324 
interesting form, Eurypauropus spinosus, on whicli he, with good 
reason, established a new family, Eurypauropodidæ. — The chief 
contribution, after the paper of Lubbock, to our knowledge of the 
external structure and the forms of the Pauropoda is found in 
Latzel’s classical work: Die Myriopoden der Østerr.-Ungar. Mo- 
narchie, 1880 — 84. The author spends twenty two pages (Zweite 
Halfte, 1884, p. 18—89, with Taf. II) on the order, and an ex- 
haustive extract with accompanying criticism of this thorough treat- 
ment would fill several pages, but I must confine myself to some 
notes. Latzel divides the order into two families: Pauropoda agilia. 
containing the genus Pauropus with the two species established by 
Lubbock (and a so-called variety of P. Huxleyi), and Pauropoda 
tardigrada, with two genera: Brachypauropus Latz. and Eurypau¬ 
ropus Ryder. Of the last-named genus the author describes three 
species, one of which is wrongly considered to be identical with the 
American E. spinosus Ryder. The genus Brachy pauropus is very 
interesting and it must, as already suggested by Ke ny on, be estab¬ 
lished as the type of a family equivalent to the two others. The 
descriptions of the external structure of the order and the genera 
are, on the whole, well done; the anal segment has not been exa- 
mined and the claws are not understood. He has observed very few 
of the differences between the two species of Pauropus , and a ra¬ 
ther large portion of the long description of P. Huxleyi deals with 
features which are of no value as distinctive characters between 
the species of the genus. 
The literature published since 1884 may be divided into two 
groups. The one portion is composed of two papers essentially of 
anatomical and morphological contents. P. Schmidt wrote: Beitrage 
zur Kenntniss der niederen Myriapoden (Zeitschr. f. wiss. Zool., 59. 
B., 1895, p. 436—510; mit Taf. XXVI—XXVII); I will only men- 
tion that the author has been unable to see the ocular areas and 
that he has captured the two old species of Pauropus at St. Pe- 
tersburgh and Narwa, but I am not sure that the determination is 
correct. The other paper is of F. C. Ken von: The Morphology 
