222 



1867. On page 4-2 line 1 we read: »le travail que nous publie- 

 rons prochainement, M. Ie professeur Ch. Robin et moi dans Ie 

 Journal d'anatomie et de physiologie de l'homme el des animaux." 

 Consequently Fumouze's work on the Caniharis ojicinalis appeared 

 first. The description of Glyciphagus cursor on p. 49 is better than 

 hitherto given by earlier writers. Here we read for the first time: 

 »tarses tres longues, plus que la largeur du corps, lisses, offrant 

 quelques piquants." »Poils ... les postérieurs ne dépassant pas, mais 

 pouvant atteindre la longueur du corps.'" Indeed these characters 

 are very striking ones and easily to use to distinguish Gl. domesticus 

 (de Geer) from Gl. cadaverum (Schrank), It is a pity that Fumouze 

 has not published a drawing of the species. 



1876. Troupeau's mite is a curious conibination of cadaverum 

 and domesticus. His description and drawiugs are for the greater 

 part those of domesticus, but the passage about, and the drawing 

 of, a wide margin of regular hexagones fits only on a cadaverum 

 which is changing into a hypopial case. 



1877. Canestrini and Fanzago's description is too short, and 

 their drawing bad, though recognizable. They say nothing about 

 the tarsi. 



1880. Mégnin gives a too-short description and a bad drawiDg. 



1884. Berlese's drawing of this species is at all events better 

 than that of Gl. cadaverum, as he has directed his attention on 

 the different lengths of the bairs. He mentions the smooth tarsi, 

 but his drawing of the tarsus is wrong, and the olfactoric hair 

 is called »apophysis tactilis." 



1888. Canestrini. I Tiroglifidi. Only a diagnosis. Nothing 

 about the smooth tarsi. 



1888. Michael gives ample descriptions of the life history, but 

 his drawings can not please me; they are not correct enough for 

 such an able investigator. There are hairs on the ventral side 

 which are not drawn, and the vulva is wrongly represented. 



1888. Canestrini. Prospetto. Description tolerably good. No 

 drawings. 



1901. As could not been expected otherwise, the best drawings 



