68 ARRANGEMENT OF THE GEOPHILIDJS—COOE. 



NotiphUus has uot been identified by recent writers, and was consid- 

 ered by Meinert to be a synonym of HimantarmmJ Koch's description 

 is, however, quite extensive and explicit, and offers several characters 

 sufficient to distinguish tlic genus from Oryanud Himantarium. From 

 Bothriogaster it is difficult, if not impossible, to indicate distinctions; 

 indeed there is no evident reason why Seliwanoff's description and 

 figures of Bothriogaster signatHs, Kessler. do not correspond with Koch's 

 Notlphiius taniiatns,' as Seliwanoff' has himself suggested by placing 

 NotiphUus ifvniatus as a doubtful synonym of signatns. Later on 

 signatus was reported from Greece by Dr. Karsch,^ so that not even a 

 difference in habitat remains. Nevertheless it can hardly be asserted 

 with confidence that the animals are specifically and geuerically the 

 same, but the agreement in all important characters is so great that 

 a generu; difference is exceedingly improbable. The fact that Koch 

 gives the legs as varying from 100 to 154 suggests the possibility that 

 he may have had more than one species under observation. The matter 

 will probably remain more or less in doubt until the Greek Myriapoda 

 are better known, but for our jiresent purpose it is sufBcieiit to point out 

 that Notiplillus would be a valid genus, were not the name preoccupied 

 in the Diptera, and that Bothriogaster may rejilace it until the typical 

 species are shown to be distinct, and not congeneric. 



Genus STIGM ATOGASTER, Latzel. 



St'Kjinatoijaster, Latzkl. Myr. Oest.-Ung. Moii., I, p. 211, 1880. 

 Type. — Stigmatogasfcr gracilis (Meinert). ^ 

 Distribution. — South Europe; North Africa. 



Genus STYLOL^^MUS, Karsch. 



Stylolamus, Karsch, Troschel's Archiv f. Naturges.. Jahrg. XLVII, Heft. 1, p. 9, 

 figs. 3, 3a, Sb, 1881. 



Type. — Styloloemus peripateticus, Karsch. 



Distribution. — Tripoli. 



The type and only specimen of this genus is in the Berlin Museum. 

 It is in very poor condition, but does not possess the abnormal charac- 

 ters which might be inferred from the figures cited above. Its affini- 

 ties are doubtless with the jSTotiphilidte, and it does not appear to 

 coincide with any of the genera. In certain of its external characters 

 it suggests Pectiniunguis. No examination of the mouth parts was 

 possible. 



' Meiuert has also described a " Hiviantarium twniaium, new species" (Myr. Mus. 

 Hauii., Ill, p. 149), wbicli of course could not stand if XoliphiUis is a synonym of 

 Himanlarium. This is either an oversight or a complete disregard of the principle 

 of priorit}^ 



-System der Myriapoden. p. 180, 1817; Die Myriapoden, II, p. 59, fig. 181. 



^ Verzeichniss der von Herru E. v. Oertzen in den Jahren 1884 und 188.5 in Grieclieu- 

 land nnd auf Kreta gesammelten Myriapoden. Berliner Entom. Zeitschr., XXXII, 

 p. 220 (1888). 



"Naturh. Tidsskr., VII, p. 32, 1879. 



