Temperature and moisture acting together may cause extensive white facial markings, that neither alone would cause. In Mustela frenata these markings occur where there is heavy rainfall and high mean annual temperature. Where there is heavy rainfall and a low mean annual temperature they do not occur and where there is high mean annual temperature and light rainfall the markings are not pure white but are of the same color as the underparts. [Plate 1] and the description of color on page [51] may be consulted in this connection. Extremely high mean annual temperature together with extremely heavy rainfall may inhibit the development of light facial markings. M. f. meridana, panamensis and costaricensis are cases in point. In either direction, north or south, from the territory inhabited by these three subspecies a similar combination of temperature and rainfall is found and similar light facial markings appear there.
Considering the delicate response of structure to climate, a person naturally questions whether or not natural selection accounts for all of the differences between subspecies. To show that natural selection determines the color of Mustela frenata, it would be necessary to assume that climate, color, and utility of color are positively correlated. Although climate (rainfall) and color are correlated in such a manner that three subspecies of weasel in places as far apart as New England, Perú, and the state of Washington are colored alike, other features of the three environments are unlike. Kinds of animals which the weasel catches for food, and flora in which the weasel finds concealment, are dissimiliar. If natural selection alone determined the color, some difference in color would be expected between the weasel which needed to be obliteratively colored, that is camouflaged, the better to catch a Phyllotis in Perú and the weasel in Washington which needed nature's aid in catching Microtus. Mustela frenata goldmani of the highlands of southern México, which is known to attack the huge pocket gophers, Orthogeomys and Cratogeomys, has a weaker dental armature than Mustela frenata texensis which does not have to overcome prey so formidable as does goldmani. Equally formidable enemies endanger M. f. goldmani and texensis. Examples of this nature could be multiplied. Without actually proving anything concerning selection, these examples give reason for us to suppose that some characters are not determined by natural selection.
Another question upon which data obtained from a study of Mustela has some bearing, is this: Where the geographic ranges of two subspecies meet, why does not the swamping effect of crossbreeding cause one subspecies to disappear? Although swamping may have occurred in some instances, it does not occur in the majority of instances. Witness the long-continued existence of the living subspecies Mustela frenata nevadensis of which skulls are available from Pleistocene deposits. Therefore, its distinctive characters, cranially at least, have been maintained for a long time. Furthermore, these characters are maintained over a large geographic region more than a thousand miles across. On the eastern margin of its range, at the eastern base of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado, M. f. nevadensis intergrades in a relatively narrow belt with the lighter-colored, longer-tailed and cranially different Mustela frenata longicauda, which has a geographic range almost equally extensive. M. f. longicauda also is uniform in its characters over a large area but at approximately 400 miles east of the base of the Rocky Mountains, it begins to intergrade with the darker-colored, shorter-tailed and cranially different Mustela frenata primulina and does so over a belt of 100 miles or more in width. At any given locality within this wide belt of intergradation the range of individual variation ordinarily does not exceed that in animals from a given locality well within the geographic range of M. f. longicauda. In the narrow belt of intergradation along the eastern base of the Rocky Mountains, the range of individual variation at several places is greater than in animals from a given locality well within the geographic range of M. f. longicauda or for that matter from well within the geographic range of M. f. nevadensis.
Considering the dominance and recessiveness of genes and the genetic mechanism in general by which characteristics of offspring are inherited from their parents, it would seem that M. f. longicauda and for that matter M. f. nevadensis and M. f. primulina would lose their distinctive characteristics because of the crossbreeding that is every year going on between longicauda and nevadensis on the one hand and between longicauda and primulina on the other hand.
Sumner (1932:84) suggests that homogeneity is prevented by population pressure. Applying his suggestion to the species Mustela frenata we could say that the subspecies longicauda pressing westward meets strong pressure from the subspecies nevadensis pressing eastward and that the width of the zone of intergradation between the two subspecies varies inversely with the strength of the population pressure from the two sides. Sumner recognizes that according to his hypothesis the two contiguous races would remain distinct only so long as there was a preponderance of centrifugal movement from both of the centers of dispersal. Sumner (op. cit.:85) recognizes that an abrupt change of environmental conditions could account in part for the boundaries of the ranges of the two subspecies and finally that his hypothesis does not certainly answer the question of why crossbreeding does not result in homogeneity between two subspecies with contiguous geographic ranges.
The hypothesis of harmoniously stabilized complexes of genes was offered by Timofeeff-Ressovsky (1940:124) to explain why the swamping effect of crossbreeding does not obliterate subspecies. The hypothesis takes into account that any one of several characters of a subspecies may be caused by several genes. Some characters of this kind may be favored by natural selection more than others. In the belt of intergradation between two subspecies, where two of these favored characters meet, a "biological tension" as Huxley (1939:415) terms it "will result, which will produce partial discontinuity between the two groups. Each group will evolve a gene-complex which is not only broadly adapted to the external environment of the central area of its range, but is also harmoniously stabilized, in adaptation to the internal genetic environment, by the selection of modifiers." Crosses, that is to say intergrades, between the two subspecies will lack this stabilization and will therefore be at a selective disadvantage. The zone of intergradation will therefore remain narrow; intermediates are constantly being brought into existence there by crossing but are as constantly being extinguished by selection.
These two hypotheses are the best that geneticists yet have offered. Neither has been tested and both, as originally proposed, would hardly apply everywhere because there are some contradictions.