112 DUBLIN NATTTEAL HI8T0EY SOCIETY. 



Habits : runs with great agility ; does not roll. 



Locality: TaUand Cove, Corawall, 1858. 



I have named it after Jonathan Couch, M. D., F. L. S., the well- 

 known illustrator of Cornish zoology. 



The only species I can at all find described which comes near my 

 Philoscia Couchii are two figured in Dana's great work as Onisci : one, 

 0. nigrescens, from New Zealand ; the other, 0. pubescens, from South 

 America. Dana evidently was unacquainted with the genus (as I have 

 before shown) as distinct from Oniscus. 



In the new species the frontal border of carapace is carried well 

 forward, and passes down to the antennae, the superior antennal ring 

 having its margin produced into a minute lobe beneath the orbit. This 

 species fully proves the judiciousness of the separation of Philoscia from 

 Oniscus. 



In the same paper I also proposed the foundation of a new genus, 

 Philougria, for the reception of a small Oniscoid, which is extremely 

 common, but which, undescribed in this country, was also apparently 

 undescribed on the Continent; at the time I stated my suspicions that the 

 genus Itea of Koch had been misdescribed ; but, owing to want of 

 proper figures, I did not feel justified in identifying my specimens, to 

 which I gave the name of Philougria celer, with the Itea riparia of 

 Koch, for I found the genus described by Koch as having only one joint 

 in the tige of the antennae, and even Zaddach, who has noted and 

 corrected this error, and has given an admirably accurate description of 

 two species, used such terms as these: — ''Antennae interiores magis 

 etiam diminuta quam in Philoscia ex uno modo articulo constare vi- 

 dentur :" a description which any one who examines the description of 

 Philougria rosea of this present paper will find to be most incorrect ; 

 the antennae in that species projecting so far beyond the front as to be 

 visible to the unassisted eye from above. 



During the past summer I was fortunate enough to meet with two 

 other species of the same genus, which are identical with two out of the 

 four species already describe^ as Itea by Koch and Zaddach ; and by 

 help of these it appears to me that we are justified in assuming that both 

 Zaddach and Koch erred in regard to the characters of the internal an- 

 tennae. The genus Itea being, then, inaccurately described, and further- 

 more the name having been long ago appropriated to a well-known 

 genus of plants by Linnaeus, I would suggest that the generic name 

 suggested by me last year should still stand, and the name Itea be al- 

 together erased from the carcinological lists ; the only species of it which 

 does not come into the present genus being the Itea crassicornis of Koch, 

 which is seemingly a Platyarthus of Brandt. The examination of the two 

 additional species obliges me to modify some of the minor characters of 

 the genus, as published in my analysis, and the abolition of the generic 

 term Itea necessitates the substitution of Philougridae for Iteadae as the 

 name of the family. This, as it now stands, includes Trichoniscus {Brandt)^ 

 should this genus prove distinct. 



