COMPARATIVE COCOONING INDUSTRIES. 175 



Next to Orb weavers, the Lineweavers exhibit the greatest variety of 

 form. A round or ovoid cocoon is the prevalent form, but the pyri- 

 form is well represented in this tribe. Among Tubeweavers the almost 

 universal form of cocoon is the piano convex or hemispherical. This re- 

 sults from the quite general habit of attaching the egg sac to the surface 

 of some object. In some cases, however, Tubeweavers suspend within their 

 nets a double convex cocoon ; and, again, hang to the foliage or other 

 surfaces a pyriform cocoon, as in the case of the European Agroeca brunnea. 

 Among Tunnelweavers there is apparently but one form, as is indicated 

 by the cocoonery of the few species known. This cocoon is a round ball 

 and is in every respect like, or at least closely resembles, that of Citigrades. 



The Citigrades also have apparently one form, a globular silken case 

 within which the eggs are enclosed with little or no padding. In numer- 

 ous species of Lycosa, Dolomedes, Cteiius, etc., this form prevails. Among 

 Saltigrades, also, there is apparently but one form, a hemispherical or piano 

 convex cocoon, attached to some surface, the case being enclosed within a 

 soft, flossy, or thick netted covering of spinningwork. Among Laterigrades 

 there is greater diversity than among the last three mentioned Tribes. But, 

 for the most part, the cocoons consist of stiff hemispherical cases attached 

 to surfaces of rocks and trees; occasionally, however, as in the case of 

 Philodromus and some species of Thomisus, the cocoon is a double con- 

 vex covering hung between leaves or twigs. 



It is thus observed that the greatest variety and complexity of cocoons, 

 as to form and structure, are to be found among the Sedentary tribes. The 

 very greatest is in the Orbweavers., where the variety of form is 

 & I l f< y remarkable. Next in order are Lineweavers, although it is pos- 

 plexity s ^ e that, if a wider study of this tribe were made, they might 

 be found to approach more nearly the Orbweavers in this re- 

 spect than we are justified at present in asserting. The Tubeweavers 

 follow in order. The Territelariae are classed ordinarily with Sedentary 

 spiders, and many of the species fully justify this classification, since, like 

 Atypus, they persistently dwell within their tubes. But they have also 

 many of the characteristics of the Wanderers, and therefore we find their 

 cocoons approaching those of Citigrades in simplicity of form. 



In the comparative chart printed upon the opposite page I have tried to show at one 

 view the typical forms of cocoons known to be made by representative genera of the va- 

 rious tribes. The following is the explanation of the chart : COCOONING FORMS OF ORBWEAV- 

 ERS: Figs. 205, 206, Epeira; 207, 208, Argiope; 209, 210, Cyrtarachne; 211, Epeira labyrinthea; 

 212, Epeira bifurca ; 213, Tetragnatha ; 214, Uloborus ; 215, Cyclosa caudata. LINEWEAVERS : 

 216, Argyrodes trigonum ; 217, Theridium frondeum ; 218, Steatoda and Theridium ; 219, 

 Theridium ; 220, 221, Theridium ; 222, Pholcus. TUBEWEAVERS : 223, 224, Agalena, Drassids ; 

 225, Segestria ; 226, Micaria limicunse ; 227, Tegenaria. TUNNELWEAVERS : 228, M ygalidae, Eury- 

 pelma; 229, Atypus; 230, Nemesia. LATERIGRADES: 231, Thomisus, Xysticus, and many 

 genera; 232, Heterapoda and others. SALTIGRADES: 233, Attus, Phidippus, and all genera. 

 CITIGRADES: 234, Lycosa, Dolomedes, and all known genera. 



