Predacious to a high degree, and armed with powerful weapons of offence, it is one of the pirates of the fresh water, and may be found in almost every pond and stream, plying its deadly vocation.
Its large and powerful wings seem only to be employed in carrying it from one piece of water to another, while its first and second pairs of legs are hardly ever used at all for progression. The last pair of legs are of very great length, and furnished at their tips with a curiously constructed fringe of stiff hairs. The body is shaped in a manner that greatly resembles a boat turned upside down, the edge of the elytra forming a sort of ridge very much like the keel of the boat.
When the creature is engaged in swimming, it turns itself on its back, so as to bring the keel downwards, and to be able to cut the water with the sharp edge. From this habit it has derived the name of Notonecta, which signifies an animal which swims on its back. The first and second pairs of legs are clasped to the body, and the last pair are stretched out as shown in the illustration, not only looking like oars, but being actually used as oars.
Now, I wish especially to call the reader’s attention to the curiously exact parallel between the water-boatman and the human oarsman. As the reader may probably know, the oar is a lever of the second order, i.e. the power comes first, then the weight, and then the fulcrum. The arm of the rower furnishes the power, the boat is the weight to be moved, and the water is the fulcrum against which the lever acts.
I have more than once heard objections to this definition, the objectors saying that the water was a yielding substance, and therefore could not be the fulcrum. This objection, however, was easily refuted by taking a boat up a narrow creek, and rowing with the oar-blades resting on the shore, and not in the water.
Now, the swimming legs of the water-boatman are exact analogues of the oars of a human rower. The internal muscles at the juncture of the leg with the body supply the place of the rower’s arms, the leg itself takes the office of the oar, and the body of the insect is the weight to be moved, and the water supplies the fulcrum. Even the broad blade at the end of the oar is anticipated by the fringe of bristles at the end of the leg, and its sharpened edge by the shape of the insect’s limb.
Besides these resemblances, there is another which is worthy of notice. All rowers know that one of their first lessons is to “feather” their oars, i.e. to turn the blade edgewise as soon as it leaves the water. Nothing looks more awkward than for a boatman to row without feathering. (We all must remember the eulogy on the “Jolly Young Waterman,” who “feathered his oars with skill and dexterity.”) In the first place, he must lift his oar very high out of the water, and, in the second, he will be impeded by any wind that happens to come against the blades.
The Water-boatman, however, does not lift its legs out of the water after every stroke, as a human boatman does, and therefore it has no need to feather in the same way. But there is even greater need for a feathering of some kind in the insect’s leg, on account of the greater resistance offered by water than by air, and this feathering is effected by the arrangement of the blade-bristles, which spread themselves against the water as the stroke is made, and collapse afterwards, so as to give as little resistance as possible when the stroke is completed.
In Art we have invented many similar contrivances, but I believe that there is not one in which we have not been anticipated by Nature. Putting aside the insect which has just been described, we have the whole tribe of water-beetles, in which the same principle is carried out in an almost identical manner. In the accompanying illustration, the oar, the rower, and the boat are placed above one another, and next to them are seen one of the oar-legs of the water-boatman and the insect as it appears when swimming on its back.