18 SUPPOSED CASES OF 



which may even have been of a different species (for the observer 

 does not appear to have carefully examined the young caterpillars, 

 which indeed are not easily known in their youth), had laid 

 her eggs in one of the corners of the box, which the possessor 

 had forgotten, or never observed. From these the young cater- 

 pillars probably made their appearance, just at the time when 

 the Phal. pacta* laid her unfertilized eggs; from want of 

 nourishment they devoured the still fresh and soft eggs, and 

 finally fell upon the pupa, or rather the pupa-case. This or some 

 other mistake, of which many may be imagined, may have 

 happened ; but this much is certain, that the history even in 

 the way in which it is related and explained, deserves no credit, 

 and that the conclusions built upon it must be proportionably 

 incorrect." 



I could not refrain from reproducing the objections which 

 Scheven urged against the observations published by Bernoulli, 

 literally, as far as space w T ould permit, as they have hitherto re- 

 mained quite unnoticed ; for as often as it was asserted that 

 certain insects could lay eggs capable of development without 

 previous impregnation, reference was always made, even in the 

 most recent timesf, to the observations published by Bernoulli, 

 which however had long before been invalidated as inadmissible 

 by Scheven. 



Just as little value attaches to the other statements which 

 are supposed to serve as vouchers for the existence of a Lucina 

 sine concubitu, as, being in the form of very short notices, they 

 also offer not the slightest security as to what precautions, if any, 

 were taken to avoid the mistakes which so easily slip into such 

 observations. For this reason we can attach no weight to the 

 case which Suckow has communicated without any further 



* For what reason Scheven indicates the moth upon which Bernoulli made 

 his supposed observation upon spontaneous reproduction as Phal. pacta, I do 

 not know, for Bernoulli compares his moth with the Noctua figured by Rosel 

 in his Insectenbelustigungen, iv. Sammlung, No. 15, which is nothing but Epi- 

 sema cceruleocephala. 



t With regard to this compare G. R. Treviranus (Biologie, Band hi. 1805, 

 p. 265) ; Burmeister (Handbuch der Entomologie, Bandi. 1832, p. 33/); Lacor- 

 daire (Introduction a V etude de V Entomologie, torn. ii. 1838, p. 383) ; and 

 V. Carus (Zur n'dheren Kenntniss des Generationswechsels, 1849, p. 21). 



