal. Geddes and Thomson have well stated,} however, that Maupas’ experiments, instead of being contradictory to Weismann’s view, should be in- serted as a saving clause, for in a state of nature this rejuvenescence by coalescence does take place when needed and neither the organism as a whole nor any part of it dies. Having established the immortality of unicellular or- ganisms, Weismann attempts to account for the intro- duction of death into the economy of nature on the principle of the advantage to the race as a whole, of the sacrifice of the old and decrepit to the young and vig- orous. The weaknesses and fallacies of this part of his theory have been pointed out with especial force by Lloyd Morgan.? The fact seems to be tolerably well established that in protozoa death never normally ends the career of the organism, although of course violent death by accident is perfectly possible, while in metazoa death is the nat- ural outcome. Or, as Weismann explains it, there is no limit to the number of times an amceban cell can divide itself, but the cells of a more complex organism are lim- * Essays upon Heredity, 1891, I, p. 26. tEvolution of Sex, Humboldt Library, p. 240. tAnimal Life and Intelligence, pp. 184 and 193. 10 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. ited in their powers of reproduction and ultimately wear out. To this latter rule Weismann makes one important exception, viz: the germ cells. In the case of some in- sects and other invertebrates it has been demonstated that almost at the commencement of embryonic devel- opment the reproductive cells are setapart. In the case of these organisms it is evident that there is an immor- tal chain of reproductive cells from one generation to another. Observation has proved, however, that it is only in rarely exceptional cases that the reproductive cells are thus set apart, and that in ordinary metazoa they appear after the embryo is well advanced toward maturity. Weismann argues very reasonably that it is at variance with the laws of development to assume, as Neegeli does, the existence of a nucleoplasm which first develops into the more complex body cells and then be- comes simplified into reproductive cells; and he accord- ingly substitutes an hypothesis of hisown. He assumes the existence of germ-plasm intermingled with the body plasm and capable of producing the latter, although body plasm cannot be converted into germ-plasm. There is, then, in the higher metazoa, not an immortal chain of reproductive cells, but an immortal chain of germ-plasms. From this standpoint the heredity of acquired char- acters is obviously impossible. The germ-plasm cannot be influenced by the body plasm. The hypothesis, from its very nature places an effectual barrier against the in- heritance of acquired characters, and in case it could be demonstrated as true, it would be necessary to explain all such supposed cases of transmission in some other way. This is what Weismann and his followers have done, but before considering the evidence for and against such transmission of acquired characters, it will be ad- visable to consider how well founded this theory is. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 11 Prof. S. H. Vines has criticised it in an article enti- tled ‘‘ An Examination of Some Points in Prof. Weis- mann’s Theory of Heredity,” which appeared in Nature, October 24, 1889 (pp. 621-626). Prof. Vines admits the immortality of protozoa, but questions the explanation of Prof. Weismann as to how the immortal protozoa evolved into the mortal metazoa. He objects to Weis- mann’s suggestion of unequal fission as being no ex- planation, and asserts that if unequal fission were the cause it would be necessary to assume that a potential mortality already existed in protozoa. ‘‘It is impossible to conceive,” he says, ‘‘that unequal fission can take place in a cell consisting throughout of essentially the same kind of substance.’? Furthermore, as Prof. Vines points out, Weismann claims that the germ-plasm is located chiefly in the nucleus of the germ-cell, but does not explain of what the remaining portion of the germ- cell consists. Obviously it must be somatoplasm, which is mortal, despite the fact that Weismann has asserted that the entire germ-cell is immortal. Prof. Vines suggests as an explanation of the paradox, ‘‘ the assump- tion that the substance of the nucleus determines the nature and character of the cell.” Admitting the above explanation that the protozoon contains both somato- plasm and germ-plasm, it is easy to understand how un- equal fission might separate the one from the other, thus originating two forms of cells, mortal and immortal; but this Weismann is not likely to admit, asserting as he does that the germ-plasm becomes changed into somato- plasm. ‘SIt is not a little remarkable,” says Prof. Vines, ‘that Prof. Weismann should not have offered any sug- gestion as to the conception which he has formed of the mode in which the conversion of germ-plasm into so- matoplasm can take place, considering that this assump- 2 12 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. tion is the key to his whole position. He has been at considerable pains to controvert the view that somato- plasm may be conyerted into germ-plasm; but in mak- ing the attack he has overlooked the necessity for de- fense.”’ Prof. Vines then gives quotations from Prof. Weismann illustrative of his theory of heredity, and of his assertion that germ-plasm must be a substance of great stability in order to be able to transmit all of the complex modifications which it acquires. He then con- tinues his objections as follows: A part of the germ- plasm, Weismann claims, goes to the formation of the somatoplasm of the developing embryo, while what re- mains goes to the formation of the nucleus of the germ- cells of the embryo. But the germ-plasm of the ovum, Prof. Vines claims, cannot influence the somatoplasm of the embryo, even from Prof. Weismann’s standpoint. ‘“‘This function caunot be discharged,” he says, ‘“‘ by that portion of the germ-plasm of the ovum which has become converted into the somatoplasm of the embryo, for the simple reason that it has ceased to be germ-plasm und must therefore have lost the properties characteris- tic of that substance. Neither can it be discharged by that portion of the germ-plasm of the ovum which is aggregated in the germ-cells of the embryo, for under these circumstances it is withdrawn from all direct rela- tion with the developing somatic cells. The question remains without an answer.” So much for the criticism from Prof. Weismann’s own standpoint. From Prof. Vine’s position it is open to a still more vital attack. Claiming as he does that the possibility of germ-plasm being converted into somatoplasm is an unwarrantable assumption on the part of Prof. Weismann, Prof. Vines cannot but assert that the entire theory of germ-plasm which is built upon this assumption, must collapse. Furthermore, inasmuch as the embryo is not formed EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 13 solely from that part of the nucleus which is purported to be the chief bearer of the germ-plasm, but from the whole nucleus plus a portion of the cytoplasm of the ovum, it is evident that the somatoplasm must have some constructive powers as well as the germ-plasm; but this is the very thing denied by Prof. Wiseman, and if true, what would be the necessity of introducing the germ- plasm at all. The somatoplasm alone would be able to. be the bearer of hereditary characters, and we would then have a continuity of somatoplasm instead of a con- tinuity of germ-plasm. Prof. Weismann’s reply to the criticism of Prof. Vines* is of especial interest for it contains an epitome of his theories brought up to date. From it, it is possible to comprehend which of his views he still holds and which he rejects, a task of some difficulty in depending upon the series of his collected essays. In reply to the objec- tion of Prof. Vines that an immortal cell could not have changed into a mortal cell by fission unless there already existed within it a latent principle of mortality, Prof. Weismann appeals to the division of labor, saying: ‘From the one cell which performed all functions comes a group of several cells which distribute themselves over the work. In my opinion, the first such differentiation produced two sets of cells, the one the mortal cells of the body proper, the other the immortal germ-cells.” Surely Prof. Weismann does not consider immortality a function of amceban cells, or, if he does, cannot hold that mortality is another function possessed by the same cells! His explanation of the distinction between im- mortality and eternity is opportune and may throw some light on the subject. By biological immortality Weis- *Prof. Weismann’s Theory of Heredity; Nature, February 6, 1890, pp. 317 -323. 14 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. mann simply means that an organism has the potential power of renewing the cycle of its existence, as long as the environment conditioning its existence remains suitable. While it can be destroyed, it does not bear within it the seeds of decay. ‘‘If, then,” says Prof. Weismann, ‘‘this true immortality is but cyclical, and is conditioned by the physical constitution of the pro- toplasm, why is it inconceivable that this constitution should be under certain circumstances and to a certain extent, so modified that the metabolic activity no longer follows its own orbit, but after more or fewer revolutions comes to a standstill and results in death? All living matter is variable; why should not variations in the protoplasm have occurred which, while they fulfilled cer- tain functions of the individual economy better, caused a metabolism which did not exactly repeat itself, 2. e., sooner or later came to a condition of rest?” This explanation, although rather vague, does indeed seem to throw some light upon the way in which mortal- ity might have originated, but his appeal to panmixia to aid him seems wholly unwarrantable. He says: ‘‘I believe that organs no longer in use become rudiment- ary, and must finally disappear solely by ‘ panmixie’; not through the direct action of disuse, but because natural selection no longer maintains their standard of structure. What is true of an organ is true also of its function, since the latter is but the expression of the qualities of material parts, whether we can directly per- ceive their relations or not. If, then, as we saw, the immortality of monoplastids depends on the fact that incessant metabolism of their bodies is ever returning exactly to its starting point, and produces no such modi- fications as would gradually obstruct the repetition of the cycle, why should that quality of its living matter which causes immortality —nay, how could it be re- EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 15 tained—when no longer necessary?” The above pas- sage is open to two objections. First, he assumes pan- mixia as proved. In discussing this subject later on it will be shown that, on the contrary, panmixia appears to be largely untenable. Secondly, panmixia means a cessation of natural selection. If we assume with Weis- mann, as there seems every reason to assume, that the original unicellular organisms, and their living repre- sentatives to-day, possess a potential immortality or possibility of indefinite existence, we certainly cannot assume that some are more immortal than others. But if potential immortality be a natural attribute of life, why should natural selection be necessary to preserve this attribute, or from what could it make its selection? If natural selection is not requisite to maintain this standard of immortality, panmixia, assuming its po- tency in other instances, could have no influence in causing mortality, being merely the negative of natural selection. Prof. Weismann then replies to Prof. Vine’s criticism of his theory of embryogenesis and the continuity of germ-plasm. He asserts that Prof. Vine’s criticism is due toamisconception, that he does not claim that germ- plasm is ever converted into somatoplasm. In his second essay he had indeed contrasted the somatoplasm or the entire substance of the body with the germ-plasm or entire substance of the germ-cells, not having arrived at the time at the conclusions of Strasburger and O. Hert- wig, that hereditary transmission was effected solely by the chromatin of the nuclear loops. This view he had adopted when the fourth essay was written, and his theory was accordingly somewhat modified. He made use of Na- geli’s term, idioplasm, in an essentially different manner, applying it to the chromatin not only of the ovum- nucleus, but also of every cell in the body. This idio- 16 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. plasma he asserted to be the vital formative principle of every cell, what remained being merely nutritive. The general term somatoplasm was then of course abandoned. There are, then, according to this theory, two series throughout the body, one formative, the other reproduc- tive. The formative, which is the chromatin of the nu- cleus, passes under the general term of idioplasma. When present in the germ-cells it is called germ-plasm; in the body cells,‘‘ somatic idioplasm.”’ The nutritive sub- stance is what was previously known as somatoplasm. To it also a new term was given, ‘‘cytoplasma.” Hav- ing made these distinctions, Weismann explains his idea of embryogenesis. This takes place, according to his theory, by the successive halvings of the nuclear loops or germ-plasm. ‘‘ Each fresh cell-division,” he says, ‘sorts out tendencies which were mixed in the nucleus of the mother-cell, until the complex mass of embryonic cells is formed, each with a nuclear idioplasma which stamps its specific histological character on the cell.” A minute part of the idioplasm he assumes to remain un- changed when the first transformation occurs, in order to preserve the continuity of the germ-plasm. This fragment of germ-plasm migrates in an inactive condi- tion from cell to cell, until it comes to the spot where it develops into the germinal cells of the next generation. How, then, does the controversy between Prof. Vines and Prof. Weismann rest? Briefly, Prof. Vines has shown that Weismann has not accounted for the intro- duction of mortality in the order of life, although it is upon the assumption of such a differentiation of cells into mortal and immortal that his entire theory rests. Vines has not shown, however, that such a differentia- tion is impossible. Weismann, on the other hand, has. refuted the charge of the inconsistency of assuming that germ-plasm can be converted into somatoplasm, although EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 17 the reverse is impossible. From the destructive, it may now be well to turn to the constructive form of criticism. There have been two theories recently advanced in opposition to Weismann’s—one by J. A. Ryder and the other by Lloyd Morgan. Ryder has presented his theory in an article entitled ‘A Physiological Hypothe- sis of Heredity and Variations,” in the ‘‘ American Naturalist.* He considers Weismann’s views to be fanciful and visionary and admits of no possible com- promise. He agrees with Morgan that the introduction of a hypothetical germ-plasm, instead of making the question of heredity more simple, in reality complicates matters. He believes with H. Milne Edwards and Hux- ley that in the division of labor of the various cells of the body, all have been specialized beyond the point where further embryonic development is possible, with the exception of the reproductive cells which remain un- specialized, and hence capable of development. Spencer confirms this view of the simplicity of the reproductive cells. He says: t‘‘ The marvellous phenomena initiated by the meeting of the sperm-cell and germ-cell, natur- ally suggest the conception of some quite special and peculiar properties possessed by these cells. It seems obvious that this mysterious power which they display, of originating a new and complex organism, dis- tinguishes them in the broadest way from portions of organic substance in general. Nevertheless, the more we study the evidence the more is this assumption shaken—the more are we led towards the conclusion that these cells have not been made by some unusual elaboration, fundamentally different from all other cells, * * * the organs for preparing sperm-cells and germ- *Vol. 24, p. 85. tPrinciples of Biology, I, pp. 219-220. 2 18 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. cells have none of the specialty of structures which might be looked for, did sperm-cells and germ-cells need endowing with properties essentially unlike those of all other organic agents. On the contrary, these reproduc- tive centers proceed from tissues that are characterized by their low organization.” Besides the accusation of producing unnecessary con- fusion by the introduction of the mystical germ-plasm, Ryder has a much more serious charge to prefer against Weismann. He claims that the isolation of the germ- plasma in the germ-cell is in conflict not alone with the principles of metabolism, upon which modern physiology stands, but also with the law of the conservation of en- ergy. ‘‘ Modern physiology,” he says, ‘‘as well as the doctrine of the conservation of energy, positively forbids us to interpose any barrier between the plasma of the parent-body and that of the germ-cells, as is done by the promulgators of the hypothesis of the continuity and isolation of the germ-plasma.” What, then, is Ryder’s theory? Briefly this: All cells of the body haye some reproductive power, as shown by the healing of a wound among the most specialized organisms, by the restora- tion of a lost lim} among lower forms, or of a lost organ, as the eye, for example, by still lower, and by the power of the lowest metazou and some plants of forming anew individual from a fragment of the parent. The lower in the scale of life we penctrate, the more generally diffused and potent do we find this regenerative power. The logical inference from this is that reproductive force is most powerful where the specialization is least. *The reproductive cells would accordingly be the least special- ized cells of the body. Moreover, they are the only cells which are normally passive and functionless. The spe- cific molecular character of the reproductive cells, then, according to Ryder, together with the molecular tenden- EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 19 cies of all the cells of the body form the efficient force for the production of a new individual. This theory would allow, nay, even necessitate, the inheritance of acquired character. Prof. Ryder states this as follows: ‘‘ Molecu- lar impressions experienced in the course of variations in the modes of manifestation of, or of disturbance of the balance of the metabolism of the parent-body, are sup- posed upon this view to be transmitted as molecular tendencies to the idle or passive plasma of the germ- cells. Variations in the molecular constitution and tendencies of the germinal matter are supposed to thus arise at different times in the same parent, and that, consequently, successive germs may be thus differently impressed.” The above view does not seem to be fundamentally different from Haeckel’s plastidule theory, although Ry- der classes the latter with those from which his own is a departure. The chief objection to it is its vagueness, and it is to be hoped that Prof. Ryder may elaborate it at some time. There appears to be nothing expressed in Lloyd Morgan’s views contradictory to the theory above stated. Morgan lays the greatest stress upon cellular continuity. He regards ‘‘the sharp distinction between body-plasm and germ-plasm as an interesting biological myth.’”? He expresses his views on cellular continuity as follows:* ‘The nucleus is the essence of the cell. And the doc- trine of cellular continuity emphasizes the fact that the nuclei of all the cells of the body are derived by a pro- cess of divisional growth from the first segmentation nucleus which results’ from the union of the nuclei of the ovum and the sperm. In this sense, then, however late the germinal cells appear as such, they are in direct * Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 142. 20 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. continuity with the germinal cell from which they, in common with all the cells of the organism, derive their origin. In this sense there is a true continuity of germ- cells.” Morgan, like Ryder, believes the reproductive cells have been set apart in the division of labor, and in this he is in accord with Weismann. The agreement is not carried out in the details, however. Morgan says:* ‘« Cell-reproduction is, however, in the metazoa of two kinds. There is the direct reproduction of differentiated cells, by which muscle-cells, nerve-cells, or others re- produce their kind in the growth of tissues or organs; and there is the developmental reproduction, by which the germinal cells under appropriate conditions repro- duce an organism similar to the parent. The former is in the direct line of descent from the simple reproduc- tion of amceba. The latter is something peculiarly metazoan, and is, if one may be allowed the expression, specialized in its generality.” Prof. Eimert expresses himself in similar terms with regard to the continuity of body cells. He says: ‘If the body of the multicellular organism is thus, even according to Weismann’s ideas, of secondary importance in comparison with the germ-plasm, if the latter corres- ponds to the unicellular organism, it follows that the multicellular is just as immortal or mortal as the uni- cellular. And thus it is impossible to see why, between the germ-plasm of the multicellular on the one hand, and that of the unicellular on the other, there should exist this profound difference, that the latter acquire characters during life and transmit them by heredity, the former not, how the former any more than the “le, p. 143. tOrganic Evolution; English Translation, p. 71. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 21 latter can nourish itself and grow without being influ- enced in its nature by its nurture.” The above discussion of the views of Weismann and his opponents is merely intended as a statement of the case in an unprejudiced light so that a provis- ional conclusion may be reached, at least on some of the points in dispute. A brief summary of the details in which the two factions agree and differ may now be given: They agree: (1.) In the immortality of protozoa. (2.) That mortal metazoa have been evolved from lunmortal protozoa. (3.) That the reproductive cells have been set apart by the principle of the division of labor. Weismann claims: (1.) That there are two forms of plasma, germ- plasma which has a formative and cytoplasma which has a nutritive function. (2.) That the germ-plasma has the immortality of protozoa, while the cytoplasma is mortal. (3.) That the two plasmas are mutually isolated. Hence: (4.) That whatever may affect the cytoplasma of the body-cells can have no influence on the germ-plasma of the ovary. Or, in other words, that acquired characters cannot be inherited. His opponents claim: (1.) That there is only one form of plasma which may be called either somatoplasm or idioplasm. (2.) That, inasmuch as every individual is formed by repeated cell divisions of the germ-cell, there is an immortality of somatoplasm. (8.) That the inheritance of acquired characters is not in opposition to any known biological law. 22 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. According to Ryder’s hypothesis acquired characters must be inherited, but this hypothesis not yet having been demonstrated does not afford a proof that such characters are inherited. Morgan, on the contrary, points out the difficulty of framing an intelligible theory which will satisfactorily explain such inheritance, al- though at the same time claiming that there is no theo- retical evidence against it. This being the state of opinion in regard to the theories, it will be well to look to the so-called proofs of the inheritance of acquired characters; but before so doing one other theory of Weismann’s bearing upon the subject must be examined, viz: panmixia, or ” according to the cor- rected version. Panmixia, according to Weismann, means the ‘ sus- pension of the preserving influence of natural selec- tion,” over an organ, part or function no longer necessary for the welfare of the species. So far all very ce pammixis, ce well. We cannot quarrel with Weismann for giving a name to this cessation, but we can disagree with him as to the result which will be brought about; and this Lloyd Morgan las done so ably that I cannot do better than refer the reader to the passage.* Weismann claims that by this failure on the part of natural selection to maintain the standard of excellence of an organ, it will degenerate and ultimately disappear. Lloyd Morgan shows that pammixis can only produce a reduction from the survival mean to the birth mean. Selection, by chminating such individuals as possess inferior parts, makes the standard of excellence of the survival mean considerably above the standard of birth mean. If then, selection cease to operate, the birth mean stand- ard will be again restored. Ory, to express it in figures, “Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 1S9. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 23 if the birth mean standard of an organ equal 3, and the survival mean 5 when selection is operative, the standard cannot possibly fall below 3 when selection ceases. Mr. J. T. Cunningham criticises pammixis as follows:* “The fallacy of this argument is so obvious that it is surprising it should be for a moment accepted. For what is stated of the maxima variations is equally true of the minima. In the absence of all selection the minima variations will be combined in sexual union with variations superior to themselves, and therefore in each successive generation the minimum will be raised. Thus the only possible result of pammixis, on Weis- mann’s theory of variation, will be the production of uniformity in a disused or useless organ, and the de- generation or disappearance of such an organ will be absolutely impossible.” In an article on ‘‘ The Factors of Organic Evolution,”’} Prof. Geo. J. Romanes calls attention to the fact that he had enunciated the principle of pammixis under the name ‘‘ Cessation of Selection,” as early as 1873. He had not claimed, however, that this cessation of selec- tion could of itself produce the total disappearance of an organ or part. As an instance of this, he supposes a structure to have been raised from 0 to an average of 100, and then to have become wholly useless, so that natural selection would be no longer operative in main- taining the standard. Reversal of selection would then set in, due to economy of growth, and variations 101, 102, 108, etc., would be eliminated, while variations 99, 98, 97, etc:, would be favored. To continue the explana- tion in the writer’s own words: ‘‘For the sake of definition, we shall neglect the influence of economy * The New Darwinism, Westminster Review, July, 1891, p. 23. + Nature, XXXVI, Aug. 25, 1887, pp. 401-407. 24 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. acting below 100, and so isolate the effects due to the mere withdrawal of selection. By the conditions of our assumption, all variations above 100 are eliminated, while below 100 indiscriminate variation is permitted. Thus, the selective premium upon variation 99 being no greater than upon 98, 98 would have as good a chance of leaving offspring which would inherit and transmit this variation as would 99; similarly, 97 would have as good a chance as #8, and so on.” He then shows how there would be a constant tendency toward reduction in the part, but that the greater the reduction the less pos- sibility of future reduction would remain. ‘‘ Thus,” he says, ‘theoretically the average would continue to diminish at a slower and slower rate, until it comes to 50, where the chances in favor of increase and diminu- tion being equal, it would remain stationary.” Prof. Romanes then gives examples of parts which he thinks have degenerated through cessation of selection. He considers the cases where the phylogenic stages are omitted in the developing embryo to be instances in point, and argues that such omissions cannot be ex- plained by economy of growth, for in allied forms where economy would be equally operative the structure per- sists. Neither can the absence of such parts be due to disuse, Prof. Romanes contends, for they were not gen- erally produced by use. The case of hard coverings, which are developed by natural selection as a protection to certain unimals, and afterwards lost when their period of usefulness is past, is also cited as an example of de- ecneration without disuse Pammnixis, then, is not new as a theory, nor is it the only ayailable explanation of degeneration. Ro- mancs himself suggested three alternatives. Besides reversal of selection, he has stated two other factors, as follows: “(The first of them is inheritance at carlier EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 25 periods of life, which progressively pushes back the de- velopment of a rudiment to a more and more remote embryonic stage of growth; and the second is the event- ual failure of the principle of inheritance itself. For, ‘whether or not we believe in Pangenesis, we cannot but deem it in the highest degree improbable that the influ- ence of heredity is of unlimited duration.’”” The former of these two factors is the same as Prof. Cope’s principle of retardation, while the latter has also been independ- ently stated by Cope, as will be seen in a subsequent quotation. There are, then, five theories besides pam- mixis by which degeneration of parts may be explained, viz: (1) reversal of selection, (2) economy of energy, (3) disuse, (4) retardation, and (5) the failure of heredity. In some cases the loss of an organ or member is an ad- vantage, and then natural selection may aid in elimina- ting it. An instance of this is to be found in insects inhabiting islands, which would be blown to sea and perish if they possessed the power of flight, and in which the wings are aborted or entirely absent. There are many cases, however, in which there is no such direct advantage to be discovered in the reduction of a part. To some of these cases the principle of economy enun- ciated by Darwin might well apply. This principle assumes that the organism has a given amount of force to expend, and that if one part be useless the growth force which has been expended in maintaining it will be diverted to some other channel. Thus birds, like the ostrich, in which the wings are aborted, have legs pro- portionately powerful. The third principle is disuse. It is universally admitted that whenever a part is not used during the lifetime of an individual it degenerates to a certain extent. The principle of disuse merely assumes that such acquired degeneration can be inher- ited. Cope enunciated the fourth and fifth principles, 26 CALIVORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. independently of Romanes.* When any part or the whole of an individual is retarded in its growth, so that the animal begins to breed before reaching maturity, Cope holds that the descendents will be deficient in such parts as were not fully developed in the parent. The statement of the action of this law in producing degene- ration of parts is as follows: ‘‘ ‘ Retardation’ continued terminates in extinction. Examples of this result are common; among the best known are those of the atrophy of the organs of sight in animals inhabiting caves. * I would suggest that the process of reduction illustrates the law of ‘retardation’ accompanied by another phe- nomenon. Where characters which appear latest in em- bryonic history are lost, we have simple retardation— that is, the animal in successive generations fails to grow up to the highest point of completion, falling farther and farther back, thus presenting an increasingly slower growth in the special direction in question. Where, as in the presence of eyes, we have a character early assumed in embryonic life, retardation! presents a somewhat different phase. Each successive generation, it is true, fails to come up to the completeness of its pre- decessor at maturity, and thus exhibits ‘retardation;’ but this process of reduction of rate of growth is followed by its termination in the part long before growth has ceased in other organs. This is an exaggeration of retardation, and means the carly termination of the process of force-conversion, which has been previously diminishing steadily in activity.” The subject of use and disuse need not be considered in further detail. From the above it is evident that there are many explanations of the phenomena of degenera- tion and that pamminxis cannot be at best more than one of several factors. * Origin of the Fittest, p. 13. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 27 Having disposed of the theoretical aspect of the ques- tion of use and disuse and the inheritance of acquired characters, a few words on the practical side of the case may now be in order. In the first place it will be advis- able to enquire what an acceptance of the views of Weismann involves. Some of the consequences are well shown by Mr. J. T. Cunningham, in his introduction to the English translation of Eimer’s Organic Evolution. He calls attention to the abnormally lengthened tongue of the woodpecker, which can be greatly protruded and thrust into holes to extract insects. The lengthened tongue, the Neo-Darwinians claim, has been produced solely by the selection of those individuals in which it was longest. They cannot but admit with the Lamarck- ians, however, that constant exercise of the tongue in the individual, especially the constant stretching to which it would be subjected in the effort to reach far- ther, would increase its length; but in admitting this they have involved themselves in the paradox of assum- ing that the tongue has become lengthened during the course of ages, and that it has also been lengthened in the individual by the Lamarckian factor of use and dis- use, but that the lengthening which has occurred in the race is in no wise related to the lengthening that has taken place in the individual. ‘‘ Which is very like the argument,” says Cunningham, ‘‘ that the /liad and the Odyssey were not written by Homer, but by another man of the same name who lived at the same time.” Another difficulty in the way of the Neo-Darwinian argument to which Cunningham, among others, has called attention, is its inability to account for the origin of totally new characters. Even though it may be able to account for the lengthened neck of the giraffe by selection, it is impossible, Cunningham argues, to ex- plain the origin of horns by this principle. From what 28 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. is the selection to be made? ‘‘ No other mammals,” he says, have ever been stated to possess two little symmet- rical excrescences on their frontal bones as an occasional variation; what then caused such excrescences to appear in the ancestors of horned ruminants? Butting with the forehead would produce them, and no other cause can be suggested which would.” An invonsisteney which has been pointed out by Romances, Osborn and Le Conte, ix the fact that the Neo- Darwinians admit the Lamarckian factors among proto- zoa. Romanes has pointed this out with especial clear- ness in his article entitled ‘ Weismann’s Theory of Heredity ”’* He calls attention to the fact that inas- much as natural selection is unavailing without varia- tion, aud that variation, according to Weismann’s view is due to the sexual admixture of different traits, there can be no individual variation among unicellular and parthenogenetic organisms, and hence natural selec- tion cunnot be a factor in producing new forms. Weis- mann, indeed, sees this to be the case and admits that modifications in such animals must be due solely to the direct action of the environment. Two objections have here been interposed. Prof. Osborn asks why, if the direct action of the environment was once a factor of evolution, as Weismann adinits, it should ever have ceased to be such if its period of usefulness did not ter- minate.t Now it is apparent that the period of useful- ness of the Lamarckian factors does not terminate with the protozoa, and couscquently natural selection itself would have tended to preserve them. Prof. Romanes’ suggestion was not stated in the form of an objection, although such is clearly imphed. It is in brief as fol- Contemporary Review, May, 1890, pp. 686-699. tAmevican Naturalist, xxiii, p. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 29 lows: The germ-plasm of Prof. Weismann is a highly stable substance unaffected from within or without. Variations occur by sexual admixture, but as there is an immortal chain of germ-plasm all variations may be ultimately referred back to the unicellular organism, and hence all variations must have heen due originally to the direct actions of the environment in producing changes in the protozoa. In considering the observed cases of transmission of acquired characters, the subject of the supposed trans- mission of mutilations may be first discussed. As is well known, many cases of such transmission are on record, but Weismann has shown that a large number of these are untrustworthy. Undue significance however, has been attached to the validity of such cases. In his in- troduction to the English translation of Eimer’s Organic Evolution, Mr. J. T. Cunningham has made a sugges- tion, the importance of which has been generally over- looked. He says: ‘‘The fact that artificial malforma- tions are not usually inherited is no argument against the inheritance of acquired characters. In all animals, from the lowest up to reptiles, recrescence of lost parts takes place, and the reappearance of lost parts in the next generation in mammals and birds seems to me to be simply recrescence slightly postponed.” Lloyd Morgan, speaking of the evidence of the inherit- ance of acquired characters, says:* ‘‘Attempts have been made to furnish such evidence by showing that certain mutilations have been inherited. I question whether many of these cases will withstand rigid criticism. Nor do I think that mutilations are likely to afford the right sort of evidence one way or the other. We must look to less abnormal influences. What we require is evidence *Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 163. 30 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. in favor of or against the supposition that mudéfcautions of the body-cells are transmitted to the germ-cells. Now these modifications must clearly be of such a nature as to be receivable by the cells without in any way de- stroying their integrity. The destruction or removal of cells is something very different from this. If it were proved that mutilations are inherited, this would not necessarily show that normal cell-modifications are trans- missible. And if the evidence in favor of inherited mutilations breaks down, as I believe it does, this does not show that more normal modifications such as those with which we are familiar, as occurring in the course of individual life, are not capable of transmission.” Weismann has devoted some attention to the reported cases of the inheritence of mutilations, and has reached the conclusion that all the published instances are either untrustworthy or of such a character that they do not conclusively prove that a case of mutilation has ever been inherited. In commenting upon his explanation of reputed cases of the transmission of rudimentary tails, he says:* ‘We have seen that the rudimentary tails of cats and dogs, as far as they can be submitted to scientific investiga- tion, do not depend upon the transmission of artificial mutilation, but upon the spontaneous appearance of de- generation in the vertebral volumn of the tail. The opinion may, however, be still held that the customary artificial mutilation of the tail, in many races of dogs and cats, has at least produced a number of rudimentary tails, although, perhaps, not all of them. It might be maintained that the fact of the spontaneous appearance of rudimentary tails docs not disprove the supposition that the character may also depend upon the transmis- sion of artificial mutilation. * Essays on Here lity, 1891, I, p. 443. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 31 ‘‘Obviously, such a question can only be decided by experiments; not, of course, experiments upon dogs and cats, as Bonnet rightly remarks, but experiments upon animals the tails of which are not already in a process of reduction. Bonnet proposes that the question should be investigated in white rats or mice, in which the length of the tail is very uniform, and the occurence of rudimentary tails is unknown.” Weismann accordingly performed these experiments, and there can be no doubt that they have been done in a thorough and scientific manner. The result has been purely negative, mice of the fifth generation bearing young with the tails of normal length. Weismann, in- deed, admits that these experiments do not constitute a complete disproof of a possibility of transmitting mutila- tions, but justly claims that, in comparison with the cases of such supposed transmission occurring com- pletely in a single generation, and where but one parent was affected, the possibilities of transmissions were in- finitely greater in his experiment. If, however, the suggestion of Cunningham, that the non-inheritance of mutilation in higher animals is comparable with regen- eration of lost parts among lower forms, but delayed to the following generation, we can easily understand that while mutilations might be inherited, the contrary would be the rule, and such inheritance would be due to an abnormal condition of the organism. Cunning- ham, furthermore, not unjustly, insinuates that even the cautious Prof. Weismann may have been betrayed into asserting a little more than he knew in order to prove his point. For example, he says:* ‘‘ Prof. Weis- mann mentions the feet of Chinese ladies, which he says are still, when uncompressed, as large as if the * Organic Evolution, Translator’s Preface, p. x. 32 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. practice of artificially compressing them had not been practiced for centuries. But he does not tell us whether he ever saw a Chinese young lady, or if he has made any observations on the feet of Chinese young women.” Eimer has mentioned a number of cases of supposed mutilation which I have not seen refuted. In arguing for the inheritance of mutilations, he says:* ‘‘ That injuries, when continued for an extremely long time, may be inherited is proved, to my mind, by atrophied (rudimentary) organs. The degeneration of these organs depends incontestably on disuse; in consequence of dis- use the blood-supply is diminished, in consequence of the decrease of nutrition degeneration takes place. If we consider the course of gradual degeneration, e. g. of the tail as it must have taken place in the higher mam- mals, to have proceeded in this purely physiological manner from the tip toward the root, the process is much the same as if the tip of the tail had been in many successive generations amputated, and the short- ening had been inherited and then the shorter tail thus acquired had been farther shortened artificially, and so on. In any case, in the degeneration of the tail an acquired character has been inherited by the offspring, a character which, in the causes of its origin, is closely similar to a perpetually repeated mutilation. Great periods of time, however, have been necessary in this case for the accomplishment of a final result.” This example of Prof. Eimer’s seems, however, to be an assumption of the validity of the point in dispute. His opponents could, of course, claim that the reduction in the length of the tail was due solely to the selection of the shortest. His examples of observed cases of in- heritance of mutilations, however, do not appear to be * Organic Evolution, Eng. translation, p. 176. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 33 susceptible of the criticism of a misinterpretation of the facts. Two only need here be given.* ‘A. Decandolle describes one such case with the assurance that it is per- fectly true. In the year 1797 a girl twenty-one years old was thrown from a carriage, and in consequence had _a scar about five centimeters wide over the left ear and temple which remained without hair. Married in 1799, she bore a son in 1800, in whom the hair was absent from the same area and remained so. The son of the man, born in 1836, had no such defect, but it was pres- ent in his grandson born in 1866, and in 1884 in this last individual when he was eighteen years old the pecu- liarity was disappearing. ‘* Dr. Meissen of Falkenberg, records in the number of Humboldt for June, 1887, the following case of in- heritance of an injury in his own family: ‘When I was seven or eight years old I had the chicken-pox, and I recollect with complete distinctness that I scratched one of the pustules on the right temple in consequence of which I had a small white scar at this spot. Exactly the same scar, which I had of course ceased to think of, on exactly the same spot, was present on my little son, now fifteen months old, when he came into the world. The resemblance is so perfect that it surprises everyone who sees the little mark.’ ”’ It is unnecessary to multiply examples of reported cases of the inheritance of mutilations. A single trust- worthy instance is sufficient to offset an indefinite amount of evidence to the contrary; more especially when the Neo-Lamarckians themselves assert that ‘such inheritance, if it occurs at all, is abnormal. The explanation given by Weismann of the inheritance of epilepsy in guinea pigs as described in the experi- * Ti Cis ps HPF: 3 34 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. ments of Brown-Séquard and Obersteiner appears forced and inexcusably far-fetched, but it will be unnecessary to dwell longer upon such cases. Suffice it to say, that epilepsy superinduced by severing certain peripheral nerves has been transmitted to the following generation, but that Weismann evades the experiment, first by sug- gesting that it was merely the predisposition to the dis- ease—due to a general derangement of the nervous sys- tem that was inherited, and secondly suggesting that the disease was transmitted by microbes penetrating the reproductive cells. An almost endless number of instances have been re- ported of the transmission of acquired characters, while the Neo-Darwinians have replied to many of them, ex- plaining the facts after their own fashion. It will be obviously impossible to give all of the cases which have been brought to light, but a few representative ones may be detailed. The evidence divides itself into two classes, viz: observed instances of transformation which appear to be due to the direct action of the environment; and, second, structures, functions, or traits which could only have resulted from the inheritance of acquired charac- ters. In the first category may be mentioned the case of the Japanese goldfish of Dr. Wahl, which Prof. Ryder records,* which, by close confinement and abundant food, were greatly modified, ‘‘ enormous and abnormally lengthened pectoral, ventral, dorsal, double and caudal fins’ being developed. ‘‘Some of the races of these fishes have obviously been affected in appearance by abundant feeding,” he states, ‘‘as is attested by their short, almost globular bodies, protuberent abdomens and greedy hab- its,’ etc. Lloyd Morgan gives some interesting instances “Am, Nat., vol. 24, page 84. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 35 of observed cases of the direct action of the environment in affecting a race. One of the finest is the transforma- tion of the brine-shrimp, Artemia, reported by Schman- kewitsch: ‘‘One species of this crustacean, Artemia sa- lina,” says Lloyd Morgan, ‘‘ lives in brackish water, while A. milhausenii inhabits water which is much salter. They have always been regarded as distinct species, dif- fering in the form of the tail lobes and the character of the spines they bear. And yet, by gradually altering the saltness of the water, either of them was transformed into the other in the course of a few generations. So long as the altered conditions remained the same the change of form was maintained.” What is to be said of such cases? Do they constitute a proof positive of the inheritance of acquired characters? At first sight they certainly do appear to be conclusive and final, but a candid examination of them compels us to admit of the possibility of a different interpretation. The two examples mentioned are fairly representative of a large number of similar instances. The whole diffi- culty with them lies in the fact that when the organism is restored to its former conditions the change does not persist. Does the son of a blacksmith inherit the strong arms of his father? Probably he does, but this is not equivalent to asserting that he inherits the strength acquired by his father in following his vocation. It is not improbable that his father became a blacksmith be- cause he was naturally strong or was predisposed to develop unusual strength. We must first in every case assure ourselves that the predisposition does not exist in the animal and only requires a favorable environment to be developed. Secondly, it must be demonstrated that there is a progressive change from one generation to the next. This there apparently was in the case of the goldfish, for a period of six years was required for 36 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. the production of some of the forms. But even in cases where the change lasts only us long as the altered envi- ronment is operative, although the permanent transmis- sion of acquired characters is not demonstrated, it is rendered highly probable. Cunningham gives an excel- lent analogy illustrative of this. He says:* ‘Ifa plant with a vertical stem is placed in a horizontal position, the ight coming from above, the end of the stem will bend up toward the light, partly by growth, partly by flexure. Sucha plant wasso placed, and, after a certain time, when the upward flexure was established, it was turned round so that the tip pointed downwards. Of course the flexure was gradually reversed until the tip pointed upwards again. After the same interval the plant was reversed once more. This was continued for some days, the plant being reversed at regular intervals. At last, when the time came for turning the plant round, the operation was not performed, it was left undisturbed. But then the plant began to reverse its flexure of its own accord, and actually turned its tip downwards, away from the light. By the regularly repeated reversal of position a rhythm had been set up in the life of the plant, and even when the cause which excited this rhythm ceased, the rhythm continued.” Weismann himself gives some instances of these ‘after-effects 7 in plants, such as the case of the sun- flower, which is as follows: “ If vigorous plants of the sunflower, grown in the open air, be cut off close to the ground and transferred to complete darkness, the exam- ination of a tube fixed to the cut surface of the stem will show that the escape of sap does not take place uni- formly, but undergoes periodical fluctuation, being stronyest inthe afternoon and weakest in the early “The New Darwinism, Westminster Review, July, 185], p. 416. t Essays upon Heredity, 189], I. p. 416. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDs. 37 morning. Now the cause of this daily periodicity in the flow of sap depends upon the periodical changes due to the light to which the plant was exposed when it was growing under normal conditions. When plants which have been grown in darkness from the first are similarly treated, the flow of sap does not exhibit any such peri- odicity.” In commenting on these instances, Weis- mann says: ‘‘ All this is certainly very interesting, and it proves that periodical stimuli produce periodical pro- cesses in the plant, which are not immediately arrested when the stimulus is withdrawn,and only become uniform gradually andafter the lapse of a considerable time. But I certainly claim the right to ask what connection there is between these facts and the transmission of acquired characters? All these peculiarities produced by exter- nal influences remain restricted to the individual in which they arose; most of them disappear comparatively soon, and long before the death of the individual.” From the theoretical standpoint of Prof. Weismann this is doubtless correct. But it has been shown, I think, that Prof. Weismann’s theory of the continuity of germ- plasm is not only unproven but highly improbable. Moreover, it has been shown that the continuity of the body plasm is highly probable. But if this be true, then there is, to say the least, a strong analogy between a rhythm which can be established in the somatoplasm and repeated during the life of the individual and a rhythm which can be established in the history of a race. Cunningham has well pointed out, however, that the Neo-Lamarckians do not claim that a change due to the environment can be established in a single generation. All that is claimed is, that when a particular environ- mental influence is continued from generation to gen- eration, the offspring successively inherit a progressive 38 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. predisposition to be modified, until, in the course of time, the modification takes place, when the cause is no longer operative, as in the case of the after effects just considered. Mr. D. G. Elliot, in a recent address on the inheritance of acquired characters delivered before the American Ornithologists’ Union,* relates an instance of the ob- served inheritance of an acquired habit in birds as fol- lows: ‘‘Currituck Sound, in North Carolina, where wild fowl are accustomed to pass the greater portion of the winter, is a great resort of sportsmen, who pursue the birds in every way to accomplish their destruction. This, at length, was carried to such a degree that the fowl] had no place left for them to rest during the day. Some years ago the gunners were surprised to find that whenever the weather permitted, as soon as a gun was fired in the early morning the birds would rise and _ be- take themselves to the ocean, and remain congregated on the water just beyond the line of the breakers, and would not return until night closed in. This custom was acquired by birds of succeeding years, until the habit has become apparently established. Now it may be said that this is not an aeguéred habit, but the result of example, the old birds leading the young to the sea. But this would be to assume that the majority of the birds which commenced this habit had survived to re- turn to this locality every winter. And even if the young, without at first comprehending the reason for so strange a proceeding, merely followed the old birds, is it reasonable to suppose they would remain in such an unusual locality throughout the day, deprived of their food, which could be obtained in profusion on the other side of the narrow beach? It must have been something * Auk, ix, Jan. 1892, pp. 77-104. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 39 more powerful than the mere example of the flight of the old birds to the ocean, witnessed by the young for the first time, which compelled them to remain. Can we not more reasonably presume that it was the knowl- edge acquired by the parents that this was a secure method to escape from a threatened danger, and trans- mitted to the young, who assumed the habit as a part cf their nature?” Mr. Elliot then mentions numerous cases of the change of nesting habits in birds. He alludes to the instance reported by Coues in Birds of the Northwest, of the geese of the Yellowstone, which build in trees in- stead of on the ground, which is the usual habit of these birds. He furthermore calls attention to the case noted by Audubon of the change in nesting habits of the her- ring gulls on White Head Island, in the Bay of Fundy, which during the lifetime of a single man had deserted the ground in favor of trees owing to the perse- cution to which they had been subjected. ‘‘A remark- able effect of this transmission of an acquired charac- ter,” says Mr. Elliot, ‘‘ is that the young hatched in the trees do not leave the nest until they are able to fly, while those hatched in nests on the ground run about in less than a week and conceal themselves at the sight of man among the moss and plants.” But cannot these instances of Mr. Elliot’s be otherwise interpreted? JI think they can. It is impossible to prove the inheritance of acquired habits by citing ex- amples which could best be thus explained, but which might be otherwise accounted for. In the first instance mentioned, the majority of the birds which commenced the habit mght have survived. Or, a smaller number might have been sufficient if we admit that birds have sufficient language to give warning of danger. More- over, Mr. Elliot’s argument that the inducement of ob- 40 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. taining food would be so strong as to compel the young birds to ignore the example of their elders really reflects upon his own assumption, for it seems difficult to con- ceive that a new adjustment of such force as this instinct is supposed to be, could be inherited in the course of a few generations. The argument derived from the change in nesting habits appears to have still less force. Mr. Elliot assumes that nest building is an instinct, but this assumption is unproven and has been emphatically doubted by Wallace. In his Philosophy of Birds’ Nests,* he says: ‘‘ At all events, till the crucial experiment is made, and a pair of wild birds, raised from the egg with- out ever seeing a nest, are shown to be capable of mak- ing one exactly of the parental tvpe, I do not think we are justified in calling in the aid of an unknown and mysterious faculty to do that which is so strictly analog- ous to the house-building of savage men.” Darwin has given many instances of the inheritance of acquired habits which, however, have been skillfully combated by William Platt Ball.f He cites, for ex- ample, the inheritance by a colt of the paces of her mother, but suggests that “selection of the constitu- tional tendency to these paces, and imitation of the mother by the colt, may have been the real causes.”’ He calls attention to the fact that the songs of birds are not inherited, but are learned from their parents, and says: “Tf use-inheritance las not fixed the song of birds, why should we suppose that in a single generation it has transmitted a newly-taught method of walking or trot- ting.” He speaks of the supposed inheritance by dogs of the intelligence acquired by contact with man, which he explains thus: ‘‘ But selection and imitation are so “Natural Selection, pp. 108-109. + Ave the Effects of Use and Disuse Inherited?) Humboldt Library, pp 31-33. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 41 potent, that the additional hypothesis of use-inheritance seems perfectly superfluous. Where intelligence is not highly valued and carefully promoted by selection, the intelligence derivable from association with man does not appear to be inherited. Lap-dogs, for instance, are often remarkably stupid.” It seems to me that Ball does not establish his point in this instance. To be sure, it might be claimed that thoroughbred dogs had attained their intelligence through selection alone {although this I should be inclined to question), but such dogs are generally, if not universally, bred with one especial end in view, either speed, hunting qual- ities, fighting qualities, beauty or eccentricty; but how often are they bred for intelligence? Moreover the most intelligent dogs are not infrequently curs. A large number of the most remarkable stories of canine sagac- ity are told of animals without a pedigree. But these dogs have not been selected at all, for the most part. What is the fate of a large litter of puppies of a cur? A part of them are generally destroyed in early infancy, and this in a manner practically impartial so far as in- telligence is concerned. The rest are generally given away, but what evidence have we that the less intelli- gent of them are killed by their new masters, while the more intelligent survive to perpetuate the race? Romanes has called attention* to the inheritance of an instinct in dogs which he considers especially invul- nerable in support of the inheritance of acquired habit. For an instinct to have been established solely by nat- ural selection, it must be of sufficient importance to be essential to the life of the race, so that those individ- uals possessing it may alone survive. This is not the *The Factors of Organic Evolution. Nature. August 25, 1887-XXXYVI, p. 406. 42 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. case with the instinct which dogs possess of turning around several times before lying down, in order to trample down a bed, a relic of primitive comfort which surely could not have become established by the survival of the fittest. ‘ Or,” says Romanes, ‘‘if this instance be held doubtful, what shall we say to the courting in- stincts in general, and to the play-instincts of the bower- bird in particular, which are surely quite without mean- ing from any utilitarian point of view? And these in- stincts naturally lead to the wsthetic faculties of mankind, few of which can be possibly ascribed to natural selec- tion, as Mr. Spencer very conclusively shows.” Weismann and Ball have both combated this, as, in- deed, they are bound to do to be consistent with their theory. Thus Ball says: ‘‘ The emotional susceptibility to music and the delicate perceptions needed for the higher branches of art, were apparently the work of natural and sexual selections in the long past. Civiliza- tion, with its leisure and wealth and accumulated knowl- edge, perfects human faculties by artificial cultivation, develops and combines means of enjoyment and dis- covers unsuspected sources of interest and pleasure. a * But modern wsthetic advance seems to he almost entirely due to the culture of latent abilities, the formation of complex associations, the selection and encouragement of talent, and the wide diffusion and imitation of the accumulated products of the well-culti- vated genius of favorably varying individuals. The fact that uneducated persons do not enjoy the higher tastes, and the rapidity with which such tastes are ac- quired or professed ought to be sufficient proof that modern culture is brought about by far swifter and more potent influences than use-inheritance.”” What has Mr. Ball shown in the above paragraph? If he has proved anything it certainly is that natural selection has not EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 43 originated, even if it has been instrumental in the de- velopment of the wsthetic faculties. In speaking of the culture of latent abilities he has yielded a most import- ant point. There was obviously a time in the evolution of organic life when piano playing, or, in more general terms, appreciation of harmony, was not even a latent faculty. It would be taxing our credulity to assume, for example, that amceba possessed it. Then it must, at some time, have come into existence as a latent faculty, and later on been developed by use, or culture, as Ball calls it; and this developed faculty has been inherited. Spencer published in the Vineteenth Century for April and May, 1886, two essays, which have since appeared in a separate form, entitled ‘‘The Factors of Organic Evolution.” ‘‘ Among the most important criticisms of this work is the one by Romanes in an article bearing the same title, which appeared in Vutwre August 25, 1887; and Ball’s criticism in his pamphlet, ‘‘ Are the Effects of Use and Disuse Inherited?” Spencer gives three forms of evidence in proof of the inheritance of acquired characters—(1) the crowding of teeth in dogs and reduced size of the jaw in civilized man; (2) the correlation of different parts of the organisin, and (3) the apparent direct influence of the environment in altering the surface of an organism. Romanes and Ball agree that Spencer has failed to prove his first point. Romanes says, in regard to this: ‘Be it observed, I am not disputing that disuse may in both these cases have co-operated with the cessation of selection in bringing about the observed result. In- deed, I am rather disposed to allow that the large amount of reduction described in the case of the dogs as having taken place in so comparatively short a time, is strongly suggestive of disuse having co-operated with the cessa- tion of selection. But at present I am merely pointing 44 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. out that Mr. Spencer’s investigations have here failed to exhibit the crucial proof of disuse as a reducing cause, which he assigns to them; it is not true that in this case disuse ‘remains as the only conceivable cause.’ ’’* The third argument, as Romanes asserts, is too theo- retical to be considered as a proof, but the second, in regard to the correlation of parts of the organism is of great importance, and, according to the opinion of Romanes, ‘‘ virtually proves the truth of the Lamarckian assuinption.” So important is this particular case that it is worthy of a somewhat extended consideration. Spencer takes the giraffe as illustrative of his point. He calls atten- tion to a statement of Darwin’s that ‘the prolonged use of all the parts together with inheritance will have aided in an important manner in their co-ordination.” “A remark,” observes Spencer, ‘‘ probably having reference chiefly to the increased massiveness of the lower part of the neck; the increased size and strength of the thorax required to bear the additional burden, and the increased strength of the fore legs required to carry the greater weight of both. But now I think that further consideration suggests the belief that the en- tailed modifications are much more numerous and re- mote than at first appears; and that the greater part of these are such us cannot be ascribed in any degree to the selection of favorable variations but must be ascribed exclusively to the inherited effects of changed func- tious.” Mr. Spencer then describes the mechanism of locomotion in the giraffe, the short hind limbs which must keep pace with the long fore limbs, and the con- sequent complex series of changes of bones, muscles and nerves which must have taken place in order to bring loc. p. 405. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 45 about this result. This might very easily be explained, indeed, by the effects of inherited use and disuse. ‘‘ If the effects of use and disuse of parts are inheritable,” says Mr. Spencer, ‘‘then any change in the fore parts of the giraffe which affects the action of the hind limbs and back will simultaneously cause, by the greater or less exercise of it, a remoulding of each component in the hind limbs and back in a way adapted to the new demands; and generation after generation the entire structure of the hind quarters will be progressively fitted to the changed structure of the fore quarters, all the ap- pliances for nutrition and innervation being at the same time progressively fitted to both.” But the factors of use and disuse aside, we must assume that all of these complex changes occurred simultaneously. It might be contended that slight variations in one direction which were advantageous might take place in one generation, and the correlative changes in other parts at some future time. In reply to this Mr. Spencer says: ‘‘ Besides the fact that until this secondary variation occurred the primary variation would be a disadvantage, often fatal, and besides the fact thai before such an appropriate secondary variation might be expected in the course of generations to occur, the primary variations would have died out; there is the fact that the appropriate variation of one bone or muscle in the hind quarters would be useless without appropriate variations in all the rest— some in this way and some in that—a number of appro- priate variations which it is impossible to suppose.” Mr. Ball either cannot or will not see the force of Spencer’s objections. He says: ‘‘ All that is needed is that natural selection should preserve the tallest giraffe through times of famine by their being able to reach otherwise inaccessible stores of foliage. The continual variability of all parts of the higher animals gives scope 46 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. for innumerable changes and nature is not in a hurry. Mr. Spencer, however, says that the chances against any adequate readjustments fortuitously arising must be in- finity to one. But he has also shown that altered de- gree of use does not cause the needed concomitant variation of co-operative parts. So the chances against a beneficial change in an animal must be, at a liberal estimate, infinity to two. Mr. Spencer, if he has proved anything, has proved that it is practically impossible that the giraffe can have acquired a long neck, or the elk its huge horns, or that any species has ever acquired any important modification.” Mr. Ball then draws attention to the facts which Wal- lace has adduced in his recent work, ‘‘ Darwinism,” proving that constant and independent variation is the rule among all animals and plants. He then says: ‘The lengthened wing might be gained in one genera- tion, and the strengthened muscle at a subsequent pe- riod; the bird in the meanwhile drawing upon its surplus energy, aided (as I would suggest) by the strengthening effect of increased use in the individual.” This expla- nation is open to two objections: First, the one already raised by Mr.Spencer, that before the second correlative variation appeared the first would be lost; and, second, the suggestion of Cunningham in regard to assuming that use could develop the character required, but that the individual thus favored could not transmit the vari- ation, but that posterity must wait for the same vari- ation to arise spontaneously. This hypothesis is so forced, illogical and absurd, that so long as a better one can be found it should be adopted. But one more class of evidence need be discussed, that furnished by paleontology. Prof. Henry F. Osborn has called special attention to this subject on two different lad EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 47 occasions.” He says: ‘‘ The evidence is of a direct and indirect character. The direct evidence is that by actual observation in complete paleontological series, the origin of adaptive structures is found to conform strictly to the lines of use and disuse. The indirect proof is that the natural selection of chance variations is unsupported by observation and is inadequate to explain the various phenomena of the second class.” Special attention is drawn to the evolution of teeth, in which every grada- tion may be traced from the simple conical reptilian tooth to the highly complex molars of some mammals. Osborn has enunciated the two following laws of cusp growth: “‘(1) The primary cusps first appear as cuspules, or minute cones, at the first points of contact between the upper and lower molars in the vertical motions of the jaw. : (2) The modeling of cusps into new forms, and the acquisition of secondary position, is a concomitant of interference in the horizontal motions of the jaws.” From the above laws it is evident that the variations in the race are the same as the variations in the indi- viduals, caused by the use and disuse of parts, and a causal connection between the two is inferred. This proof of the inheritance of the characters of use and dis- use has been criticised by Poulton. In a foot-note to Weismann’s Essays upon Heredity,t he says: ‘‘ One of the most remarkable forms of this revival of Lamarck- ism is the establishment in America of a ‘ Neo-Lamarck- ian School,’ which includes among its members many of the most distinguished American biologists. One of the arguments upon which the founders of the school t Page 437. 48 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. have chiefly relied is derived from the comparative mor- phology of mammalian teeth. The evolution of the various types are believed to be due to modifications in shape, produced by the action of mechanical forces (pressure and friction) during the life of the individual. The accumulation of such modifications by means of heredity explains the forms of existing teeth. “Tt may be reasonably objected that the most element- ary facts concerning the development of teeth prove that their shapes cannot be altered during the lifetime of the individual, except by being worn away. The shape is predetermined before the tooth hascutthe gum. Hence the Neo-Lamarckian School assumes, not the transmis- sion of acquired characters, but the transmission of characters which the parent is unable to acquire!” In replying to the criticism of Mr. Poulton, Osborn says: ‘To the objection that the teeth are entirely formed before piercing the gum, and that use produces an actual loss of tissue as contrasted with the growth of bone, it may be said that by our theory, it 1s not the growth itself but the reactions which produce this growth in the living tissue, which we suppose to be transmitted.” Osborn also criticises Weismann’s theory as follows: ‘‘In Weismann’s variation theory the preponderating influence must be conservative; however it may explain progressive modification, or even correlation of old char- acters, it does not admit that the genesis of new char- acters should follow definite lines of adaptation which are not pre-existent in the germ-plasma. We find that new characters of the second class do follow such pur- posive or directive lines, arising simultaneously in all parts of the organism, and first appearing in such min- ute form that we have no reason to suppose that they can be acted upon by selection. The old view of nature’s choice between two single characters, one adaptive, the EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 49 other not adaptive, must be abandoned, since the latter does not exist in the second class.” I have attempted to present a fair statement of both sides of the case in this controversy in regard to the in- heritance of acquired characters, and to all of the import- ant arguments which have been adduced both pro and con, illustrated by typicalexamples. It will be remembered that the scepticism in regard to the possibility of ac- quired characters being transmitted arose from the theory of heredity eflunciated by Prof. Weismann. A study of the different theories of heredity disclosed the fact that while Darwin’s hypothesis of pangenesis, or any subsequent modification of it, was a merely formal and provisional scheme for explaining the supposed facts of heredity, Weismann’s theory of germ-plasm appears to be a speculative deduction from real facts which the facts themselves do not warrant. That consequently, although this theory may be true, it appears rather vis- ionary and certainly should not be unconditionally accepted as true or even as a working hypothesis, unless the facts dependent upon it can be thus best explained. The practice of ‘stretching facts to fit into a theory is a habit which cannot be too strongly condemned. If Weismann’s theory of germ-plasm is unproven there is no apparent reason why acquired characters may not be inherited. An examination of the testimony on this point seems to indicate that both sides have cited cases which did not prove their point. Many so-called proofs which have been brought forward by the Neo- Lamarckians in reality prove nothing, but, on the other hand, some of the interpretations of the Neo-Darwin- ians appear forced and illogical. It is obvious that a single established case of inherit- ance of an acquired character would be sufficient to prove the principle, however many other cases might be dif- 4 50 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. ferently explained. And it seems to me that some fairly well established, if not absolutely convincing, cases have been adduced. Furthermore, the Neo-Dar- winians maintain the illogical assumption that the changes which are observed in the individual have no possible causal connection with the changes which take place in the race, this assumption being contradictory to the law of correspondence of the ontogenic and phylo- genic series. Lastly, it is impossible to explain, from the Neo-Darwinian point of view, simultaneous varia- tions of an adaptive nature. From all this we may come to a provisional conclu- sion that acquired characters are trausmissible. We are justified in using this assumption as a working hypothesis, and in feeling confident that future investi- gation will place it upon a footing where it is beyond the possibility of refutation. ‘ VARIATION AND NATURAL SELECTION. The end of science is the establishment of natural law, which is merely the orderly relationship existing between phenomena, and consequently cannot be con- sidered as an ultimate cause. Thus gravitation is merely a name for the observed relation between bodies, but does not in any way tell us why these relations exist. Evolution is a term expressive of change in form, and modern biology is striving to determine the precise laws conditioning such changes as occur in organic beings. There are two sets of changes—ontogenic and phy- logenic. It has become the fashion of late years among certain scientists to attribute changes of the second class solely to the action of natural selection, and it thus becomes necessary in inquiring into the laws of evolution to consider first this principle, and de- termine what it can effect. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 51 It will be necessary to understand clearly the scope and meaning of the term natural selection, or Darwin- ism, as it is frequently called in recognition of its enun- ciator, before inquiring into what it can accomplish. Darwin himself used the term in two different senses, more narrowly as synonymous with Spencer’s term sur- vival of the fittest and in the broader interpretation of the cause of modifications including the facts of varia- tion. In this latter application, however, it is inac- curate and misleading. Indeed, the process, isasarule, not one of selection, as Lloyd Morgan has pointed out,* but rather of rejection, in which case natural elimina- tion becomes a more correct term. But how can any change be brought about in a species by this process? Prof. J. G. Schurman in a chapter on tae Metaphysics of Darwinismt writes as follows of natural selection: ‘‘There have been objections to the theory, especially to the somewhat startling assumption that the results of man’s purposive selection in breeding could be attained and that, too, on a much larger scale—by the blind and purposeless operations of nature; but granting all that the hypothesis requires of us, we are still in presence of the fact that natural selection, or survival of the fittest, can accomplish nothing until it is supplied with mate- rial for ‘ selection,’ until there has appeared upon the field an antecedent ‘ fittest ’—a fittest organ, function, habit, instinct, constitution, or entire organism. Natu- ral selection produces nothing; it only culls from what is already in existence. The survival of the fittest is an eliminative, not an originative, process.” So obvious is the above assertion that it needs no dis- cussion. A variation must be originated before it can * Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 79. tThe Ethical Import of Darwinism, pp. 77-78. 52 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. be selected. We find then, that before variations can occur in the phylogenic series they must take place in the ontogenic series, or in other words, natural selection is strictly conditioned upon individual variation. It therefore becomes a matter of no small moment to en- quire into this subject, from the standpoint of observa- tion to determine what are the possibilities of variation, and from the theoretical aspect to establish the condi- tions of variation. Wallace, more than any other scientist, probably, has given attention to the record- ing of individual variations, and his most recent work, Darwinism, furnishes us with a large number of facts of this sort. An inspection of the instances there given* and of cases adduced by other writers, as Semper in his Animal Life, discloses the fact that they are all quanti- tive and not qualitative. Variations may occur in size, in shape, in position, in number and inecolor. Varia- tions in size are most numerous and most marked, per- haps, but such variations if in any special direction entail variations in shape. Variation in the position of parts is almost equally great, perhaps, although less readily observed and consequently less frequently re- corded. Variations in number may be trivial and unnoticeable, or may become monstrous as with six- fingered men and two-headed calves. Besides the above mentioned deviations I know of none, except the occasional suppression of parts, either internal or external. The above variations might at first sight appear suf- ficient to produce changes in structures already in ex- istence, but the old difficulty still remains of accounting for the origination of new parts. Wallace’s answer to this is certainly apologetic.t Have we aright to assume * Darwinism, pp. 41-82. tl.c., pp. 128-131. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 53 that variations occurred in past geological ages different in nature from those which occur to-day? If we do not do so, from which class of the variations above enumer- ated were feathers evolved, or horns, for example? Singularly enough, Wallace, an avowed opponent of Lamarckianism, triumphantly appeals to the principles of use in the one difficult variation which he does really explain, the shifting of the eye of the flatfish.* If in- dividual variation does not normally originate new parts, such as horns, for example, and I know of no reason either theoretical or practical for assuming that it does, then there must be some other factor occasionally called into play; but if some factor exists which must be opera- tive at rare intervals it is but reasonable to assume that it is constantly operative to some extent rather than to suppose that it is lying idle until natural selection is obliged to call upon it to lend a helping hand. The above considerations lead to another frequently urged difficulty that even supposing the necessary varia- tions did occur, we are obliged to assume that they were advantageous. That incipient modifications of an organ- ism are always advantageous is considerable of an assump- tion. It seems incredible, indeed, that some very pro- nounced distinctions can be of utility. Thus it seems difficult to explain, by utility or adaptation, the fact that in California a species of magpie is found identical with the one found east of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, with the exception of being smaller and having the bill bright yellow instead of black. The birds are well isolated geo- graphically throughout the greater part or the whole of their range, so the difference could hardly be accounted for by the theory of recognition markings. This is but one of a great number of instances of a similar nature *1iu., pp. 129-130. 54 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. which might be adduced. Examples of insular species are especially noteworthy in this regard. Mr. Romanes has considered these difficulties at some length in a book which has but just appeared.* The Duke of Argyll in advocating design in nature, made use of the above objections to natural selection, and it is to him that Mr. Romanes addresses his reply. It is hardly necessary to say that the difficulties above stated were not mentioned with a view to show the necessity for design in nature, or some direct supervising power to control the origination of variations, but merely to call attention to the proposition that natural selection, with the help of purely fortuitous variation, does not seem sufficient to account for all structural and specific details. Mr. Romanes, in his reply to the Duke of Argyll, shows how careful it is necessary to be in any particular instance in saying that a character is of no use. Thus the eye must have been of use in its most incipient stages as a black pigment spot which indicated vaguely the presence of light to the nerves in its vicin- ity. The wing in its incipient stages must also have been of use, as Mr. Romanes points out. Even if a variation were of no use at first 1b might be indircctly preserved by natural selection through correlation of growth. ‘‘Mr. Darwin, who has paid more attention to this matter than any other writer, has shown, in consid- erable detail, that all the parts of any given organism are so intimately bound together, or so mutually dependent upon each other, that when one part is caused to change by means of natural selection, some other parts are very likely to undergo modification as a consequence.” The theories which have been put forth to explain variation are, forthe most part, very incomplete. Darwin * Darwin and After Darwin. I—The Darwinian Theory, pp. 350-373. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 55 freely confesses his ignorance on this point, saying: “Our ignorance of the laws of variation is profound. Not in one case out of a hundred can we pretend to as- sign any reason why this or that part has varied.” * Spencer suggests a number of causes for variation.t He considers the influences of environment in altering functions to be one factor in determining variations, asserting * * * ‘that organisms produced by the same parents at the same time, must be more or less differentiated both by insensible initial differences, and by slight differences in the conditions to which they are subject during their evolution.” He then appeals to first principles to show that no two parts of a homogeneous substance can be exactly alike, and that consequently there must alavays be a difference at least in the number of physiological units composing a reproductive cell. Thus we have a clue to the differences existing in the young of a single litter. Weismann’s theory of variation is probably the most carefully worked out in its details, and is perfectly con- sistent with his theory of the isolation of the germ plasm. It appears impossible, however, that any progressive modification could take place according to this view, for it depends exclusively upon the number of ahnenplas- mas of each sex which enter into combination, this number being largely determined by the amount of sur- plus germ plasm which is disposed of in the extrusion of the two, polar cells. But variation according to this theory, it would seem, must be strictly conservative, for all modifications must be within the extremes of an- cestral modification. Thus, let us suppose that every living individual of some species has been measured, and that 500 represents the number of units in the * Origin of Species, p. 73, Humboldt. tPrinciples of Biology, I, pp. 257-272. 56 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. smallest individual of the species, and 550 in the largest. There could be, then, no variation due to sexual admix- ture which fell below 500 or rose above 550, and hence no progress would be possible. Another difficulty in Weismann’s theory of variation has been recently communicated to Nuture, by Prof. Marcus Hartog.* He argues from the assumption that Weismann’s theory is proved, and the result is, as he says, indeed a startling one. He first presents five theses expressing the main assumptions of Weismann’s theory, which Poulton has since admitted to be an impartial and correct statement of the case. ‘lhey are as follows: ‘‘T. Each primitive germ-cell of either sex, contains a number of ancestral germ-units, the ahnenplasmas; and this number is constant, for the species at least. II. These ancestral germ-units are far more con- stant and unchangeable in character than the species itself. III. They lie associated together in the germ-cell without loss or alteration of their individual peculiar- ities. IV. The number contained in the mature ovum and spermatzoon is reduced by one-half, and in the fertilized ovum or oosperm the number is restored to the normal by the summation of the ahnenplasmas of the two fusing cells. This process is comparable to the shuffling of two packs of cards by taking half from each and joining the talons or remainders to form a new pack. V. The possible combinations under this process are so numerous as to explain the variations among the offspring of sexual union. Accepting these statements, we next inquire, How *Nature, October 29, 1891, p. 613. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 57 are we to conceive of these ancestral units, the ahnen- plasmas? Two hypotheses may be given in answer to this question: A. Each ahnenplasma unit corresponds to an in- dividual of the species itself; and if put under proper tropic conditions, would, singly, reproduce such an in- dividual. : B. The ahnenplasmas correspond to the primitive Protozoan ancestors, which, according to theory, could alone reproduce modifications due to external causes (acquired modifications).”’ Prof. Hartog then shows that if hypothesis A be ac- cepted the ahnenplasmas must have varied with the race, but this would make the shuftling process super- fluous as an explanation of variation, and would also be contradictory to thesis IT. ‘‘According to hypothesis B,”’ he continues, ‘‘ the ahnenplasmas of all Metazoa being similar and Proto- zoan, if the numbers are equal and the shuffling fair, any two parents may beget any offspring whatever; on the plane of thesis V, a lioness might be expected to bring forth a lobster or a starfish or any other animal, which as we know, does not take place in nature. The only escape from this result is to assume the postulates—(1) that the number of ahnenplasmas varies from species to species; (2) that the number in the combination and not the character of the ahnenplasmas determines the species. And as there is nota particle of evidence for the latter postulate, we may say that on hypothesis B, the theory breaks down by its non-conformity with the facts. We have then the dilemma, from which I see no escape, that the theory is inconsistent, on A with itself, on B with the facts.” It is too soon to attempt to pass judgment upon this 58 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. objection, as the subject is still under discussion. Cer- tain it is, however, that the replies which have been made by Poulton and Trow are incorrect and Hartog demonstrates their inconsistency with the views of Weis- mann by a letter from that gentleman. Lloyd Morgan suggests as an hypothesis of variation a modification of Spencer’s theory of physiological units, which has much to commend it, viz., the organic com- bination of the elements of the two sexes into a specific- ally new compound. Morgan explains the need of this hypothesis as follows:* ‘* * * if, in sexual union, there is a mere mixture, a mere commingling of heredi- tary characters, it is quite impossible that new characters should result, or any intensification of existing charac- ters be produced beyond the mean of those of ovum and sperm. * * * Let us suppose, for the sake of illus- tration, that a pair of organisms have each an available store of forty units of growth-force, and that these are distributed among five sets of organs, « to e, as in the first two columns. Then the offspring will show the organs as arranged in the third column. ——— Parents — Offspring. a. rime lO a PLO: . 10 Ong ike 8. 10. 9 Cesraretatels v, 5 7 d 7 9. 8 é 6 6. 6 40 40 40 ‘«There is no increase in the set of organs a, which are strongly developed in both parents; and no decrease in the set of organs e, which are weakly developed in both parents. By sexual admixture alone there can be no increase or decrease beyond the mean of the two “ Animal Life and Intelligence, pp. 150, 151. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 59 parental forms. If then the union of sperm and ovum be the source of new or more favorable variations other than, or stronger than those of either parent, this must be due to the fact that the hereditary tendencies not merely commingle, but under favorable conditions com- bine, in some way different indeed from, but perhaps analagous to, that exemplified in chemical combina- tion.” According to this theory it is of course possible that new variations could be originated by sexual admixture. It would also help to explain the presence of useless specific characters, which would, according to the old view, be obliterated by the swamping effects of inter- crossing. ‘‘If, however,” says Morgan,* ‘‘on the hypothesis of combination, we have definite organic compounds, instead of, or as well as, mere hereditary mixtures, if, in other words, variations take definite lines determined by the laws of organic combination (as the nature and properties of chemical compounds are deter- mined by the laws of chemical combination), then this difficulty disappears.” .It would account also for the introduction of new parts or‘organs, and for their pres- ervation before they had reached a point of usefulness. The chief objection to this view, aside from its purely hypothetical nature, which the author freely concedes, is the fact that it appears to prove too much. There are three general hypotheses concerning modifications: (1.) The variations may be ‘‘spontaneous,” or due to some unknown cause, and occurring in all directions indiscriminately, as Wallace and other Neo-Darwinians claim, so there would be ample material for natural selection to work upon. According to this view external influences have nothing to do with variations. (2.) Ds Cay De 152s 60 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Variations may be caused chiefly by the response of the organism, or of its parts, to influences external either to the organism as a whole or to the parts thus affected. Or (8) variations may, as in the first instance, be wholly independent of external influences, but due, not to the selection of such modifications as happen to be suitable, but to inherent properties of the organism itself, or to predetermined properties of the combinations of organ- isms. It is Nageli who advanced the first part of this third hypothesis, while Morgan’s organic combination theory would, if pushed to its logical conclusion, it seems to me, lead to the second part. If certain combinations must inevitably lead to éertain fixed and definite results, regardless of environment, not only the incipient stages but also the more advanced condition of an organism should be due exclusively to the operation of this force. In reality there are but two alternatives in regard to the origin of variations. They are due either to some force or tendency or property resident within the organ- ism itself, whether it be Weismann’s sexual combination of different germ-plasmas, Nageli’s idioplasm with the in- herent tendency to vary in the right direction, or Mor- gan’s,organic compound of sexually different elements which must on uniting produce a new given result; or to the workings of forces outside of the whole organism or of the parts affected. The possibility, of course, exists of both alternatives being valid. There is, however, a very fundamental objection to the first class of forces as being sufficient to originate variations, viz.: that it is at variance with the law of the conservation of energy, as suggested by Ryder, that an organism can create any- thing new within itself without the aid of any force ex- ternal to it—a feat no less difficult than for a man to lift himself by the straps of his boots. The delusion of supposing that it is only a very little which is created new each time only seryes to confuse the mind. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 61 It is still not inconceivable that both external and in- ternal forces may influence variation. There is no pos- sible doubt that sexual combination is productive of variations, but I think it has been shown that these are not progressive. It is doubtless this factor which pro- duces individual variation in species which have re- mained unmodified through long geological ages. This class might well be termed conservative variations. It is a fact well known to gardeners and breeders that when a species is placed under entirely new environ- mental conditions it is apt to produce variations which are well marked, known as sports. Itis such variations as these, due to the influence of environment, which, it would seem, are originative of new characters and might be called progressive variations. According to this view not only certain unusual modifications are due to en- vironment, but all variations which are new have been thus produced. It must not be supposed that the en- vironment acts definitely upon the organism, compelling it to vary in a single direction. Such may be the case in some instances, but not universally. Change in nu- triment may produce very different results in different individuals, even of the same species, and would thus furnish natural selection with a very diverse, although by no means unlimited, assortment to pick from. Climate would often act in a more direct manner in modifying organisms as will be seen later on in considering the varieties of North American birds. Use and disuse of parts would also be productive of definite variations. According to the principles above stated, variations may be classified as follows: I. Conservative. Occurring in all directions within the limits of variation of the species. Produced by sexual com- bination of unlike individuals. 62 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. II. Progressive. Produced by the action of enyiron- ment upon the whole organism or by the interaction of parts. 1. Definite. Direct action of environment in one direction, including use and disuse. 2. Indefinite. General action of environment in producing variations which can be accumulated by natural selection. Dr. W. K. Brooks in his book on heredity (p. 213) quotes the following secondary laws of variation which should be borne in mind: (1) ‘‘ Specific characters are more variable than gen- eric characters.” (Darwin, Origin of Species, p. 122.) (2) ‘Species of the larger genera in each country vary more frequently than species of the smaller gen- era.” (1. ¢., p. 44.) (3) <‘‘A part developed in any species in an extra- ordinary degree or manner, in comparison with the same part in allied species, tends to be highly vari- able.” (1. ¢., p. 119.) (4) ‘If any given character is very variable in one species of a group, it will tend to be variable in allied species, and if any given character is perfectly constant in one species of a group it will tend to be constant in allied species.”” (Walsh, Proc. Ent. Soc. Phila., Oct. 1863, p. 213.) The above discussion has answered the question, is natural selection creative? in the negative. An attempt has been made to show that it is not even admissible to assume unlimited variation as affording material for natural selection. Prof. Schurman goes even a step farther than this with regard to the origin of varia- EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 63 tions. He says:* ‘‘They originate, we know not how, in the nature of the organism. Nor would the state of the case be essentially altered if it were domonstrated, in opposition to Darwin, that every organic modifica- tion was occasioned by some external stimulus. For the change thus set up in the organism in response to the foreign excitation would obviously derive its character from the constitution of the organism, just as, to use Darwin’s own example, the peculiarity of a flame is due to the constitution of the combustible materials, and not to the igniting spark.” Prof. Schurman is arguing for a theistic conception of the origin of variations, and hence, of the creation of species, but his conclusion here does not effect the scientific, but only the met- aphysical aspect of the case. As stated in the in- troduction to this chapter, natural law does not explain first cause, with which, indeed, science is not concerned. The ultimate reason for the enlargement of a muscle when exercised, for example, cannot be ascertained, but, nevertheless, if it could be shown why such exercise pro- duced in successive generations variations in the direction of increased dimension, we would have as good an expla- nation of the cause of those particular variations as we have of the cause of the earth’s attraction by the sun through gravitation. That variations are conditioned by the reaction of the organism on the influences of the environment, is undeniable, but this does not detract from the validity of an explanation of the origin of variations, so far as science is concerned. An analogy may illustrate this better, perhaps. Certain qualities of the mind are developed by education. It is possible to formulate the exact process by which these mental traits were brought about and it is justifiable to state * The Ethical Import of Darwinism, p. 81. 64 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. that the origin of these qualities is known, and the cause of their presence in the mind, despite the fact that had not the mind the potential possibility of de- veloping them they could never have been introduced. LAWS CONDITIONING EVOLUTION. If the above considerations upon individual variation contain within them even a flimsy core of truth; if natural selection even in its widest interpretation be not creative; then, indeed, it is necessary to discard the dogma of chance so much preached by the scientists of the day, and admit that justas the formation of the crystal is due to the working of natural law, so, too, is the evolution of man and of all the diversified life of the globe due to workings of the same natural law. Prof. Cope, Prof. Hyatt and Haeckel have placed especial stress upon the importance of the laws of biology, and it will be necessary to consider some of the laws which they have enunciated. The laws goy- erning the evolution of life may be stated under three heads: (1) laws of development, (2) laws of struc- ture, and (3) laws of heredity. They may be diagram- atically classified as follows: I. Laws of development, 1. Bathmism or growth force. 2. Phylogenic extent and density. 3. Metabolism. a. Anabolism b. Katabolism. 4. Sexual intensification. 5. Acceleration and retardation. 6. Law of concentration. II. Laws of structure. 1. Homology. 2. Successional relation. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 65 Parallelism. Adaptation. Geratology. Bilateral symmetry. Correlation of growth. ITI. Tis of heredity. 1. Uninterrupted or continuous transmission. 2. Interrupted or latent transmission. 3. Sexual transmission. 4. Mutual or amphigonous transmission. Of the laws of development, growth force or bath- mism, as Prof. Cope has termed it, is the most funda- mental. Protoplasm is a great store house of energy from without. It, alone, is capable of converting into its own substance foreign matter—inorganic among plants and organic among animals. By this conversion of foreign substance into the body of the organism, growth is induced, but this growth requires an expendi- ture of energy. The Century Dictionary refers to the following passage of Cope’s for a definition of bath- mism:* ‘It is here left open whether there be any form of force which may be especially designated as ‘ vital.” Many of the animal functions are known to be physical and chemical, and if there be any one which appears to be less explicable by reference to these forces than others, it is that of nutrition. Probably in this instance force has been so metamorphosed through the influence of the originative or conscious force in evolu- tion, that it is a distinct species in the category of forces. Assuming it to be such, I have given it the name of Bathmism.” Bathmism, then, is the vital force inducing growth. Prof. Cope has stated as a fundamental law of bath- MS TUR go * Method of Creation, p. 26. 5 66 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. mism* * * * ‘that growth-force, uninfluenced hy inherited peculiarity, or any stronger influence locating a nutritive fluid, must develop extent in the direction of least resistance, and density on the side of greatest resist- wnce, when not too great. The illustration of this state- ment would be that of a globular mass of cells brought to the point of junction of two media, as water and earth or air and earth, elongates in the direction of the medium presenting the least resistance, i.¢., air.” This law may be further illustrated by the growth of the foliage of a tree. When a tree is located in the midst of a forest, it is crowded on all sides and accordingly expends its energy in growing upward. If, on the other hand, a barrier be placed to its upward growth, the foliage will become dense and matted at the point of obstruction. This daw of extent and density, as enun- ciated by Prof. Cope, is apparently intended to account for the distribution of force in individuals or species only, but it seems to me possible that a broader inter- pretation may be put upon it than Prof. Cope had in- tended to imply. As an analogy representing the dif- ferentiation of life the structure of a tree has been com- monly used, the spreading branches of which illustrate the divergent course of life through past geologic ages, while the leaves and terminal buds constitute the life of to-day. But the analogy of the tree may serve an- other purpose. It has been stated that the growth of a tree is conditioned by Cope’s law of extent and density. This is alaw of ontogony. But just as the perfect tree represents the direction of organic progress, so the law of growth force which conditions the growth of the tree, conditions also the growth of organic beings as a whole. In other words, life as a whole has made progress or * Origin of the Fittest, p. 30. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 67 developed in extent along the lines of least resistance and multiplied in forms on the same plane, or has de- veloped in density along the lines of greatest resistance. This may be called the Law of Phylogenic Extent and Density. According to this view, living matter has within it the potential possibility of indefinite growth and modification. The growth is limited as Spencer has shown by the mass outrunning the surface, while modi- fication is limited (1) by the possibilities of environ- ment to create variations, and (2) by the ability of the organism to adapt itself to its environment. If it be asked how an organism can adapt itself to an environ- ment which is itself the cause of the variations, the re- ply is by the selection of such environmental variations as are adaptive, or conversely by the elimination of such as are unadaptive. Living matter, then, like a gigantic tree or bush, spreads out in all directions where the en- vironment offers least resistance, and man was not an avcident or happy coincidence in the aimless wander- ings of blind forces, but rather the inevitable outcome of natural law. Metabolism, according to the Century Dictionary, is ‘‘the sum of the chemical changes within the body, or within any single cell of the body, by which protoplasm is either renewed or changed to perform special func- tions, or else disorganized and prepared for excretion.” Geddes and Thomson in their work on the Evolution of Sex, have especially emphasized the importance of the laws of metabolism in the development of species. Metabolism should be clearly distinguished from bathm- ism or growth force. The latter is a force analogous to electricity, for instance, which conditions the growth of an organism; while the former is an expression of the changes continually taking place in protoplasm. There are two phases of metabolism. When the protoplasm is 68 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. in a passive growing state and storing away energy, it is spoken of as anabolic, but when it is in a disruptive condition, giving out energy and breaking up into simpler compounds it is said to be katabolic. The metabolism of an organism is constantly varying be- tween the anabolic and katabolic state, although of course not in rhythms of definite duration. Messrs. Geddes and Thomson have devoted a consider- able space in their work on the Evolution of Sex to estab- lishing the principle that the male nature is naturally katabolic, the female naturally anabolic. They have en- forced this principle by many examples and arguments, and it is justifiable, it seems to me, to use it as a work- ing hypothesis. The law of sexual intensification pro- posed hy me ina recent paper on the Colors of West Coast Mammals* is based upon this principle. Among west coast mammals are certain species which have as- sumed a black color in harmony with their surround- ings, which are dark in hue, owing to the volcanic rock of which the soil is formed. A particular species was taken as an example, the black-headed ground squirrel (Spermophilus granomurus vtvicapillus), and an attempt was made to account for the black color. For three reasons it was assumed that the ancestors of this species were paler in color, probably gray or brown: (1) Be- cause black is never a primitive color but rather a mark of specialization. (2) Because the races and species which are not blackjoccupy a much greater geographical area, the black form being very local; and (3), be- cause the young are paler than the adult. If the pre- ceding discussion has established the impossibility, or even the improbability of natural selection exercising a creative power, it becomes proper to ask how the black * Zoe, li, pp. 203-216. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 69 color of this race was produced from brown or gray an- -cestors. It is found that the male averages considerably darker than the female, although females may be found as dark as the lightest males. This is in accordance with the principle enunciated by Geddes and Thomson, that the tendency of the male is katabolic, of the female anabolic. The surplus of energy of the male would be expended in pigment, making the color more intense than in the female. It will now be necessary to anticipate two of the laws of heredity as quoted in Zoe from Haeckel.* ‘‘A third law of conservative transmission may be called the law of sexual transmission, according to which each sex transmits to the descendants of the same sex peculiari- ties which are not inherited by the descendants of the other sex. * * * A fourth law of transmission, which has here to be mentioned, in a certain sense con- tradicts the last, and limits it, viz.: the law of mixed or mutual (amphigonous) transmission. This law tells us that every organic individual produced in a sexual way receives qualities from both parents, from the father as well as from the mother.” Now, according to this law of mutual transmission, there would be a constant tendency for the characters of the male and female to combine more or less in the off- spring. This tendency, if acting alone, would result in an average color for both sexes. The females would be- come darker and the males lighter. The katabolism of the males, however, would tend to keep them at an average distance in advance of the anabolic females, and a tolerably constant ratio would be established. If, then, there were nothing to hinder the female from ap- proaching the characters of the male, the latter would * History of Creation, 1, pp. 209-210. 70 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. be constantly pushed ahead by katabolism and drag his mate after him. Thus, in the case in point, suppose the following proportions of color existed in a pair of these ground squirrels: MALE. FEMALE. Brown : .10 20 Black .... Subs are .60 40 White.. eee be 380 40 In accordance with the law of mutual transmission the two sexes are approaching the average: brown 15, black 50 and white 85. As the first ratio had been ad- justed by the difference in metabolism which is sup- posed to be constant, the real goal toward which the male of the next generation is advancing is shown in the following proportion: IsT GENERATION. 2D GENERATION. MALE. FEMALE, MALE. FEMALE. Brown .. .10 : 20 § x : 15 Black... .60 : 40 = x ; 50 White... .80 : 40 a x F 35 The male of the second generation would then have the proportion of colors as follows: brown 7.5, black 75, and white 26.25, the black having increased consider- ably. In nature no such rapid increase as this is sup- posed to occur. The conservative law of sexual trans- mission and innumerable limiting and modifying cir- curostances would retard it. After attaining a certain goal it would be impossible for any further intensification to take place in the male, as, for example, when it had become perfectly black. The color of the male then becoming stationary, it would be possible for the female to become more and more like the male in accordance with the law of mixed transmis- sion, the characters of the one sex being transferred to the other. This, apparently, has actually taken place in EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 71 another black form, the jack-rabbit of Espiritu Santo Island, Lower California, Lepus insularis, in which both male and female are equally black. This law, as stated in Zoe, referred only to transformations of color, but would apply equally to any form of modification. Varia- tions, according to the principles stated in this chapter, are due to influences of the outer world upon the organ- ism. One of the most potent environmental influences is nutriment. If there be an abundance of nourishment during a period of time, the tendency will at first be anabolic, or constructive. There is, at such times, a storing away of energy for future use. Geddes and Thomson have shown that a preponderance of females is born in times of plenty, of males in times of want. After a time of bountiful nourishment suppose a period of scanty food supply to follow. There will be a ten- dency toward katabolism, which means a breaking up of the energy which has been accumulating, a tendency toward variation and a preponderance of males. The males being more katabolic than the females, will tend to vary in advance of the latter in every direction in which a surplus of energy might be expended. In noting the different kinds of variation which have been observed it was found that they might consist of differ- ences in size, shape, position, number, color or the addition of parts. It is obvious that any increase of size of the whole organism or of any particular part is due to an increase in the number of constituent cells, while variations in shape are due simply to a different distribution of the cells or to an increase or decrease in the number in any particular region. Variations such as ordinarily occur in organisms then, are apparently either variations in number or position. Number and position depend on the amount and location of growth- force, which in turn is conditioned by the metabolism 72 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. of the organism, which last is determined by nutrition. The law of sexual intensification would thus seem to be applicable to any form of modification, which may be encouraged by natural selection, in which the male takes the lead, but would in no wise serve to originate any new part or structure. At first sight this law might appear to be a mere re- statement of the view of Dr. W. k. Brooks. According to his view, the male cells are the bearers of gemmules inducing variation, and in hard times the variable males being in preponderance, would induce progressive varia- tion. Rev. J. T. Gulick has criticised this view as fol- lows:* ‘* There can be no doubt that in many species the males are more variable than the females, and that in some of the same species the proportion of males in- creases with the degree of adversity; but this does not seem to be sufhcient ground for maintaining that the increase in the proportion of males will increase the variability of the offspring. Increase in the number or amount of the variable element does not necessarily in- volve increase in the variability of either element, or in the offspring of both. I find need of additional factors in order to bring these facts into any relation to the in- crease of variability. Granting that the sperm-cell is the source of variation and the germ-cell the source of fixity, and that increased tendency to variation in the offspring will be secured by an increased range of varia- tion in the sperm-cells, it does not follow that increase in the relative number of males will increase the range of variation in the sperm-cells, and therefore in the off- spring.” This difficulty, which implies that, however great the majority of the variable sex may be, unless each one * Journ. Linn. Soc., xxiii, p. 317. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 73 founda mate the variability of the species would not increase, does not, of course, apply to the law of sexual intensification, which has, it seems, been placed upon a firm basis through the researches of Messrs. Geddes and Thomson. Cope first enunciated the law of acceleration and re- tardation. Two passages may be cited from his writings explanatory of this law: ‘‘I believe that this is the simplest mode of stating and explaining the law of varia- tion; that some forms. acquire something which their parents did not possess; and that those which acquire something additional have to pass through more numer- ous stages than their ancestors; and those which lose something pass through fewer stages than their ances- tors; and these processes are expressed by the terms ‘ac- celeration’ and ‘retardation.’”* On another occasion he had expressed the law thus: ‘‘It was also shown that, if the embryonic form were the parent, the advanced de- scendant was produced by an increased rate of growth, which phenomenon was called «acceleration; but that if the embryonic type were the offspring, then its failure to attain to the condition of the parent is due to the supervention of a slower rate of growth; to this phenom- enon the term retardation was applied.” + With regard to the cause of acceleration Prof. Cope first made the following suggestion:{ ‘‘ The successively higher degree of oxidization of the blood in the organs designed for that function, whether performing it in water or air, would certainly accelerate the performance of all the vital functions, and among others that of growth. Thus it may be that acceleration can be ac- counted for, and the process of the development of the * Origin of the Fittest, p. 297. fl.c., p. 125. tlie, p. 143-144. 74 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. orders and sundry lesser groups of the vertebrate king- dom indicated; for, as already pointed out, the defini- tions of such are radically placed in the different struc- tures of the organs which aérate the blood and distri- bute it to its various destinations. ‘‘ But the great question: What determined the direc- tion of this acceleration? remains unanswered. One cannot understand why more highly oxidized blood should hasten the growth of partition of the ventricle of the heart in the serpent, the more perfectly to separate the aérated from the impure fluid; nor can we see why a more perfectly constructed circulatory system, sending purer blood to the brain, should direct accelerated growth to the cerebellum or cerebra] hemispheres in the croco- dile.” The above statement of .the cause of acceleration is in reality no explanation, for after all the real question is what determined the direction of the acceleration, for which Prof. Cope does not here attempt to account. In the paper on the Method of Creation of Organic Forms * he offers another explanation, which appears to be final. He asks, ‘‘What are the influences locating growth- force?” and answers, ‘‘ The only efficient ones with which we are acquainted are: first, physical and chemical causes; second, use; and! would add a third, viz.: ef- fort.” To this third influence Prof. Cope ascribes a most important function—that of originating new parts; to it, indeed, may be attributed, according to Prof. Cope, the origin of the fittest. He says: ‘“ You cannot rub the sclerotica of the eye without producing an expan- sion of the capillary arteries and corresponding increase in the amount of nutritive fluid. But the case may be different in the muscles and other organs (as the pig- *1ow., p. 195. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 75 ment cells of reptiles and fishes), which are under the volition of an animal. Here, and in many other in- stances which might be cited, it cannot be asserted that the nutrition of use is not under the direct control of the will through the mediation of nerve force. There- fore I am disposed to believe that growth-force may be, through the motive force of the animal, as readily de- termined to a locality where an executive organ does not exist, as to the first segment or cell of such an organ already commenced, and that effort is, in the order of time, the first factor in acceleration.” All that can be said to the above is that it may be true, but that it has not yet been demonstrated. There . is, indeed, a vast difference between the assumption that use can modify a part which already exists, and the assumption that desire or effort can originate something which does not exist. Moreover, even if effort be a valid factor in creation, it cannot, it seems to me, have the general application ascribed to it by Prof. Cope. For example, it could apparently have no influence upon the origination of new colors. Does the bird desire to. be protectively colored? If so, it must decide what colors would be most in harmony with its surroundings and then make an effort of will to have these colors developed; all of which is, on the face of it, inconceiv- able. Or by what imaginable sort of effort could feathers be originated? Effort, then, if it can be shown to have any creative power, must be relegated to a very special field, and cannot be considered as the sole or even principal originator of the fittest. What then can be considered the originator of the fittest? This I have attempted to indicate in the discussion of variation. It is an emphasis of the Hilairian rather than the Lamarckian factor. It is rather morein accord with the views of Eimer than Cope, although both are 76 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. considered of importance. It is the recognition of the importance of physical and chemical causes, as the originators of new parts. The environment produces changes of which natural elimination destroys the least advantageous, leaving only the fittest to survive. There are metabolic rhythms in life. When the anabolic ten- dency is in the ascendent life is non-progressive, or there may even be retardation; but when the katabolic tendency is in the ascendent, life progresses along lines determined: first, by the nature of the variations, and second, by the operation of natural selection or elimi- nation. It may be of interest to note the bearing of the law of phylogenic extent and desiiny. In the growing tree whenever its progress is checked in any direction, if the resistance be not too great the foliage becomes dense and matted. So with life as a whole. When a new plan of organization was originated, nature ran riot for a time in the wealth and multiplicity of forms she dis- played. Take for example the age of reptiles. In their palmy days they were without competitors; climate and vegetation conspired for their well being; the soil had not been cultivated and was capable of bearing an im- mense crop. This was a period of acceleration. There was no resistance to the upward progress of growth-force and it advanced rapidly along certain lines. Having originated this great variety and multiplicity of forms quite suddenly, comparativcly speaking, a barrier was presented to their future progress. The climate may indeed have remained as propitious and the food as abundant, yet an obstacle to their advance was intro- duced. And this obstacle was apparently simply the fact that they had reached the goal of their specializa- tion. The growth-force was still there to be expended and was used in increasing density or mass to speak EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. OK figuratively, or in other words, in the great multiplica- tion of such species as already existed. In course of time the conditions of life became less favorable to them, more powerful antagonists arose, and they began to dwindle. Retardation began, and to-day there are left a few poor fragments of that mighty host that lived in the age of reptiles. Prof. Alpheus Hyatt’s law of concentration is very closely related to the preceding, being in fact a form of acceleration. Prof. Hyatt thus alludes to it:* ‘‘ The law of concentration in development seems to express an invariable mode of action of heredity, in the earlier reproduction of hereditary characteristics of all kinds and under all conditions. In progressive series it acts upon healthy characteristics and appears to be an adaptation to favorable surroundings, and in retrogress- ive series upon pathological characteristics, and is prob- ably an adaptation to unfavorable surroundings usually leading to the extinction of the series or type.”’ This ends the discussion of the laws of development. Of the laws of structure and heredity little need be said. For the sake of completeness, however, and especially as it will be necessary to refer to them in the second part of the work, it will be advisable to include a brief state- ment of them. Prof. Cope, in the Chapter on Evolution and its Consequences,f states the following four laws of structure: ‘1. Homology. This means that animals are com- posed of corresponding parts; that the variations of an original and fixed number of elements constitute their only difference. * * * ‘¢2. Successional Relation. This expresses the fact * Fossil Cephalopoda in the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Proc. A. A. A. S., 1883, xxxii, p. 360. tl.c., pp. 6-7. 78 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. that species naturally arrange themselves into series in consequence of a mathematical order of excess or defi- ciency in some feature or features. Thus species with three toes naturally intervene between those with one and four toes. * * * “3, Parallelism. This states that while all animals in their embryonic and later growth pass through a num- ber of stages and conditions, some traverse more and others traverse fewer stages; and that, as the stages are nearly the same for both, those which accomplish less resemble or are parallel with the young of those which accomplish more. * * * ‘4, Teleology. This is the law of adaptation so much dwelt upon by the old writers, and admired in its ex- hibitions by men generally. It includes the many cases of fitness of a structure for its special use, and expresses broadly the general adaptations of ananimal to its home and habits.” 5. Geratology. Prof. Hyatt has enunciated this principle of distorted or pathological types.* It is the law that there ‘‘ is an exact correspondence between the life of an individual and the group to which it belongs: namely, the young and adolescent stages having direct correspondence and repéating the past history of its own group to a greater or less extent, the adult corre- sponding to the present with all the peculiarities and differences of its group, and the metamorphoses of old age to the pathological modifications and changes found in the types which arose in the unfavorable localities, or which were found as a rule to terminate the history of the group in time.” To this list may be added the following special laws of structure, both of which may be more or less closely related to homology: * Proc. A. A. A. S., xxxii, p. 349. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 79 6. Bilateral symmetry. It is not clearly apparent why bilateral symmetry should be so prevalent in organic structures, whether it be due to some fundamental law of growth, or persistence of type, or to some principle of utility. Wallace has advocated the last view with re- gard to the bilateral symmetry in the colors of animals, arguing from the fact that where protective or recogni- tion markings are no longer of utility, as with domesti- cated animals, bilateral symmetry is lost. 7. Correlation of growth. This law has been most clearly enunciated and established by Darwin. Owing to the close interdependence of parts in organisms, any- thing which affects one structure in the body may cause a similar or corresponding modification to appear in some other structure which is not directly influenced. The laws of heredity may be condensed after Haeckel, thus:* 1. Uninterrupted or continuous transmission. Chil- dren are in general like their parents. Thisis expressed by the phrase ‘‘like produces like,” or more accurately ‘similar things produce similar things.” 2. Interrupted or latent transmission. Among certain lower forms of life there is an alternation of generations, the children being like the grandparents, the parents a different organism. ‘‘If we express this general law and the succession of generations by the letters of the alphabet, then A= C = E,whilst B= D=F, and so on.” 8, Sexual transmission. Each sex transmits to its offspring certain peculiarities not possessed by the other sex, as, for example, the antlers of a deer. 4. Mixed or mutual (amphigonous) transmission. ‘This law tells us that every organic individual pro- duced in a sexual way receives qualities from both parents, from the father as well as from the mother.” * History of Creation, pp. 205-213. 80 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 5. Abridged or simplified transmission. In embryonic development the organism does not pass through all ancestral stages, but omits a portion of them in order more rapidly to reach a state of maturity. Having clearly defined my attitude in regard to the non-creativeness of natural selection and the necessity of qualifying it by the laws of development, structure and heredity, it will in the future frequently be found convenient to speak figuratively of selection as the orig- inator of this or that character. Whenever a use is found for any structure or peculiarity of a species it is justifiable to assume that such a character has been encouraged by selection or elimination, and this is a most important, although not the ultimate step, in deter- mining how the feature under consideration came about. It is indeed the only step which can be explained in most cases, the causes of the origination of anything new being so intimately dependent upon the nature of the organism, that comparatively little is known of them. Two forms of selection still remain for consideration, sexual and physiological. Both have a direct and vital bearing upon the subject of the colors of birds; for if sexual selection be a valid factor in evolution it is undoubtedly an agent in the production of the bright plumage and gay ornamentation of male birds; while if the hypothesis of physiological selection be correct much light is thrown upon specific color marks which would otherwise appear useless. It thus becomes important to consider both of these theories with considerable care. SEXUAL SELECTION. Darwin originated the theory of sexual selection and Wallace has been his most determined opponent. Both should be heard from before a decision is reached. Darwin says;* ‘‘ This form of selection depends, not on * Origin of Species. I, p. 108. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 81 a struggle for existence in relation to other organic beings or to external conditions, but on a struggle be- tween the individuals of one sex, generally the males, for the possession of the other sex. The result is not death to the unsuccessful competitor, but few or no offspring.” There are two forms of sexual selection, the law of battle which is universally admitted, and ‘ pref- erential mating ’’ as Lloyd Morgan has termed it,* which is doubted by many. It is known that the males of many animals, especially among mammals and birds, fight among themselves for a female, the victor carrying off the prize. There can be little doubt that in such cases the more powerful males become the parents of the race, and that every advantage which they may possess in the way of strength, agility, or special weapons, such as antlers or spurs, will be selected in accordance with the law of battle. Preferential mating is thus described by Darwin:t ‘‘ Amongst birds, the contest is often of a more peaceful character. All those who have attended to the subject, believe that there is the severest rivalry between the males of many species to attract, by singing, the females. The rock-thrush of Guiana, birds of paradise, and some others, congregate; and successive males display with the most elaborate care, and show off in the best mauner their gorgeous plumage; they likewise perform strange antics before the females, which, standing by as specta- tors, at last choose the most attractive partner. Those who have closely attended to birds in confinement well know that they often take individual preferences and dislikes. Thus Sir R. Heron has described how a pied peacock was eminently attractive to all his hen birds. I cannot here enter on the necessary details, but if man can in a short time give beauty and an elegant carriage * Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 198. tl.c., p. 109. 6 82 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. to his bantams, according to his standard of beauty, I can see no good reason to doubt that female birds, by selecting, during thousands of generations, the most melodious or beautiful males, according to their standard of beauty, might produce a marked effect.” Darwin’s theory of sexual selection with regard to the colors of birds is simply this, that both sexes were orig- inally dull colored and alike, but the females, in se- lecting those males for mates which were more brightly colored than their fellows, have gradually brought about the brilliant and diversified plumage of the male birds of to-day. Wallace takes a directly opposite view, as expressed in the following passage: * ‘I have long held this portion of Mr. Darwin’s theory to be erroneous, and have argued that the primary cause of sexual diver- sity of color was the need of protection, repressing in the female those bright colors which were normally produced in both sexes by general laws; and I have attempted to explain many of the more difficult cases on this principle (‘A Theory of Birds’ Nests,’ chap. VI. ante).”” : Mr. Wallace then proceeds to elaborate his views, explaining how the colors of male birds have become more brilliant without reference to sexual selection. He makes the valuable suggestion that brilliant colors are concomitants of a healthy organization, dull hues of a diseased system. The vitality of the male he considers to be greater thau of the female, especially during the breeding season, and the brilliant colors and long plumes which are donned at that time are due to the necessity for this vital energy to find some outlet. ‘‘ The greater intensity of coloration in the male” he says, + ‘‘ which may be termed the normal sexual difference, would be * Natural Selection 1891, pp. 364-365. tl. c., p. 366. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 83 further developed by the combats of the males for the possession of the females.- The most vigorous and ener- getic usually being able to rear the most offspring inten- sity of colour, if dependent on, or correlated with vigor, would tend to increase. But as differences of colour depend upon minute chemical or structual differences in the organism, increasing vigor acting unequally on different portions of the integument, and often produc- ing at the same time abnormal developments of hair, horns, scales, feathers, etc., would almost necessarily lead also to variable distribution of colour and thus to the production of new tints and markings.” In follow- ing out this line of argument Mr. Wallace suggests that color is proportionate to integumentary development, reaching its maximum among butterflies and birds where there is the greatest expanse and variation of wings, but it has been asked why, if this hypothesis be a true.one, bats are generally so dull colored, or beetles so brightly. ‘‘ The endless processes of growth and change during the development of feathers, and the enormous extent of this delicately organized sur- face,” he says,* ‘‘must have been highly favorable to the production of varied colour effects, which, when not injurious, have been merely fixed for purposes of specific identification, but have often been modified or sup- pressed whenever different tints were needed for purposes of protection.” This appeal to the extent and structure of the feather can have but little weight, for, in the majority of cases, it is the exposed edge of the feather alone which is colored; the basal half being as a rule white or some dull shade of buff or gray. Whether the appeal of Mr. Wallace to the general laws of growth is or is not justifiable as an explanation *1.o., p. 369. 84 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. of the markings of birds, the question with which we are at present concerned is whether the female exerts any choice of a mate dependent upon color, and whether, if she does so, it is possible that the markings cfa species might in course of time be changed by this means. Wallace asserts that there is no evidence that the female is in any way influenced by color in choosing amate. Among butterflies it does indeed seem incredi- ble that any such selection can take place, and Mr. Wallace presents the argument against this in the strongest possible light. His argument is controverted by Poulton, however, with considerable force.* Prof. Geo. W. and Elizabeth G. Peckham have published a paper entitled Observations on Sexual Selection in Spiders of the Family Attide,f in which they advocate the factor of sexual selection in the production of the colors of spiders. They show that in this group the female is fierce and pugnacious, which trait, according to Wallace, should be accompanied with a surplus of vitality and accordingly with brilliant colors, as he claimed to be the case with the humming-birds. But in this group the males are nearly always brilliantly colored, while the females are inconspicuous. On the other hand, the dull colors of the female could not have been originated for protection, for ‘‘all the species of this family have covered nests.”” The most important part of the paper is devoted to a minute description of the courting habits of different species of Attidee. In conclusion the authors. sum up the results of their observations as follows: ‘¢The fact that in the Attidw the males vie with each other in making an elaborate display, not only of their grace and agility but also of their beauty, before the females, and that the females, after attentively watching *The Colors of Animals, 291-297. t Natural History Society of Wisconsin. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 85 the dances and tournaments which have been executed for their gratification, select for their mates the males that they find most pleasing, points strongly to the con- clusion. that the great differences in color and in orna- ment between the males and females of these spiders are the result of sexual selection.” Indeed, anyone who will attentively follow the account of these elaborate and painstaking investigations of the courting habits of this family of spiders, must admit that in this instance at least, there is considerable reason to believe that sexual selection has played an important part in the modifica- tion of color. Among birds it is difficult if not impossible to secure such definite results from observation. It is known, however, that many male birds display their markings before the female in a very elaborate way. Darwin pointed this fact out as being especially confirmatory of his theory of sexual selection. It is thus explained by Wallace:* ‘‘At pairing-time the male is in a state of excitement, and full of exuberant energy. Even un- ornamented birds flutter their wings or spread them out, erect their tails or crests and thus give vent to the nervous excitability with which they are overcharged. It is not improbable that crests and other erectile feathers may be primarily of use in frightening away enemies, since they are generally erected when angry or during combat. * * * But if those portions of the plumage which were originally erected under the influence of anger or fear became largely developed and brightly colored, the actual display under the influence of jealousy or sexual excitement becomes quite intelligi- ble.”” Mr. Wallace, in the above passage, has introduced a new theory explaining the brilliant colors of male *L.¢., p. 377. 86 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. birds, which it seems to me would need far greater proof to establish than the theory of sexual selection which itis intended to supplant. According to this new hypoth- esis the brilliant crests, etc., of birds have been largely developed in order to frighten away enemies, but it would require a great amount of observational evidence to demonstrate this. On the contrary, in the majority of cases the colors of the male bird are not in the least calculated to inspire an enemy with fear. Let us take a familiar example and compare the two views as explana- tions. The house-finch (Carpodacus mexicanus frontalis), is now at the height of the courting season and certainly displays a great amount of energy in the prosecution of his love-making. Three or four males may frequently be seen following a single female from fence to fence, or tree to tree. The wings are slightly lowered and the birds either face the object of their devotions displaying the bright crimson of the head, throat and breast, or hop directly away exposing the rump patch of the same color. Their vivacious song is also a feature of the courtship. The dull colored female eventually flies away with one of the competitors for her favor and the re- maining males start in quest of other mates. It would of course be utterly impossible to assert that the female had chosen the most brilliantly attired of her suitors, but it is indeed a significant fact that several males, or at least two, have presented themselves to her, display- ing their charins of song and dress, and that one of them is successful without any fighting with his com- petitors. Another fact of some importance,—I have seen a single male house-finch paying assiduous atten- tions to a female, and utterly repulsed and deserted by the object of his devotions. From the above it is evident that it is not mere perseverance which deter- mines which male shall be successful, as Mr. Wallace EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 87 has argued, but the choice is really made by the female. Mr. Wallace has, however, interposed another objec- tion of great importance. He says: *‘‘ Again, evidence collected by Mr. Darwin himself, proves that each bird finds a mate under any circumstances. He gives a num- ber of cases of one of a pair of birds being shot, and the survivor being always found paired again almost im- mediately. This is sufficiently explained on the assump- tion that the destruction of birds by various causes is continually leaving widows and widowers in nearly equal proportions, and thus each one finds a fresh wate; and it leads to the conclusion that permanently unpaired birds are very scarce, so that, speaking broadly, every bird finds a mate and breeds. But this would almost or quite neutralize any effect of sexual selection of color or ornament, since the less highly-colored birds would be at little or no disadvantage as regards leaving healthy offspring.” If it were indeed true that every male bird found a mate there would be a serious difficulty in the way of sexual selection, but Mr. Wallace has not estab- lished this in the passage above quoted. It seems quite as natural to suppose that there are always a number of birds who have not found mates, and that consequently there are constantly a supply of bachelors and old maids on hand to mate with any unfortunate widow or widower. Collectors of birds have often commented on the fact that several males are nearly always shot to one female. To be sure the duller colors and more retiring habits of female birds would insure their protection, but even where special search is made for them they are found to be less common than the other sex. This is noted, moreover, among species in which the sexes are alike. If there be such a preponderance of males as seems “le., p. 370. 88 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. highly probable, then, of course, every bird does not find a mate, and Mr. Wallace’s objection is invalidated. Prof. and Mrs. Peckham have shown that among the Atti every male does not geta mate. They say: *‘In spiders, as the females gradually become adults, they have a choice from among a number of males, as these mature several days earlier. The males will pair as often as they have the opportunity, and as the mating season lasts for two or three weeks, the more brilliant males may easily be selected again and again.”’ Of considerable significance as showing the unsettled state of scientific opinion upon this difficult question, is the fact that two eminent English naturalists have each just published a work in which the subject is discussed, and have arrived at directly opposite conclusions. Prof. Frank E. Beddard, in his book entitled Animal Color- ation, concludes that sexual selection, if operative at all, is a very insignificant factor, while Prof. George J. Romanes, in the first volume of the series on Darwin and After Darwin, writes to the contrary in the following emphatic sentence: ¢ ‘‘And, as regards the particular case now before us, I think I have shown, as far as space will permit, that in the phenomena of decorative colour- ing (as distinguished from merely brilliant colouring), of melodious song (as distinguished from merely tune- less cries), of enormous arboresceut antlers (as distin- guished from merely offensive weapons), and so forth— I say that in all these phenomena we have phenomena which cannot possibly be explained by the theory of natural selection; and, further, that if they are to be ex- plained at all, this can only be done, so far as we can at present see, by Mr. Darwin’s supplementary theory of sexual selection.” Inasmuch as these two scientists have "els u., Pp. 60. tp. 400. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 89 arrived at these opposite conclusions from consulting in the main the same works that have been referred to in the preceding discussion, it may be profitable to notice the grounds for their decisions. Prof. Beddard, in his chapter on Sexual Coloration,* first enumerates instances of sexual dimorphism and dichromatism among forms where sexual selection is ob- viously precluded by the nature of the case, as, for ex- ample, among some species of Echinoderms. Te states that even among birds when the sexes are different in color the female is sometimes as beautifully marked as the male, as in certain species of curassows, parrots, and the upland goose. He contends with Wallace that these brilliant colors are most common and striking in butterflies and birds where the nature of the expanded surface would facilitate their development. He points to the very slight exhibition of sexual dichromatism in mamumals, and cites instances showing the dependence of sexual dichromatism in birds upon the sexual organs. What is to be said of those objections to sexual selection? His first objection is, indeed, a valid one so far as it goes, viz., in showing that there can be sexual diversity in color and form without any selection, but this by no means disproves sexual selection in forms where it might be possible. As regards certain isolated instances of birds in which the female, although differ- ently colored from the male is equally beautiful, there is much room for argument. In the first place it would be necessary to know in each specific instance in what the degree of difference consisted. Certain colors in birds have complementary colors which are more prim- ative but not necessarily less beautiful. Thus many scarlet male birds when kept in captivity become yellow, which color is often characteristic of the female of the * pp. 253-282. 90 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. same species. A bird might accordingly develop a brilliant scarlet color in its plumage through the instru- ientality of sexual selection, while the female, through partial inheritance, would be colored yellow upon cor- responding parts of the body. In the same manner various colors in one sex might be imperfectly inherited, producing a female bird but little inferior to her mate, although quite differently marked. The instance of the upland goose (Bernicla mugellanica) in which ‘ the female is a rich brown diversified by white marks, while the male is black and white,” would be a case in point. To the suggestion that the structure of the feather offers greater facilities mechanically, for the display of color, the objection has already been raised that only the tip of the feather is colored. In another connection I have suggested * that the absence of brilliant colors in mam- mals, may be due to the fact that they are characteristi- cally nocturnal in their habits, and the faculty of color perception would very naturally be less exercised and less highly developed than among birds. That the color of birds may be influenced by the removal of the sexual organs is an undoubted fact, but it does not throw any light upon the origination of the color. Even though a color had been developed by sexual selec- tion, it would eventually become an attribute of one sex only, andmight be expected to chanye if the bird were unsexed. Prof. Beddard also calls attention to the difficulty of believing ina highly developed esthetic sense, which has been urged by Wallace with such force. He alludes to the excitability during the breeding season of animals among which there is no pairing, but this does not appear to be as significant as he imagines. Granting it to be a fact that low forms of life do show signs of excitability * Zoe, ii, p. 209. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 91 during the breeding season, which is due to the state of their nervous organization, and granting, even, that the excitement shown by birds at this time may be due to the same cause, to a large extent, this does not account for the fact that the male birds display their ornaments in a painstaking and elaborate way. Prof. Beddard states Mr. Stolzmann’s view as set forth in the Proceed- ings of the Zoological Society.* This theory is indeed an ingenious one and may be used as supplementary to the theory of sexual selection. It is based upon the assump- tion that male birds are much more numerous than the females, an assumption which Mr. Wallace rather too hastily discarded. Mr. Stolzmann suggests that this preponderance of male birds would be a disadvantage to the species, for the unpaired males would be apt to annoy the setting females and prevent the raising of the brood. Accordingly those species in which the males greatly predominated would stand less chance of per- petuating their kind than species in which the sexes were more evenly divided, and any device by which the surplus males could be killed off would enable such as were left to rear their offspring with greater success. Such a device is to be found, according to Mr. Stolz- mann’s view in the long tail feathers and brilliant colors of many male birds. If Mr. Stolzmann’s view be correct then natural selection, it would appear, must be causing individuals to assume instruments for their own destruction in order that the species may live. This conclusion is arrived at from a merely superficial consideration of the case, however. Natural selection is in reality only preserving the lives of the greatest number of individuals. In any given generation the fittest individuals to survive would be those males which were least ornamented, but these would be the least fit to * 1885, p. 615. 92 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. leave offspring, because from their very advantages over the females in point of numbers and strength, they would prevent them from rearing their young. Conse- quently these unornamented and inconspicuous males would leave fewer offspring than the conspicuous males which were fewer in numbers. The survival of the fittest, then, should be regarded in the long run as the survival of the individuals best fitted to leave offspring. And now it may be well to enquire how this theory might be made to support sexual selection instead of opposing it, as Prof. Beddard intended it should. A very weighty objection to sexual selection has been raised by Mr. Wallace, viz., that even admitting the fact of selection on the part of the female bird its influence would be entirely neutralized by natural selection, for if these ornaments were developed solely for the sake of beauty, the individuals possessing such charms would be at a disadvantage in the struggle for existence, and perish. If the paradox can be demonstrated, on the contrary, that these disadvantageous appendages which have been acquired for the purpose of adornment, are in reality an advantage, this difficulty is entirely done away with. Prof. Romanes does not consider Mr. Wallace’s objec- tions in great detail, but takes issue with him on the leading points in question. He says:* ‘‘ There is no conceivable reason why mere brélliwncy of color, as an accidental concomitant of general vigor, should have run into so extraordinary, so elaborate, and so beautiful a design of colors. Morcover, this design is only unfolded when the tail is erected, and the tail is not erected in battle (as Mr. Wallace’s theory of the erectile function in feathers would require), but in courtship; obviously, therefore, the purpose of the pattern, so to speak, is cor- *lou, pp. 394-395. EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 93 related with the act of courtship—it being only then, in fact, that the general purpose of the whole structure, as well as the more special purpose of the pattern, becomes revealed.” Mr. Romanes also calls attention to the fact that in many cases, such as the appendage of the bell- bird, a very elaborate structure has been evolved which is used only in courtship. Such a tube as the bell-bird’s inflatable tube, which is present only in the male, cer- tainly could not have been developed by any excess of vitality, or in accordance with any general laws of growth. Mr. Romanes is inclined to throw aside the difficulty of constancy in esthetic taste in birds a little too lightly. Hesays: * ‘‘Although we know very little about the psychology of the lower animals, we do observe in many cases that small details of mental organization are often wonderfully constant and uniform throughout all members of a species, even where it is impossible to suggest any utility as a cause.” In commenting on the display of ornaments by male birds, Mr. Wallace writes:+ ‘‘ But it by no means fol- lows that slight differences in the shape, pattern, or colors of the ornamental plumes are what lead a female to give the preference to one male over another; still less that all the females of a species, or the great majority of them, over a wide area of country, and for many suc- cessive generations, prefer exactly the same modifica- tion of the color or ornament.”’ Or to put the difficulty in the words of Lloyd Morgan, { ‘‘ Sexual selection of preferential mating involves a standard of taste; that standard has advanced from what we consider a lower to what we consider a higher esthetic level, not along =p. 399. + Darwinism, p. 285. + Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 205. 94 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. one line, but along many lines. What has guided it along these lines?” There are apparently but two views to take in regard to the beautiful in life, either that which appeals to the wsthetic taste of man in animal and floral colors has been developed solely for the utility of the individual possessing it, in accordance with the general laws of growth (such as the direct action of the environment, the structure of the integument, ete.), in which event any beauty which it may possess for man is purely incidental or a mere coincidence; or else it has been produced by the selection of the most beautiful, generally by the female. Even Wallace admits that the beautiful colors of flow- ering plants have been produced by the selective agency of insects which aid in fertilization. Prof. Peckham has shown that in all probability the brilliant colors of some spiders have been produced by the selective agency of the female, while the argument for sexual selection in birds has a great deal in its favor. But it is not a little remarkable that those things which appeal to man as beautiful should be the same ones that affect animals as low in the scale as insects. Mr. E. B. Poulton believes this esthetic sense to be generally present in the ani- mals as well as in man. He says: *‘‘ If an artist, en- tirely ignorant of natural history, were asked to arrange all the brightly colored butterflies and moths in Eng- land in two divisions, the one containing all the beau- tiful paiterns and combinations of color, the other including the staring, strongly contrasted colors, and crude patterns, we should find that the latter would con- tain, with hardly an exception, the species in which in- dependent evidence has shown, or is likely to show, the existence of some unpleasant quality. The former division would contain the colors displayed in courtship “Loo, p. 316 EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 95 and when the insect is on the alert, concealed at other times. ‘The immense difference between the two divisions, the one most pleasing, the other highly repugant to our esthetic susceptibilities, seems to me to be entirely un- explained if we assume that the colors of both are intended for the purposes of recognition. But these great differences are to be expected if we accept Mr. Darwin’s views; for the colors and patterns of the latter division appeal to a vertebrate enemy’s sense of what is conspicuous, while those of the former appeal to an insect’s sense of what is beautiful. It is, of course, highly remarkable that our own esthetic sense should so closely correspond with that of an insect. I believe, however, that it is possible to account for this wonder- ful unanimity in taste.” Mr. Poulton accounts for it by supposing that ‘‘ our standards of beauty are largely derived from the con- templation of the numerous examples around us, which, strange as it may seem, have been created by the esthe- tic preferences of the insect world.” But this does uot explain why insects should have the same standards of beauty as man. Morgan indeed takes a stand decidedly opposed to Poulton. Thus he says:* ‘To sum up, then, concerning this difficult subject, the following are the propositions on which I wouldlay stress: (1) What we term an esthetic sense of beauty involves a number of complex perceptual, conceptual, and emotional ele- ments. (2) The fact that a natural object excites in us this pleasurable emotion does not carry with it the implication that the object was evolved for the sake of its beauty. (3) Even if we grant, as we fairly may, that brightly colored flowers, in association with nectar, have been objects of appetence to insects; and that * Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 413. 96 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. brilliant plumage, in association with sexual vigour, has been a factor in the preferential mating of birds;—this is a very different thing from saying that, either in the selection of flowers by insects, or in the selection of their mates by birds, a consciously wsthetic motive has been a determining cause. (4) In fine, though ani- mals may be incidentally attracted by beautiful objects, they have no wsthetic sense of beauty Gade 314 MOIGEHT US: 5.,.yasiasrsieienis-eiitasereins een teene, 290 PRO sy rane aviosccuayecnaaawod 149 146, 291 Meadowlark. ,156, 175, 1/8, 203, 211, 240, 293 Megoscops asio, 250; table of races of, showing relation of color, 250. asio maccallii 254 flammeolus..... 254 PCH OP SIG vieies:psisniw win seieeinriiaciesinarn 254 Melanerpesssssiisie scarcer sanisiguianecapaveiw . 280 GUPITODS 5 ci veer cea simesaccvaies + 223 CATOlINUS see scis exededeeies eae pee ete 222 erythrocephalus..145, 153, 216, 217, 218 formicivorus bairdi..143, 170, 173, 175, 181, Melanistic plumage, methods of, as- suming, 151; theory of, suggested by Stejneger, 226; Spinus psaltria agan instance of the assumption of, 241; instances of noted by Ridgway, 243. Meldola, criticism of Romanes theory of physiological selection, 115; Ro- manes’ reply to, 115-116, 191 Meleagris - 236, 263, 264 Melopelia leucoptera......... evant eeeaticets 206 Melospiza ....... 196, 215, 225, 236, 250, 308 GUDOLIA ieiciaivnesa steccrd as a sisiain ea sierarascinveseters 249 FASCIA «cists dieiainfeees eaicisiese aw sremyene 248 LBMAX camo wiscinnaenunanaerreas 248 heermanni ............. 00.000 248 MONTANE, ... 2... cece ccs cece ence 248 rufina...... 248, 249 SAMUCLIS .... ce ceeeeceees evens 248 Merriam, on plumage changes, 134; on geographical distribution and North American faunal areas, 234, 235. MOP lisse Sisvpn gags darecscontemcammaauainn 335, 336 CONANIS sensewwsersese jess eet wees % 336 migratoria propinqua.............+ 217 oi , 222 Morgan, criticism of hypothesis of pangenesis, 5-6; criticism of Weis- mann’s explanation of death, 9; Weismann’s theory of heredity op- posed by, 17; on cellular continu- ity, 19-20; criticism of panmixis, 22; on inheritance of acquired characters, 29-30; transmission of mutilations discussed by, 30; in- stances of environmental influ- ences, 35; suggests modification of Spencer’s theory of physiological units, 58; explanation of preferen- tial mating, 81; opposed to Poul- ton’s views of the esthetic tastes of birds, 95-96. Motacilla melanope.............06 icvten ts Motacillide 331 Mutilations, transmission of discussed by Morgan, 29-30; transmission of discussed by Weismann, 30-31 ; Eimer on observed instances of, 32. Myadeste sis. ccssscisccictes eeremicwicieioas cman 335 FOWNSONAE o5 ican; svagraegeices 204, 217 MYyiarcbus scecmsrimceisecintie wexetese 256 CIMNETASCEDS ..... eee eee eee eee 256 CTINIMUIStdcacneraxnteaiaguanasiaid: 256 lawrenceii. » 243 mexicanus .. wee 256 nigricapillus. « 243 Myiodioctes.... 2. ..ccceeece cere ewan 236 Myiodynastes .ci09 teenage vecoeesiawe cs 285 Naegeli, on the existence of a nucleo- plasm first developing into body cells, then becoming simplified into reproductive cells, 10. 356 Natural selection, discussion of by Cunningham, 27-28; argued against as not creative, by Schurmann, 651; conditioned by variation, 62-53; further discussion of, 106-107, 110; Romanes on, as originator of spe- cies, 113-114; suggestions on as originator of species, by Belts, 114; as originator of species up- held by Meldola, 115. Nelson, E. W., on Plectrophenax ni- valis... 301 NGOCOLYS: esi. gacriginwic dvidariran oa aie ecient 236 Nighthawk, western...185,196, 207, 219, 254 Nuthatches Nyctala........... Nyctea nyctea. 152, 198 Nyctidromus.. 207 Oporornis... 236 PFOTMOSD ix acerca scwteaene aes eeaains tae 187 Oreortyx..... 236, 258 OLIGO Es cors yd! coinngih adap ay oo engeee 293 Arizona hooded. .133, 156 fiery.... 156 hooded.. 156 Oroscoptes........ ... 236 Ontalisisccies chicane 5 ioiwmanucied Acces aw 265 ORty Risin seers Hocalven Taaiacse rine G55 236 Osborn, on laws of cusp growth, 47; criticised by Poulton, 17; reply to Poulton’s criticisms, 48. OB PREY tc Assi oe ineseneate BN ae aes RES 272 Otocoris....... 218, 250 OW WTI ccs cysts sane e ceoesds deiales Kia nee 273 DBLLO WING s se-cee ve ccielscwrens Horas 197, 210 RPGat HOmMedecspspiuerages ayes oes 254 horned iis Aeslewea WeEweR aA ENS OAS 273 BCTOCCH eseseidranes dextinws ve eke nes 250 BLOW Vesjeieaianus sabaude: opninteingays death Seiko 198 western borned.................64% 210 Pammixis, Weismann’s explanation of, 22; criticism of by Morgan, 22; criticism of by Cunningham, 23; Romanes’ explanation of, 23; Ro- manes’ theories on, 24-25; Cope views in regard to, 26, PANGIOM sccirs seicnun se Sakae AE cE. mae s 272 Pangenesis, Darwin’s doctrine of, 3; explanation of by Romanes, 3-5; modification of by Brooks, Galton. Herdman, etc., 5; criticism of by Morgan, 5-6. Parabuteo......... 2. 269 unicinctus harrisi...... 147 Parallelism, Cope on laws of.. 718 PAV BU GUNG sccrtsuciscoare aititisid oaks Se ener 207 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Parrots... PATtTIdPeB isi cewersees or cenraawa voee Partridge, massena.............5 ceeee mountain,........ eee eee eee nee atricaplllis) ss sncmis acne smears hudsonicus . Passerculus... Passer domesticus Passerella PRCA ce es. case cos ae megarhyncha .. unalaschcensis. . Passerina.......--.+ cyanea..... VOrsicoloP cscs ticsda se 28 HG THERE Peckham, Prof. and Mrs., description of sexual selection among the At- Pediocetes .. Perisoreus .. Petrochelidon. lunifrons.. Peucea .. cassini.. mexicana.. Phenopepla.. Phainopepla. nitens Phalenoptilus .. 12. 236, 215, 236, .. 180, 196, 216, : 237 PHAIATO POS ais’ ih RE CHORDEILES. | Melospiza Fasciata 2 ” cinerea 3 fasciata rufina 4 guttata 5 “ - Samuelis 6 - » heermanni 7 » fallax 8 montana del.C.AK. LITH.@ ri TO! ary, SF PLATE XIlll. VA, PLATE XIV. . , ? Agelaius phoeniceus & Agelaius gubernator J Abelaiug: tricolor # = Agelaius phoeniceus 3 Agelaius Piterhetae winter summer Agelaius tricolor? summer Agelaius subernator ¢ winter del. C.A.K, LITH BRITTON 2 REY SF Noof wn | Sphyrapicus PLATE XV. varius Juv. «2% ad. winter » Pad. breeding » nuchalis? ad. » Sad. » nuchalis od ad. ruber dad. PLATE XVI. Icterus cucullatus nelsoni Icterus cucullatus nelsoni Icterus bullocki PLATE XVII. Icterus cucullatus } Icterus cucullatus nelsoni Teterus bullocki " Teterus galbula Icterus parisorum Icterus spurius peatioien Top of Head Back UpperTail Coverts Ear tigrina olivacea zestiva bryanti czerulescens ccronata audubont maculosa ceerulea pensylvanica castanea striata blackburnize dominica Sracia nigrescens chrysoparia Whi ye Pot ky een virens townsend! occidentalis kirtlandi vigorsil palmarum discolor PLATE XVIII. Coverts Throat Breast Sides Abdomen | UnderTail Coverts Lam ’ tt, O yu *" f ] ia \ Wath h ‘ ie an i by, hy et) I Be \s a Fi : a ft 7? Dendroica Top of Head Back Rump UpperilCoverts| Ear ee IE tigrina | olivacea eestiva bryanti Ceerulescens | coronata auduboni maculosa l carulea | f pensylvanica lj castanea I oX striata - blackburnias dominica eracia nigrescens chrysoparia virens ‘townsendi _ occidentalis kirtlandi vigorsl palmarum | discolor PLATE XIX. rCoverts Throat Breast Sides Abdomen | UnderTail Coverts wipe i NON aeae {t ian ity) =