282 



Annals Entomological Society of America [Vol. XV, 



and_^most reliable means of identification of the species, while 

 on]^the other hand the vulvae appeared less manifold and did 

 not^^supply equally favorable criteria. Another reason lies in 

 this^that the vulvae have long remained a mystery. 



Since 1909 (Sitzb. Ges. naturf. Freunde Berlin, 1909, 

 No. 4), Verhoeff claimed to have settled the matter by holding 

 that the vulvas — as well as the penis — - had to be identified 

 with pairs of limbs. These were supposed to be the posterior 

 limbs of the third segment, which the author admitted to be 



Fig. I. Paeromopus lysiopetaliniis; gnathochilarium, ventral aspect. 



Fig. II. Paraiulus tiganus. Base of gnathochilarium of adult female, dorsal 



aspect. The postmentum, p, is fastened to the gula, G, along the 



line left blank, y. 

 Fig. TIL* Paraiulus venustus. Base of gnathochilarium of adult female seen 



obliquely from the side. 



double, as the abdominal segments. It was in fact but a mere 

 personal view, supported by no convincing reasons, and has been 

 contradicted by Brolemann & Lichtenstein (1919, Arch. Zool. 

 exper. gen., LVIII, fasc. 4, mars, 1919), who admit that the 

 so-called vulvse are not the equivalent of limbs, but are merely 

 superficial differentiations of the membrane surrounding the 

 aperture of the oviduct. 



It is not deemed appropriate to recall in this paper the 

 reasons which have prompted the opinions here recorded. 

 Yet it will not be useless, in order to render the task easier 



