l60 DR. K. W. VERHOEFF ON BRACHYCHAETEUMA, 



only had at my disposal a single and not very well preserved 

 male example. When I subsequently, in 1897, undertook for 

 the first time a thorough re-investigation of the genera of the 

 Ascospermophora, in the fifth paper of my " Beitrage zur 

 Kenntniss palaarct. Myriap." 1 , I instituted for this " Atracto- 

 soma" latzeli the genus Polymicrodon. I had before me, how- 

 ever, some further species from the Balkan Peninsula, which I 

 separated from Polymicrodon s. str. as a second sub-genus 

 Dyocerasoma. From Mr. Bagnall I have received a series of 

 Polymicrodon from various localities in the North of England, 

 and among them are two adult males which enable me to 

 complete our knowledge of this genus in several particulars. 

 I was able especially to convince myself that Polymicrodon 

 is at least as closely related to Macheiriophoron as to 

 Dyocerasoma, and that the latter must be completely separated 

 from Polymicrodon as an independent genus. 



I have come to the conclusion, further, that my first account 

 of latzeli, written in 1891, is incorrect in certain points, unless 

 we are dealing with a second English species of Polymicrodon, 

 which I consider unlikely, because the specimens from the 

 North of England, though showing among themselves a few 

 slight and unimportant differences, agree in the main with the 

 typical latzeli from France. 



In 1895, m n0 - 47^ °f tne "Zoolog. Anzeiger," I described 

 in my " Aphorismen," etc., from Boran-sur-Oise a latzeli 

 gallicum, and in 1896 I published figures illustrating it in the 

 fourth paper of my "Beitrage," 2 plate 14, figures 63 and 64. 

 Figure 64, showing the anterior gonopods, agrees so com- 

 pletely with those of the specimens from the North of England 

 that I am led to the conclusion that my figures 4 and 5 in the 

 Berlin, entom. Zeitschr., 1891, are diagrammatic, or that 

 incorrectness has been introduced through maceration and 

 distortion of the specimen. The particular differences, there- 

 fore, on the strength of which I separated the sub-species 

 gallicum I no longer consider valid. If it should prove, how- 



l ' Berlin. Archiv f. Naturgesch., 1897, Bd. I, H. 2, pp. 129-138. 

 2 Archiv fur Naturgesch., 1896, Bd. I, H. 3. 



