chap, xxii.] SUPPOSED CASES OF DOUBLE LEG. 



547 



852 



deal more slender than the normal anterior leg. Owing to the slight 

 degree to which the anterior legs of this insect are structurally differen- 

 tiated from the middle legs, it cannot be positively stated that the 

 extra leg is in form an anterior or a middle leg, but in size and general 

 conformation it approaches very nearly to that of an anterior leg. It 

 is complete in all its joints, having normal ciliation and claws, but the 

 spurs are entirely absent from the apex of the tibia and probably have 

 never been formed. This is an unfortunate circumstance ; for, inas- 

 much as the anterior spur of a normal anterior tibia in this species is 

 markedly differentiated from the posterior spur, it would have been 

 easy to determine the surfaces of this leg had the spurs been present. 

 As it is, the matter cannot be positively decided, and it must suffice to 

 say that the general form of the leg and the shape and curvature of its 

 joints are such as to make it appear to be fashioned as an anterior leg 

 and as a leg of the side upon which it occurs, namely, the left. This 

 specimen was most kindly lent for description by Mr C W. Dale, of 

 Glanville's Wootton, Dorsetshire. It is the specimen mentioned in 

 Ann. and Mag., 1831, iv. p. 21. 



Elater variabilis (Elat.): complete extra leg articulating by 

 separate coxa close to right anterior leg. Germar, E. E., Mag. der 

 Ent., ii. p. 335, PL i. fig. 12. [This case has been copied by many 

 authors. The figures represent the right fore leg and the extra one as 

 normal right legs, but they are not sufficiently detailed to give con- 

 fidence that this was so. If the specimen still exists it is to be hoped 

 that it may be properly described.] 



853. 



This is a list of all remaining cases in which it 

 is duplicity of a leg. The point of origin is shewn 



* , seen by myself. J, partly amorphous or 

 R, right. L, left, tr., trochanter, f, femur, tb, 

 * J Osmoderma eremita 1 (Lamell.) L 1. c. 



IVIallodon sp. (Longic.) R 3. c. 



Pasimachus punctulatus (Carab.) L 2. tr. 



Broscus vulgaris (Carab.) R 1. tr. 



Agonum sexpunctatum (Carab.) R 3. f. 



% Carabus septemcarinatus S R3. f. 



% Carabus nemoralis L 3. f. 



Carabus creutzeri ? L 1. f. 



Procrustes coriaceus- (Carab.) R3. f. 



IVTeloe coriaceus (Het.) L 1. f. 



Carabus helluo R 1. f. 



Trichodes syriacus (Cleridae) R 1. f. 



J Chrysomela haemoptera (Phyt.) ? 3. f. 



is in any way possible that there 

 approximately, 

 mutilated. 0, no description, 

 tibia, ts, tarsus. 

 Mocquerys, Col. anorm., 1880, 



p. 46, fig. 

 ibid., p. 50, fig. 

 Jayne, Trims. Amer. Ent. Soc, 



1880, vm. p. 156, PI. iv. fig. 4. 

 Imhoff, Ber. Verh. not. Ges. 



Basel, 1838, in. p. 3. 

 Schneider, Jahresb. schles. Ges. 



vaterl. KuUur, 1860, p. 129. 

 Kraatz, Dent. ent. Zt., 1877, xxi. 



p. 57, PI. i. fig. 32. 

 Otto, Herm., Term.j 'iizetek, 1877 , 



i. p. 52, PI. ii. 

 Kraatz, I. c, fig. 31. 

 Mocquerys, I. c, p. 55, fig. 

 St annius, Miill. Arch. Anat.Phys., 



1835, p. 306, fig. 11. 

 Rey, Ann. Soc. Linn, de Lyon, 



1882, xxx. p. 423. 

 ibid. 

 Curtis, Brit. Ent., PI. Ul,fig. 5*. 



state explicitly that there was no conceivable doubt as to the genuineness of the 

 abnormality. When received by me it was absolutely natural and had not been in 

 any way mended. 



1 Probably this is the specimen mentioned byBELLiER de la Chavig-nerie, Bull. 

 Soc. ent. France, 1851, S. 2, ix. p. lxxxii. 



2 See also Klingelhofer, Stet. ent. Zt., 1844, v. p. 330. 



35—2 



