. The Cambridge natural history. Zoology. 308 LEPIDOPTERA CHAP. comparatively broad piece, visible on the front edge of the clypeus; its lateral part usually forms a prominence which has often been mistaken for a mandible; Kellogg has applied the term " pilifer " to this part. In the middle of the labrum a small angular or tongue-like projection is seen just over the middle of the base of the proboscis; this little piece is considered by several authorities to be an epipharynx. Mandibles.—Savigny, Westwood, and others considered the parts of the labrum recently designated pilifers by
. The Cambridge natural history. Zoology. 308 LEPIDOPTERA CHAP. comparatively broad piece, visible on the front edge of the clypeus; its lateral part usually forms a prominence which has often been mistaken for a mandible; Kellogg has applied the term " pilifer " to this part. In the middle of the labrum a small angular or tongue-like projection is seen just over the middle of the base of the proboscis; this little piece is considered by several authorities to be an epipharynx. Mandibles.—Savigny, Westwood, and others considered the parts of the labrum recently designated pilifers by Kellogg to be the rudimentary mandibles, but Walter has shown that this. Fia. 159.—Mouth of Lepidoptera. Tiger-moth, Arctia caja. A, Seen from front; B, from front and below, a, Clypeus ; 6, labrum ; c, epipharynx ; d, mandibular area ; d', prominence beneath mandibular area ; e, one side of haustellnm or pro- ; /, maxillary palp ; g, labial'palp. is not the case.^ The mandibles are usually indistinguish- able, though they, or some prominence possibly connected with them," may frequently be detected in the neighbourhood of the pilifers; they are, according to Walter, largest and most perfectly developed in Uriocephala, a genus that was not dis- tinguished by him from Micro2:)teryx and was therefore termed " niedere Micropteryginen," lower Micropteryges. The opinion entertained by Walter that Micropteryx proper (his " hohere Micropteryginen ") also possesses rudimentary mandibles is considered by Dr. Chapman, no doubt with reason, to be erroneous.^ The mandibles, however, in the vast majority of I^epidoptera can scarcely be said to exist at all in the imago; there being only an obtuse projection — without trace of ^ Jena. Zeitschr. Naturw. xviii. 1885, p. 751. " The writer is not quite convinced that the supposed mandibles of these Macro- lepidoptera are really entitled to be considered as such. 3 Tr. ent. Soc. London, 1893, p. 2
Size: 2579px × 969px
Photo credit: © The Book Worm / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1890, booksubjectzoology, bookyear1895
