Our Common Insects: A Popular Account of the Insects of Our Fields, Forests, Gardens and HousesPackard, A. S. (Alpheus Spring)
Science
Our Common Insects: A Popular Account of the Insects of Our Fields, Forests, Gardens and Houses
Packard, A. S. (Alpheus Spring)
Insects
We have arrived, then, at our Leptus, with a head bearing two pairs of
jaws. The spiders and mites do not advance beyond this stage. But in the
true insects and Myriopods, we have the addition of special sense
organs, the antennae, and another pair of appendages, the labial palpi.
It is evident that in the ancestor of these two groups the first pair of
appendages became early adapted for purely sensory purposes, and were
naturally projected far in advance of the mouth, forming the antennae.
Before considering the changes from the mandibulate form of insects to
those with mouth parts adapted for piercing and sucking, we must
endeavor to learn how far it was possible for the caterpillar or maggot
to become evolved from the Leptus-like larvae of the Neuroptera,
Orthoptera, Hemiptera and most Coleoptera. I may quote from a previous
article[28] a few words in relation to two kinds of larvae most prevalent
among insects. "There are two forms of insectean larvae which are pretty
constant. One we call _leptiform_, from its general resemblance to the
larvae of the mites (Leptus). The larvae of all the Neuroptera, except
those of the Phryganeidae and Panorpidae (which are cylindrical and
resemble caterpillars), are more or less leptiform, _i. e._, have a
flattened or oval body, with large thoracic legs. Such are the larvae of
the Orthoptera and Hemiptera, and the Coleoptera (except the
Curculionidae; possibly the Cerambycidae and Buprestidae, which approach
the maggot-like form of the larvae of weevils). On the other hand, taking
the caterpillar or bee larva, with their cylindrical, fleshy bodies, in
most respects typical of larval forms of the Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera
and Diptera, as the type of the _cruciform_ larva, etc. * * * The larvae
of the earliest insects were probably leptiform, and the cruciform
condition is consequently an acquired one, as suggested by Fritz
Mueller."[29] It seems that these two sorts of larvae had also been
distinguished by Dr. Brauer in the article already referred to, with
which, however, the writer was unacquainted at the time of writing the
above quoted article. The similar views presented may seem to indicate
that they are founded in nature. Dr. Brauer, after remarking that the
Podurids seemed to fulfil Haeckel's idea of what were the most primitive
insects, and noticing how closely they resemble the larvae of Myriopods,
says, "specially interesting are those forms among the Poduridae which
are described as Campodea and Japyx, since the larvae of a great number
of insects may be traced back to them"; but he adds, and with this view
we are unable to agree, "while others, the caterpillar-like forms
(Raupenform), resulted from them by a retrograde process, and also
the still lower maggot-like forms. While on the one hand Campodea, with
its abdominal feet, and the larva of Lithobius are related, so on the
other the Lepismatidae, which are very near the Blattariae, are nearly
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account