ACARINA FROM THE JUAN FERNANDEZ ISLANDS 559 



is to be said about the description and it is manifestly insufficient to give us 

 any idea of what it looks like. 



Subsequently Banks (1895, p. 15) gives a short description of the species. 

 Unfortunately he omits telling us, whether he has examined the type specimen of 

 Say, which according to Say was kept in the cabinet of the Academy of 

 Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, and if he has not, it is quite possible that 

 there are two distinct species. 



Banks' description is as follows: » Length 1,3 mm. Black; cephalothorax 

 broadly triangular, narrowed behind, margins serrate, seta short, clavate; ab- 

 domen elevated, dorsum composed of four concentric circles, connected to each 

 other by curved lines or ridges, the circles are not perfect, but elongate and 

 pointed behind, the central one is divided by a median line which is connected 

 to the sides by oblique lines; there are a few fine hairs on the anterior margin 

 of the abdomen; sides and venter granulate, legs quite long, smooth and with 

 a few simple white hairs. » 



As a matter of fact this diagnosis contains two statements which are 

 distinctly opposed to those made by Say. The latter describes the legs as 

 rather short and minutely granulate, whereas Banks tells us that his species 

 has quite long and smooth legs! And Banks gives later a drawing of his 

 species (191 5, fig. 203, p. lOi), which amply confirms his statement that the 

 legs are long; indeed they are quite exceptionally long for a Neoliodes. 



In 1909 EwiNG (p. 415, figs. 23 — 26 pi. 16) described a species which 

 he called Neoliodes concentricus Say(?) on specimens which according to him 

 do not agree with Banks' figure of that species. In respect of the length of 

 the legs it certainly agrees better with Say's description than Banks' does. 

 EwiNG writes: »If it should prove in the future to be new, I would suggest 

 that it be named after Mr. Hood, who first found the species in the middle 

 part of the continent.* As a matter of fact Berlese has subsequently called 

 it Hoodi and referred it to Platyliodes. 



And this imperfectly described species, which most likely is composed by 

 two species, is made the type of a new genus by Jacot, the same author who 

 in Science (1930, p. 273) writes: >Coldly considered there is perhaps no more 

 illogical procedure in our scientific nomenclature than this author notation. 

 For usually on turning to the author's work, instead of finding a 

 detailed description, a detailed set of figures and comparative 

 data, one fin.ds a few lines in Latin which might fit one of many 

 species, or a fairly long description which dodges the differential 

 characters.** 



It is not my intention to put any blame on the shoulders of Banks 

 for having failed in 1895 to realize that there may be many species on which 

 Say's diagnosis of A^. concentricus fits. Because at that time nobody could 

 guess, how extremely rich in species the Oribatei were. In 25 years genera 

 which previously embraced only one or two species have come to be raised 

 to families containing several genera and 40 — 50 species, as is evidenced f. i. 

 by the genus Galmnna. 



* Widened by me. 



