144 PROC. ENT. SOC. WASH., VOL. 21, NO. 6, JUNE, 1919 



present paper, together with the basal ring "gg," which is the 

 "cardo" mentioned in the table. The "stipes" is the basal seg- 

 ment "gb" of the gonopods, and the "cochlearium" is the distal 

 segment "eg" of the gonopods. The "penis" mentioned in the 

 table as composed of the "second gonapophyses," is represented 

 by the penis valves "pv" of the present paper, and the "first 

 gonapophyses," which constitute the "praeputium" according 

 to Rohwer, are made up of the structures labeled "gl," "pal" 

 arid "pa" in the figures of the present paper. 



While it is quite possible that the foregoing table may repre- 

 sent the actual meaning and relationships of the parts of the 

 genitalia to one another, I do not find myself entirely in accord 

 with all of the interpretations Mr. Rohwer has given them. 

 The gonopods or forceps may or may not be the appendages of 

 the ninth, or even of the tenth segment; but one can not deter- 

 mine this point with any degree of certainty until the develop- 

 ment of these structures has been traced through the larval to 

 the adult stages. Furthermore, I would not interpret the "cardo" 

 or basal ring "gg" (of all figures) as a part of the forceps proper, 

 but rather as a basal plate which bears the forceps, and which 

 may possibly represent the sternal region of the tenth or other 

 abdominal segment, although, as stated above, this question can 

 be best settled by making a study of the ontogenetic development 

 of the parts in question. 



The sclerites referred to as the "praeputium" in the table, 

 to my mind are merely detached basal portions of the forceps, 

 and therefore would not belong to part of a segment which does 

 not bear the forceps. As far as the "penis" is concerned, I am 

 inclined to consider that it does not belong to the same segment 

 as that bearing the forceps, since the penis rods ("pr" of all figures) 

 extend forward to the segment in front of the basal ring of the 

 forceps; but here again, I would not care to give any definite 

 opinion on the subject, until the ontogenetic development of the 

 parts in question has been worked out; and reference to the sup- 

 posed "segments to which the different parts of the copulatory 

 apparatus belong has been purposely omitted from the appended 

 table of the parts according to the interpretation here given. 



The choice of Hartig's term "praeputium" is, to my mind, a 

 rather unfortunate one, if there is to be any uniformity of applica- 

 tion of terms used in the comparative anatomy of all insects, 

 since the designation praeputium has been universally used by 

 students of the earwig or Dermapteron group (e. g., Zacher, and 

 others included in the list of papers dealing with the genitalia of 

 males of Dermaptera given in the bibliography of a paper on the 



