402 AuGusTA Rucker, 



very beginuing- ot a ratlier imsuccessful attempt to get a great number 

 of specimens befoi-e g"iving tlie fixed character of the species, I 

 observed that I liad two distinct tj^pes in my collectioii. One set 

 had prominent and pecnliar appendag-es around the reproductive 

 orifice while the reproductive appendages in the other set were not 

 so prominent and did not possess papillae. In all other respects 

 the animals were similar. I naturally concluded that I had both 

 sexes of Koenenm and subsequent sectioning showed this to be true. 

 These results, which I did not start out to get and which I happened 

 to obtain, I included in a few notes on the internal anatomy. i) 



Again, in carrying out further investigations on the internal 

 anatomy, together with observations concerning the Variation of 

 characters which might be considered specific, where only one or 

 two specimens were to be had, I have obtained some very interesting 

 results in quite another direction , . . the post-embryonic develop- 

 ment, which may be expected to throw some light on the pliylo- 

 genetic position of the Koenenia. I have likewise been able through 

 study of the living animal, to verify some of my former results, 

 which were arrived at by means of sections and whole mounts, and 

 which have been unduly criticised by H. M. Hansen, in : The Entomol. 

 Tidsskr., 1901, Something further can be added in regard to the 

 habits of these animals and the best methods for collecting, when 

 special fixing fluids are desired which cannot be handled on the field. 



Before going further in my results, I feel that I must, in justice 

 to myself and the work which I have undertaken, consider some of 

 the criticisms made by Dr. Hansen in his paper "On six species of 

 Koenenia". Dr. Hansen begins his six-paged Postscript by 

 saying I had "kindly" sent him a copy of my separate and he 

 would insert a review of it. He then quotes from my paper: "We 

 have been more fortunate than Drs. Hansen & Sörensen in being 

 able to distinguish the two sexes. It hardly seems possible that 

 the males of Grassi's species could be so rare when they are so 

 abundant in our species". That it was surprise on my part that 

 the European observers had not been so fortunate as we were. and 

 that there was no doubt entert ained of Dr. Hansen's ability, goes 

 without saying. No one could believe that a young worker in scienee. 

 would be so presumptive as to doubt the ability of a man so renowned 

 as Prof, B. Grassi, or of men who have done such meritorious work 



1) The Texan Koenenia, in: Amer. Naturalist, May 1901. 



