In the STERNUM the differences in form are slight, except in the size and outline of the perforations, which, both in the larger and lesser sized breeds, are sometimes small. These perforations, also, are sometimes either nearly circular, or elongated as is often the case with Carriers. The posterior perforations occasionally are not complete, being left open posteriorly. The marginal apophyses forming the anterior perforations vary greatly in development. The degree of convexity of the posterior part of the sternum differs much, being sometimes almost perfectly flat. The manubrium is rather more prominent in some individuals than in others, and the pore immediately under it varies greatly in size.]

CORRELATION OF GROWTH.

By this term I mean that the whole organisation is so connected, that when one part varies, other parts vary; but which of two correlated variations ought to be looked at as the cause and which as the effect, or whether both result from some common cause, we can seldom or never tell. The point of interest for us is that, when fanciers, by the continued selection of slight variations, have largely modified one part, they often unintentionally produce other modifications. For instance, the beak is readily acted on by selection, and, with its increased or diminished length, the tongue increases or diminishes, but not in due proportion; for, in a Barb and Short-faced Tumbler, both of which have very short beaks, the tongue, taking the rock-pigeon as the standard of comparison, was proportionally not shortened enough, whilst in two Carriers and in a Runt the tongue, proportionally with the beak, was not lengthened enough, thus, in a first-rate English Carrier, in which the beak from the tip to the feathered base was exactly thrice as long as in a first-rate Short-faced Tumbler, the tongue was only a little more than twice as long. But the tongue varies in length independently of the beak: thus in a Carrier with a beak 1.2 inch in length, the tongue was .67 in length: whilst in a Runt which equalled the Carrier in length of body and in stretch of wings from tip to tip, the beak was .92 whilst the tongue was .73 of an inch in length, so that the tongue was actually longer than in the carrier with its long beak. The tongue of the Runt was also very broad at the root. Of two Runts, one had its beak longer by .23 of an inch, whilst its tongue was shorter by .14 than in the other.

With the increased or diminished length of the beak the length of the slit forming the external orifice of the nostrils varies, but not in due proportion, for, taking the rock-pigeon as the standard, the orifice in a Short-faced Tumbler was not shortened in due proportion with its very short beak. On the other hand (and this could not have been antic.i.p.ated), the orifice in three English Carriers, in the Bagadotten Carrier, and in a Runt (pigeon cygne), was longer by above the tenth of an inch than would follow from the length of the beak proportionally with that of the rock-pigeon. In one Carrier the orifice of the nostrils was thrice as long as in the rock- pigeon, though in body and length of beak this bird was not nearly double the size of the rock-pigeon. This greatly increased length of the orifice of the nostrils seems to stand partly in correlation with the enlargement of the wattled skin on the upper mandible and over the nostrils; and this is a character which is selected by fanciers. So again, the broad, naked, and wattled skin round the eyes of Carriers and Barbs is a selected character; and in obvious correlation with this, the eyelids, measured longitudinally, are proportionally more than double the length of those of the rock-pigeon.

The great difference (see figure 27) in the curvature of the lower jaw in the rock-pigeon, the Tumbler, and Bagadotten Carrier, stands in obvious relation to the curvature of the upper jaw, and more especially to the angle formed by the maxillo-jugal arch with the premaxillary bones. But in Carriers, Runts, and Barbs the singular reflexion of the upper margin of the middle part of the lower jaw (see figure 25) is not strictly correlated with the width or divergence (as may be clearly seen in figure 26) of the premaxillary bones, but with the breadth of the h.o.r.n.y and soft parts of the upper mandible, which are always overlapped by the edges of the lower mandible.

In Pouters, the elongation of the body is a selected character, and the ribs, as we have seen, have generally become very broad, with the seventh pair furnished with processes; the sacral and caudal vertebrae have been augmented in number; the sternum has likewise increased in length (but not in the depth of the crest) by .4 of an inch more than would follow from the greater bulk of the body in comparison with that of the rock-pigeon. In Fantails, the length and number of the caudal vertebrae have increased.

Hence, during the gradual progress of variation and selection, the internal bony framework and the external shape of the body have been, to a certain extent, modified in a correlated manner.

Although the wings and tail often vary in length independently of each other, it is scarcely possible to doubt that they generally tend to become elongated or shortened in correlation. This is well seen in Jacobins, and still more plainly in Runts, some varieties of which have their wings and tail of great length, whilst others have both very short. With Jacobins, the remarkable length of the tail and wing-feathers is not a character which is intentionally selected by fanciers; but fanciers have been trying for centuries, at least since the year 1600, to increase the length of the reversed feathers on the neck, so that the hood may more completely enclose the head; and it may be suspected that the increased length of the wing and tail-feathers stand in correlation with the increased length of the neck- feathers. Short-faced Tumblers have short wings in nearly due proportion with the reduced size of their bodies; but it is remarkable, seeing that the number of the primary wing-feathers is a constant character in most birds, that these Tumblers generally have only nine instead of ten primaries. I have myself observed this in eight birds; and the Original Columbarian Society (5/37. J.M. Eaton 'Treatise' edition 1858 page 78.) reduced the standard for Bald-head Tumblers from ten to nine white flight- feathers, thinking it unfair that a bird which had only nine feathers should be disqualified for a prize because it had not ten WHITE flight- feathers. On the other hand, in Carriers and Runts, which have large bodies and long wings, eleven primary feathers have occasionally been observed.

Mr. Tegetmeier has informed me of a curious and inexplicable case of correlation, namely, that young pigeons of all breeds which when mature become white, yellow, silver (i.e., extremely pale blue), or dun-coloured, are born almost naked; whereas pigeons of other colours are born well- clothed with down. Mr. Esquilant, however, has observed that young dun Carriers are not so bare as young dun Barbs and Tumblers. Mr. Tegetmeier has seen two young birds in the same nest, produced from differently coloured parents, which differed greatly in the degree to which they were at first clothed with down.

I have observed another case of correlation which at first sight appears quite inexplicable, but on which, as we shall see in a future chapter, some light can be thrown by the law of h.o.m.ologous parts varying in the same manner. The case is, that, when the feet are much feathered, the roots of the feathers are connected by a web of skin, and apparently in correlation with this the two outer toes become connected for a considerable s.p.a.ce by skin. I have observed this in very many specimens of Pouters, Trumpeters, Swallows, Roller-tumblers (likewise observed in this breed by Mr. Brent), and in a lesser degree in other feather-footed pigeons.

The feet of the smaller and larger breeds are of course much smaller or larger than those of the rock-pigeon; but the scutellae or scales covering the toes and tarsi have not only decreased or increased in size, but likewise in number. To give a single instance, I have counted eight scutellae on the hind toe of a Runt, and only five on that of a Short-faced Tumbler. With birds in a state of nature the number of the scutellae on the feet is usually a constant character. The length of the feet and the length of the beak apparently stand in correlation; but as disuse apparently has affected the size of the feet, this case may come under the following discussion.

ON THE EFFECTS OF DISUSE.

In the following discussion on the relative proportions of the feet, sternum, furculum, scapulae, and wings, I may premise, in order to give some confidence to the reader, that all my measurements were made in the same manner, and that they were made without the least intention of applying them to the following purpose.

[TABLE 5.I.

PIGEONS WITH THEIR BEAKS GENERALLY SHORTER THAN THAT OF THE ROCK-PIGEON, PROPORTIONALLY TO THE SIZE OF THEIR BODIES.

Column 1. Name of Breed.

Column 2. Actual length of Feet (inches).

Column 3. Difference between actual and calculated length of feet, in proportion to length of feet and size of body in the Rock-pigeon.

Column 3a. Too short by (inches).

Column 3b. Too long by (inches).

1. 2. 3a. 3b.

Wild rock-pigeon (mean measurement). 2.02

Short-faced Tumbler, bald-head. 1.57 0.11 ..

Short-faced Tumbler, almond. 1.60 0.16 ..

Tumbler, red magpie. 1.75 0.19 ..

Tumbler, red common (by standard to end of tail). 1.85 0.07 ..

Tumbler, common bald-head. 1.85 0.18 ..

Tumbler, roller. 1.80 0.06 ..

Turbit. 1.75 0.17 ..

Turbit. 1.80 0.01 ..

Turbit. 1.84 0.15 ..

Jacobin. 1.90 0.02 ..

Trumpeter, white. 2.02 0.06 ..

Trumpeter, mottled. 1.95 0.18 ..

Fantail (by standard to end of tail). 1.85 0.15 ..

Fantail (by standard to end of tail). 1.95 0.15 ..

Fantail crested var. Ditto. 1.95 0.0 0.0

Indian Frill-back Ditto. 1.8O 0.19 ..

English Frill-back. 2.10 0.03 ..

Nun. 1.82 0.02 ..

Laugher. 1.65 0.16 ..

Barb. 2.00 0.03 ..

Barb. 2.00 ..

0.03

Spot. 1.90 0.02 ..

Spot. 1.90 0.07 ..

Swallow, red. 1.85 0.18 ..

Swallow, blue. 2.00 ..

0.03

Pouter. 2.42 ..

0.11

Pouter, German. 2.30 ..

0.09