INDEX

Every reference is to the page: words in italics are names of genera or species; figures in italics indicate that the reference relates to systematic position; figures in thick type refer to an illustration; f. = and in following page or pages; n. = note.

END OF VOL. IV

Printed by R. & R. Clark, Limited, Edinburgh.

[1]. The muscles are to a certain extent segmented in correspondence with the limbs; and the heart, in Phyllopoda and Stomatopoda, may have segmentally arranged ostia.

[2]. Herbst, Arch. Entwick. Mech. ii., 1905, p. 544.

[3]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xlix., 1906, p. 469.

[4]. Present in Nebalia.

[5]. As many as 37 ambulatory appendages may be present.

[6]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxi., 1881, p. 343.

[7]. Abhandl. Senckenberg. Nat. Gesellsch. xiv., 1886.

[8]. The Cumacea, Anaspidacea, and certain Isopods possess a maxillary gland only.

[9]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxxii., 1891, p. 279.

[10]. Arch. Zool. Exp. (2) x., 1892, p. 57.

[11]. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard, xxxv., 1899, p. 152.

[12]. Arch. f. mikr. Anat. lxvii., 1906, p. 364.

[13]. Vol. x., 1897, pp. 97, 264.

[14]. For this use of the term Branchiopoda, cf. Boas, Morph. Jahrb. viii., 1883, p. 519.

[15]. Bernard, “The Apodidae,” Nature Series, 1892.

[16]. Arb. Zool. Inst. Wien, vi., 1886, p. 267.

[17]. I do not understand Packard’s account of the telson in Thamnocephalus.

[18]. The nomenclature here adopted is not that of Lankester.

[19]. [The red pigment in Lernanthropus, see p. [68], has been shown to be not haemoglobin, so that the presence of this substance in Phyllopod blood becomes doubtful.—G.S.]

[20]. Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. lxxi., 1902, p. 508.

[21]. Cf. Gaskell, Journ. Anat. Physiol. x., 1876, p. 153.

[22]. Bernard’s statement that Apus is hermaphrodite seems based on insufficient evidence.

[23]. Sayce has since described it, Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria, xv., 1903, p. 229.

[24]. A. cancriformis had been supposed to have disappeared from the British fauna for many years, but it was found in Scotland in 1907. See R. Gurney, Nature, lxxvi., 1907, p. 589.

[25]. Branchipodides has been described by H. Woodward, from Tertiary strata.

[26]. Consult Baird, “Monograph of the Branchiopodidae,” Proc. Zool. Soc. 1852, p. 18. Packard, 12th Ann. Rep. U.S. Geol. Survey, part i., 1879.

[27]. Arch. f. Math. og Naturvidensk. xx., 1898, Nos. 4 and 6. Thiele, Zool. Jahrb. System. xiii., 1900, p. 563.

[28]. Bernard, loc. cit. p. 19; Baird, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1852, p. 1; Sayce, Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria, xv., 1903, p. 224.

[29]. Sars, Arch. f. Math. og Naturvidensk. xx., 1898, Nos. 4 and 6.

[30]. Sars, Christiania Vidensk. Forhand. 1887. For Australian Phyllopods, see Sars, Arch. f. Math. og Naturvid. xvii., 1895, No. 7, and Sayce, loc. cit. p. 36.

[31]. Simocephalus vetulus anchors itself to weeds, etc., by a modified seta on the exopodite of the second antenna. It does not employ a dorsal organ for purposes of fixation. [G. S.]

[32]. Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. xxiv., 1874, p. 1.

[33]. Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. xxvii., xxxiii., 1876, 1879.

[34]. Consult Lilljeborg, Nov. Acta Reg. Soc. Upsalensis, 1901; Scourfield, J. Quekett Micr. Club, 1903–4.

[35]. More properly Chydoridae, but the universally known name Lynceidae is convenient.

[36]. Grundzüge der Zoologie, 4. Aufl. 1880, p. 543.

[37]. Fauna and Flora G. v. Neapel, Monograph 19, 1892.

[38]. Ibid. Monograph 25, 1899.

[39]. Norwegian North Polar Exp. Sci. Results, vol. i. part v., 1900.

[40]. They may assist the animal by retarding its sinking. Cf. Chun, “Aus den Tiefen des Weltmeeres,” 1905.

[41]. Schmeil, Bibliotheca Zoologica, Hefte 11, 15, and 21.

[42]. Giesbrecht, Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neap. xi., 1895, p. 648.

[43]. Loc. cit. p. 59.

[44]. Claus, Copepodenstudien, 1. Heft, Vienna, 1889.

[45]. Malaquin, Arch. Zool. Exp. (3), ix., 1901, p. 81.

[46]. Canu, Trav. Inst. Zool. Litte. vi., 1892.

[47]. Giesbrecht, Fauna and Flora G. v. Neapel, Monogr. 25, 1899.

[48]. Arb. Zool. Inst. Wien, ii. 1879, p. 268.

[49]. Ibid. xv., 1905, p. 1.

[50]. Heller, Reise der Novara, vol. iii., 1868.

[51]. For fish-parasites in British waters consult Scott, Fishery Board for Scotland, Scientific Investigations, xix., 1900 et seq.

[52]. Canu, loc. cit. p. 66.

[53]. The Cambridge Museum possesses two specimens of Philichthys xiphiae, from the frontal bones of a Swordfish (Xiphias gladius) taken off Lowestoft in 1892.

[54]. Claus, Arb. Zool. Inst. Wien, vii., 1888, p. 281.

[55]. Proc. Biol. Soc. Liverpool, i., 1887.

[56]. Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. xlix., 1890, p. 71.

[57]. The genus Pennella also includes parasites on the whales Hyperoodon and Balaenoptera.

[58]. Claus, Schriften d. Gesellsch. Marburg. Suppl. 1868.

[59]. Claus, Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. xi., 1861, p. 287.

[60]. Hansen, “The Choniostomatidae,” Copenhagen.

[61]. Claus, Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. xxv., 1875, p. 217.

[62]. C. B. Wilson, Proc. U.S. Nat. Museum, xxv., 1902, p. 635.

[63]. Max Müller (Science of Language, 2nd series, p. 534) gives references to a number of old authors who vouch for the truth of this legend, going back as far as Giraldus Cambrensis in the twelfth century. The legend appears to be of Scotch or Irish origin. Giraldus complains of the clergy in Ireland eating Barnacle geese at the time of fasting under the pretext that they are not flesh, but born of fish living in the sea. The form of the legend varies, certain authors alleging that the geese are produced from the fruits of a tree which drop into the water, others that they grow in shells (Barnacles) attached to floating logs. Aldrovandus (De Avibus, T. iii., 1603, p. 174) ingeniously combines both versions in a woodcut representing undoubted Barnacles growing on a tree with luxuriant foliage at the water’s edge, below which a number of liberated geese are swimming. Müller ascribes an etymological origin to the legend, the Barnacle goose (deriv. Hibernicula, bernicula = Irish goose) being confounded with pernacula, bernacula, a little shell.

[64]. “A Monograph of the Cirripedia,” vols. i. and ii., Ray Society, 1851, 1853.

[65]. “Rep. on the Cirripedia, H.M.S. ‘Challenger,’” vols. viii. and x., 1883.

[66]. “Monographie des Cirrhipèdes,” Paris, 1905, in which will be found full references to literature.

[67]. Arch. Biol. xvi., 1899, p 27.

[68]. Berndt, Sitzb. Ges. Naturfr. Berlin, 1903, p. 436.

[69]. Arch. Zool. Exp. viii., 1880, p. 537.

[70]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxx., 1890, p. 107.

[71]. Plankton Expedition, ii. G. d. 1899.

[72]. Y. Delage, Arch. Zool. Exp. (2), ii., 1884, p. 417; G. Smith, Fauna u. Flora G. von Neapel, Monogr. 29, 1906.

[73]. G. Smith, Fauna u. Flora d. Golfes v. Neapel, Monogr. xxix., 1906, pp. 60–64, 119–121.

[74]. Bull. Sc. Dép. Nord (2), 10 Ann. xviii., 1887, p. 1. Ibid. (3), i., 1888, p. 12; and other papers.

[75]. G. Smith, loc. cit. chap. v. I. scorpio should be I. mauritanicus throughout this Monograph.

[76]. F. A. Potts, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. l., 1906, p. 599.

[77]. Faxon, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (5), xiii., 1884, p. 147.

[78]. G. Smith, Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neapel, xvii., 1905, p. 312.

[79]. C. L. Boulenger, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1908, p. 42.

[80]. Garnier, C. R. Soc. Biol. liii., 1901, p. 38.

[81]. Gruvel, Monographie des Cirrhipèdes, 1905, p. 152.

[82]. Claus, Untersuchungen zur Erforschung des Crustaceensystems, Wien, 1876. Brady and Norman, “Monograph of the Marine and Fresh-Water Ostracoda of the N. Atlantic,” Trans. R. Dublin Soc. (2) iv., 1889, p. 63. Müller, Fauna und Flora G. von Neapel, Monogr. xxi., 1894; “Deutschlands Süsswasser-Ostracoden,” Chun’s Zoologica, xii., 1900.

[83]. “The Germ Plasm,” Contemp. Science Series, 1893, p. 345.

[84]. The term pereiopod is applied to those thoracic limbs which are used in locomotion, and are not specially differentiated for any other purpose.

[85]. Claus, Arb. Inst. Wien, viii., 1889, p. 1.

[86]. Robinson, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. 1., 1906, p. 383.

[87]. Morphol. Jahrb. viii., 1883, p. 485.

[88]. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (7), xiii., 1904, p. 144.

[89]. The lacinia mobilis is a movable tooth-like structure jointed on to the biting face of the mandible.

[90]. Trans. Linn. Soc. (2), vi., 1894–1897, p. 285.

[91]. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, xxxviii., 1897, p. 787.

[92]. G. Smith, Proc. Roy. Soc. 1908.

[93]. This characteristic is found in the Crustacea elsewhere only in the Argulidae and certain Euphausiidae.

[94]. The Victorian Naturalist, xxiv., 1907, p. 117.

[95]. Challenger Reports, vol. xiii., 1885, p. 55.

[96]. Sars, “Crustacea of Norway,” iii., 1900.

[97]. Sars, “Crustacea Caspia,” Bull. Acad. Imp. Sci. St. Pétersbourg, series 4, xxxvi., 1894, and “Crustacea of Norway,” iii., 1900, p. 120.

[98]. “Crustacea of Norway,” vol. ii., Isopoda, 1899, in which many references to literature will be found.

[99]. Smith, Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neapel, xvii., 1905, p. 312.

[100]. G. Smith, Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neapel, xvi., 1903, p. 469.

[101]. Mayer, Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neapel, i., 1879, p. 165.

[102]. Beddard, Challenger Reports, vol. xi., 1884.

[103]. Hansen, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xlix., 1906, p. 69.

[104]. A useful little book on British Woodlice by Webb and Sillem (1906) may be profitably consulted. Budde Lund’s Isopoda Terrestria, 1900, is useful to the specialist.

[105]. The pleopods are traversed by a system of minute tubes called pseudotracheae, somewhat resembling the tracheae of Insects.

[106]. Bonnier, Trans. Inst. Zool. Lille, viii., 1900.

[107]. G. Smith, Fauna and Flora Neapel, Monograph 29, chap. vi.; M. Caullery, Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neapel, xviii., 1908, p. 583.

[108]. M. Caullery (loc. cit. p. 130) questions the truth of this observation, but I am convinced of its accuracy.

[109]. Trav. Inst. Lille, v., 1887.

[110]. Chilton, Trans. Linn. Soc. vi., 1894, p. 185.

[111]. Spenser and Hall, Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria, ix. p. 12.

[112]. “Das Tierreich,” 21, Amphipoda Gammaridea, 1906.

[113]. Cf. P. Mayer, Fauna u. Flora G. von Neapel, Monogr. vi., 1882; xvii., 1890.

[114]. Abhandl. königl. Gesellsch. Göttingen, xvi., 1871.

[115]. Mem. Nat. Acad. Sci. v., 1891.

[116]. Sars, Challenger Reports, xiii., 1885; Chun, Bibliotheca Zoologica, xix., 1896, p. 139.

[117]. Die Physiologie der facettierten Augen von Krebsen und Insecten. Leipzig, Wien, 1891.

[118]. Valdivia Expedition, vol. vi., 1904.

[119]. Ann. Sci. Nat. (Zool.) (7), xiii., 1892, p. 185.

[120]. A Naturalist in Indian Seas, 1902.

[121]. “Atlantis,” Bibliotheca Zoologica, Heft 19, 1896, p. 193.

[122]. Loc. cit. p. 150.

[123]. Bell, A History of the British Stalk-eyed Crustacea, 1853; Heller, Die Crustaceen des Südlichen Europa, 1863.

[124]. Cf. Claus, Würzburger Naturwiss. Zeitschr. ii., 1861, p. 23.

[125]. Arch. f. Naturg. vi., 1840, p. 241.

[126]. Spence Bate’s Challenger Reports.

[127]. Some of the pereiopods remain biramous in certain Peneidea and Caridea (see p. [163]).

[128]. Bull. U.S. Fish Commission, xv., 1895.

[129]. Zool. Bulletin, i., 1898, p. 287.

[130]. Archiv für Entw. Mech. xi., 1901, p. 321.

[131]. Challenger Reports, xxiv., 1888.

[132]. Loc. cit. p. 150.

[133]. Keeble and Gamble, Phil. Trans., Ser. B, cxcvi., 1904, p. 295. The chromatophores are also directly responsive to light, but the lasting adaptations to colour-backgrounds are brought about indirectly, the stimulus being transmitted through the eyes and nervous system. The influence of light may also affect the metabolism of the animal, the chromatophores being accompanied by a ramifying fatty tissue, which disappears if the animal is kept in the dark.

[134]. Challenger Reports, xxiv., 1881.

[135]. Borradaile’s useful paper on the classification of the Decapoda (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (7), xix., 1907, p. 457) should be consulted for this and other Decapod groups. Also Alcock’s Cat. of the Indian Mus., “Decapod Crustacea.”

[136]. Giard and Bonnier, Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. 1892.

[137]. Coutière, Fauna and Geogr. Maldive and Laccadive Archipelagos, ii., 1905, p. 852.

[138]. Keeble and Gamble, Phil. Trans. Ser. B., cxcvi., 1904, p. 295. In the young a constant and very simple chromatophore-system is present, but in the adult a barred, lined, or monochrome colour-pattern may be present, which is ultimately induced by the nature of the environment, and does not subsequently change. In other species of Hippolyte, and in Palaemon and Crangon, only one adult colour-pattern occurs. Thus H. varians, besides reacting to light by its chromatophores, possesses a permanent colour-pattern, which is also determined by environment.

[139]. Claus, Unt. z. Erforschung d. genealog. Grundlage d. Crustaceensystems. Vienna, 1876.

[140]. Milne Edwards and Bouvier, Ann. Sci. Nat. (7), xvi., 1894, p. 91.

[141]. Garstang, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xl., 1897, p. 211.

[142]. Milne Edwards and Bouvier, Bull. Soc. Philomath. Paris (8), ii., 1889; and Expédition du Talisman, “Crustacés Décapodes,” 1900.

[143]. Alcock, loc. cit.; Borradaile, op. cit. p. 162; i. p. 64.

[144]. Brandt, Bull. Phys. Math. Acad. St. Pétersbourg, i. p. 171, and viii. p. 54; Boas, K. Dansk. Vidensk. Selskab. Skrift. Naturvid. og Math. Afd. 6, Bd. 2, 1880; Bouvier, Ann. Sci. Nat. (Zool.) (7) xviii. p. 157.

[145]. Vol. xxvii. p. 81.

[146]. Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., xxxi., 1904, p. 147.

[147]. For general literature consult Ortmann in Bronn’s Tier-Reich, v. 2, 1901, p. 778. See also Reports of Challenger, Valdivia, and Talisman Expeditions, etc.

[148]. Gurney, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xlvi., 1902, p. 461.

[149]. Bouvier, Bull. Soc. Philomath. Paris, (8) viii., 1896.

[150]. Loc. cit. p. 183.

[151]. M‘Culloch, Rec. Australian Mus. vi. part 5, 1907, p. 353.

[152]. Lankester, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xlvii., 1903, p. 439.

[153]. Garstang, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xl., 1897, p. 211, and Journ. Mar. Biol. Ass. iv., 1895–97, p. 396.

[154]. Loc. cit. p. 181.

[155]. Rep. Brit. Ass. for 1898, p. 887.

[156]. Naturalist in Indian Seas, 1902.

[157]. There appears to be some doubt on this point, as Westwood (see p. [153]) described direct development in a Gecarcinus. Possibly different species behave variously.

[158]. Kingsley, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1880, p. 187.

[159]. American Naturalist, xxxiii., 1899, p. 583.

[160]. Planktonstudien, Jena, 1890.

[161]. “Report on the Plankton,” Internat. Inst. Marine Biol. 1903.

[162]. Internat. Inst. Mar. Biol. 1903.

[163]. A Naturalist in Indian Seas.

[164]. Scourfield, J. Quekett Micr. Club, 1903–4, gives a useful list of British Fresh-water Entomostraca. For the identification of fresh-water Cladocera, Lilljeborg’s “Cladocera Sueciae,” Nov. Act. Reg. Soc. Upsalensis, 1901; for Copepoda, Schmeil’s “Süsswasser Copepoden,” in Bibliotheca Zoologica, iv., v., and viii., 1892, 1893, and 1895 are recommended.

[165]. Trans. Norfolk and Norwich Nat. Soc. vii.

[166]. Le Lac Leman, 3 vols., Lausanne, 1892.

[167]. Consult Apstein, “Das Süsswasserplankton,” Kiel and Leipzig, 1896; and Arch. f. Hydrobiologie u. Planktonkunde, numerous papers.

[168]. Mr. C. H. Martin points out to me that in the Scottish lochs, which from their geological nature are evidently not connected with subterranean waters, none of them nor similar forms occur; nor do they in the Tasmanian lakes which are on igneous diabase, so that Forel’s conclusion would seem to be of wide application.

[169]. See Chilton, Trans. Linn. Soc. (2) vi., 1894, p. 163, with review of literature.

[170]. S. F. Harmer, Trans. Norfolk and Norwich Nat. Soc. ii., 1899, p. 489.

[171]. Mem. Nat. Acad. Washington, iii., 1886, p. 1.

[172]. Arch. Zool. Exp. (4), ii., 1904, p. 1.

[173]. See Calman, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1906, p. 187.

[174]. The Crayfish, Internat. Scient. Series.

[175]. Mem. Harvard. Mus. x., 1885.

[176]. Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc. xli., 1902, p. 267, and xliv., 1905, p. 91.

[177]. G. O. Sars, “Crustacea Caspia,” Bull. Acad. Imp. Sc. St. Pétersbourg (4), xxxvi., 1893–4, pp. 51 and 297; (5) i., 1894, pp. 179 and 243; also Crustacea of Norway, vol. ii. Isopoda, 1900, p. 73.

[178]. Daday, Termés Füzetek, xxv., 1902, pp. 101 and 436.

[179]. Daday, Bibliotheca Zoologica, Heft 44, 1905.

[180]. On the cheek the furrow represents a pleural groove, and does not form the limit of the posterior cephalic segment.

[181]. M‘Coy, Synop. Sil. Foss. Ireland, 1846, p. 56, and Brit. Pal. Foss., 1851, p. 146, pl. 1 E, fig. 16; Salter, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. iii., 1847, p. 251.

[182]. Figures showing this suture are given by Oehlert, Bull. Soc. géol. de France (3), xxiii., 1895, pl. 1, figs. 9, 12, 15.

[183]. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (2) iv., 1849, p. 396.

[184]. Lindström, “Visual Organs of Trilobites,” Svenska Vet. Akad. Handl. xxxiv., 1903. Exner, Physiol. d. facett. Augen v. Krebsen u. Insecten, 1891, p. 34, pl. ii. figs. 18, 19.

[185]. Journ. Morphol. ii., 1889, p. 253, pl. 21.

[186]. Watase, Johns Hopkins Univ. Studies, Biol. Lab. iv., 1890, p. 290. Lindström, op. cit. p. 27.

[187]. A suture is said to be present at the external margin of the flattened cephalic border.

[188]. Goldfuss, “Beitr. zur Petrefaktenkunde,” 1839, p. 359, pl. 33, fig. 2d.

[189]. Spencer, Geol. Mag. 1903, p. 489.

[190]. For an example of this see Salter, Mon. Brit. Trilobites, 1864–83, pls. 15, 16.

[191]. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard, viii., 1881, p. 191.

[192]. Studies in Evolution, 1901, pp. 197–225; Geol. Mag. 1902, p. 152. Walcott, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, ix., 1894, p. 89.

[193]. Syst. Sil. Bohême, i., 1852, pp. 257–276.

[194]. American Geologist, xx., 1897, p. 34.

[195]. Proc. R. Irish Acad. xxiv., 1903, p. 332, and Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci. xlix., 1906, p. 469.

[196]. This has received some support from H. Milne Edwards, Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool. (6), xii., 1881, p. 33; H. Woodward, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. xxvi., 1870, p. 487, and vol. 1., 1894, p. 433; Bernard, ibid. vol. 1. p. 432.

[197]. Kingsley does not admit this relationship, and regards the Trilobita as a group quite distinct from all other Crustacea. See American Naturalist, xxviii., 1894, p. 118, and American Geologist, xx., 1897, p. 33.

[198]. Zittel states that Apus appears first in the Trias.

[199]. Monogr. Brit. Trilobites, 1864, p. 2.

[200]. “A Natural Classification of Trilobites,” Amer. Jour. Sci. (4), iii., 1897, pp. 89–106, 181–207. Reprinted in Beecher’s Studies in Evolution, 1901, p. 109. A classification based on the character of the pygidium has been proposed by Gürich, Centralbl. für Min. Geol. u. Pal. 1907, p. 129. A classification based on the minute structure of the test has been given by Lorenz, Zeitschr. d. deutsch. geol. Gesellsch. lviii., 1906, p. 56.

[201]. Neues Jahrb. für Min. Geol. u. Pal. 1898, i. p. 187.

[202]. Lake, Brit. Cambrian Tril. 1907, p. 45.

[203]. The British Carboniferous Proëtidae are described by H. Woodward, Monogr. Brit. Carb. Trilobites, Palaeont. Soc. 1883–84.

[204]. This can be maintained in the Crustacea by counting the seventh abdominal segment, which appears in Gnathophausia; but this is not universally regarded as a true segment. See also Nebalia (p. 111).

[205]. This and the following Sub-class correspond with Lankester’s Sub-class Euarachnida. The Delobranchiata have gills patent and exposed, and adapted for breathing oxygen dissolved in water. The Embolobranchiata have either the gill-books (now termed lung-books) sunk into their body, or the gill-books are wholly or partially replaced by tracheae. In either case the members of this Sub-class breathe atmospheric oxygen.

[206]. Woodward, “On some Points in the Structure of the Xiphosura, having reference to their relationship with the Eurypteridae,” Quart. J. Geol. Soc. xxiii., 1867, p. 28, and xxviii., 1871, p. 46. Milne Edwards, A., “Recherches sur l’anat. des Limules,” Ann. Sci. Nat. (5), xvii., 1873, Art. 4. Lankester, E. R., “Limulus an Arachnid,” Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxi., 1881, p. 504. Kingsley, J. S., “The Embryology of Limulus,” Journ. Morph. vii. p. 35, and viii. p. 195, 1892–3. Kishinouye, “On the Development of Limulus longispina,” Journ. Coll. Sci. Japan, v., 1892, p. 53. Patten, W., and Redenbaugh, W. A., “Studies on Limulus,” Journ. Morph. xvi., 1900, pp. 1, 91.

[207]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xlviii., 1905, p. 165.

[208]. μηρός = a thigh.

[209]. This segment, though present in embryo Scorpions, has disappeared in the adults of those animals.

[210]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xlix., 1906, p. 469.

[211]. Zool. Anz. xiv., 1891, pp. 164, 173.

[212]. Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. lix., 1895, p. 351.

[213]. They are described in great detail in Lankester’s article, “Limulus an Arachnid,” Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxi., 1881, p. 504.

[214]. Tr. Linn. Soc. xxviii., 1872, p. 471.

[215]. Tr. Linn. Soc. xxviii., 1872, p. 472.

[216]. A rudimentary ninth pair of ostia are described anteriorly.

[217]. J. Morph. vii., 1892, p. 35.

[218]. Kingsley, loc. cit.

[219]. J. Coll. Tokyo, v., 1893, p. 53.

[220]. Lockwood, Amer. Nat. iv., 1870–71, p. 261.

[221]. For a diagnosis of the species and a list of synonyms, see Pocock, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (7), ix., 1902, p. 256.

[222]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxxi., 1890, p. 379; Proc. Cambr. Phil. Soc. ix., 1895–1898, p. 19; J. Anat. Physiol. xxxiii., 1899, p. 154.

[223]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxxi., 1890, p. 317.

[224]. I am indebted to Mr. Henry Woods for these paragraphs on fossil Xiphosura.

[225]. The British fossil forms of this group are described and figured by H. Woodward, “Monograph of the Merostomata,” Palaeontogr. Soc. 1866–78, and Geol. Mag. 1907, p. 539.

[226]. Packard, “Carb. Xiphos. N. America,” Mem. Nat. Acad. Sci. Washington, iii., 1885, p. 146, pl. vi. fig. 1a, pl. v. fig. 3a (restoration). Williams, Amer. Journ. Sci. (3), xxx., 1885, p. 45. Fritsch, Fauna d. Gaskohle, iv., 1901, p. 64, pl. 155, figs. 1–3, and text-figures, 369, 370.

[227]. Walcott has described, under the generic name Beltina, imperfect specimens from the Algonkian (pre-Cambrian) of Montana, which he thinks may be the remains of Eurypterids (Bull. Geol. Soc. America, x., 1899, p. 238).

[228]. Walcott, Amer. Jour. Sci. (3), xxiii., 1882, p. 213.

[229]. Descriptions and figures of British Eurypterids are given in the following works:—Huxley and Salter, “Pterygotus,” Mem. Geol. Survey, Brit. Org. Remains, i., 1859; H. Woodward, “Monograph of the Merostomata,” Palaeont. Soc. 1866–78, and Geol. Mag. 1879, p. 196; 1887, p. 481; 1888, p. 419; 1907, p. 277; Peach, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. xxx., 1882, p. 511; Laurie, ibid. xxxvii., 1892, p. 151; xxxvii., 1893, p. 509; and xxxix., 1899, p. 575.

[230]. A detailed account of Eurypterus fischeri has been given by G. Holm, Mém. Acad. Impér. Sci. St. Pétersbourg (8), viii. 2, 1898. See also F. Schmidt, ibid. (7), xxxi. 5, 1883. Descriptions of American forms of Eurypterus are given by Hall, “Nat. Hist. New York,” Palaeont. iii., 1859, p. 395; ibid. vii., 1888, p, 156; and Second Geol. Survey Pennsylvania, “Report of Progress,” PPP., 1884; Whiteaves, Geol. and Nat. Hist. Surv. Canada, “Palaeozoic Foss.,” iii., 1884, p. 42.

[231]. It was this ornamentation found on fragments of Pterygotus anglicus which led the Scotch quarrymen to apply the name “Seraphim” to that Eurypterid. On this subject Hugh Miller writes: “The workmen in the quarries in which they occur, finding form without body, and struck by the resemblance which the delicately waved scales bear to the sculptured markings on the wings of cherubs—of all subjects of the chisel the most common—fancifully termed them ‘Seraphim’” (The Old Red Sandstone, ed. 6, 1855, p. 180).

[232]. The third leg in the male possesses on the fifth joint a curved appendage which extends backwards to the proximal end of the second joint. This structure may have been a clasping organ.

[233]. It has been suggested that the metastoma really belongs to a pregenital segment of the mesosoma which is absent in the adult, but has been found in the embryo of Scorpions.

[234]. Sarle, New York State Museum, Bulletin 69, Palaeont. 9, 1903, p. 1087.

[235]. Beecher, Geol. Mag. 1901, p. 561.

[236]. Peach, Nature, xxxi., 1885, p. 295; Pocock, Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci. xliv., 1901, p. 291; Laurie, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. xxxix., 1899, p. 575.

[237]. Peach, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. xxx., 1882, p. 516.

[238]. Cf. p. 258.

[239]. Nature, xlviii., 1893, p. 104.

[240]. Souvenirs entomologiques, Sér. 9, 1907, p. 229.

[241]. Brauer, Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. lix., 1895, p. 355.

[242]. Das Tierreich, 8. Lief., 1899, p. 4.

[243]. Arachnides de France, vii., 1879, p. 84.

[244]. Fauna of British India, “Arachnida,” 1900, p. 8.

[245]. Tr. Zool. Soc. xi. part x., 1885, p. 373.

[246]. Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. lix., 1895, p. 351.

[247]. Das Tierreich, 8. Lief., 1899.

[248]. Pocock, Fauna of British India, “Arachnida.” London, 1900.

[249]. Laurie, J. Linn. Soc. Zool. xxv., 1894, p. 30.

[250]. See M. Laurie in J. Linn. Soc. Zool. xxv., 1894, p. 20.

[251]. Tr. Linn. Soc. (2) vi., 1896, p. 344.

[252]. Bernard, loc. cit. p. 366.

[253]. J. Linn. Soc. xxv., 1894, p. 29.

[254]. See Pocock, Ann. Nat. Hist. (6), xiv., 1894, p. 120.

[255]. Kraepelin, Das Tierreich, Berlin, 8. Lief., 1899, p. 234.

[256]. The term mostly in use is Araneida, which should mean Araneus-like animals. This is clearly not allowable, unless there is a genus Araneus or Aranea. For many years there has been no such genus recognised, but Simon now attempts to re-establish it, inadmissibly, as it appears to us. (See note, p. 408).

[257]. Mém. Mus. d’Hist. Nat. xviii., 1829, p. 377.

[258]. Pickard-Cambridge (Spiders of Dorset, 1879–1881) omits the coxal joint, which, with its lobe, he calls the maxilla, and therefore gives only five joints, which he names axillary, humeral, cubital, radial, and digital.

[259]. Pickard-Cambridge, in his Spiders of Dorset, names them exinguinal, coxal, femoral, genual, tibial, metatarsal, and tarsal.

[260]. Nat. Hist. Tidsskr. iv., 1843, p. 349.

[261]. J. Linn. Soc. xv., 1881, p. 155.

[262]. Proc. Asiat. Soc. Beng. 1875, p. 197.

[263]. Tijdschr. v. d. Nederl. Dierkundige Ver. (2), i., 1885–1887, p. 109.

[264]. Études sur la circulation du sang chez les Aranées du genre Lycose. Utrecht, 1862.

[265]. Recherches sur l’appareil circulatoire des Aranéides. Lille, 1896.

[266]. Arch. f. Naturg. 55 Jahrg., i., 1889, p. 29.

[267]. M‘Leod, Bull. Ac. Belg. (3), iii., 1882, p. 779.

[268]. American Spiders and their Spinning Work, ii., 1890, p. 208.

[269]. Ann. Nat. Hist. (3), xv., 1865, p. 459.

[270]. Voyage of the Beagle.

[271]. Correspondence of John Ray, p. 77.

[272]. Warburton, Q. J. Micr. Sci. xxi., 1890, p. 29.

[273]. Rep. Brit. Ass. 1844, p. 77.

[274]. Nature, xl., 1889, p. 250.

[275]. See Warburton, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxi., 1890, p. 29.

[276]. Aranéides de la Réunion, Maurice et Madagascar, Paris, 1863, p. 238.

[277]. M‘Cook, American Spiders and their Spinning Work, i., 1889, p. 351; F. O. Pickard-Cambridge, J. Micr. and Nat. Sci. July 1890.

[278]. Moggridge, Harvesting Ants and Trap-door Spiders. London, 1873, p. 120.

[279]. Verh. Ges. Wien, xviii., 1868, p. 905 (Abstract in Zool. Rec. v., 1868, p. 175).

[280]. The figure of this cocoon has been accidentally inverted in the works of both Blackwall and Pickard-Cambridge.

[281]. Fabre, Nouveaux souvenirs entomologiques, ch. xi.

[282]. Aranéides de la Réunior, Maurice et Madagascar, Paris, 1863, p. xlvi.

[283]. Hist. de la grande île de Madagascar, 1658, p. 156.

[284]. Science Gossip, 1877, p. 46.

[285]. Insect Life, i., 1889, p. 205.

[286]. Ann. Soc. ent. France, xi., 1842, p. 205. Translated from the Spanish by L. Fairmaire.

[287]. M‘Cook, American Spiders and their Spinning Work, ii., 1890, p. 188.

[288]. M‘Cook, t.c. p. 389.

[289]. British Spiders, 1861, p. 102.

[290]. Ann. Nat. Hist. (1), xi., 1843, p. 1.

[291]. Naturalist in Nicaragua, 2nd ed., 1888, p. 134.

[292]. Nouveaux souvenirs entomologiques, ch. xii.

[293]. M‘Cook, t.c. p. 384.

[294]. The Naturalist in Nicaragua, p. 19.

[295]. Spiders of Dorset, 1879–1881, p. 292.

[296]. Ibid. p. 360.

[297]. Naturalist on the Amazon, 1873, p. 54.

[298]. Protective Resemblances and Mimicry in Animals, 1873, p. 4.

[299]. Nature, lxviii., 1908, p. 631.

[300]. J. Morph. (Boston, U.S.A.) i., 1887, p. 403.

[301]. Nature, xxiii., 1880, p. 149.

[302]. Warburton, Ann. Nat. Hist. (6), viii., 1891, p. 113.

[303]. Spiders of Dorset, 1879–1881, p. xxvii.

[304]. Spiders, their Structure and Habits, 1883, p. 98.

[305]. Sexual Selection in Spiders, p. 37. (Occasional Papers of the Nat. Hist. Soc. of Wisconsin, I., 1889.)

[306]. Arachnides de France (vol. i., published 1874). Histoire naturelle des araignées (2nd ed. vol i., published 1892).

[307]. Simon’s Cribellatae comprise Hypochilidae, Uloboridae, Psechridae, Zoropsidae, Dictynidae, Oecobiidae, Eresidae, Filistatidae.

[308]. The Spider genus Mygale was established by Walckenaer in 1802, but the name was preoccupied, having been used by Cuvier (Mammalia) in 1800.

[309]. Hist. Nat. des Araignées (2nd ed.), i., 1892, p. 76.

[310]. The “scopula” is the pad of close-set thick hairs which covers the under surface of the tarsus and often of the metatarsus. The “claw-tufts” are groups of longer hairs, often extending beyond the claws, and giving the foot a bifid appearance.

[311]. The three families mentioned above constitute the “Araneae Theraphosae” of Simon, the remaining families being distinguished as “Araneae Verae.” The Aviculariidae and the Atypidae are united by some authors to form the Theraphosidae.

[312]. According to Bertkau (in a letter to Simon, cited in Hist. Nat. des Ar. i. p. 327), two pairs of linear stigmata under the anterior part of the abdomen lead, to pulmonary sacs, but to tracheae.

[313]. L. Koch replaced Melanophora by Prosthesima, believing the former to be preoccupied, but according to Simon (Hist. Nat. des Ar. i. p. 341) C. Koch’s use of Melanophora for an Arachnid was antecedent (1833) to Meigen’s employment of it for Diptera, 1838.

[314]. Hist. Nat. des Ar. i. p. 416.

[315]. Pickard-Cambridge, Spiders of Dorset, p. 77.

[316]. Hist. Nat. des Ar. i. p. 594.

[317]. Hist. Nat. des Ar. i. p. 692.

[318]. The Erigoninae, Formicinae, and Linyphiinae, together with the Epeiridae, form Simon’s family of Argiopidae.

[319]. I.e. as developed in the course of the work, not as set forth on p. 594 of vol. i., where five sub-families are established (Theridiosomatinae, Arciinae, Eurycorminae, Amazulinae, Poltyinae), which are afterwards merged in the Argiopinae.

[320]. Simon’s treatment of this group in his Hist. Nat. Ar. does not appear to us satisfactory. He revives the name Araneus as a generic term, a proceeding to which there are very valid objections, and merges in it, in whole or in part, about twenty-five generally received genera, including 800 species. He then proceeds to break up the genus Araneus into six entirely artificial “series,” according to the eyes. However unsatisfactory the merged genera may be, nothing seems to be gained by this proceeding. The facts about “Araneus” are these. Clerck and Linnaeus used the name “Araneus” for every member of the order. Latreille, in subdividing the order, retained the name for A. (Epeira) diademata (1804), but later (1827) transferred it to A. (Tegenaria) domestica. Walckenaer, seeing the impropriety of using Araneus as a generic term, discarded it, establishing Epeira, which has since obtained universal recognition.

[321]. Simon, in his Histoire naturelle des araignées, removes the Sparassinae and the Selenopinae to the Clubionidae, considering that, notwithstanding the direction of their legs, they have a greater affinity with that group than with the other Thomisidae.

[322]. Ent. Tidsskr. xviii., 1897, p. 223, pl. iv.

[323]. Zool. Anz. xxiv., 1901, p. 537.

[324]. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xlvii., 1904, p. 215.

[325]. Trans. Linn. Soc. (2), vi., 1896, p. 323.

[326]. Nature, xlvi., 1892, p. 247.

[327]. Ann. Nat. Hist. (1), xii., 1843, p. 81.

[328]. Pocock, Nature, lvii., 1897, p. 618.

[329]. Cook, Nature, lviii., 1898, p. 247.

[330]. Öfv. Ak. Förh. lvi., 1899, p. 977.

[331]. Trans. Linn. Soc. (2), vi., 1896, p. 310.

[332]. Das Tierreich, Berlin, 12. Lief., Arachnoidea, 1901, p. 4.

[333]. Arachnides de France, vii., 1879, p. 2.

[334]. Arachnides de France, vii., 1879, p. 5.

[335]. See Bernard, J. Linn. Soc. xxiv. (Zool.), 1893, p. 410.

[336]. See Bernard, J. Linn. Soc. xxiv. (Zool.), 1893, p. 422.

[337]. For the embryology of Chernetidea, see J. Barrois, “Mém. sur le développement des Chélifers,” Rev. Suisse de Zool. iii., 1896. Metschnikoff, Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. xxi., 1876, p. 514; and Vejdovský, Congrès zool. international de Moscou, 1892, p. 120, may also be consulted.

[338]. Monograph of the British Species of Chernetidea, Dorchester, 1892.

[339]. Revue Zoologique par la Société Cuvierienne, p. 10.

[340]. Arachnides de France, vii., 1879, p. 122.

[341]. On two Orders of Arachnida, Cambridge University Press, 1904.

[342]. Mag. Nat. Hist. (i.), xii., 1843, p. 325.

[343]. Zool. Jahrb. iii., 1888, p. 319.

[344]. T. C. pp. 67–75.

[345]. Long sternum (μῆκος = length; στῆθος = breast).

[346]. Arachnides de France, vii., 1879.

[347]. Transverse sternum (πλάγιος = transverse).

[348]. Monograph of the British Phalangidea, Dorchester, 1890.

[349]. The single exception is Opilioacarus, see p. [473].

[350]. C. R. Ac. Sci. cxxv., 1897, p. 879.

[351]. “The Biology of the Cattle Tick,” Journ. Compar. Med. and Vet. Archives, 1891, p. 313.

[352]. Entomological News (Philadelphia), vol. xi., Jan. 1900.

[353]. For the Protozoa to which these and similar diseases are due, cf. vol. i. pp. 120 f.

[354]. C. R. Soc. Biol. Paris (7), iv., 1882, p. 305.

[355]. Ann. Soc. Linn. Lyon, xxii., 1876, p. 29.

[356]. Bull. Soc. Nat. de Moscou, liv. 1879, pt. i. p. 234.

[357]. Z. wiss. Zool. xxxvii., 1882, p. 553.

[358]. P. Z. S., 1895, p. 174.

[359]. Arch. f. Naturg. i., 1876, p. 65.

[360]. Tr. Linn. Soc. (2), v. Zool., 1890, p. 281.

[361]. See account given by Tulk in Mag. Nat. Hist. xviii., 1846, p. 160.

[362]. Entomological News (Philadelphia), vol. xi., Jan. 1900.

[363]. Michael, British Oribatidae (Ray Soc.), i., 1883, p. 176.

[364]. Loc. cit. p. 168.

[365]. Claparède, Z. wiss. Zool. xviii., 1868, p. 455. Michael, British Oribatidae, i., 1883, p. 73, writes it “Deutovium.”

[366]. Atti Ist. Veneto, ii., 1891, p. 699.

[367]. Rev. Sci. Nat. Ouest, ii., 1892, p. 20.

[368]. Eriophyes, v. Siebold, Jahresber. Schles. Ges. xxviii., 1850, p. 89; Phytoptus, Dujardin, Ann. Sci. Nat. (3), xv., 1851, p. 166.

[369]. See Michael, British Tyroglyphidae, published by the Ray Society, 1901–2.

[370]. The first paper appeared in Mém. Soc. Zool. ix., 1896, pp. 1–44.

[371]. “Ticks, a Monograph of the Ixodoidea.” Part I. Argasidae, 1908.

[372]. With, Vid. Medd. 1904, p. 137.

[373]. Silvestri, Redia, ii., 1904, fasc. 2, p. 257.

[374]. Arch. mikr. Anat. Bd. i., 1865, p. 428.

[375]. A. Basse, Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. lxxx., 1906, p. 259.

[376]. Ann. Sci. nat. (2), xiv., 1840, p. 269, and xvii., 1842, p. 193.

[377]. Zool. Jahrb. Anat. iii., 1889. This paper contains a bibliography.

[378]. Morph. Jahrb. xxii., 1895, p. 491.

[379]. C. R. Ac. Sci. cxviii., 1894, p. 817.

[380]. Tr. R. Soc. Edinb. xlv., 1908, p. 641. This contains a Bibliography of recent literature. See also Richters, Zool. Anz. xxx., 1906, p. 125, and Heinis, Zool. Anz. xxxiii., 1908, p. 69.

[381]. P. Zool. Soc. 1897, p. 790.

[382]. Hay, in P. Biol. Soc. Washington, xix., 1906, p. 46, states that the name Lydella, Dujardin, is preoccupied, and suggests as a substitute Microlyda.

[383]. The animals included in this group are usually called Linguatulidae or Pentastomidae after the two genera or sub-genera Linguatula and Pentastoma. But the animal which Rudolphi in 1819 (Synopsis Entozoorum) named Pentastoma had been described, figured, and named Porocephalus by Humboldt (Recueil d’observations de zoologie et anatomie comparee, i. p. 298, pl. xxvi.) in 1811. The familiar name Pentastoma may, however, be preserved by incorporating it in the designation of the group.

[384]. This description is mainly based on the account of P. teretiusculus given by Spencer, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xxxiv., 1893, p. 1.

[385]. Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. lii., 1891, p. 85. This contains a very full bibliography, of 143 entries.

[386]. Centrbl. Bakter. xl., 1906, p. 368; v. also Thiroux, C. R. Soc. Biol. lix., 1905, p. 78.

[387]. Shipley, Arch. parasit. i., 1898, p. 52. This contains lists of synonyms and of memoirs published since Stiles’ paper, etc.

[388]. H. B. Ward, P. Amer. Ass. 1899, p. 254.

[389]. Nouv. Dict. de méd., de chir. et d’hyg. vétérinaires, xii. 1883.

[390]. Tr. R. Soc. Edinb. xxxii., 1884, p. 165.

[391]. Lohrmann, Arch. Naturg. Jahrg. 55, i., 1889, p. 303.

[392]. Von Linstow, J. R. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, ii., 1906, p. 270.

[393]. Pycnogonides, Latreille, 1804; Podosomata, Leach, 1815; Pychnogonides ou Crustacés aranéiformes, Milne-Edwards, 1834; Crustacea Haustellata, Johnston, 1837; Pantopoda, Gerstaecker, 1863.

[394]. Syst. Nat. ed. xii. 1767, vol. ii. p. 1027.

[395].

Brünnich’s description (“Entomologia,” 1764), is still more accurate, and is worthy of transcription as an excellent example of early work. “Fig. iv. Novum genus, a R[ev.] D[on.] Ström inter phalangiis relatum, Söndm. Tom. i. p. 209, t. 1, f. 17. Exemplar hujus insecti, quod munificentia R. Autoris possideo, ita describo; Caput cum thorace unitum, tubo b excavato cylindrico, antice angustiore, postice in thoracem recepto, prominens; Oculi iv. dorsales, a, in gibbositate thoracis positi; c, Antennae 2 tubo breviores moniliformes, subtus in segmento thoracis, cui oculi insident, radicatae; segmenta corporis, excepto tubo, iv., cum tuberculo e medio singuli segmenti prominulo. Pedes viii., singuli ex articulis vii. brevissimis compositi, ungue valido terminati. Ex descriptione patet insectum hoc a generibus antea notis omnino differre, ideoque novum genus, quod e crebris articulationibus Pycnogonum dico, constituit.” The confusion between Cyamus and Pycnogonum seems to have arisen with Job Baster, 1765; cf. Stebbing, Knowledge, February 1902, and Challenger Reports, “Amphipods,” 1888, pp. 28, 30, etc.

[396]. Hoek, Chall. Rep. p. 15, mentions a specimen of Colossendeis gracilis, Hoek, “furnished with a pair of distinctly three-jointed mandibles; and the specimen was the largest of the three obtained.”

[397]. As a rare exception, Hoek has found the eggs carried on the ovigerous legs in a single female of Nymphon brevicaudatum, Miers.

[398]. Meisenheimer (Zeitsch. wiss. Zool. lxxii., 1902, p. 235) compares these with certain glands described in Branchipus by Spangenberg and by Claus.

[399]. Ortmann, who would unite Barana with Ascorhynchus, observes: “Bei dieser Gattung [Ascorhynchus] konnte ich die Kittdrüsen beobachten, die bei A. ramipes mit dem von Barana castelnaudi [castelli] Dohrn, bei A. cryptopygius mit Barana arenicola übereinstimmen und also die primitivsten Formen der Ausbildung zeigen.”—Zool. Jahrb. Syst. v., 1891, p. 159.

[400]. Mém. Acad. Sci. St-Pétersb. (vii.), xxxviii., 1892.

[401]. Fauna und Flora G. von Neapel, iii. Monogr. 1881, p. 46; see also Loman, J. C. C., Tijdschr. D. Ned. Dierk. Ver. (2), viii., 1907, p. 259.

[402]. The dorsal lobe is absent in Rhynchothorax.

[403]. For a very detailed account of this mechanism, here epitomised in the merest outline, and for an account of its modifications in diverse forms, the student must consult Dohrn’s Monograph (t. cit. pp. 46–53).

[404]. Dohrn, t. cit. p. 55.

[405]. Biol. Stud. Johns Hopkins Univ. v., 1891, p. 49.

[406]. Vergl. Entwickl. d. wirbellosen Tiere, Jena, 1893, p. 664.

[407]. In the second joint in Ascorhynchus abyssi, Sars, and A. tridens, Meinert.

[408]. Biol. Bulletin Woods Holl, vol. ii., Feb. 1901, p. 196.

[409]. Studi e ricerche sui Picnogonidi, Firenze, 1876.

[410]. Semper came near to discovering the fact when he saw, at Heligoland, ripe eggs in a Phoxichilidium that was, nevertheless, totally destitute of ovigerous legs. The animal, he says, was adult and sexually mature: “Trotzdem fehlen dem Tiere die Eierträger vollständig; es muss sich also das Tier noch mindestens ein Mal häuten vor der Eierablag, und dabei müssen die Eierträger gebildet werden.” (Arb. Inst. Würzburg, 1874, p. 273).

[411]. The correspondence is not universally admitted. Meinert (Ingolf Expedition, 1899) believes that the second and third appendages of the larva disappear, and that the palps and ovigerous legs are new developments; so giving to the normal Pycnogon nine instead of seven appendages. See also Carpenter “On the Relationship between the Classes of the Arthropoda,” Proc. R. Irish Acad. xxiv., 1903, pp. 320–360. The latest observer (Loman) inclines to the older view.

[412]. A slightly different account is given of the Australian P. plumulariae by v. Lendenfeld (Zeitschr. wiss. Zool. xxxviii., 1883, pp. 323–329).

[413]. Zur Lehre vom Generationswechsel und Fortpflanzung bei Medusen und Polypen, 1854.

[414]. Rep. Brit. Ass. 1859; cf. “Gymnoblastic Hydroids,” Ray Soc. pl. vi. fig. 6.

[415]. Trans. Tyneside Field Club, v. (1862–3), 1864, pp. 124–136, pls. vi., vii.; Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (3), ix., 1862, p. 33.

[416]. See also Hallez, Arch. Zool. Exp. (4), v., 1905, p. 3; Loman, Tijdschr. Ned. Dierk. Ver. (2), x., 1906, p. 271, etc.

[417]. “On Hydroid and other Corals,” 1881, p. 78.

[418]. Hugo Mertens, Mitth. Zool. Stat. Neapel, xviii., 1906, pp. 136–141.

[419]. One is tempted to explain such cases as the above of harmonious or identical coloration by the simple passage of pigments unchanged from the food.

[420]. Fabricius says of his Pycnogonum (Nymphon) grossipes, “Vescitur insectis et vermibus marinis minutis; quod autem testas mytilorum exhauriat mihi ignotum est, dum nunquam intra testam mytili illud inveni, licet sit verisimile satis,” Fauna Groenlandica, p. 231.

[421]. Loeb (Arch. Entw. Mech. v. 2, 1897, p. 250) also says that the Pycnogons are positively heliotropic.

[422]. See also P. Gaubert, “Autotomie chez les Pycnogonides,” Bull. Soc. Zool. Fr. xvii., 1892, p. 224.

[423]. Cf. Carpenter, Proc. R. Irish Acad. xxiv., 1903, p. 320; Lankester, Quart. J. Micr. Sci. xlviii., 1904, p. 223; Bouvier, Exp. Antarct. Fr., “Pycnogonides,” 1907, p. 7, etc.

[424]. “Nous ne les plaçons ici qu’avec doute,” Règne Anim. éd. 3, tom. vi. p. 298.

[425]. Cf. also J. E. W. Ihle, “Phylogenie und systematische Stellung der Pantopoden,” Biol. Centralbl., Bd. xviii., 1898, pp. 603–609; Meisenheimer, Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, xii., 1902, pp. 57–64; also Stebbing, in Knowledge, 1902.

[426]. The chelate form of the foremost appendages is of little moment. A chela consists merely of a more or less mobile terminal joint flexing on a more or less protuberant penultimate one, and in the Scorpions, in Limulus, throughout the Crustacea, and even in Insects (cf. vol. vi. p. 554), we see such a structure arising independently on very diverse appendages.

[427]. Cf. Oudemans, Tijdschr. d. Ned. Dierk. Ver. (2), i., 1886, p. 41: “Jedermann weiss nun, dass diese Tiere eine ganz besondere Urgruppe bilden, ohne alle Verwandschaft mit irgend einer anderen Arthropodengruppe.”

[428]. Cole (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (7), xv., 1905, pp. 405–415) has attempted such a phylogenetic classification, starting with Decolopoda, and leading in two divergent lines, through Nymphon and Pallene to the Pycnogonidae, and through Eurycide and Ammothea to Colossendeis. This hint is in part adopted in the subjoined classification. Bouvier, in his recent Report on the Pycnogons of the French Antarctic Expedition (t. cit.), gives reasons for separating the Decolopodidae and Colossendeidae from all the rest. Loman, in Die Pantopoden der Siboga Expedition, 1908, has recently suggested another, and in many respects novel, classification of the whole group.

[429]. See (inter alia) Dohrn, l.c.; E. B. Wilson, Rep. U.S. Fish. Comm. (1878), 1880; Hoek, Chall. Report, 1881; G. O. Sars, Norw. N. Atl. Exp. 1891; Meinert, Ingolf Exped. 1899; Möbius, Fauna Arctica, 1901, Valdivia Exped. 1902; Cole, Harriman Alaska Exped. 1904; Hodgson, Discovery Exped. 1907; Bouvier, Exp. Antarct. Fr. 1907.

[430]. Boston Journ. Nat. Hist. i., 1834, p. 203; Cf. Hodgson, Pr. R. Phys. Soc. Edinburgh, xvi., 1905, p. 35; Zool. Anz. xxv., 1905, p. 254; Discovery Exp., “Pycnogonida,” 1907; Bouvier, Exp. Antarct. Fr. 1907.

[431]. See pp. [535], [541]. Cf. Dohrn (t. cit.), p. 228.

[432]. The first known species was described as Phoxichilus proboscideus, Sabine, from the shores of the North Georgian Islands (1821).

[433]. Pocock (Encycl. Brit., 10th ed., Art. “Arachnida”) makes Hannonia the solitary type of a family. Cf. Loman, Zool. Jahrb., Syst., xx., 1904, p. 385.

[434]. Loman conjoins all these genera, and also Lecythorhynchus, with Nymphopsis, as a sub-family Nymphopsinae of Ammotheidae.

[435]. Edinb. New Phil. Journal, Oct. 1842, p. 367 (P. capillata on Plate).

[436]. Proc. Boston Nat. Hist. Society, vol. i., 1841–44, p. 92.

[437]. Found by Sir John Ross’s expedition in 1840, and subsequently by the Challenger expedition and other visitors.

[438]. Stebbing has recently shown (Knowledge, Aug. 1902, p. 157) that the genus Phoxichilus was instituted by Latreille (Nouv. Dict. d’hist. nat. 1804) for the Pycnogonum spinipes of Fabricius, now Pseudopallene spinipes, auctt. Hence he changes Pseudopallene to Phoxichilus, Latr., and Phoxichilidae and Phoxichilus, auctt., to Chilophoxidae, etc.; it also follows that the family known to all naturalists as Pallenidae should, according to the letter of the law of priority, be henceforth known as the Phoxichilidae. In my opinion this is a case where strict adherence to priority would serve no good end, but would only lead to great and lasting confusion (cf. Norman, J. Linn. Soc. xxx., 1908, p. 231).

[439]. Vide note 2, p. 537.

[440]. Mag. Nat. Hist. vi., 1838, p. 42; Mag. Zool. and Bot. i., 1837, p. 368.

[441]. Edinb. New Phil. Journ. xxxii., 1842, p. 136; xxxiii., 1842, p. 367; Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (1), xiv., 1844, p. 4.

[442]. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (3), xiii., 1864, p. 113.

[443]. Proc. R. Dublin Soc. (N.S.), viii., 1893, p. 195; Fisheries, Ireland, Sci. Invest. 1904, No. iv. (1905).

[444]. Cf. A. M. Norman, J. Linn. Soc. xxx., 1908, pp. 198–238.

THE CAMBRIDGE NATURAL HISTORY

Edited by S. F. Harmer, Sc.D., F.R.S., and A. E. Shipley, M.A., F.R.S.

In Ten Volumes. Fully Illustrated. Medium 8vo.

17s. net each.

FIELD.—“The Cambridge Natural History series of volumes is one of very great value to all students of biological science. The books are not intended for popular reading, but for utilisation by those who are desirous of making themselves thoroughly acquainted with the branches of zoology of which they treat.”

VOLUME I.

Protozoa, by Marcus Hartog, M.A., D.Sc.; Porifera (Sponges), by Igerna B. J. Sollas, B.Sc.; Coelenterata and Ctenophora, by S. J. Hickson, M.A., F.R.S.; Echinodermata, by E. W. MacBride, M.A., F.R.S.

FIELD.—“The book can be in the strongest manner recommended to those for whose benefit it has been written. We know of no work from which a more truly scientific account of the Protozoa, Echinodermata, and other lower forms of animal life could be gained.”

VOLUME II.

Flatworms and Mesozoa, by F. W. Gamble, D.Sc.; Nemertines, by Miss L. Sheldon; Threadworms and Sagitta, by A. E. Shipley, M.A., F.R.S.; Rotifers, by Marcus Hartog, M.A., D.Sc.; Polychaet Worms, by W. Blaxland Benham, D.Sc., M.A.; Earthworms and Leeches, by F. E. Beddard, M.A., F.R.S.; Gephyrea and Phoronis, by A. E. Shipley, M.A., F.R.S.; Polyzoa, by S. F. Harmer, Sc.D., F.R.S.

CAMBRIDGE REVIEW.—“Most of the articles are of a very high order of merit—taken as a whole, it may be said that they are by far the best which have as yet been published.... We may say with confidence that the same amount of information, within the same compass, is to be had in no other zoological work.”

VOLUME III.

Molluscs, by the Rev. A. H. Cooke, M.A.; Brachiopods (Recent), by A. E. Shipley, M.A., F.R.S.; Brachiopods (Fossil), by F. R. C. Reed, M.A.

TIMES.—“There are very many, not only among educated people who take an interest in science, but even among specialists, who will welcome a work of reasonable compass and handy form containing a trustworthy treatment of the various departments of Natural History by men who are familiar with, and competent to deal with, the latest results of scientific research. Altogether, to judge from this first volume, the Cambridge Natural History promises to fulfil all the expectations that its prospectus holds out.”

VOLUME IV.

Crustacea, by Geoffrey W. Smith, M.A., and the late W. F. R. Weldon, M.A.; Trilobites, by Henry Woods, M.A.; Introduction to Arachnida, and King-Crabs, by A. E. Shipley, M.A., F.R.S.; Eurypterida, by Henry Woods, M.A.; Scorpions, Spiders, Mites, Ticks, etc., by Cecil Warburton, M.A.; Tardigrada (Water-Bears), by A. E. Shipley, M.A., F.R.S.; Pentastomida, by A. E. Shipley, M.A., F.R.S.; Pycnogonida, by D’Arcy W. Thompson, C.B., M.A.

VOLUME V.

Peripatus, by Adam Sedgwick, M.A., F.R.S.; Myriapods, by F. G. Sinclair, M.A.; Insects, Part I., Introduction, Aptera, Orthoptera, Neuroptera, and a portion of Hymenoptera (Sessiliventres and Parasitica), by David Sharp, M.A., M.B., F.R.S.

Prof. RAPHAEL MELDOLA, F.R.S., F.C.S., in his Presidential Address to the Entomological Society of London, said:—“The authors of this volume are certainly to be congratulated upon having furnished such a valuable contribution to our literature. When its successor appears, and I will venture to express the hope that this will be at no very distant period, we shall be in possession of a treatise on the natural history of insects which, from the point of view of the general reader, will compare most favourably with any similar work that has been published in the English language.”

VOLUME VI.

Hymenoptera (continued) (Tubulifera and Aculeata), Coleoptera, Strepsiptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera, Aphaniptera, Thysanoptera, Hemiptera, Anoplura, by David Sharp, M.A., M.B., F.R.S.

SATURDAY REVIEW.—“Dr. Sharp’s treatment is altogether worthy of the series and of his own high scientific reputation.... Certainly this is a book that should be in every entomologist’s library.”

VOLUME VII.

Hemichordata, by S. F. Harmer, Sc.D., F.R.S.; Ascidians and Amphioxus, by W. A. Herdman, D.Sc., F.R.S.; Fishes (exclusive of the Systematic Account of Teleostei), by T. W. Bridge, Sc.D., F.R.S.; Fishes (Systematic Account of Teleostei), by G. A. Boulenger, F.R.S.

ATHENÆUM.—“All who take a serious interest in the advance of ichthyology will find this a fascinating book.”

VOLUME VIII.

Amphibia and Reptiles, by Hans Gadow, M.A., F.R.S.

NATURE.—“In concluding the review we would express the opinion that by this handsome volume a very important addition to science has been made; that the beautiful illustrations, together with the clear and charming accounts of the life-histories which it contains, will do much to popularise the study of a rather neglected section of zoology; and that lovers of Reptiles, of which there are more than one generally thinks, will feel that the new knowledge imparted to them emanates from one who is thoroughly in sympathy with their enthusiasm.”

VOLUME IX.

Birds, by A. H. Evans, M.A.

IBIS.—“Mr. Evans has produced a book full of concentrated essence of information on birds, especially as regards their outer structure and habits, and one that we can cordially recommend as a work of reference to all students of ornithology.”

VOLUME X.

Mammalia, by Frank Evers Beddard, M.A., F.R.S.

NATURE.—“Cannot fail to be of very high value to all students of the Mammalia, especially from the standpoints of morphology and palæontology.”

LONDON: MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES

  1. Silently corrected obvious typographical errors and variations in spelling.
  2. Retained archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as printed.