September iSyi.J 



PSYCHE. 



315 



series and therefore giving rise to a new 

 combination. Such characters are then 

 important, if they constantly recur in a 

 series in combination with others. 



Since a genus cannot be defined except 

 as a natural series of related species, 

 we refrain from entering into the distinc- 

 tion of subgenera, groups of species, etc. 

 We rind better stopping-places for the 

 limitation of families, and on this point 

 we maintain the view which was 

 set forth in the Journal of the Imperial 

 academy of sciences (v. 91, i. 1SS5. 

 p. 327), according to which '• the 

 known larval forms furnish important 

 characters for separation into the 

 groups known among insects as fami- 

 lies and genera", seldom for a higher 

 categorv. The expression genus was 

 there discarded, for two reasons : first, 

 because many of our families are the 

 genera of older authors, and second, 

 because in genera in which the like or 

 similar life habits of the larvae come in- 

 to consideration among the characteris- 

 tics, the larvae have acquired constant 

 characters. 



If in more recent times, strange to 

 say, it is still disputed whether the 

 classification should be based upon the 

 mature insect or upon the entire devel- 

 opment, we can quickly decide, since 

 the former view is contrary to all the 

 j luidamental principles of the natural 

 system. Whither views formed on 

 such a basis lead, may be best seen in 

 the new division of the Coleoptera into 

 genuine and rhynchophorous. This 

 comes from a misunderstanding of the 

 value of characters derived from the 

 earlier stages. The latter must, for 



the higher categories (family, order, 

 class, etc.), be considered of high 

 importance ; for genera and species 

 the characters of the imago are always 

 more important, because the larvae 

 (with few exceptions) show far fewer 

 distinguishing features, and by means 

 of them one could only distinguish se- 

 ries [not species]. Perfectly in harmony 

 with this is the communication presented 

 in the Records of the Imperial academy 

 (math. nat. class, v. 47, p. 36)011 the so- 

 called family of JMuscaria schizome- 

 tofla, where the non-existence of such a 

 family was proved. The idea of many 

 smaller groups was also suggested there. 

 That the known larval forms cannot in 

 this case prove the contrary, had been 

 shown even earlier (Verh. k. k. zool.-- 

 bot. ges., 1878, 161. See also Loew, 

 Stettin, ent. zeit., 1845. p. 312). 



In conclusion we note particularly 

 that it shall be our special task to es- 

 tablish the most natural genera possi- 

 ble, and in every case to attempt to re- 

 duce former genera to this basis. 

 Whoever thinks the genera too many is 

 at liberty to consider them merely se- 

 ries of species, for convenience given a 

 definite name. Some of our groups 

 are then to be considered as genera, 

 while others may be subdivided. 



Since our characterization of the groups 

 is based on essentially different points of 

 structure from those of former authors, 

 we are in a position to arrange in our 

 system only those forms which we could 

 examine and of which we possess the 

 tvpe specimens. Species, the descrip- 

 tions of which do not mention the points 

 that are important to us. must be laid 



