Vol. XXVli] ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. 255 



ment were doubtless similar enough to be grouped in a single 

 family, or sub-family, whose ancestors in turn, if traced fur- 

 ther back, would be similar enough to the ancestors of the 

 Lepismid group, to be classed in a single family with them. In 

 the same way, if we continue to trace the lines of descent still 

 further back, the ancestral groups would be successively more 

 and more inclusive (i. e. the ultimate ancestral types become 

 more and more alike, the further back we go) until we at 

 length reach the ancestral stem-family containing the similar 

 forms which were eventually to give rise to the various Ap- 

 terygotan and Pterygotan lines of descent with all their sub- 

 divisions and ramifications. 



In a recent issue of the Zeitschrift f. wiss. Insektenbiologie 

 (Bd. XI, 1915, Heft 9-10, pp. 269-273) I expressed the opinion 

 that there were several lines of descent leading from the an- 

 cestors of the Apterygota to those of the Pterygota*, and I 

 further suggested that the similarities in structure between 

 the Protura (or "Myrientomata") and the Plecoptera, or be- 

 tween the Dicellura and the Dermaptera would indicate that 

 there have been lines of descent leading from the ancestors of 

 the Protura to those of the Plecoptera, and from the ancestors 

 of the Dicellura to those of the Dermaptera. The study of 

 new material (such as nymphs of Pcltopcrla, specimens of 

 Lepismids from the Galapagos Islands, etc.) not available at 

 that time, however, has led me to interpret these facts in an- 

 other w r ay. While I still believe that there are numerous lines 

 of descent leading from the ancestral groups which gave rise 

 to the ancestral Apterygota to those groups which gave rise to 



* This paper, which was submitted for publication more than two 

 years ago, recently appeared in the "Zeitschrift" despite my request to 

 withdraw it. Furthermore, since the proof sheets were never sent me 

 for correction, the article is full of obvious typographical errors, such 

 as the total absence of capital letters in the title, misspelled words in 

 the text (e. g. "sence" for sense), and even the omission of certain 

 words which have totally altered the meaning of certain of the state- 

 ments (e. g. on page 271 the statement "the Apterygota are no more 

 to be regarded as degenerate Pterygota, than Amphioxus is to be re- 

 garded as a vertebrate" should read than Amphioxus is to be re- 

 garded as a degenerate vertebrate (!)). 



