225 
and Obistum, 2-jointed in Chthonius. That femur in 
Chiridium and trochantin plus femur in Chelifer are 
homologous mav be considered as doubtless, that femur 
in Chiridium and the whole femur in Chelifer are 
homologous with pars basalis and pars tibialis femoris 
together shall, I suppose, be proved by the above men- 
tioned facts and by a further examination of my figures 
showing: 1) that the articulation between pars tibialis 
femoris and tibia in Garypus is shaped as the articula. 
tion between femur and tibia in Chelifer, but vastly 
differing from the articulation between the 2 parts of 
femur in Garypus; 2) that these 2 parts in Garypus 
together have almost the same form as a femur; 3) that 
tibia in Chelifer as to the shape is in accordance with 
tibia in Garypus, not with pars tibialis femoris. I have 
found a further confirmation of this interpretation by 
seeing that the 3 characteristic fissures of the 
lyriform organs, found in Obistum muscorum on 
the dorsal side somewhat before the apex, of 
the 2 hindmost pairs of legs, are found again 
on the upper side of the pars tibialis of the 2 
foremost pairs of legs, not on the pars basalis. 
I look upon it as doubtless that the structure in 
Obisium is the most primitive, but from practical reasons 
I have chosen the used representation. 
Gaubert has attempted such a study (op. cit.). He 
makes use of the names given by Milne-Edwards to the 
joints in the limbs of the Decapoda, excluding, however, 
»ischiopodite« and adding a »second dactylopodite«. I 
have not myself inspected if Milne-Edwards has used 
these names by the Arachnids, which seems most likely 
from what Gaubert says, but at all events I consider them 
as being, at least at present, most unappropriated, and 
besides I do not understand the omission of the ischio- 
podite. Gaubert says (p. 177): »les membres des 
15 
