No. 400.] SEGMENTS OF THE HEXAPOD LEG. 271 
gigas, which he subsequently mentions.!_ Later, in his contri- 
bution to Cuvier’s “Le Regne Animal," he figures the pro- 
thoracic trochantin of Oryctes nasicornis. The present confused 
terminology of these segments is due to the preceding error 
of Audouin. Newport? made a somewhat similar error by 
describing the anterior margin of the coxa (coxa genuina) in 
Hydrous piceus, as the metathoracic trochantin. Among the 
recent writers on insect anatomy, Packard? confuses the tro- 
chantin with the meron; 
Miall and Denny ® hold 
that the occurrence of 
the joint applied to the 
coxa (trochantin) “is so 
partial" that it need 
scarcely be taken into 
consideration ; Sharp* 
believes with Packard 
that the posterior part 
of the coxa (meron) in 
Panorpa represents the 
trochantin ; while Com- 
stock, in a description 
of the metathorax in 
Euchromia gigantea, Fis. 4.—Periplaneta orientali nego PC c', coxal . 
agrees essentially with groove formed for reception of fem 
the preceding, although he correctly figures the trochantin of 
the prothorax and mesothorax. Lowne’ regards the piece 
1 Etude de la poitrine ou des pattes inférieures et latérales du mesothorax. 
Ann. Sci. Nat., tome i, p. 426, 1824. This is merely a continuation of Recherches 
anatomiques 
2 Todd’s elpeti of Anatomy and Physiology, p. 916, 1835-59- 
8 Systematic Position of the Orthoptera in Relation to the Orders of Insects. 
Third Report U.S. Ent. Com., 1880-82. A Text-Book of Entomology, p. 95, 1898. 
* The Structure and Life History of the Cockroach, p. 61, 1886. 
5 Camb. Nat. Hist., vol. v, p. 104, 1895 
? Manual for the Study of Insects, p. 504, 1895. It was due to Professor Com- 
stock’s suggestion of a possible error in considering the lateral margin of the meta- 
thoracic coxa of Euchromia as the actual eg aud of the mesothoracic 
trochantin, that the study leading to this paper was commenced. 
T The Anatomy, Physiology, egt ca and vimm of the Blow-Fly, 
vol. i, p. 179, 1890-92. 
