ON THE TRANSFORMATION OF INSECTS. 17 



locomotive pupa, and forms, therefore, an aberrant order of this 

 section. 

 2. Amorpha Dermata, which, on assuming the quiescent state, 

 retain the last cuticle of the previous state, which do not exhibit 

 the least trace of the site of the wings, legs, antenna?, or eyes. 

 The sections contain the great orders, for which the genera, 

 Syrphus, CEstrus, Musea, &c. serve as types. 



The insects of the last section, possessing, as they certainly 

 do, the extreme character of the Amorpha, nevertheless, as 

 has previously been stated, testify a very evident approach to 

 the neighbouring Necromorpha ; for, when the skull or cover- 

 ing of the quiescent insect is broken, a perfectly Necromorphous 

 form is disclosed; and thus, though nothing could appear 

 more different than the exterior appearance of the two, yet 

 this examination proves that the real difference exists only in 

 the circumstance that one group retains the covering of the 

 previous state longer than the other group. If we select two 

 well-known insects, the flesh-fly (Musca vomitoria), and the 

 honey-bee {Apis mellifica), we shall find little or no difficulty 

 in tracing the similarity. The grubs or maggots from which 

 these insects proceed are not dissimilar ; but the grub of the 

 fly merely ceases to feed, becomes quiescent, and hardens 

 externally, while that of the bee ceases to eat, is walled in 

 its cell by the workers, lines its cell with silk, casts its cover- 

 ing, and becomes quiescent, every limb being distinct, detached, 

 and perfect, but enveloped in a delicately soft and smooth 

 skin, and perfectly motionless. This is the true Necro- 

 morphous character. Now the fly, on the contrary, is Amor- 

 phous ; but if a few days before the perfect insect appears, the 

 hard and apparently inorganic case which covers it is gently 

 opened, we find within a form precisely resembling the 

 Necromorphous form of the bee just described : — thus it appears 

 clear that the so-called pupas of the bee and the fly are neither 

 substantially nor numerically the same state. Every ecdysis is 

 certainly a transformation ; and therefore, calling the imao-o, 

 as it certainly is, the ultimate state, then the so-called pupa of 

 the bee is the penultimate ; and the so-called pupa of the fly 

 the antepenultimate. The difference is thus explained : — 

 the fly, on assuming the perfect state, casts two skins, the bee 

 only one. 



NO. I. VOL. III. D 



