HANSE^s AND SÖRENSEN, THE TARTARIDES. 31 



to »Endtarsen mit 2 dorsalen und einer ventralen Klaue») in 

 Tartarides, but this statement is therefore erroneoiis: the 

 pseudonychium, a process from the firm chitine (»plantula>> 

 W. S.) bearing the two real claws, is ne ver wanting. 



In his main work on the Uropygi KraepeHn writes on 

 the second pair of walking legs in Tartarides: »das Ite Seg- 

 ment des 4 gliedrigen Tarsus tibienartig verlängert», and in 

 a foot-note belonging to that sentence he says: »Thorell 

 spricht von 3 Tarsenghedern, da er das basale, gestreckte 

 wol fiir die Tibia hielt». But Thorell did not commit that 

 error: a perusal of his detailed description of the three pos- 

 terior pairs of legs in Tripeltis [Trithyreus] Grassii (1. c, p. 559) 

 will show, that he speaks of patella, tibia, a long metatarsus 

 and a three- jointed tarsus; the elongate joint mentioned by 

 Kraepelin as the first tarsal joint is separated with good reason 

 by Thorell as metatarsus, as we do in this paper. Further- 

 more it is seen in the same paper (p. 548) that Thorell in 

 his description of Hypoctonus jormosus Butl., belonging to 

 the Oxopoei, applies the name metatarsus to the short joint 

 situated between tibia and the three- jointed tarsus; it may 

 be added that the articulation between metatarsus and tarsus 

 differs from those between the joints of the tarsus itself. 



We differ, however, from Thorell as to the interpretation 

 of the joints beyond the femur in the first pair of walking 

 legs. He thinks that in this pair of limbs patella is wanting; 

 the consequence is that he considers our patella as tibia, our 

 tibia as metatarsus, our metatarsus as the two proximal tarsal 

 joints. We are of the opinion that the articulations between 

 the joints in question are so weekly developed, that it is 

 impossible with any certainty to decide the morphology of 

 the joints b}^ considering the direction of movements allowed, 

 but that other structural features speak in favour of our in- 

 terpretation which, for the rest, is not new. We will produce 

 four points in support of our opinion: 1) In the mandibular 

 palp a patellar . part is developed as a joint as long as the 

 tibial part — Thorell himself holds this view on these parts 

 of the palp in Tartarides — but it is rather improbable that 

 patella should be wanting in the first pair of walking limbs 

 intermediate between the mandibular palps and the three 

 posterior pairs of legs, in which limbs a patellar part. or 

 a patella, exists. 2) In Amblypygi the first pair of walking 



