35 



in species, and only less widely spread than Forficula, occurring 

 probably over the entire extent of the torrid and temperate part of 

 every continent, excepting Australia. Though abundant in all the 

 East Indies, it has also not been brought from Oeeanica. See Cop- 

 iscelis. Oken proposed the generic name Labio for a group of mol- 

 lusks in 1815. 



LABIDOPHORA (see PLATYLABIA). 



LABIDURA. 



1815. Leach, Edinb. Encyl., ix, 118: bases this name upon the spe- 

 cies riparia (^gigantea), which, therefore, is the type. 

 Whenever since employed, it has always been in the same sense. 

 Serville does not even refer to it, either in 1831 or 1839. Althoiigh 

 this word in a Gallic form was proposed as early as 1806, for the 

 whole group of earwigs, it did not receive a Latin dress (with the' 

 same scope) until 1840,^ and therefore the present use of this word 

 is not affected. The genus is one of the richest in species and is 

 widely spread in the Old World, especially in the East Indies and 

 in Europe. It has not been found in Australia. But a single species 

 has been described as indigenous to America (Jamaica) and this 

 may prove to be wrongly placed here, as it is an apterous species. 

 Fossil species have been found in the tertiaries of the Rocky IMoun- 

 tains, but these, too, should perhaps be separated from this group. 

 See also Forficesila and Psalis. 



LOBOPHORA.* 



1839. Serv., Orth., 32 : proposes this name for rufitarsis (from 



Java), a species since determined to be identical with the older 



morio, which is therefore the type. 



The name has since been employed by several authors (Stal, 



Dohrn, etc.) but is preoccupied in Lepidoptera (Curtis, 1825). Che- 



lisoches (/ij/lij', o;ftw) may be used in its place. The genus is mainly, 



if not exclusively, confined to Australasia, including all the islands 



of the Indian Ocean and the neighboring main and Oeeanica. 



' See our synonymy of the family name. 



