Stejneger on Japanese Woodpeckers

The faunal synopsis is preceded by an introduction which treats of the distribution of the species in the region in general, and in the different botanical zones of the country.Then follows a bibliography of the ornithological literatnre relating to Lapland, apparently very full, sufficiently detailed, and embracing II3 separate titles.Tills large material is a&nirably handled when treating each individual species, which is preceded by a complete synonyfny of all the published records of its occm'renee within the region.It is only to be regretted that he should have paid any attention at all (cf.p. 2o in regard to 1%lco canal/cans) to Rev. Bowden's miserable 'The Naturalist in Norway,' for a worse fi'and and humbug, as far as the ornithology at least is concerned, has never been published.In the synopsis the author follows Dresser's arrangement and nomenclature; a course to be specially commended.Altogether Mr. Pleske's book makes a nost welcome addition to ornithological literature, and we most heartily congratulate him upon its cmnpletion.--L.S. W. E. Brooks on the Genus Acanthis.--Mr.Brooks, the well-known Indian Ornithologist, now living in Milton, Ontario, has recently contributed to 'The Ibis' two papers* on the Redpolls, especially the American species.The final result to which Mr. Brooks has arrived, he gives as follows: "We have, then, five very well-marked species of -/lcanl,5oes, viz. A. hornemannoe, A. exoel36es, A. roslrala, A. loenar/a, and A. rtfescens ; also one doubtful bird, A. l'naria holbwllL" Of this latter he says: '-To me it is not a thoroughly satisfactory species, like the others, but at present its long bill is not easily accounted for.I am not partial to the trlnomial system, but for convenience' sake this bird might stand asAcatthis holboellL It is a variation not yet thoroughly worked out."The present reviexver, who, on an earlier page of this number of 'The Auk,' has attempted to put this form on a satisfactory footing, feels quite satisfied with this admission of Mr. Brooks, who, it must be remembered, is an opponent of the theory of evolution, and to whom a form must bea'full' species or nothing.On the other hand it is very gratifying to find one's views in regard to so difficult a gronp as the Redpolls sbared and sustained by an ornithologist of so great power of discrimination as Mr. Brooks, whose stateinents the present writer is glad to indorse in most cases.The differences of opinion between Mr. Brooks and myself relate directly to the question of 'species or subspecies,' or perhaps 'binomials or trinomials,' differences which, in fkct, are quite unessential.--L.S.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.