PHYLOMYLACRIS MANTJDIOIDES. 127 



The median remains undivided in the proximal third of the wing, and then 

 forks, the inner of the resultant veins again dividing on the broken edge. The 

 areas on either side of the main stem of the median are, like those of the radius, 

 well spaced. 



The ciibitus vein is less curved basally than the median and radius, well 

 separated from the latter, and passing obliquely towards the distal end of the 

 inner margin of the wing. It gives off six inward branches, the first arising near 

 the base, and margins the anal furrow. The second branch gives off two irregular 

 twigs which do not reach the margin, and the fourth is forked. The rest are 

 undivided. 



The whole of the anal area is remarkably well developed. It stands out as a 

 tumid mass, marked off from the rest of the wing by the first branch of the 

 cubitus, and with all the anal veins in high relief. 



A broad area interposes between the first anal vein and the anal furrow, and 

 upon this run out a few small and wavy veins which die out on the membrane. 

 The first well-defined vein has a short stem dividing at once into two equal 

 branches, which continue to the margin. The inner of these two branches either 

 forks again, or has received the larger and distal portion of the next vein, the 

 basal part being joined to the third vein, and forming an enclosed area. The 

 next vein forks, and also the sixth, the remainder being closely packed together, 

 and rapidly diminishing in strength and length as they crowd down upon the 

 margin. 



The interstitial neuration consists of a well-defined meshwork which shows a 

 tendency to a longitudinal arrangement in the direction of the wing-margin. 



Affinities. The incorrect figure published by Kirkby has been a source of 

 confusion, and probably accounts for Goldenberg's reference of the species to 

 Blattidium, Scudder. At the time when he so referred it, Scudder had become 

 familiar with the distinctive characters of wings of this type, and had created a 

 new genus Neci/mylacris to receive them ('Mem. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist.,' vol. iii, 

 p. 52, 1879). We can only account therefore for his reference of the wing to 

 Etoblattina on the score of the faulty drawing, as he does not seem to have seen 

 the wing. The later drawing by Handlirsch is wrong in almost every detail, and 

 his reference of the wing to the Archimylacridre was the only one possible under 

 the circumstances. 



Scudder's genus Necymi/lacris was founded, not upon N. lacoann, as Hand- 

 lirsch assumes (a fragment only of that wing being known), but upon N. heros. 

 Handlirsch's later name of Eumorphoblatta ('Die Fossilen Insekten,' p. 195, 1906) 

 is rightly reduced by Pruvost ('Ann. Soc. Geol. Nord,' vol. xli, p. 350, 1912) to 

 the position of a synonym. 



The figures of the three new species published by Pruvost in that paper are 

 admirably reproduced, and as they show a complex of raised nervures in nearly 



