DAPHNIADiE. 
67 
gives all Muller’s species, merely quoting his descriptions 
and copying his figures. 
Fabricius, in his £ Entomologia Systematica/ 1793, 
changes Muller’s names in one or two instances, but does 
not extend the number of species ; but Schrank, in the 
‘ Naturforscher’ for that year, describes a new one. 
Donovan, in his ‘ Natural History of British Insects,’ 
1802, gives an indifferent figure of a species taken when 
in its young state, and which appears to be the Daphnia 
vetula. He calls it Monoculus conchaceus, and makes a 
few remarks upon its habits and manners, giving a 
frightful picture of its ferocity and cowardice ! “ By nu- 
merous filaments which it darts forth,” he says, “ it 
causes such a motion in the water as to attract unresist- 
ingly the insects floating into its mouth. Thus it 
exists,” he concludes, “ a life of rapine and destruction, 
enjoyed at the expense of the lives of thousands ; and as 
the objects of its ravenous disposition are defenceless, so 
are they the sport of their conqueror ; the few moments 
of intermission its craving appetite grants them, is occu- 
pied equally in the spoil, first pressing them to death, and 
then tossing them undevoured into the fluid. But should 
a more powerful insect oppose him, he immediately con- 
tracts his parts, and nothing more than the external 
covering is open to his antagonist’s violence, and he will 
sooner die ignobly than offer the least opposition.” 
Latreille, in his ‘ Hist. Nat. gen. et part, des Crustaces 
et Insectes/ 1802, enumerates all Muller’s species, re- 
taining his names ; and they are given in the same manner 
by Bose, in his ‘ Hist. Nat. des Crust, edit, de Buffon, 
par Deterville/ 1802, both authors giving a number of 
general details with regard to the family. 
Ramdohr, in 1805, published a detailed account of 
the anatomy of two species, the sima {vetula) and longi - 
spina of Muller, in his ‘Beyt. zur Naturg. einig. deuts. 
Monoculus-arten.’ Previous to his time, Schceffer, De 
Geer, and Muller, were the only authors who had 
attempted any particular anatomical details, and this 
