226 ENTOMOLOGISK TIDSKRIFT 1897 
rangement of which are only represented approximately in figg. 
1 and 3. The head bears a great resemblance to that of the 7 arfari. 
dest, However we must point out as a very remarkable feature that 
the sternal carapace of the head, which is proportionally much 
larger, and especially broader than in any other order of Arach- 
nida, is divided into two parts (fig. 2) by a narrow band of 
feebly chitinized skin, the hindmost of these parts corresponding 
distinctly enough to the fourth pair of limbs. Though this has 
already been mentioned by Grassi, we must emphasize the fact 
as a curiosity, as it is quite unique in Arachnida?, which other- 
wise show no trace of independence in the segments constituting 
the head. The foremost larger part of the sternal carapace is 
furnished with about half a score of plumose sete which are 
arranged in two indistinctly arched rows. 
Thorax (t'} 17; fige. 1, 2, 3). Both segments are entire 
free, a feature which, elsewhere, is only met with in Zartarzdes® 
and in So/fugæ. Hoping that the figures (1—3) render a more 
detailed description superfluous, we will only add that, except 
on the dorsal part of the first segment, they are provided with 
a few sete arranged in rows. — Evidently the articulations be- 
tween head and thorax and between the segments of the latter 
are not very flexible. 
Structure of the Mouth (0, figg. 2 and 3; besides figg. 
7 and 8). Jt is simpler than in any other Arachnid, nay than 
in almost all other Condylopods, no limbs at all participating in its 
forming, and we are of opinion that in this respect the mouth 
of Koenenza — simple and plain as it is — presents great in- 
terest. It has the shape of a downward sloping protruding knot, 
and its opening consists of a relatively large split extending not 
quite up to the base of the mouth-eminence. Seen from below, 
4 Schizonotus THOR. (Vyctalops CAMBR.). — Tripeltis THOR. (of which, 
however, we do not know the species established by Thorell himself) does 
not differ generically from Schzzonotus. 
5 In order to avoid misunderstanding we observe that we do not con- 
sider this feature fundamentally important, or distinctive of the order Palpi- 
gradi. If more genera of this order be found in the future, we shall not won- 
der if, in this point, such animals resemble Schizonotus. 
5 We are quite aware that this statement disagrees with all that has 
hitherto been written on the subject. 
” 
