—— Servetur ad imumQualis ab incepto processerit et sibi constet,
—— Servetur ad imumQualis ab incepto processerit et sibi constet,
I shall regard asInsectsall thoseAnnulosathat respire by tracheæ[36]and have no circulation, considering theTrachean Arachnidaand theMyriapodafor the present as sub-classes, the one bordering upon theArachnida, and the other upon theCrustacea. Some of these I am ready to own seem separated by an interval sufficiently wide from theHexapods, which may be regarded as more peculiarly entitled to the denomination ofInsects. The most striking differences will be found in the coalition of the head with the trunk in some (Phalangidæ), and the disappearance of the annulose form of the body in others (AcarusL.), so that the legs only are jointed[37]. Yet anapproach to such structure may be traced in some Hexapods; for instance, the coalition of the head and trunk inMelophagus, Latr., and that of the trunk and abdomen inSminthurus, Latr.[38]TheMyriapodaexhibit other remarkable differences; though their head and trunk are distinct, the former antenniferous, and their body annulose, the abdomen as well as the trunk is furnished with legs, sometimes amounting to hundreds; but even to this a tendency has been observed in some Hexapods[39]. If you examine a specimen ofMachilis polypoda, an insect related to the common sugar-louse (Lepisma saccharina), you will find that the abdomen is furnished with a double series of elastic appendages, which, being instruments of motion, may be regarded as representing legs. It is worthy of notice, that theMyriapodawhen first disclosed from the egg have never more thansixlegs[40], and keep acquiring additional pairs of them and additional segments to their abdomen as they change their skins: and it is equally remarkable, that many Hexapods are subject to a law in some degree the very reverse of this, having many abdominal legs in their first state, and losing them all in their last. The union of the head with the trunk in theTrachean Arachnidahas been regarded as almost an unanswerable argument, in spite of their different internal organization, for including them in the same class with thePulmonary Arachnida; but the case ofGaleodes, which, though furnished with gills, (as an eminent Russian Entomologist Dr. G. Fischer is reported to have discovered,) implying also a circulation, and evidently belonging to the last-mentioned class, has nevertheless a distinct thorax consisting of more than one piece, to whichare affixed only six legs[41], proves that even this circumstance possesses no weight when set against the organization. If it was a difference in this respect, that proved theCrustaceaclassically distinct fromInsecta—that likewise was the principal reason for the separation also of theArachnida—it seems to follow that it ought also to furnish an argument equally cogent for considering theTrachean Arachnida, as well as theMyriapoda, distinct from thePulmonary.
Another difference between the tribes in question is that of theirmetamorphosis; and this appears to have had great weight with Lamarck, inducing him to include in hisArachnida, not only theTracheansandMyriapods, but even the apterousHexapods, exceptPulex, or theAnopluraandThysanuraof modern authors. But the metamorphosis alone, unless supported by the internal organization, will I think scarcely be deemed a sufficient reason for separating from each other tribes agreeing in that respect, and placing them with others with which they disagree. The metamorphosis in some of the Hexapods (Lepidoptera) consists in the loss of legs, the acquisition of wings, a great change in the oral organs and in the general form; in others (someColeoptera), in the acquisition only of wings and a change of shape, the oral organs remaining much the same; in others again (CurculioL.), in the acquisition of six legs and wings and a change of form; in the flea, in the acquisition of six legs and a change of form only; in theOrthoptera,Hemiptera, &c. in the mere acquisition of wings; in theLibellulidæ, in the loss of the mask that covers the mouth and the acquisition of wings; in theDiptera, in theacquisition of six legs, wings, a change of the oral organs and of the form; in some of theOctopods(AcarusL.), in the acquisition of a pair of legs; and in others (PhalangiumandAraneaL.), solely in a modification of them as to their proportions; in theMyriapods, the alteration that takes place in this respect is considerable; a large number of pairs of legs is acquired and many additional abdominal segments, and the proportion which the abdomen bears to the whole insect is quite altered. In all these cases there is a change more or less, either partial or general, of the original shape or organs of the animal; and with regard to their metamorphosis, there is a greater difference between a young and adultIulusthan between a young and adultgrasshopperorbug: so that if the metamorphosis,per se, be assumed as a principal regulator of the class, the grasshopper or bug have as little claim to belong to it as theIulus.
M. Lamarck lays considerable stress upon another character—ThatInsectaengender only once in the course of their lives, andArachnidamore than once. But this, if examined, will be found to be confined chiefly to thePulmonary Arachnida, theTracheansfollowing the law ofInsectain this respect[42].
You may perhaps object that the bringing of the TracheanArachnidaand theMyriapodainto the classInsectawill render the approximation of them to a natural arrangement more difficult, since it will be impossible at the same time to connect theMyriapodswith theCrustacea, and theTracheanwith the genuineArachnida.I admit the validity of your objection, but by no arrangement of insects in a simple series can we attain this object: the difficulty, however, may perhaps be obviated in this way. The distribution of organized matter, to adopt Mr. Wm. MacLeay's metaphor[43], begins in a dichotomy, constituting the animal and vegetable branches of the great tree of nature, and from these two great branches, by means of infinite ramifications, the whole system is formed, and, what is remarkable, these branches unite again so as to represent a series returning into itself, a discovery due to the patient investigation and acumen of our learned friend just mentioned. Now, in considering theApteraorder, we find at first setting out from the Hexapods, a dichotomy, where theAnopluraLeach branch off on the one side, and theThysanuraLatr. on the other—the former, by means of thePediculidæ, taking their food by suction, particularlyPhthirusLeach, or the Morpion (in which the segments of the trunk and abdomen become indistinct[44]) approach theOctopodsby the hexapodAcariL.—the latter byMachilis polypodatending towards theMyriapods. In the Octopod branch a further dichotomy takes place, from which you proceed on one side to theAraneidæin theArachnida, byPhalangium, &c.; and in the other byChelifer, &c. toScorpio. Again, theMyriapodbranch also divides, going by theIulidæto one branch of theIsopod Crustacea, and by theScolopendridæto another.
But there is another view of this subject before alluded to, which may be repeated here, and which seems toprove that the types of form in one natural group or class are reproduced in another; this appears to result from the following parallel series:
No type representing theMyriapodahas yet been discovered in theArachnidaclass; but I have little doubt of its existence. You will observe that the analogies between the larvæ of thewingedorders and theApterawere first noticed by Mr. W. MacLeay[45]. It is probable that these parallel series of representatives of each other might be increased, as well as the numbers in the respective columns.
What I have said will, I trust, sufficiently justify me for making at present no more material alterations in the classification I long since proposed to you[46]; I shall, therefore, now proceed to define the objects I consider asInsecta; but I shall first observe—that as Latreille considers thebranchiopod CrustaceaorEntomostracaof Müller as entitled to the denomination ofCrustaceo-Arachnida[47]; so hisTrachean Arachnidamight be calledArachnida-Insecta, and hisMyriapoda,Crustaceo-Insecta.
Sub-kingdom—Annulosa[48].
Class—Insecta.
First Definition—From theirexternalOrganization.
Second Definition—From theirinternalOrganization.
In defining theArachnidaI shall only mention those particulars in which they differ fromInsectæin their external anatomy.
Class—Arachnida.
The external characters in this class are the same almost in every respect as those which distinguish thePhalangidæ, the whole difference consisting almost in the systems of circulation, respiration, and digestion. Perhaps some future anatomist may discover in the tribe just mentioned, that there is a nearer agreement between them and theArachnidain these systems than is at present suspected, which would prove them trueArachnida. I am inclined to think thatPhrynusandGonyleptes, &c. breathe by branchial spiracles; but having no opportunityof examining living specimens, I dare not speak with any confidence on the subject.
Having thus given you a view of the most important diagnostics by which what we have all along calledInsectsmay scientifically be distinguished from other invertebrate animals, it may not be without use, if, under this head, I take a morepopularand familiar view of the subject, and say something upon those distinctions which may attract the attention of the more common observer.
The notion of diminutive size, particularly as compared with vertebrate animals, seems more frequently attached to the idea of an insect than any other; and this notion is generally correct, for one insect that is bigger than the least of the above animals, thousands and thousands are vastly smaller: but there exist some that are considerably larger, whether we take length or bulk into consideration, and this in almost every order. To prove this most effectually, and that you may have a synoptical view of the comparative size of the larger insects of the different orders and tribes, I now lay before you a table of the dimensions of such of the largest as I have had an opportunity of measuring, including particularly those giants that are natives of the British isles.
From this table you see that several insects included in it exceed some of the smallestVertebratain bulk. In theMammalia, theSorex Araneus, called by the common people here the Ranny, is not more than two inches long excluding the tail; and theMus messorius, or harvest-mouse, peculiar to the southern counties of England, is still more diminutive: so that to these little animals, the largerDynastidæ,Goliathi, andPrioni, &c., appear giants, and may compete with the mole in size. Even some of the beetles of our own country, as the greatHydrophilus, the stag-beetle, &c., are more bulky than the two first-named quadrupeds. Amongst the birds, manyPicæ,Passeres, &c., yield to several insects in dimensions, and their wings when expanded do not extend so far as those of not a fewLepidoptera. The great owl-moth of Brazil (Erebus Strix) in this respect is a larger fowl than the quail. Those beautiful little creatures, the humming-birds (TrochilusL.), the peculiar ornament and life of tropical gardens, which emulate the most splendid butterflies in the brilliancy of their plumage, are smaller than a considerable number of insects in almost every order, and even than some of those that are natives of Britain. Various reptiles also are much inferior in size to many of the insects of the above table. The smallest lizard of this country would be outweighed by the great British beetles lately mentioned, and the mole-cricket (Gryllotalpa vulgaris); and some of the serpent tribe are smaller than the largerScolopendræandIuli. Amongst thefishesalso, though some are so enormous in bulk, others in this respect yield the palm to several insects. Theminnowand thesticklebackthat frequent our own pools and streams are considerably inferior in size to some of our water beetles.
In looking over the table, and comparing the different species that compose it with each other, you will perceive that the largest insects of the two sections ofHemiptera, of theLepidopteraas to theirbodymerely, of theHymenopteraandDiptera, in general size fall considerably short of those of the other orders; and that certain individuals of theOrthopteraandApterabear away the palm in this respect from all the rest. In theColeopterathe giants, with the exception of theGoliathi, are chiefly to be found amongst the timber devourers in theLamellicornandCapricorntribes. Of orthopterous insects thePhasmidæpresent the most striking examples ofmagnitude; and in theNeuroptera, theAgrionidæof greatlength.
It is worthy of remark here, that although the tropical species of a genus usually exceed those of colder climates in size, theGryllotalpaof Brazil is very considerably smaller than that of Europe: whether this is the case with the rest of the cricket tribe I have not had an opportunity of ascertaining. TheLepidoptera, though often remarkable for the vast expansion of their "sail-broad vans," if you consider only their bodies, never attain to gigantic bulk. Even the hawk-moths (SphinxL.), though usually very robust, make no approach to the size of the great beetles, or the length of some of the spectres (Phasma) and dragon-flies (Agrionidæ). With regard to the superficial contents of their wings, a considerable difference obtains in different species where they expand to the same length—for thesecondarywings are sometimes smaller than theprimary, and sometimes they equal them in size. In some instances, also, the latter although long are narrow, and in others they are nearly as wide as long: regard, therefore, should be had to their expansionboth ways. In theHymenopteraandDiptera, the principal giants are to be found in the predaceous or blood-sucking tribes, asScolia, theSphecidæ,Pompilidæ,Vespidæ, &c., belonging to the former order; and theAsilidæandTabanidæto the latter. The true and false humble bees (BombusandXylocopa) and the fly tribe (Muscidæ), though they sometimes attain to considerable size, scarcely afford an exception to this observation. Amongst theApteranone of theHexapodsstrike us by their magnitude, and few of theOctopods, though the legs of some of thePhalangidæinclose a vast area. That in the table would with them describe a circle of six inches diameter, though its body is little more than a quarter of an inch in length. TheMyriapodsexceed most insects in the vast elongation of their body, which with their motion gives them no slight resemblance to the serpents. In the classArachnida, the bird-spiders (Mygale) are amongst the principal giants, nor do theScorpionsfall far short of them—both of them when alive often alarming the beholder as much by their size as by their aspect.
But as I have before observed, generally speaking, one of the most remarkable characters of the insect world, is the little space they occupy; for though they touch the vertebrate animals and even quadrupeds by their giants, yet more commonly in this feature they go the contrary way, and by their smallest species reach the confines of those microscopic tribes that are at the bottom of the scale of animal life. I possess an undescribed beetle, allied toSilpha minutissimaE. B.[50]which, though furnishedwith elytra, wings, antennæ, legs, and every other organ usually found in the order it belongs to, is absolutely not bigger than the full stop that closes this period. In several other coleopterous genera there are also very minute species, as inCryptophagus,Anisotoma,Agathidium, &c. I know noorthopterousinsect that can be called extremely minute, except that remarkable one found on the Continent in the nests of ants, theBlatta Acervorumof Panzer[51], but now called, I believe,Myrmecophilus: nor indeed any in theHemiptera,Neuroptera, andDiptera, that approach the extreme limits of visibility: but in theLepidoptera, the pygmyTinea occultellais almost invisible except in flight, being scarcely thicker than a horse's hair, and proportionably short; indeed, many others of those lovely Lilliputians, the subcutaneousTineæ, decorated with bands of gold and silver, and studded with gems and pearls, that in larger species would dazzle the beholder's eye, are in size not much more conspicuous. In theHymenopteraorder,Ichneumon Punctumof Dr. Shaw, which forms so striking a contrast to his giantPhasma dilatatum, being placed together in the same plate; and another that I possess, under the trivial name ofAtomos, would elude the searching eye of the entomologist unless when moving upon glass. Linné named the tribe of parasites to which these belong,Minuti, on account of their generally diminutive size. But these little minims, under the superintendence of Providence, are amongst the greatest benefactors of thehuman race, since they keep within due bounds the various destroyers of our produce.
The number of minute species of insects seems greatly to exceed that of large ones, at least in Europe, of which it may be asserted probably with truth, that two-thirds are under a quarter of an inch in length, and one-third not exceeding much a duodecimal of it. It might hold good perhaps inColeoptera,Hymenoptera,Diptera, andAptera: but inOrthoptera,Hemiptera,Neuroptera, and especiallyLepidoptera, a large proportion would be found to exceed three lines in length. Neither can it be affirmed of extra-European species, of those at least preserved in cabinets, amongst which it is rare to find an insect less than the fourth of an inch long. This, however, must probably be attributed to the inattention of collectors, who neglect the more minute species.
Though size forms a pretty accurate distinction between insects and the great bulk ofvertebrateanimals, it affords less assistance in separating them from theinvertebrateclasses, which are of every size, from the monstrous bulk of someCephalopoda(cuttle-fish) andMollusca(shell-fish, &c.) to the invisible infusory animalcule: but external characters, abundantly sufficient for this purpose, may be drawn from the general covering, substance, form, parts, and organs of the body. As I shall enter into pretty full details upon this subject when I come to treat of the external anatomy of insects, I shall here, therefore, only give such a slight and general sketch of the distinctions just mentioned, as will answer the end I have in view. I must here repeat what I have before observed, and what it is necessary that you should always bear in mind, namely,that at the limits of classes and of every other natural group, the characters begin to change, those peculiar to the one group beginning gradually to disappear, and those of the other to show themselves; so that it is impossible almost to draw up a set of characters so precise as exactly in every respect to suit all the members of any natural group.
Whichever way we turn our eyes on the objects of creation, above—below—athwart,analogiesmeet us in every direction, and it appears clear, that the Book of Nature is a Book of Symbols, in which one thing represents another in endless alternation. And not only does one animal, &c. symbolize another, but even between the parts and organs of one set of animals there is often ananalogyas to theirsituationanduse, when there is little or noaffinityas to theirstructure—or again, the analogy is in theirsituation, without affinity in either structure or use. Thus certain parts in one tribe represent other certain parts of another tribe, though as to their structure there is often a striking disagreement. This is particularly observable between the vertebrate and invertebrate animals. I shall therefore, in my remarks on the general and particular structure of insects, contrast it in its most important points with that of the first-mentioned tribe.
The first thing that strikes us when we look at an insect is its outsidecovering, or the case that incloses its muscles and internal organs. If we examine it attentively, we find that it is not like the skin of quadrupeds and otherVertebrata, covering the whole external surface of the body; but that in the large majority it consists of several pieces or joints, in this respect resembling theskeleton of the animals just named; and that even in those in which the body appears to have no such segments, as in many of the Mites (AcarusL.), they are to be found in thelimbs. This last circumstance, to have externally jointed legs, is the peculiar and most general distinction by which theInsectaof Linné, including theCrustacea, may always be known from the other invertebrate animals[52].
If we proceed further to examine thesubstanceof this crust or covering, though varying in hardness, we shall find it in most cases, if we exclude from our consideration the shells of theMollusca, &c., better calculated to resist pressure than that of the majority of animals that have no spine. In all the invertebrate tribes, indeed, the muscles, there being no internal skeleton, are attached to this skin or its processes, which of course is firmer than the internal substance; but in insects it is very often rigid and horny, and partially difficult to perforate, seldom exhibiting that softness and flexibility which is found in the cuticle of birds and most quadrupeds. From this conformation it has been sometimes said, that insects carry theirboneson theoutsideof their body, or have anexternalskeleton. This idea, though not correct in all respects, is strictly so in this—that it affords a general point of support to the muscles, and the whole structure is erected upon it, or rather I should say within it. The difference here betweenInsectsand theVertebrataseems very wide; but some of the latter make an approach towards it. I allude to the Chelonian Reptiles (TestudoL.),in which the vertebral column becomes external or merges in the upper shell. Thecyclostomousfishes also are not very wide of insects as to their integument. But on this subject I shall be more full hereafter.
Theformsof insects are so infinitely diversified that they almost distance our powers of conception: in this respect they seem to exceed the fishes and other inhabitants of the ocean, so that endless diversity may be regarded as one of their distinctions. But on all their variations of form the Creator has set his seal of symmetry; so that, if we meet with an animal in the lower orders in which the parts are not symmetrical, we may conclude in general that it is no insect.
But it is by theirpartsandorgansthat insects may be most readily distinguished. In thevertebrateanimals, the body is usually considered as divided intohead,trunk, andlimbs, theabdomenforming no part of the skeleton; but in theinsecttribes, besides the organs of sense and motion, the body consists ofthreeprincipal parts—Head,Trunk, andAbdomen—thefirst, as was before observed, bearing the principal organs ofsenseandmanducation; thesecondmost commonly those ofmotion; and the third those ofgeneration—the organs of respiration being usually common to both trunk and abdomen. These three primary parts,—though in some insects the head is not separated from the trunk by any suture, as for instance in theArachnida; and in others, head, trunk, and abdomen form onlyonepiece, as in some mites,—still exist in all, and in the great majority they are separated by incisures more or less deeply marked: this is particularly visible in theHymenopteraandDiptera, which, in this respect, are formed upon a common model;and in the rest, with the above exceptions, it may be distinctly traced.
Theheadof insects is clearly analogous to that of vertebrate animals, except in one respect, that they do not breathe by it. It is the seat probably of the same senses asseeing,hearing,smelling,tasting—and more peculiarly perhaps of that oftouch. Theeyesof insects, though allowed on all hands to be organs ofsight, are differently circumstanced in many particulars from those of the animals last mentioned; they are fixed, have neither iris nor pupil, are often compound, and are without eyelids to cover them during sleep or repose; there are usually two compound ones composed of hexagonal facets, but in some instances there are four; and from one to three simple in particular orders. Theantennæof insects in some respects correspond with theearsof the animals we are comparing with them; but whether they convey the vibrations of sound has not been ascertained: that they receive pulses of some kind from the atmosphere I shall prove to you hereafter—so that if insects do nothearwith them in one sense, they may, by communicating information, and byaëroscopy, to use Lehman's term, not directly in his sense[53], supply the place of ears, which would render them properly analogous to those organs. That in numbers these remarkable organs aretactorsis generally agreed, but this is not theiruniversaluse. That insectssmellhas been often proved; but the organ of this sense has not been ascertained. What has improperly been called theclypeus, or the part terminating the face above the upper lip (labrum), is in the situation of thenoseof theVertebrata,and therefore so far analogous to it, and in some cases even in form: I therefore call it thenose. Whether this part represents the nose by being furnished with what answer the purpose ofnostrils, residing somewhere at or above the suture that joins it to the upper lip, I cannot positively affirm; but from the observations of M. P. Huber, with regard to the hive-bee, it appears that at least these insects have the organ of the sense in question somewhere in the vicinity of the mouth, and above the tongue[54]: analogy, therefore, would lead us to look for its site somewhere between the apex of the nose and the upper lip; and in some other cases, which I shall hereafter advert to, there is further reason for thinking that it actually resides at the apex of the nose. The organ oftastein insects, though some have advanced theirpalpito that honour, is doubtless in some part within the mouth analogous in a degree to the tongue and palate of the higher animals. The organs of manducation, in what may be deemed the most perfect description of mouth, consist of anupper lipclosing the mouth above, a pair ofmandiblesmoving horizontally that close its upper sides, and alower lipwith a pair ofmaxillæattached to it, which close the mouth below and on the under sides, both labium and maxillæ being furnished with jointed moveable organs peculiar to annulose pedate animals, called palpi. In some tribes these organs assume a different form, that they may serve for suction; but though in many cases some receive an increment atthe expense of others, and a variation in form takes place, none, as M. Savigny has elaborately proved, are totally obliterated or without some representative[55]. The organs now described, except the upper lip, are formed after a quite different type from those ofVertebrata, with which they agree only in their oral situation and use.
The second portion of the body is theTrunk, which is interposed between the head and abdomen, and in most insects consists of three principal segments, subdivided into several pieces, which I shall afterwards explain to you. I shall only observe, that some slight analogy may perhaps be traced between these pieces and the vertebræ and ribs of vertebrate animals, particularly the Chelonian reptiles. This is most observable inGryllusL. andLibellulaL., in which the lateral pieces of the trunk are parallel to each other[56]. In theDipteraand many of theApteramost of these pieces are not separated by sutures. Each of the segments into which the trunk is resolvable bears a pair of jointedlegs, the first pair pointing to thehead, and the two last to theanus. These legs in their composition bear a considerable analogy to those of quadrupeds, &c., consisting ofhip,thigh,leg, andfoot; but the last of these, the foot orTarsus, is almost universally monodactyle, unless we regard theCalcariathat arm the end of the tibia, as representing fingers or toes, an idea which their use seems to justify.Acheta monstrosaandTridactylus paradoxus, however[57], exhibit some appearance of a phalanx of these organs. They differ from them first in number, the thoracic legs beinginvariablysixin all insects, with the exception of theOctopodsor most of theTrachean Arachnida, which have usuallyeight. In theMyriapods, though there are hundreds ofabdominallegs, only six are affixed to thetrunk. Next they differ with regard to thesituationof their legs; for though the anterior pair or arms are analogous in that respect, the posterior pair are not, since inquadrupedsthese legs are placedbehindthe abdomen, but ininsects beforeit—in fact, in the former the legs may be considered as placed at each end of the body, excluding only the head and tail, but in the latter in the middle. Though they correspond with those of quadrupeds in being inpairsor opposite to each other, yet their direction with respect to the body is different, the legs of quadrupeds, &c. being nearly straight, whereas in insects they are bent or form an angle, often very obtuse at the principal articulations, which occasions them to extend far beyond the body, and when long to inclose a proportionally greater space. Thewingsare the organs of motion with which the upper side of the trunk is furnished; and these, though they are the instruments of flight, are in no other respect analogous to those of birds, which replace the anterior legs of quadrupeds, but approach nearer, both in substance and situation, to the fins of some fishes, and perhaps in some respects even to the leaves of plants. M. Latreille is of opinion, That the four wings or their representatives replace the four thoracic legs of the decapodCrustacea[58]. Upon this opinion, which shows great depth of research and practical acumen, I shall have occasion to express my sentiments when I come to treat more at large on the anatomyof the trunk and its members; at any rate they do not replace the two anterior pair of legs of the hexapodAptera. When merely used as wings, they commonly consist of a fine transparent double membrane, strengthened by various longitudinal and transverse nervures, or bones as some regard them, accompanied by air-vessels, of which more hereafter, as well as of their kind and characters. I shall only observe, that insects are known from all other winged animals, by havingfourwings, or what represent them, and this even generally in those that are supposed to have only a pair. Another peculiarity distinguishes the trunk of insects that you will in vain look for in the vertebrate animals—these are one or two pair of lateralspiraclesor breathing pores. Though the respiratory sacs, &c. of birds are almost as widely dispersed as the tracheæ and bronchiæ of insects[59], yet their respiration is perfectly pulmonary, and nothing like these pores is to be discovered in them.
The principal peculiarity of the third part of the body, theabdomen, is its situation behind the posterior pair of thoracic legs, and its rank as forming a distinct portion of what represents the skeleton. In most insects it is so closely affixed to the posterior part of the trunk as to appear like a continuation of it, but in the majority of theHymenopteraandDiptera, and in theAraneidan Arachnida, or spiders, it is separated by a deep incisure; and in the first-mentioned tribe is mostly suspended to the trunk by a footstalk, sometimes of wonderful length and tenuity. In theMammaliathemalegenital organs are partly external; but in insects as well as in many of the vertebrate animals, except when employed, they areretracted within the body. This part is the principal seat of the respiratory pores or spiracles, many having eight in each side, while others have only one.
Such are the principal external characters which distinguishInsectaandArachnida, or what we have heretofore regarded as insects, to which here may be added another connected with their internal organization. The union of the sexes takes place in the same manner as amongst larger animals; and the females with very few exceptions, more apparent than real, are oviparous. They are, however, distinguished by this remarkable peculiarity already alluded to, that, except in the case of theArachnida, one impregnation fertilizes all the eggs they are destined to produce. In most cases, after these are laid, the females die immediately, and the males after they have performed their office, though they will sometimes unite themselves to more than one female. One other circumstance may be named here—that no genuine insect or Arachnidan has yet been found to inhabit the ocean.
Before I conclude this letter, it is necessary to apprize you, that every thing which it contains relative to the characters of insects, has reference to them only in theirlastor perfect state, not in those preparatory ones through which you are aware that the majority of them must pass. The peculiar characteristics of them in these states—in theegg, thelarva, and thepupa, will be the subjects of my next letters, which will be devoted to a more detailed view of the metamorphosis of insects than I gave you before when adverting to this subject[60].