78 AMERICAN SPIDERS AND THEIR SPINNINGWORK. 



and as a consequence could only spin very imperfectly. It was observed 

 to follow the habits of the bunting spider, which does not build a web, 

 but catclies its prey by stalking. This change of habit was only tem- 

 porary, as tlie spider recovered its legs after moulting. ^ Mr. Darwin also 

 alludes to this incident. 



My observations are wholly contradictory of this. I have placed upon 



my vines an Epeira domiciliorum that had lost all the legs on one side, and 



found it to weave a serviceable web, although necessarily some- 



Spmnmg ^vhat imperfect. It hung upon its snare and trapped flies with 



, ., , . fair success. I have often noted similar defects in various siie- 



tilation. . • 1 , 1 Tir T 



cies always witli the same result. Mr. Romanes' inference as 



to the plasticity of instinct needs a little more confirmation. Indeed, 

 the inference was long ago fully explo(h'(l by the observations of Dr. 

 Heineken, a surgeon in the Island of Madeira during the early part of 

 this century. This gentleman, in order to test the ability of orbweaving 

 spiders to spin after mutilation, removed at intervals, successively, the legs 

 of various individuals, with the following results : Epeira (Argioi^e) fasciata, 

 with all the legs removed except the second and last on the left side and 

 the last but one on the right side, thoroughly mended its web when two- 

 thirds of it had been torn away. It maintained the same position and 

 attitude as before mutilation, and in every respect had the manner of an 

 Orbweaver. 



Another EpeTroid sjiider had all the legs removed except the first on 

 the right side and the second and last on the left side, leaving the spider 

 with but three legs. On the following day, filaments appeared in several 

 directions. These were constantly added to, and in the course of two weeks 

 a geometric web was formed equally perfect, but more sparing in quantity 

 than one made bj'^ a spider in the same species and under the same mode 

 of confinement, but healthy and unmutilated. The entanglement and taking 

 of flies, and the conduct of the two spiders was in every respect similar. 

 They were confined in large glass jars. A number of individuals were 

 experimented ujion with the same result. In the case of one tubemaking 

 spider, the number of limbs was reduced to two, and the web entirely de- 

 stroyed. Even tlien enough web was spun to cover the spider imperfectly 

 and occasionally to entangle an exhausted fly. It lived for five weeks after 

 mutilation.'^ 



' Transactions Linnifan Society, Vol. XI., page "!K1. 



- Dr. Heineken, On the Eeproduction of Members in Spiders and Insects. Zuolo^rical 

 .Tonrnal, Vol. 1\., page 428. 1828-29. 



