i8 9 3-J 



THE BRITISH NATURALIST. 



43 



How are Young Spiders Fed ? — In my rambles for botanical 

 specimens in the last three years, many new and curious things have 

 been thrust upon my attention in the insect world, and these I have 

 recorded for future use. One fact in particular struck my attention, 

 and I herewith submit it to the readers of Science, partly to record the 

 fact, and partly to ask if any other readers of your excellent periodical 

 have ever observed a similar fact. We have been taught by the best 

 works on spiders that the young of spiders derive their food mostly 

 from the atmosphere. The " Encylopcedia Britannica " confirms this 

 view. On the 19th day of June, 1891, I discovered in a ploughed 

 field an enormous spider of the Lycosidce species, which was 1^ inches 

 long. She presented a very curious appearance, being covered with 

 scores cf tiny spiders from one end of her body to the other. When 

 I touched her with a weed-stem, the young spiders scampered off at a 

 lively rate, only to return when left to themselves. The spinnarets 

 and abdomen of the mother spider were greatly distended Suddenly 

 there was a copious flow of white liquid which the young greedily 

 devoured. Examining the fluid under my microscope, I was fully 

 convinced that this was veritible milk, and that this spider, at least, 

 nursed its young, instead of bringing them up on atmospheric 

 moisture. I should be glad to know if any reader of Science has ever 

 observed a similer occurrence. — -John Sanborn, Naples, N.Y. 



[The above is copied from " Science " (New York) 16th December, 1892, in hope 

 that some of our British observers of Spider life may throw some light on the 

 matter. — Ed. B.N.] 



Epeira quadrata. — Can you give me an idea of the nest (structure, 

 character of material, &c), of Epeira quadrata ? — C. E. Stott, Bolton. 



The Synonymy of Polyommatus Phl.eas. — -In the " British 

 Naturalist," Vol. II., p. 242, you state, on the authority of Mr. Dale, 

 that " Phlceas was first named by Linnaeus in the ' Fauna Suecicae,' 

 1746." This rather startled me, as I had satisfied myself only a 

 fortnight ago that the 1746 edition did not contain trivial names. To 

 make sure, I have referred to the volume again, and find I was right. 

 That edition uses what (although a hibernianism) I will call the pre- 

 Linnaean method of indicating insects, viz., the generic name with a 

 'diagnosis. Linnaeus first used trivial names in the 10th ed. of " Syst. 

 Nat," then in the 1761 Ed. of " Fauna Suecicae." I imagine it is in 

 this latter work that Phlceas first received its appellation. Staudinger 

 gives Fn. Su., 285, as its origin. This must be the 1761 Ed., as p. 

 285 of the 1746 Ed. does not deal with Lepidoptera at all.— F. J. 

 Buckell, 32, Canonbury Square, London, N. 



Dr. Buckell is right about the " Fauna Suecicae." Linnaeus appar- 

 ently, in Ed. X. of the " Syst. Nat.," confounded two species under 

 Virgaurea. However, in Ed. XII., both Phltoas and Virgaurea appear, 



