588 BRITISH 0RII3ATIDJ]]. 



In looking at these classifications it must be remem- 

 bered that the two authors use the name Oppia for 

 Nota.^plfi, — Damceus only for the tridactjle species of 

 that genus, — Belba for the monodactyle species of the 

 same genus (my reasons for considering this incorrect 

 are given at p. 350) ; Garahodes for Tegeoo'tiuus, — 

 Tritia for the tridactyle Hoplophora ; and Berlese uses 

 Liodes for Nothrus theleprodus (see, however, the 

 remarks on that species), and Neozetes for Serrarius 

 (see p. 581). 



Both these classifications are based upon old ana- 

 tomical errors, it is therefore scarcely worth while to 

 discuss them. Prof. Canestrini's follows Nicolet's 

 classification in most matters and retains the great 

 reliance on monodactyle and tridactyle, and homo- 

 dactyle and heterodactyle claws, which has already been 

 fully dealt with in this book. 



Prof. Berlese's somewhat complicated classification 

 would I think be open to numerous objections, even if it 

 were not rendered unserviceable by the anatomical 

 errors alluded to above. The sub-family Nothridce does 

 not seem to me to be a happily combined group ; 1 

 have already remarked on the sub-genus Angelia at 

 p. 480. 1 cannot think that the numerous named 

 sub-genera are convenient, nor the fact that the sub- 

 family Orihatidce has precisely the same name as the 

 family. The mode of separating Nothrus from Her- 

 mannia has already been discussed at pp. 439, 480 ; 

 the question of a two-clawed Nothrus at p. 491 ; and 

 the separation of the monodactyle from the tridactyle 

 species of Damceus at p. 404. 



It will be observed that in both classifications genera 

 are inserted which I do not treat of in this book ; the 

 reason for not doing so is not that they are not British, 

 for representatives of each genus are found here, but 

 it is that I do not consider they belong to the family 

 Orihatidce. The first of these is the genus called 

 Nicoletiella in Canestrini's and Panoplia in Berlese's 

 classification ; the latter author properly puts a ? as 



