29 
On the other hand meso- and metathorax generally show the 
dorsolateral seta, which is missing so often on the abdomen. This 
seta I consider as a primary one, for it not only oecurs on nearly 
all thoracal segments, but it is found also on the abdomen in widely 
diverging families (e.g. Phalera bucephala, Pieris napi, Hepialus spec). 
In the two last cases I could not detect it in the first instar, but it 
did occur in the more advanced. Yet QvuAIL mentions this seta in 
the first instar of Pieris brassicae, where I failed to see it. The 
most remarkable circumstance however in connection with this seta 
is the occurrence of a pigment-spot on the pupae and imagines of 
Pierids exactly in the position where one might look for the seta, 
being even present in those cases, where during the last larval 
instar the setae become irregularly spread over the segment and 
are not surrounded by a considerable amount of pigment. It is on 
account of these arguments that I feel justified in considering the 
dorsolateral seta as a primary one. 
[ could amplify the outcome of my investigations with the results 
obtained by the writers mentioned before. Though they sometimes 
appeared to be in contradiction with my conclusions, in my opinion 
they really support them. 
In the following survey of the types occurring in different families 
of Lepidoptera, the latter ones are arranged according to SHARP’s 
handbook. 
Of Rhopalocera Nymphalidae 1 studied Vanessa urticae L. For 
this family Wm. MiiLLer gives a primitive, design, consisting of setae 
in instar I, yielding their place later on to a pattern of spines 
which shows a corresponding arrangement. The species I studied 
possessed from the beginning, besides common setae, a number of 
spines. These according to my theory may be indicated as follows 
(on the abdomen): the dorsal, suprastigmal and infrastigmal scoius 
and besides these in the form of simple setae, the subdorsal and 
poststigmal. Where such a close similarity existed with the primitive 
pattern, a real homology might be anticipated. Yet, for a number 
of S.-American forms, W. Mürrer observed that these scoli where 
the product of the transformation of secondary setae, spread amongst 
the primary ones. So the above mentioned similarity would be inci- 
dental; but in agreement with Mürrer the original nomenclature 
may be maintained. 
In the kind of Vanessa which I studied, primary setae were almost 
completely absent. 
As to the question, whether the pupal pattern must be reckoned 
to the primary or to the secondary design, I have not as yet arrived 
