196 
PROCEEDINGS OE SOCIETIES. 
Habits : runs with great agility; does not roll. 
Locality: Talland Cove, Cornwall, 1858. 
I have named it after Jonathan Couch, M. D., E. L. S., the well- 
known illustrator of Cornish zoology. 
The only species I can at all find described which comes near my 
Philoscia Couchii are two figured in Dana’s great work as Onisci: one, 
0. nigrescensj from Hew Zealand; the other, 0. puhescens, from South 
America. Dana evidently was unacquainted with the genus (as I have 
before shown) as distinct from Oniscus. 
In the new species the frontal border of carapace is carried well 
forward, and passes down to the antennae, the superior antennal ring 
having its margin produced into a minute lobe beneath the orbit. This 
species fully proves the judiciousness of the separation of Philoscia from 
Oniscus. 
In the same paper I also proposed the foundation of a new genus, 
Philougria, for the reception of a small Oniscoid, which is extremely 
common, but which, undescribed in this country, was also apparently 
undescribed on the Continent; at the time I stated my suspicions that the 
genus Itea of Koch had been misdescribed; but, owing to want of 
proper figures, I did not feel justified in identifying my specimens, to 
which I gave the name of Philougria celer , with the Itea rip aria of 
Koch, for I found the genus described by Koch as having only one joint 
in the tige of the antennae, and even Zaddach, who has noted and 
corrected this error, and has given an admirably accurate description of 
two species, used such terms as these :—“ Antennae interiores magis 
etiam diminuta quam in Philoscia ex uno modo articulo const are vi- 
dentur:” a description which any one who examines the description of 
Philougria rosea of this present paper will find to be most incorrect; 
the antennae in that species projecting so far beyond the front as to be 
visible to the unassisted eye from above. 
During the past summer I was fortunate enough to meet with two 
other species of the same genus, which are identical with two out of the 
four species already described as Itea by Koch and Zaddach; and by 
help of these it appears to me that we are justified in assuming that both 
Zaddach and Koch erred in regard to the characters of the internal an¬ 
tennae. The genus Itea being, then, inaccurately described, and further¬ 
more the name having been long ago appropriated to a well-known 
genus of plants by Linnaeus, I would suggest that the generic name 
suggested by me last year should still stand, and the name Itea be al¬ 
together erased from the carcinological lists; the only species of it which 
does not come into the present genus being the Itea crassicornis of Koch, 
which is seemingly a Platyarthus of Prandt. The examination of the two 
additional species obliges me to modify some of the minor characters of 
the genus, as published in my analysis, and the abolition of the generic 
term Itea necessitates the substitution of Philougridae for Iteadae as the 
name of the family. This, as it now stands, includes Trichoniscus (. Brandt ), 
should this genus prove distinct. 
