Page:Wood 1865 - The Myriapoda of North America.djvu/109

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
244
CLASS MYRIAPODA.

again there is a similar but less marked degradation in value as we go from the higher to the lower order. There is very little alteration in the segments of the body in the Chilopoda. They are all formed after one common type; more or less parallelopipedal, with a solid sternum below and scutum above separated by membranous sides, which give origin to the appendages. The only important aberrations from this are the occasional fusion of two scuta into one, and at times a slight development of the atrophied subsegment. Not so in the Chilognatha; here there are three distinct types of form and composition of the segments. Now each of these is peculiar to one of the three divisions indicated, strongly corroborating their claims to rank as suborders.

There is one imperfection in my knowledge of the subject which I recognize and would guard against. I have never seen any of the species of the Polyxenidae, and have not read a sufficiently accurate description of them and their anatomy to be able to assign their place; yet is it questionable but that they belong in one of the three suborders? There seems to be no room for a fourth division.




CLASS MYRIAPODA.


ORD. I. SYNGNATHA.[1]

Caput segmentis duobus distinctis compositum. Corporis segmenta subsegmenta unica efformata, singula pedum par unicum instructa. Organorum sexualium apertura ad extremitatem posteriorem.

Ord. Syngnatha, Leach, Linn. Trans., vol. xi, 1815, p. 381.[2]

Ord. Chilopoda, Latreille, Cours D'Entomologie, 1831, p. 175, et auctores.

  1. Although it would seem much better to retain the name of Chilopoda, it having been so universally adopted, yet the prior appellation must have the preference. I have used Chilopoda all through this memoir through ignorance of the priority of Syngnatha.
  2. Mr. Newport states (Linn. Trans., vol. xix, p. 273) that the name Syngnatha was originally proposed by M. Latreille, and adopted by Dr. Leach. Dr. Leach, however, gives the name as his own (loc. cit.), and I have not been able to find it in any of the works of Latreille at my command. Mr. Newport does not refer to the place where the latter uses it.