
1899] REGENERATION IN ORTHOPTERA 321 
perfect ; but in the second case an unjointed stump is formed. There 
seems to be no appendage which may not suffer mutilation during the 
hazardous process of moulting. 
In jumping Orthoptera, tarsal regeneration occurs readily on any 
of the legs, and this conforms with the fact that mutilation of the 
tarsus is peculiarly liable to occur during moulting. Experiment 
shows that the terminal portion of the tibia may also be regenerated, 
and this too may be associated with the fact that in exuvial mutilation 
or, more rarely, as the result of attack, the muscles at the end of the 
tibia are often torn when the tarsus is pulled off. 
Bordage also notes that in Phylloptera laurifolia and Conocephalus 
differens the regenerated tarsus is tetrameral, as is normal in Locustidae, 
while in Gryllus campestris the regenerated tarsus has three joints. 
In Locustidae and Gryllidae the tibia of regenerated anterior legs does 
not possess the tympanic apparatus borne on the normal limb. 
Diastataxy. 
THE Journal of the Linnean Society—Zoology—tfor July, vol. xxvii., 
contains two very important contributions towards a solution of that 
ornithological puzzle known hitherto as “ Aquinto-cubitalism.” Mr. P. 
Chalmers Mitchell has approached the question from the point of view 
of comparative anatomy; Mr. W. P. Pycraft from that of embryology. 
The riddle to be solved, it will be remembered, was the meaning of 
the constant absence of a remex from between the fifth pair of secondary 
major coverts of the wing in certain birds, or groups of birds. Wings 
in which this feather was wanting were known as aquinto-cubital ; 
when there was no such deficiency the wing was known as “ quinto- 
cubital.” 
Mr. Mitchell has proposed the term diastataxic for the former, and 
eutaxic for the latter. These terms are undoubtedly superior to the 
older ones, and have been adopted by Mr. Pycraft in his paper. 
Till now, it was believed that in the diastataxic wing the fifth 
remex was missing; both the present authors agree, however, that this 
is not the case. 
Mr. Pycraft endeavours to show that the remex in question has lost 
its original relations, but not its existence. According to him the 
diastataxial wing is at first eutaxic, changing more or less suddenly during 
development from the one into the other. This is brought about by a 
remarkable, but unmistakable shifting of position of all the coverts of 
the dorsal surface of the wing and of the remiges (1-4). The remiges 
in question move outwards (wrist-wards), and backwards, the movement 
being accompanied by certain of the obliquely transverse row of 
coverts (1-5). As a consequence, the fifth of these rows becomes 
