| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Supplement to Harvesting Ants and Trap-Door Spiders
Author: Moggridge, John Traherne
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Supplement to Harvesting Ants and Trap-Door Spiders" ***
This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.
TRAP-DOOR SPIDERS ***
Supplement to Harvesting Ants and Trap-door Spiders.
J. Traherne Moggridge
Transcriber's Note: Text emphasis denoted as _Italic_ and =Bold=.
Whole numbers and fractional parts as 123-4/5.
SUPPLEMENT
TO
HARVESTING ANTS
AND
TRAP-DOOR SPIDERS.
SUPPLEMENT
TO
HARVESTING ANTS
AND
TRAP-DOOR SPIDERS.
BY
J. TRAHERNE MOGGRIDGE, F.L.S., F.Z.S.
_WITH SPECIFIC DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SPIDERS,_
BY THE
REV. O. PICKARD-CAMBRIDGE.
[Illustration]
LONDON:
L. REEVE & CO., 5, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN.
1874.
LONDON:
SAVILL, EDWARDS AND CO., PRINTERS, CHANDOS STREET,
COVENT GARDEN.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
SUPPLEMENT TO HARVESTING ANTS 157
SUPPLEMENT TO TRAP-DOOR SPIDERS 180
SPECIFIC DESCRIPTIONS OF SPIDERS 254
EXPLANATION OF PLATES.
Plate XIII., p. 183, fig. A.--Silk lining of tube of _Atypus
piceus_ (Sulz.), taken at Troyes in Champagne, and
communicated to me by M. E. Simon; B, drawing of portion
of nest of _Cyrtauchenius elongatus_ (Sim.) made after the
description of the discoverer, and subject to his (M. E.
Simon's) corrections. This is the only illustration in the
present work not taken from an actual specimen. These figures
are of the natural size.
Plate XIV., p. 193.--Diagrams of the known types of trap-door nest.
Fig. A, nest of _Atypus piceus_ (Sulz.); B, nest of cork
type; B 1, the layers of silk with earth rims of which a cork
door is composed; C, single-door unbranched wafer type; D,
single-door branched wafer type; E double-door unbranched
wafer type; E 1, lower door of the same, of the natural size;
F, Hyères double-door branched wafer type; F 1, lower door
of the same, of the natural size; G, and G 1, double-door
branched cavity wafer type. At G 1 the perfect type is seen,
while at G, the descending cavity, the outlines of which are
indicated by dotted lines, has been filled up; G 2, lower
door of the same of the natural size. (Figs. A, B, C, D,
E, F, G and G 1, diagrammatic representations of nest on a
reduced scale, Figs. B 1, E 1, F 1 and G 2, of the natural
size).
Plate XV., p. 198, fig. A.--Nest of _Cteniza Californica_ (Camb.)
nearly entire, enclosed in the clayey earth of the bank from
which the specimen was taken, the door being artificially
represented as being partly open; A 1, door of the same as
seen when closed; B, _Cteniza Californica_ (Camb.) from a
living specimen; B 1, the same seen in spirits, the legs not
represented; B 2, the same seen sideways; (figs. A, A 1, B, B
1 and B 2, are of the natural size); B 3, the eyes, greatly
magnified; B 4, the three claws terminating the tarsal joint
of the hindmost left leg; B 5, line representing the measured
length of the spider excluding the falces and spinners, the
uppermost division gives the length of the caput terminating
at the half-moon-shaped fovea, the middle division that of
the thorax, and the lowest that of the abdomen, while the
transverse line gives the breadth of the cephalothorax; B 6,
eggs laid by the spider in captivity on the under side of the
gauze which covered the box (the position is reversed here)
of the natural size; B 7, the same magnified; B 8, another
group of eggs, magnified; B 9, a portion of the same still
more highly magnified; B 10, lines showing measured lengths
of legs of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th pairs, and of palpus,
with those of the several joints.
Plate XVI., p. 211, fig. A.--Part of the nest of _Nemesia Simoni_
(Camb.) taken at Bordeaux; A 1, _N. Simoni_ (Camb.) from
life, of the natural size; A 2, the same seen in spirits,
the legs not represented; A 3, the same seen sideways and
magnified; A 4, the eyes, magnified; A 5, the thoracic fovea,
magnified; A 6, line showing measured length of spider, (see
above explanation of fig. B 5, plate XV.); A 7, lines showing
measured lengths of legs of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th pairs,
and palpus of spider, with those of the several joints. B,
cephalothorax and abdomen of another specimen of _N. Simoni_,
in which the proportions are different, taken from life, of
the natural size.
Plate XVII., p. 215, fig. A.--Part of the nest of _N. suffusa_
(Camb.) taken at Montpellier; A 1, _N. suffusa_ (Camb.)
from life, of the natural size; A 2, the same in spirits,
seen sideways and magnified, the legs not represented; A
3, another view of the same; A 4, the eyes, magnified; A
5, length of spider (see above, fig. B 5, plate XV.); A 6,
measurements of legs and palpus; B, _N. meridionalis_ (Costa
and Sim.), male, from a specimen in spirits, of the natural
size, legs not represented; B 1, the same magnified; B 2, the
eyes, magnified; B 3, radial and digital joints of the left
palpus with bulb, magnified; B 4, another view of the same,
magnified; B 5, back view of the same, magnified, but less
highly; B 6, length of spider (see above, fig. B 5, plate
XV.); C, _N. meridionalis_ (Costa and Sim.) female, from a
specimen in spirit of wine, of the natural size, legs not
represented; C 1, eyes of the same, magnified; C 2, length of
spider. These two specimens (male and female) were collected
in Corsica, and named by M. E. Simon, who kindly presented
them to me; they are now in the possession of the Rev. O.
Pickard-Cambridge.
Plate XVIII., p. 225, fig. A.--Part of nest of _N. congener_
(Camb.) taken at Hyères; A 1, lower door of this nest viewed
from above, of the natural size; A 2, side view of the same;
A 3, _N. congener_ (Camb.) taken from life, of the natural
size; A 4, side view of the same, enlarged to twice the
natural size, the legs not represented; A 5, cephalothorax
and falces from specimen in spirits, magnified;[108] A 6, the
eyes, magnified; A 7, femur, patella (or genual joint) and
tibia of leg of third pair, showing the three spines on the
outer side of the patella, magnified. B, lower door from a
smaller and younger nest, viewed from above, of the natural
size; B 1, the same viewed sideways.
[Footnote 108: While these pages were passing through the press
(Hyères, Oct. '74), I have had an opportunity of examining 17
additional specimens of _N. congener_. I learn from this that the
pattern represented on the caput in fig. A 5, does not accord with
that in the majority of adult specimens, being usually less defined
and composed of three converging bands. Mr. Pickard-Cambridge's
description (p. 293 below) is, however, quite correct. I may mention
that three spines were present on the patella (genual joint) of legs
III in 16 specimens, the 17th specimen having but a single spine.]
Plate XIX., p. 229, fig. A.--Nest of a young specimen of _N.
Manderstjernæ_ (Ausserer = _N. meridionalis_ Camb., in "Ants
and Spiders," p. 101) from Mentone, showing the descending
cavity, with the lower door pushed across, so as to close
the main tube and join the cavity; A 1, upper portion of
the same, showing the lower door closing the branch. B,
_N. cæmentaria_ (Latr.) from a living specimen taken at
Montpellier; B 1, the same seen in spirits of wine, legs not
represented; B 2, the eyes, magnified; B 3, one of the two
larger claws; and B 4, the small claw of the tarsus of one of
the hindmost legs; B 5, length of spider; B 6, measurements
of legs and palpus. C, the eyes of _N. Moggridgii_ (Camb.)
(= _N. cæmentaria_, Camb., in "Ants and Spiders," p. 92),
magnified. D, _N. incerta_ (Camb.), male, from a specimen
preserved in spirits, collected at Digne in the Basses
Alpes, by M. E. Simon, who kindly lent me the specimen for
examination, represented of twice the natural size, and
without the legs; D 1, another view of the same; D 2, radial
and digital joints of the palpus and palpal bulb, magnified;
D 3, back view of the same; D 4, the eyes magnified. E, eyes
of _N. dubia_ (Camb.), male (= _N. cæmentaria_, Sim.), from
a specimen in spirits, collected in the Pyrénées Orientales,
communicated by M. Simon, magnified; E 1, radial and digital
joints of the palpus with palpal bulb of the same, magnified;
E 2, another view of the same.
Plate XX., p. 254, fig. A, _Cteniza Moggridgii_ (Camb.), male (=
_Ct. fodiens_, Camb., in "Ants and Spiders," p. 89), from
a living specimen taken at Mentone, of the natural size; A
1, the same seen sideways, the legs not represented; A 2,
cephalothorax and falces of the same; A 3, the eyes; A 4,
radial and digital joints and the palpal bulb; A 5, another
view of the same; A 6, one of the two large claws, and A
7, the small claw of the tarsus of one of the legs of the
hindmost pair; A 8, length of the spider and breadth of the
cephalothorax; A 9, measurements of legs and palpus. (Figs.
A 1, A 2, A 3, A 4, A 5, A 6, and A 7, are all magnified.)
B, _N. Manderstjernæ_ (Ausserer), male (= _N. meridionalis_,
Camb., in "Ants and Spiders," p. 101), from a living specimen
taken at Mentone, of the natural size; B 1, the same seen in
spirits and magnified to twice the natural size; B 2, the
same viewed sideways; B 3, the eyes; B 4, tibia, metatarsus
and tarsus of the right leg of the first pair showing the
spine and process on the under and inner side of the enlarged
tibia; B 5, right leg of the third pair showing the three
short spines on the patella; B 6, one of the two large claws,
and B 7, the small claw of the tarsus of one of the legs of
the hindmost pair; B 8, radial and digital joints of palpus
with palpal bulb; B 9, another view of the same; B 10, back
view of the same (figs. B 1 to B 10, all magnified); B
11, measurements of legs and palpus. C, tibia, metatarsus
and tarsus of right leg of _N. Manderstjernæ_ (Ausserer),
male, viewed from the under side and magnified, drawn from
the original specimen belonging to Dr. L. Koch, collected
at Nice, and described as _N. Manderstjernæ_ by Professor
Ausserer. My best thanks are due to Dr. L. Koch for having
enabled me to examine this valuable specimen. [In fig. C,
the curved spine should bend towards, and not away from, the
process on its right and inner side.]
LIST OF SPIDERS DESCRIBED.
Cteniza Moggridgii, sp. n. ♂ p. 254, pl. XX. fig. A.
" Californica, sp. n. ♀ p. 260, pl. XV. fig. B.
Nemesia cæmentaria (Latr.) ♀ p. 264, pl. XIX. fig. B.
" Eleanora (Cambr.) p. 272.
" Moggridgii, sp. n. ♀ p. 273, pl. XIX. fig. C.
" incerta, sp. n. ♂ p. 276, pl. XIX. fig. D.
" dubia, sp. n. ♂ p. 280, pl. XIX. fig. E.
" Manderstjernæ (Auss.) ♂ and ♀ p. 283, pl. XX. fig. B.
" meridionalis (Costa) ♂ and ♀ p. 289, pl. XVII. fig. B.
" congener, sp. n. ♀ p. 292, pl. XVIII. fig. A 3.
" suffusa, sp. n. ♀ p. 295, pl. XVII. fig. A 1.
" Simoni, sp. n. ♀ p. 297, pl. XVI. fig. A 1.
SUPPLEMENT TO HARVESTING ANTS.
During the short time which has elapsed since _Harvesting Ants and
Trap-door Spiders_ left the printer's hands, fresh material has
rapidly accumulated, and an assiduous search after these creatures,
and the continued study of their works and ways, has met with ample
reward and encouragement.
It was my wish, when originally publishing these observations, many
of which were due to the active co-operation of friends, to invite
my readers to take part with me in my pleasure and pursuits, so
that we should from that time work together, and, by communicating
our discoveries to each other, increase our knowledge, and at the
same time enlarge the field of our research. My intention was
that we should leave to others the necessary work of collection,
preservation, and arrangement, and that, while our fellow naturalists
pin specimens into classified cabinets, and devote long hours to the
description of peculiarities of form and colour, we should undertake
the lighter task of complementing their labours by observing and
recording the habits and conditions of existence of the creatures
themselves.
Looked at in this light, the present pages and those of the
preceding work may be regarded as so many drawers in our _Cabinet
of Habits_, and though, as we open drawer after drawer, many gaps
and blank spaces remind us how much remains to be done in order to
complete the collection, yet the interest and suggestiveness of
the specimen-facts already secured, should encourage and direct us
onwards. There have not been wanting instances in which my readers
have associated themselves with me in the way indicated, and it is
with pleasure, when reviewing the entire work, that I recall how
many of its most interesting features are due to the researches and
assistance of friends,[109] and commemorate at once their discoveries
and unfailing kindness. I had certainly expected that before this
time some new species of harvesting ants would have been discovered,
either on the Riviera, where attention has been especially called to
the subject, or in other parts of Europe, where dissimilar conditions
might have been expected to be associated with a different fauna; but
this has hitherto not been the case.
[Footnote 109: To all who have rendered me this valuable help I tender
my cordial thanks. I am under very special obligations to Mr.
Pickard-Cambridge, for descriptions of spiders, and to Mr. F. Smith
for the names of the Ants; assistance which I should have found it
almost impossible to dispense with or to replace.]
One might naturally suppose that if harvesting ants were discovered
in localities very widely distant from each other, they would prove
to belong to different species, but thus far, both in Europe and
Northern Africa, it is the same two well-known species of _Atta
barbara_ and _A. structor_ that constantly reappear.
For instance, I have recently learned that harvesting ants are found
at Cadenabbia on the lake of Como, and at Montpellier in Southern
France; but on examination, the ants from the former place are
clearly seen to belong to the species _structor_, and those from
Montpellier to the two species _structor_ and _barbara_.
I was greatly interested to receive specimens of ants, and of the
seeds which they were carrying and storing beneath the stones of a
paved road at Cadenabbia, for this is the northernmost point[110] at
which the habit of harvesting has as yet been noted. This discovery
suggests the possibility of the occurrence of the habit in the warmer
and more sheltered of the Swiss valleys. When at Montpellier in May
last I frequently observed long trains of ants bringing seeds and
small dry fruits to their nests, but these harvesters also turned
out on close inspection to be _Atta structor_ and _A. barbara_,
with its red-headed variety. These, it will be remembered, are the
only species of European ants which have as yet been proved to be
harvesters and seed-storers in the fullest sense of the term, that is
to say, which not only gather and carry seeds, but also store them in
large quantities below the surface of the ground.[111]
[Footnote 110: I have related in a note at the foot of p. 4 in _Ants
and Spiders_ how _Formica nigra_ in England, though paying no
attention to seeds generally, will sometimes collect the fresh seeds
of the sweet violet (_Viola odorata_).
When I published this account I was quite unaware that the fact that
certain English ants collect sweet violet seeds had been observed by
Mr. R. Wakefield forty years before.
This was communicated by Mr. Wakefield in a letter to Mr. John
Curtis, the substance of which was read before the Linnean Society
in 1854, and published in their Proceedings (see Proceedings of the
Linnean Society, ii. 293), where we read: "He (Mr. Wakefield) states
that he has seen the black species (_Formica nigra_, L.) for days and
nights together industriously occupied in dragging to its cells the
seeds of the common violet (_Viola odorata_, L.)
"He first noticed this fact on the 3rd of July, 1832; and he regards
it as a curious subject of inquiry for what purpose, if not for
their own future provision, they could accumulate these stores?" Mr.
Wakefield appears to accept this as evidence that these ants possess
the habit of storing seeds; but this is not so, as will be seen by
reference to my note alluded to above, and I am inclined to believe
that they collect these particular seeds either under the mistaken
belief that they are larvæ, to which when fresh they bear some
resemblance, or for the sake of some juices which they may obtain
from the fleshy appendage attached to the seed.]
[Footnote 111: Six other species belonging to the genus _Atta_ are
found in Europe, but they are all unknown to me.
It seems likely that, if other harvesting ants do exist in Europe
they may belong to one of these six species; for we have seen (_Ants
and Spiders_, p. 59) that all the ants which are known to possess
this habit are either members of the genus _Atta_ or belong to genera
closely related to it.]
In the case of _Pheidole megacephala_ (the only other European ant
which I have detected collecting seeds in large numbers), I have
never been able to find granaries or subterranean stores of any
kind, though I have frequently made extensive search for them, and
explored, to all appearance, the whole nest.
When we remember the great variety of ants which inhabit Europe alone
(a recent list[112] enumerating no fewer than 104 distinct species),
it certainly may seem strange at first that only two of their number
should possess this habit. Perhaps, however, we may yet discover
that some other of these species are true harvesters; but at present
the chances seem rather against it, since the harvesters found at
such distant points as Algiers, Cadenabbia, and Montpellier have all
turned out to belong to one or other of the two species, _structor_
or _barbara_.
[Footnote 112: _Description des Fourmis d'Europe pour servir à l'étude
des insectes myrmecophilis_, by Ernest André, in _Rev. et Mag. de
Zool._ 3^{e} ser. tom. ii. (1874), p. 152, &c.]
Indeed it may very well be that the numerical superiority and wide
distribution of these two species have served to secure to them a
more or less exclusive right to the habit of harvesting, for it
is clear that a given tract of country can only afford supplies of
grain to a limited number of colonies; so that, if these ants have
taken up the ground and are strong enough to maintain possession, no
others would have a chance. However this may be, I find that the more
insight I gain into the distinctive habits and relations of animals,
the more the belief impresses itself upon me that wherever we find
many closely-allied species inhabiting restricted areas, there we may
safely look for important differences among these species in respect
of their modes of life, and in the development of their instinct and
intelligence. And indeed this may be considered as a corollary of
the great law of natural selection, which uniformly tends to secure
the greatest possible amount of divergence in this respect, and to
prevent the co-existence in close proximity to each other of distinct
species having the same requirements and manner of life.
Thus, for example, even _Atta barbara_ and _structor_, though most
closely related as species, differ in habit; the former leading a
much more active life during the winter months at Mentone than the
latter, and seeking its home rather in wild than cultivated ground.
Then what differences different ants present in respect of strength,
speed, powers of offence and defence, numerical strength of colonies,
timidity, date and frequency of departure of winged ants from the
nest, odour emitted, combativeness, architecture and selection of
localities, nature of food, nocturnal and diurnal habits, and in
many other properties and conditions! It is doubtless owing to
dissimilarity in these and other respects that it becomes possible
for so many species to co-exist within very narrow limits, so that
even three or four distinct kinds sometimes form their nests so close
to each other that their galleries interlace and almost touch.
There are probably very few conditions of life (except those
concerned with the nature and manner of obtaining food) which have a
greater influence either in keeping creatures apart or in bringing
them into collision, than those which constitute differences in their
respective periods of activity and development. Thus, two species of
which one has nocturnal and the other diurnal habits, or of which
one is dormant while the other is active, may be said to travel
different roads and to be complete strangers to one another. Complete
separation of this kind is, of course, not the rule, and the greater
number of species find themselves in more or less constant rivalry,
but possess a sufficient number of points of dissimilarity in habit
and requirements to make their co-existence possible.
It is curious to note what little differences, as they seem to us,
may determine the fate of an ant. For example, the lizards will
lie in wait for and greedily seize and devour the winged males and
females of _structor_ and _barbara_, though they dare not attack the
assembled workers. It is curious to watch the way in which these
worker ants will protect the winged ants which are about to leave
the nest, by gathering round and swarming over them. When, as often
happens, the nest is placed in an old terrace-wall, one may see the
lizards creeping along or lying moulded into the inequalities of the
stones, all having their eager eyes directed towards the swarm. One
may then see the worker ants walk with impunity straight up to the
very noses of the lizards, while the male or female which should
chance to straggle in the same direction would infallibly be eaten
up. The lizards plainly show their fear of the workers by the way in
which, when they make up their mind to try a dash at some outlying
part of the ant colony, they leap through the lines in the utmost
haste as if traversing a ring of fire.
Now these worker ants are destitute of stings, and I can only suppose
that their power of combination, stronger jaws and more horny coats,
have gained them this immunity. I remarked that the smaller lizards
appeared to have some difficulty in dealing with the males and
females which they captured, and would beat and pound them against
the stones before devouring them, while the larger ones would often
make but one mouthful of them, swallowing wings and all!
If it were not for this body-guard of workers it is difficult to
see how the males and females in such situations could ever escape.
It is also plain that if the worker harvesting ants were as liable
to be seized and devoured as their winged companions, the species
would soon become extinct, for they expose themselves more than ants
ordinarily do, and their long provision-laden trains would be almost
at the mercy of any enemy which could attack them without fear of
results.[113]
[Footnote 113: Speaking of the enemies of ants, I may mention having
seen a young robin in England picking up and swallowing the workers
of _Formica nigra_ just as if they were crumbs. I knew that birds
would eat the male and female ants, but I had thought the workers
were exempt from their attacks, and, indeed, they must be so as a
rule, for otherwise they would speedily become extinct.]
Remembering this, it is interesting to note how differently the
tiger-beetle (_Cicendela_) behaves when hunting the powerful
harvesting ants and when preying upon the weak little _Formica
(Tapinoma) erratica_; for, while it seizes the latter without taking
any precautions, it is evidently more than half afraid of the former.
I have seen this beetle lying in wait near a train of _structor_ or
_barbara_ ants, watching until some individual separated a little
from the main body, when it would rush forward and make a snap at it,
retiring again as quickly as it came. If the tiger-beetle fails to
seize its prey exactly behind the head it will let it go again, and
two or three ants are often thus cruelly mutilated before a single
one is carried off.
No doubt the beetle has learned that if once this ant clasps its
mandibles upon either antennæ or legs, nothing, not even death
itself, will make it release its hold. It therefore tries to pin the
ant in such a way that it cannot use its formidable jaws. Perhaps the
habit of forming long compact trains may have been acquired by the
ants partly with a view to guarding against attacks of this kind.
The colonies of the little _F. erratica_, on the other hand,
apparently have to trust to their habit of working under the covered
ways which they construct, as well as to their activity and great
numbers for their preservation.
I had thought that the very powerful, and, to me, disagreeable, odour
of these little ants might have rendered them distasteful to the
tiger-beetle, but this is evidently not the case.
I have said above that, as far as our present knowledge goes, only
two out of the 104 species of European ants are possessed of the
habit of collecting and storing seed, and it may be reasonably asked
how it can have come about, if this is the case, that the ancient
authors were so well acquainted with the fact.
The explanation is that these writers lived on the shores of
the Mediterranean, where these two species--_Atta barbara_ and
_structor_--are extremely common objects, both on account of their
abundance and their habits. The long trains of harvesters remain
exposed to view for hours together, and _structor_ seeks the
neighbourhood or even the interior of towns, so that these ants
arrest the attention even of the unobservant, and often become
familiar as the sparrows.
There can be little doubt that these two ants display the same habits
throughout all the warmer districts which they inhabit, but whether
they do so in Switzerland, Germany, Northern France, and the other
colder portions of their range, remains one of the many interesting
questions which still await investigation.
Mr. F. Smith has recorded the presence of _Atta barbara_ in
Palestine, and I have lately obtained some curious evidence which
goes to show that harvesting ants not only carried on their
operations in times past in that country, but that their seed-stores
were on a much larger scale than any I have observed on the Riviera.
I am indebted to Dr. F. A. Pratt for the information that mention
was made of ants and their stores in the Misna, that codification of
the traditionary and unwritten laws of the Jews, which was commenced
after the birth of Christ under the presidency of Hillel, and which
has at least the merit of serving as a record of a multitude of very
ancient customs and observances which, but for it, would probably
have long ago been forgotten.
Now it so happens that the very first section of the Misna is called
_Zeraim_, and has to do with seeds and crops, and I was thus enabled,
without any very prolonged search, to light upon one of the passages
in question.[114] It occurs in a chapter entitled _De Angulo_ in the
Latin version, treating of the _corner_ of the fields bearing crops
which should be set aside for the poor, and of the rights of the
gleaners, and may be freely rendered as follows: "The granaries of
ants (_Formicarum cavernulæ_), which may be found in the midst of a
growing crop of corn, shall belong to the owner of the crop; but, if
these granaries are found after the reapers have passed, the upper
part (of each heap contained in these granaries) shall go to the poor
and the lower to the proprietor." And then is added: "The Rabbi Meir
is of opinion that the whole should go to the poor, because whenever
any doubt arises about a question of gleaning the doubt is to be
given in favour of the gleaner."
[Footnote 114: "Formicarum cavernulæ in media segete proprietarii
censentur; pone messores superiore parte pauperum, inferiore
proprietarii. R. Meir totum pauperum esse censet, quia quod dubium
est in spicelegio, spicilegium est." And to this the following
explanatory note is appended: "Formicarum cavernulæ, Frumentum inibi
repertum." Misna, Sect. I. Zeraim. Cap. IV. p. 25. Latine vertit et
commentario illustravit Gulielmus Guisius. _Accedit_ Mosis Maimonidis
_Præfatio in_ Misnam, Edo. Pocockio _Interprete_, Oxoniæ A.D. 1690.]
The intention of this very quaint bit of legislation, or rather
of the ancient custom which gave rise to it, appears to have been
the following; it was to settle once and for all a nice point of
conscience with reference to the claims of the poor upon these ant
stores. If the heaps of grain were found among the standing corn
before the reapers reached the spot or while they were still at
work, the proprietor might claim them without any hesitation; but,
if they were discovered after the passing of the reapers, then it
was conceivable that the ants, which during the whole time had never
ceased their labours, might have collected some of the grain from the
fallen ears of corn which lay upon the ground, and were the property
of the gleaners. These grains would be those which the ants had
collected most recently, and would therefore lie on the surface of
each granary heap. Thus it was settled that the upper portion of each
heap should belong to the poor, and the lower, that collected from
the standing crop, to the proprietor.
We may perhaps laugh at the notion of critically discussing and
legislating upon such a subject, and think that such a pitiful matter
might have been allowed to pass among those _minima_ about which even
the Jewish law need not care.
Be this as it may, it is interesting for us to learn that a custom of
the kind had its place among the recognised traditions of the people,
and that the harvesting ants of Syria had earned a place in these
records by amassing stores of sufficient size, and so disposed as to
make them worth collecting.
This reminds us of what M. Germain de St. Pierre has related (_Ants
and Spiders_, p. 29) of the extent of the depredations made among the
corn crops at Hyères by these ants; and doubtless other observers who
have opportunities for watching the ants during the summer months
might supply further confirmation.
It would be of interest to learn the extent and manner of concealment
of these large stores of grain, but, during the months from October
to May, I have never seen corn in any quantity in the granaries,
though there was frequent evidence of its late presence in the
dense masses of husks of oats and other large grain lying near the
nests. In October, 1873, I found near the entrances to a nest of
_structor_ a circular mound formed of this refuse, twenty-seven
inches in diameter, and averaging two inches in thickness, while
near other nests I have found the chinks between the stones of the
terrace-wall behind which the nest lay, literally stuffed with husks.
It was plain that these grains of cereals and the larger grasses
had been collected during the summer. The granaries in the winter
and spring contain the grains of some few of the autumnal grasses,
but are principally filled with seeds of the other more abundant
autumn-fruiting plants belonging to the neighbourhood.
I have now collected from the granaries of these ants the seeds or
small dry fruits of fifty-four distinct species of wild plants, and
on examination I find that during my stay in the south (from October
to May) the seeds of the distinctively spring and summer-flowering
plants are either entirely absent or are very scarce, while the
great bulk of the seeds belong to plants which ripen their fruits
in the autumn. Thus the grains of oats, of the large fescue and
brome grasses, of quaking grasses (_Melica_), and other kinds common
near the nests in May, are conspicuously absent in the winter, as
are the fruits of all the sedges but one, and this one (_Carex
distans_) retains its fruits till late in the autumn. Among other
spring-flowering plants common near the nests, the seeds of which
are also absent, I may mention violets (_Viola odorata_), poppies,
(_Papaver_), certain species of _Veronica_, _Helianthemum guttatum_,
_Silene quinque-vulnera_ and _Plantago Bellardi_.
Here a curious question arises--viz., What becomes of the large
stores of seeds which one may still find in the nests in May, when
the ants are busy pouring fresh supplies into the nest? The answer
probably is, that, as the weather becomes warmer, ever-increasing
calls are made by the larvæ upon the food-resources of the nest, and
that old and new seeds rapidly disappear together, and all the energy
and activity of the colony is needed to meet the increased demand.
Still, it would be interesting, if it were possible, to assure
oneself whether this is the case; that is to say, whether the
residue of the winter stores is really consumed during the summer,
or whether a portion of it remains in the granaries until the
following autumn. One might perhaps learn something as to this if
one had an opportunity of opening a nest late in July, and before
the characteristic autumn-fruiting plants had set their seed. If the
granaries were then principally filled with seeds of spring-fruiting
plants, and the winter seeds were almost or entirely absent, this
would afford tolerably good negative evidence in favour of the latter
having been eaten during the summer.
One thing is certain, and that is, that these harvesting ants do not
habitually abandon their nests every year. On the contrary, while
many swarms leave the nests at different seasons, a portion of the
original colony, or of its descendants, still remains in the old
home, and very few out of the many nests which I have watched during
the past three years, and of which I have noted and mapped the
positions, have been deserted. On my return to Mentone in October,
1873, I hastened to examine the nests between which war had been
carried on in the previous year (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 38), and
found in one case that the vanquished nest was completely lifeless
and abandoned, while the victorious colony was remarkably thriving,
and its granaries teemed with seeds. The locality occupied by the
other belligerent colonies had unfortunately been built over.
I have often been asked whether I could give an approximate estimate
of the quantity of seeds contained in a nest of average size, but
I have hitherto felt unable to do this in a satisfactory manner. I
am now in possession of more reliable data, and believe that the
following calculation may be taken as a near approximation to the
truth. During the spring of 1873 I removed with but very little loss
the contents of two granaries from a very extensive nest of _Atta
structor_, consisting principally of seeds of clover, fumitory, and
pellitory. These seeds, when perfectly clean and freed from earth,
weighed in the one case 4 sc. 4 grs., and in the other 5 sc. 8 grs.
Now there cannot have been less than eighty such granaries in this
nest, so that, if we take five scruples as the average weight of the
seeds in each granary, and this, allowing for loss in collection,
which we may fairly do, we should have a total weight of more than
sixteen ounces, or one pound avoirdupois weight of seeds contained
in the nest. But, though this mass of seeds represents the result
of infinite labour on the part of the ants, each individual granary
contains but an insignificant quantity, and the store-chambers often
lie at great distances apart; it is therefore impossible to believe
that the stores alluded to in the Misna can have been as small and
scattered as these were, and we must, on the contrary, suppose them
to have been both larger and more accessible.[115]
[Footnote 115: Perhaps these heaps of corn may have been piled up at
the entrance to the nest, as is sometimes the case when the workers,
in their eagerness to secure as much as possible of a passing
harvest, bring in the supplies too fast for their companions within
the nest to be able to find room for and accommodate. When this
happens the seeds lie outside the nest until fresh chambers are
prepared for their reception.]
The means employed by the ants to prevent the germination of the
seeds contained in their granaries still remain secret, and all the
experiments and investigations which I have hitherto been able to
make have failed to give me the clue.
The problem to be solved is the following: Given seeds, the readiness
of which to germinate has been proved, to place them in damp soil at
depths varying from half an inch to twenty inches below the surface
in such a manner that they shall remain there dormant, neither
germinating nor decaying, for weeks and even months. These very seeds
must be capable of germinating after the conclusion of the experiment.
This is what the ants do for millions of seeds, for the instances
in which a few seeds appear to have sprouted within the nest in
defiance of the ants, are very rare and wholly exceptional; and
when after prolonged wet weather germinated seeds are seen outside
the nest, it will usually be found that these have the little root
cut off, and are eventually carried back into the nest and used as
food. By a fortunate chance I have been able to prove that the seeds
will germinate in an undisturbed granary when the ants are prevented
from obtaining access to it; and this goes to show not only that the
structure and nature of the granary chamber is not sufficient of
itself to prevent germination, but also that the presence of the ants
is essential to secure the dormant condition of the seeds.
I discovered in two places portions of distinct nests of _Atta
structor_ which had been isolated owing to the destruction of the
terrace-wall behind which they lay, and there the granaries were
filled up and literally choked with growing seeds, though the earth
in which they lay completely enclosed and concealed them, until by
chance I laid them bare! In one case I knew that the destruction of
the wall had only taken place ten days before, so that the seeds had
sprouted in this interval.
My experiments also tend to confirm this, and to favour the belief
that the non-germination of the seeds is due to some direct influence
voluntarily exercised by the ants, and not merely to the conditions
found in the nest, or to acid vapours which in certain cases are
given off by the ants themselves.
In order to put this latter point to the test of experiment, I
confined about a hundred harvesting ants (_A. structor_), with their
queen and several larvæ, in a glass test-tube eight inches long and
one inch in diameter, closed with a cork and filled up to within
about an inch of the cork with damp sandy soil, most of which was
taken from the ants' nest.
I added six peas, six cress and six millet, and then kept the tube
tightly corked for nine days, only once removing the cork for a few
seconds in order to sprinkle a little water on the ants, which were
evidently in need of it. On the ninth day I turned out the contents
of the tube and found that all the peas, millet and cress, had
germinated and were growing strongly. One of the cress, however, had
had its root, which lay across the gallery constructed by the ants,
gnawed off; four clover seeds, which had come with the soil taken
from the nest, and which had formed part of the ants' stores, had
germinated also. Here the small quantity of air contained in the
test-tube must certainly have become saturated with any vapour which
the ants may be supposed to give off, and we cannot therefore accept
this as the cause of the dormant condition of the granary seeds.
I made other experiments in which harvesting ants were imprisoned
along with various seeds in small, cylindrical, closed vessels
containing a little damp sand. Here the vessels were frequently
rolled from side to side or shaken, during the twenty-two hours for
which the experiment lasted, so as to excite the ants and make them
give off such odours as they possessed, but no trace of injurious
influence was produced upon the seeds, which germinated and grew
normally afterwards.
At Mr. Darwin's suggestion I made a long series of experiments
with formic acid, in which measured quantities, pure or diluted,
were placed in a watch-glass on damp sand and surrounded by seeds,
the whole being enclosed in a covered tumbler, so that the effects
produced on the seeds by the vapour rising from the acid might be
noted. Similar seeds were sown at the same time and in the same
way, but without the acid, so as to permit of comparison. These
experiments have afforded some interesting results,[116] but do not
supply any positive data which might help us to discover the secret
of the ants. They narrow, indeed, the area in which search can
profitably be made, indicating as they do that the vapour of formic
acid is incapable of rendering the seeds dormant after the manner of
the ants, and showing, on the contrary, that its influence is always
injurious to the seeds, even when present only in excessively minute
quantities.
[Footnote 116: I hope shortly to offer these observations, together
with another series of a similar nature in which my friend Mr. J. B.
Andrews has taken part, to the Linnean Society.]
It appears to me now that the most promising field for experiments
made with a view to clearing up this difficulty, is that afforded by
the closer investigation of the phenomena of normal germination, and
by a study of the conditions under which seeds remain dormant, as
they are occasionally known to do, in situations which our general
experience would have selected as favourable to germination.
I have good hopes, also, that when we come to know more of the habits
of harvesting ants in tropical countries, and when naturalists have
excavated and described their subterranean stores--a thing which has
not yet been done as far as I know--we may gather fresh indications
to guide us in our search.
I am puzzled to account for the fact, which I have seen stated by
more than one observer in India, that the ants there have a habit
of bringing out large quantities of grain and seed and laying them
in heaps outside their nests at the commencement of the wet season.
Dr. King, the director of the Royal Botanic Gardens at Calcutta,
has told me that when in the Gwalior territory during the beginning
of the rainy season, he saw heaps of seeds, principally those of a
leguminous plant (_Alyssocarpus_), piled up round the entrances to
the ants' nests, and that it was precisely at that time that flocks
of a rock-grouse (_Pterocles exustus_) first made their appearance.
They fed freely upon the seeds, and Dr. King found the crops of some
of these birds, which he had shot, filled with them.
It is difficult to imagine why these Indian ants should turn out from
their nests the very seeds which it had cost them so much labour to
collect, and the more so as we find that these seeds are devoured
by birds. It seems just possible, however, that the ants, remaining
torpid during the rainy season, do not require the seeds, and know
that, under these circumstances, if left in the nest, they would
sprout, and choke up the galleries and granaries. Perhaps also they
may have learned that a certain number of the ejected seeds will
spring up and afford future harvests within easy reach of the nest.
All this, however, and especially the suggestion as to the dormant
condition of the ants during the rainy season, might easily be proved
or disproved by direct observation; and at present we have nothing
but mere speculation to go upon.
It is curious to find that the native population in a certain part
of India pay a kind of tribute to the ants, for Dr. King informs me
that the Hindoos in Rajputana, a province in which the old traditions
and superstitions retain especial hold, have a custom of scattering
dry rice and sugar for the ants, and thus apparently recognise both
their love of sweet things and their habit of collecting seeds.
It may be that this custom is now little more than a meaningless
rite; but in the past it probably had its origin, either in a wish
to propitiate the good will and avert the destructive attacks of
creatures which are the scourge and dread of entire districts, or in
a sentiment of combined fear and admiration--fear of the power, and
admiration of the energy, forethought, perseverance, and sense of
duty to the community displayed by these marvellous insects.
That the latter feeling may have had some share in prompting this
act is suggested by another custom which is stated[117] to prevail in
Arabia, in accordance with which an ant is placed in the hand of a
newly-born child, in order that its virtues may pass into and possess
the infant.
[Footnote 117: Freytag, paragraph under the Arabic word for Ant, in
his _Lexicon Arabico-Latinum_, vol. iv. p. 339, where he quotes from
a local dictionary.]
Among the many curious and obscure features in the economy of ants,
one of the most interesting is the occasional presence in their nests
of different creatures which live among and often in harmony with
them, the nature of the relations between host and guest being for
the most part quite unknown.
When examining the contents of some granaries from an extensive nest
of _Atta structor_ at Mentone last spring (1874), I found large
numbers of a minute, shining-brown beetle moving about among the
seeds. These little creatures were themselves not unlike some very
small seeds, and were of an elliptic form, measuring a trifle less
than one line in length. They proved to belong to the scarce and very
restricted genus _Coluocera_.[118] This species, named by Kraatz _C.
attæ_, on account of its inhabiting the nests of ants belonging to
the genus _Atta_, has been found in Greece.
[Footnote 118: I am indebted to Mr. F. Smith of the British Museum
for the name of this beetle and for the following reference to its
description; Kraatz in _Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift_ for
1858-9, p. 140.]
Mr. Bates,[119] in his most interesting account of his travels on the
Amazons, remarks upon the singular fact, of which the above instance
is an example: "that some of the most anomalous forms of Coleopterous
insects are those which live solely in the nests of ants," and he
then goes on to allude to the strange snake _Amphisbæna_, a native
of that region, which also lives in the nests of the Sauba ants
(_Œcodoma cephalotes_), observing how curious it is that an abnormal
form of snakes should be found in the society of these insects. He
is of opinion, however, that the _Amphisbæna_ is not an inoffensive
guest, but lives upon the ants whose nest it selects for its home.
[Footnote 119: _Naturalist on the Amazons_, p. 61-2 (Ed. 2, 1864).]
Another remarkable inhabitant of ants' nests is a minute cricket, of
which I found a single example in the midst of a colony of black ants
at Mentone in February, 1874. This miniature cricket is scarcely as
large as a grain of wheat, the body, excluding the antennæ and other
appendages, measuring only two lines in length. It has been described
by Dr. Paolo Savi[120] under the name of _Gryllus myrmecophilus_. He
detected it in the nests of several species of ants in Tuscany, where
it lived on the best terms with its hosts, playing round their nests
in warm, and retiring into them in stormy weather, while allowing the
ants to carry it from place to place during their migrations.
[Footnote 120: Dr. P. Savi, _Osservazione sopra la Blatta acervorum di
Panzer_ in _Bibliotheco Italiana_, tom. xv. p. 217.]
_Gryllus myrmecophilus_ has also been observed in nests of the turf
ant (_Tetramorium cæspitum_) near Paris.[121]
[Footnote 121: _Bulletin Soc. Entom. de France_ (1872), p. li.]
At Mentone I have never found more than this one specimen, and the
ants among which it was domiciliated were of a species new to me
(_Camponotus_ (_Formica_) _lateralis_, Oliv.). This colony of ants
was composed of many winged males and females, as well as workers,
the last-named measuring from two and a half to three lines in
length, and black in colour. In other colonies I have found the
workers black, with red head and thorax.
Another ant, not enumerated in my list in _Ants and Spiders_, is
_Camponotus_ (_Formica_) _sylvatica_, which I detected in March last
under stones on Cap Martin, near Mentone. When disturbed, this ant
runs along with its abdomen raised vertically in the air, much as
the devil's coachhorse (_Staphylinus_) does. The same curious habit
of erecting the abdomen is found in another ant, not uncommon in
decaying wood in the South, _Crematogaster scutellaris_; and probably
all three insects adopt this threatening attitude, which is that of
the scorpion preparing to strike and sting, in order to intimidate
their enemies, though _Crematogaster_ is the only one which really
possesses a sting.
_Camponotus sylvatica_ has the same long legs and slender body as
_Formica cursor_, and is of about the same size; the workers, which
are of a dark brown colour, measuring about 3-1/2 lines in length.
Perhaps it may be well, in concluding these remarks on Harvesting
Ants, to call attention to the principal questions which still await
solution. The first is one which any observer who travels in Central
Europe during the summer may help to solve.
1. Do _any_ ants collect and store seed in Switzerland, Germany,
North France, England, or indeed in any of the colder parts of the
world?
2. What are the habits of _Atta structor_ and _A. barbara_ when
living, as they are known to do, in Switzerland, Germany, and
Northern France?
3. How do the ants contrive to preserve the seeds in their granaries
free from germination and decay?
4. How are the seed-stores of tropical ants disposed below ground,
and of what do they consist?
5. Do harvesting ants exist in the southern states of North America,
in Australia, New Zealand, or at the Cape?
SUPPLEMENT
TO
TRAP-DOOR SPIDERS.
There would doubtless be a just feeling of pride and satisfaction
in the heart of a naturalist who could say that he had made himself
thoroughly acquainted with all the species of a particular group of
animals, had learned their most secret habits, and mastered their
several relations to the objects, animate and inanimate, which
surrounded them. But perhaps a still keener pleasure is enjoyed by
one who carries about with him some problem of the kind but partially
solved, and who, holding in his hand the clue which shall guide him
onwards, sees in each new place that he visits fresh opportunities of
discovery. The latter is certainly the condition of those who take
an interest in searching out the habits and characters of trap-door
spiders; for this subject, far from being exhausted, expands under
the light of recently acquired facts, and invites research in many
parts of Europe, north as well as south.
We have only to compare the number of types of trap-door nest which
were known before the publication of _Ants and Spiders_, with those
at present recorded, to see how fruitful this field of inquiry has
already proved.
Before this little work was published, only one type of trap-door
nest was known in Europe: two new types were described in its pages,
and I have now the pleasure of being able to bring three more
hitherto unknown European types before the notice of my readers, thus
raising the number to six in all. I do not include in these six types
the very curious, and still imperfectly-known nest of _Atypus_;[122]
a spider which is a true representative of the trap-door group as
far as its structural characters are concerned, but which, although
it excavates a silk-lined burrow in the earth, does not appear to
construct any kind of door at the mouth of its tube.
[Footnote 122: See _Ants and Spiders_, page 78. _Atypus_ belongs to
the sub-family _Atypinæ_, a division which does not include any of
the _Nemesias_ or _Ctenizas_, and of which indeed _Atypus_ is the
only European representative.]
Much uncertainty still hangs over the habits of this spider, as the
facts hitherto recorded, though perfectly authentic, are difficult
to piece together into a satisfactory whole. One thing, however,
is clear, and that is, that the nests and habits of the spiders of
the genus _Atypus_ (of which, as Mr. Pickard-Cambridge, informs me,
two if not three distinct species inhabit England) merit attentive
study, and would most certainly repay it. Hastings, Portland, the
coast of Dorsetshire, and the neighbourhood of London and Exeter, are
the habitats hitherto cited for this spider, but I cannot doubt its
existence in many sheltered localities on the south coast of England.
The most recent contribution to our knowledge of this genus is
contained in a paper by M. Eugène Simon,[123] who describes three
species (two of which are new), as inhabiting France, and it remains
to be ascertained whether our British _Atypi_ agree in their
characters with any of these.
[Footnote 123: Note sur les Espèces françaises du genre _Atypus_,
Latr. in Ann. Soc. Entomologique de France, 5^e ser. tom. iii.
(1873), p. 109.]
He describes (p. 113-4) the nest and mode of life of _Atypus piceus_,
Sulzer (=_A. Sulzeri_, Latr.),[124] the commonest of the three
species, as follows:--"They (the spiders) seek dry and somewhat sandy
slopes, sometimes also woods, chiefly plantations of evergreens;
their retreat is always concealed either by stones, or in moss which
one must remove carefully and in large masses (_plâques_) in order to
detect them."
[Footnote 124: Thus named by M. Simon.]
"This Atypus excavates an oblique hole of 15 to 20 centimetres deep,
and of the size of its body; it lines it with a rather narrow silken
tube of a very close texture, the upper part of which, exceeding the
subterranean portion in length, lies horizontally on the surface
of the ground, and ends in an open tapering point. Near its lower
extremity the tube is suddenly contracted, and then dilates into
the form of a fairly spacious apartment, in which the spider lives;
the cocoon enclosing the eggs is suspended by a few threads at the
contraction. I have frequently surprised _Atypus_ in the act of
holding earth-worms in their falces, and I think that these Annelids
constitute the larger part of their food; indeed, if one examines
the lower portion of the silk chamber, one may remark a part where
the tissue is thinner and more transparent. I have not been able to
detect an opening, but it is probable that the _Atypus_ can easily
part the not very compact threads, and thus obtain for itself an easy
prey, and dispense with the necessity of ascending to the surface
of the ground. When taken out of its tube, _Atypus_ does not even
attempt to escape; it is therefore plain that it is not organized
for the pursuit of an active prey; and, on the other hand, the upper
extremity of the tube is ill-adapted for an ambuscade, being almost
closed, and without support. This small opening would seem to be
solely intended for the entrance and exit of the male (a very much
smaller creature than the female) during the breeding season, which
occurs in the month of October."
[Illustration: _Plate XIII_]
M. Simon says that this species of _Atypus_ is common in all the
centre, east and west of France, and that he has detected it in
great abundance in the neighbourhood of Troyes, in Champagne, in the
month of October, when the male was inhabiting the same tube with
the female.[125] I am greatly indebted to M. Simon for having given
me the specimen of a silk tube taken entire from a nest found in
this locality, which I have figured in Plate XIII., fig. A. It will
be seen that the tube has collapsed, but one may still trace the
enlargement near the base which forms the chamber, the elbow where it
is bent at the surface of the ground, the moss, scales, and fibres
of plants which are woven into, and serve to conceal the aërial
portion, and its termination in a twisted and apparently-closed mouth.
[Footnote 125: M. Simon has discovered another species of _Atypus_ at
Digne in the Basses Alpes which constructs a similar nest to that
described above. This species was detected for the first time by M.
Simon and described by him under the name of _Atypus bleodonticus_.]
Indeed, I believe that, in this specimen, the upper extremity of the
tube is really closed, for, when I succeeded in inflating this aërial
portion, the lips did not part, but remained drawn together.
It seems very extraordinary that the mouth of the tube should be thus
closed, so that the female spider becomes a prisoner, self-immured,
and I can only suppose that this is a temporary condition, limited
perhaps to the period during which she receives the visits of the
male.
At the very base of the tube I found a mass of earth, roots and
vegetable fibres, and in this I hoped to have detected the _débris_
of insects or other food, such as I sometimes find at the bottom of
and below the tubes of the trap-door nests in the South, but of this
there was no trace.
It is difficult to me to imagine how the spider could contrive to
live by the capture of worms, after the fashion suggested by M.
Simon; for who does not know the speed with which, on the slightest
alarm, worms draw back into their holes and escape pursuit, and the
muscular power which they exert in resisting any attempts to drag
them out of the earth?
M. Simon's account of the closed tube and capture of worms by this
spider corresponds, however, with that given by Mr. Joshua Brown, the
first discoverer of _Atypus_ in England.
This gentleman communicated his discovery to Mr. Edward Newman[126]
in 1856, since which time (with the exception of M. Simon's paper
quoted above) little or nothing seems to have been done to clear up
the points which remain doubtful in the history of these singular
creatures.
[Footnote 126: Note on _Atypus Sulzeri_ of Latreille, by Mr.
Edward Newman, read before the Linnean Society; a report of this
communication is given in _The Zoologist_, vol. xiv. (1856), p. 5021.]
Several nests of _Atypus_ were discovered by Mr. Joshua Brown in the
neighbourhood of Hastings, when traversing a lane bounded on either
side by high and steep sand-banks, partially covered with grass and
bushes.
His attention was at first arrested by the sight of "something
hanging down which looked like the cocoon of some moth;" but, on
closer examination, the silk case proved to be empty, and was
continued as a tube into the ground to a depth of 9 inches, where he
came upon the spider lying at the bottom. Further research revealed
the existence of a number of these nests in the same locality, but
the length of the different tubes varied much; they were usually
about 9 inches long, but some were much longer, often baffling his
attempts to follow them; the longest which he was able to secure
entire measured 11 inches. All the nests were, however, alike in
having a tubular silk lining, about 3/4 of an inch in diameter, a
part of which protruded from the ground for about 2 inches, and was
pendent, inflated, and covered with particles of sand, assimilating
it to the surrounding surface; it was closed at the upper extremity,
leaving no exit to the open air.
Mr. Brown took home some of these tubes in a collapsed state with
the spider at the bottom. In one case, on opening the box in which
the nest was placed, he perceived a movement throughout the tube,
as if it were being inflated; this however soon subsided, but the
following morning he was surprised to see that the whole tube was
inflated, especially at the end which had lain exposed on the bank.
He failed to find any aperture by which the spider could enter or
leave her nest, and his captives, though passing backwards and
forwards in their tubes, never came out at either end. He never saw
flies or any fragments of insects in the nests; but, on drawing out
one of the tubes, he observed a worm at the lower end, partially
within it, partially outside, and he perceived that the spider
had evidently been eating a considerable portion of its anterior
extremity.
It will readily be seen that there are some discrepancies between the
different accounts which have been given of the nests of _Atypus_
found in England and France,[127] and I think it quite probable that
some at least of the nests described may really differ, and be the
work of distinct species belonging to this genus. Mr. Brown describes
his nests as having by far the greater part of their length under
ground, while in those observed by M. Simon, as shown in my figure,
Plate XIII. fig. A, the exposed portion of the tube equalled or
exceeded the subterranean.
[Footnote 127: A subject already alluded to in _Ants and Spiders_, at
p. 78.]
An imperfect specimen at the British Museum, from some English
station (exact habitat not given), appears to have the proportions
described by Mr. Brown; the length of the aërial portion of the tube
being less than one-fourth of that of the subterranean; the upper
end of the tube is however open, but I am doubtful whether this was
originally so or not, for the silk is torn at this point, and the
opening may be a rent caused by rough handling.
After a comparison of the above description, it appears to me that
the following are the principal points which remain to be cleared up:
1. What is the precise structure of the nests of Atypus, and are they
always uniform in character at all seasons of the year?
2. What is the use of the exposed aërial portion of the tube?
3. Do the two British species make similar nests?
4. What food, besides worms, does the female live upon, and how does
she obtain it?
5. Does she ever leave the nest?
6. What becomes of these spiders and their nests in the winter, and
how long do they live?
7. When do the young leave the nest; and do they, like their
relatives in the South, construct nests like those of their parents
in miniature?
I would commend all these points to any lover of Nature who may
seek the southern coasts of England during the autumn and winter
months, and I think it more than likely that a careful search in
the sandy banks near St. Leonards, the slopes under the fir-woods
of Bournemouth, and the deep lanes in the neighbourhood of Torquay,
would be rewarded with success.
If the breeding season in England only commences in October, as
appears to be the case in France, it would seem most probable that
the spiders survive the winter. Very possibly these spiders and
their nests might be transplanted and placed for observation in a
garden; and if room were granted them in a greenhouse or Wardian
case, or even in a large flower-pot in a living-room, it is not
unlikely that the warmer temperature might waken them up to renewed
activity.
It seems clear that _Atypus_ has to fear the insidious attacks of
enemies; for not only is the external portion of the tube closed or
almost closed at certain seasons, but it is covered outside with such
materials as may serve to make it resemble the surrounding surface
of the ground. Thus Mr. Brown's nests, lying on a sandy bank, were
covered with particles of sand, while my specimen from Troyes has
moss and fibres of plants woven into its upper extremity.
Indeed, all the European representatives of the suborder
_Territelariæ_ which I have myself met with, conceal their nests
with great care and skill. There appear to be others, however, which
either make no nests at all but hide under stones, or only construct
a simple silk tube, open at the mouth, and without any special
contrivance for its dissimulation. Further observation of the habits
and dwellings of these apparently unworthy members of the trap-door
group is much to be desired.
Mr. Bates,[128] in his work on the Amazons, describes _Mygale
(Theraphosa) Blondii_, a large and powerful spider of that region, as
burrowing into the earth and "forming a broad slanting gallery about
three feet long, the sides of which he lines beautifully with silk."
This spider "is nocturnal in his habits," and maybe seen "just before
sunset keeping watch within the mouth of his tunnel, disappearing
suddenly when he hears a heavy foot-tread near his hiding place."
[Footnote 128: Bates, H. W., _Naturalist on the Amazons_, Ed. 2.
(1864).]
This nest would therefore appear to have an open tube undefended
by any door; but in this case the great size of the spider and the
depth of the burrow, which is more than twice as long as that of the
average European nests, may help to explain this apparent want of
precaution.
But, if we wish to learn with what different materials and by what
varied means the same end of self-preservation can be attained, we
have only to cast a glance at the sketch of a portion of a nest at
fig. B, Plate XIII., p. 183, where it will be seen that the entrance
to the nest, far from being concealed or obscured in any way, is
rendered a most striking object, and one which appears devised
for the very purpose of attracting attention. The nest to which I
refer is the work of _Cyrtauchenius elongatus_, from Morocco, and
consists, according to the account given me by its discoverer, M.
Simon, of a deep cylindrical burrow in the soil, the silk lining of
which is prolonged upwards for about three inches above the surface
of the ground, and enlarged into a funnel shape, so that it becomes
from two to three inches across at the orifice. This aërial portion
being snow-white, at once attracts the eye even from a considerable
distance, and the nests rising up amid the sparse grasses and other
small plants which serve to support but not to conceal them, present
the appearance of scattered white fungi.
This is therefore quite a new type among the nests constructed by
trap-door spiders, new in form and probably in function also, and I
would propose to distinguish it provisionally as the _funnel type_.
Now the female _Cyrtauchenius_ is, like its near relatives the
_Nemesias_, a sluggish and rather helpless creature, and shows no
apparent physical superiority which might countenance its dispensing
with the methods of concealment which form the characteristic habit
of the group.
How then does this spider manage to escape its many enemies,
especially the insidious attacks of the insects of the _Sphex_ and
_Ichneumon_ families, which certainly abound in Morocco?
Mr. Wallace, to whom I put the question, suggested that this species
may perhaps be chiefly nocturnal in its habits, and that, if this
is the case, the bright white and flower-like tube of the nest may
possibly serve to attract night flying insects, which would thus
become its prey.
In any case, whether we can discover them or not, some curious points
of difference must exist between this spider and its allies, which
secure to it a comparative immunity.
It appears to me that there are few questions which can be of greater
interest to the naturalist than those which have to do with the
conditions determining the existence of a given species in a given
place.
Of the questions, Who are your relatives? Where do they live? and How
are you able to live here? surely the last is not the least important.
And, if we wish to try to answer this question, we must do all in
our power to find out how the habits and conditions of life of the
creature in question, differ from those of its competitors; for we
may be quite certain that it does not exist where we see it by grace
and favour, but by merit; if it is neither stronger, cleverer nor
more numerous than its neighbours, we may be sure that it has found
some means of living which does not interfere fatally with their
requirements. Hence the endless diversity of function and habits in
all living creatures, which forms such a prolific and marvellous
subject for our study and contemplation.
I am indebted to M. Simon for permission to publish the details given
above on _Cyrtauchenius elongatus_, and also for having given me such
directions as enabled me to make the sketch from which the drawing at
Plate XIII., fig. B, was copied.
I must however state that this illustration is not taken from an
actual specimen, but is prepared solely from his description; so that
it cannot pretend to complete accuracy of detail. M. Simon assured
me nevertheless that it conveyed the general appearance of this
remarkable nest with sufficient fidelity, and I have been induced to
reproduce it here in the hope that it may serve to make my meaning
plainer, and to suggest the kind of object which one should look for,
if an opportunity offered.
Another species of the same genus, _Cyrtauchenius Doleschallii_, is
known to inhabit Sicily, but the nest is undescribed. M. Lucas has
described two species,[129] belonging to the closely-allied genus
_Cyrtocephalus_, both of which appear to construct nests somewhat
similar in form to that discovered by M. Simon. Whether these
nests are equally showy we cannot tell, as the account is brief and
few details are given; but one, that of _Cyrtocephalus terricola_,
appears to differ in having threads stretched from the opening of its
funnel, which serve to ensnare insects and to give notice of these
captures.
[Footnote 129: _Cyrtocephalus Walckenaëri_ and _terricola_, Lucas
(H.), _Animaux articulés de l'Algérie_ (Paris, 1847-9), vol. i. p.
94-5.]
The great trap-door group therefore comprises spiders which differ
widely in respect of their dwelling places. Some construct no nest
at all or only an irregular web, and live under stones; others,
like _Theraphosa Blondii_, make a simple cylindrical tunnel, or,
like those just described, a tube having a prolonged, uncovered,
funnel-shaped mouth: others again, belonging to the genus _Atypus_,
form the curious and as yet imperfectly-understood nests with a
silken tubular lining, part of which hangs down outside; while on the
highest rung of the architectural ladder, stand the builders of the
veritable trap-door nests.
It seems quite possible that, when we know more of the structures
made by _Territelariæ_ generally in various parts of the world, we
shall find that nests of various degrees of complexity and perfection
of structure exist, bridging over the gulf between the barbarous
dwellers under stones and the highly civilized inhabitants of the
branched wafer and cork nests.
Indeed, thanks to recent discoveries, I am already able to do
something of this kind for one small group of spiders, namely, for
that of the European _Nemesias_ having nests with wafer doors.
[Illustration: _Plate XIV._]
I hope to make this plain by reference to the diagrams on Plate XIV.,
where the figures C, D, E, F, and G represent on a reduced scale five
types of wafer nest constructed by as many distinct spiders, and
where a gradation may readily be traced between the simplest type at
C and the most complicated at G; but we shall speak more fully of
this matter by-and-by.
In these diagrams I have placed that representing the nest of
_Atypus_ on the extreme left (A);[130] next to this stands that
of a nest of the cork type (B), a type which must be carefully
distinguished from all the rest. It must not be supposed that the
solid cork door (so called from its resemblance to a short cork
closing the neck of a bottle), is nothing more than a thicker edition
of the wafer door; it is not so, but, on the contrary, possesses a
very characteristic structure of its own, being composed of many
layers of silk, each furnished with a sloping rim of earth, while the
wafer door consists of but a single layer of silk.
[Footnote 130: These types may be briefly enumerated as follows:
A, nest of _Atypus_.
B, cork nest, and B, 1, layers of silk and earth forming the door of the
cork nest.
C, single-door, unbranched wafer nest.
D, single door, branched wafer nest.
E, double-door, unbranched wafer nest, and E, 1, lower door of the same.
F, the Hyères double-door branched wafer nest, and F, 1, lower door of
the same.
G, double-door branched cavity wafer nest, as seen in the oldest and
largest specimens, and G, 1, the same in the younger specimens.
G, 2, the lower door of this nest, being of the same form in young
and old nests.
]
I have represented at B 1 the 14 layers of silk and earth which went
to make a single cork door examined by me. It will be seen that the
outermost of these layers is the largest, and the innermost the
smallest, and I have already (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 150) shown
reason for believing that the latter constituted the first door the
spider ever made, and that the consecutive layers mark successive
stages in the enlargement of the nest.
There is therefore a broad distinction as to construction between
cork nests and wafer nests; moreover, while the former are, as far
as we know at present, all of one type, and only differ in size or
proportion, the latter appear under five distinct types.
Thus, every known cork nest, whether found in Europe, America, or
the Antipodes, has the same solid door and simple tube; while of the
wafer nests, some have branched and others simple tubes, and some
again possess a lower door in addition to the upper or surface door.
In the following pages I intend to treat of the trap-door spiders and
their nests in the same order in which the latter are placed in the
diagram, commencing with those of the cork type B, and then dealing
successively with the several wafer nests from C to G. We have
already spoken of A, the nest of _Atypus piceus_, and seen that our
present knowledge of this nest, of the habits of its occupant and of
those of its relations, is still far from complete.
The cork type is, as my readers will perhaps remember, the great
cosmopolitan type which ranges round the world, and which, curious to
say, is built by many different spiders belonging to distinct genera.
The idea of planning this very perfect bit of mechanism appears to
be the common inheritance of these several spiders, separated though
they are by wide intervals of geographical space as well as to
structural divergence.
At Mentone two distinct spiders construct nests of the cork type,
one of these being a _Nemesia_ and the other a _Cteniza_. They are
as unlike each other as they well can be, and it seems remarkably
strange that their nest-building instinct should be so similar. The
nest of the _Cteniza_ is indeed shallower than that of the _Nemesia_,
and a practised eye can usually trace a difference between the
slightly less angular lower surface and more semi-circular outline
of the door of the former, and the more abruptly bevelled and more
circular door of the latter.
These spiders and their nests have been already described and figured
in _Ants and Spiders_ under the names of _Ct. fodiens_ and _Nemesia
cæmentaria_. Recent discoveries have however shown that these spiders
possess distinctive characters of their own, and, though closely
allied to the species indicated, should be separated from them.
Last spring when pulling down an old terrace-wall (by permission) I
had the good fortune to discover the very remarkable male _Cteniza_
drawn at fig. A, Pl. XX., p. 254. I found no trace of a nest or web
of any kind, and the spider was merely hiding between the stones.
There appears to be scarcely any doubt that this is the male of the
female Mentonese _Cteniza_ which has, up to this time, been called
_Ct. fodiens_. A comparison with typical specimens of the true _Ct.
fodiens_ from Corsica, has however shown that the two are certainly
distinct, and Mr. Pickard-Cambridge[131] now describes the Mentonese
form under the name of _Ct. Moggridgii_.[132]
[Footnote 131: Mr. Pickard-Cambridge has once more kindly undertaken
the task of naming and describing my collections of trap-door
spiders, and the results of his labours will be found at the end of
the present work.]
[Footnote 132: I take this opportunity of thanking him for the
compliment. A description of this new species will be found at p.
254, below.]
The females of the true _Cteniza fodiens_ are far larger than those
of our new Mentonese species, and construct their nests in dry and
exposed places, instead of in the moist and shady ivy-covered banks
selected by the latter. I have found _Cteniza Moggridgii_ at San Remo
and Mentone, and it will probably be also discovered at Nice, but I
failed to detect it either at Cannes or Hyères.
The Corsican male at the first glance curiously resembles that found
at Mentone, but differs essentially in details and especially in
having the surface of the caput unbroken, whereas the caput of the
latter presents a very peculiar character in an impressed line which
runs across it from side to side (figs. A 1 and A 2). Both agree,
however, in being strangely unlike their females.
The other builder of a nest of the cork type at Mentone was, as has
been already stated, described and figured in _Ants and Spiders_
under the name of _Nemesia cæmentaria_. Now the true _N. cæmentaria_
of Latreille is found at Montpellier, the classical habitat where the
first discovery of trap-door spiders in Europe was made towards the
end of the last century, but its true characters have been hitherto
but imperfectly known.
I have lately been able to secure several specimens at this place,
and they certainly differed in their markings from the so-called
_cæmentaria_ of Mentone. M. Simon had previously informed me that
he considered our Mentonese spider distinct from the typical
_cæmentaria_, and had kindly proposed to give my name to the
Mentonese species; and now Mr. Pickard-Cambridge, on the receipt
of the specimens collected by me at Montpellier, coincides with M.
Simon, and adopts his nomenclature, calling the Mentonese _Nemesia N.
Moggridgii_.[133]
[Footnote 133: See below, p. 273.]
I found but one nest of the cork type at Montpellier, where it was
most abundant, and invariably inhabited by the same spider, so that
there can be little doubt that this is the celebrated _Nemesia
cæmentaria_ of Latreille, the nests of which were described by the
Abbé Sauvages in 1763.
When living, the pattern on the abdomen is far more distinct and is
traced on a paler ground than in _N. Moggridgii_, and the patterns
on the back of the caput, as seen in specimens preserved in spirits,
and the relative sizes of the lateral eyes, as well as other details
enumerated by Mr. Pickard-Cambridge, afford characters by which they
may be known apart; and it is probable that when the males, which
are at present unknown, shall be discovered, they will be found to
present other distinctive peculiarities. In the present instance
we have the reverse of the case described above, in which two very
distinct spiders constructed a similar nest, for here both spiders
and nests are much alike.
We have yet to learn what are the special advantages which each
type of nest affords; but it is plain from the fact of the
same type being adopted indifferently by both nearly- and most
distantly-related spiders, that the form of the nest is governed far
more by the conditions which it is contrived to meet, than by the
affinity or resemblance of the spiders which construct it.
I have found _N. Moggridgii_ at San Remo, Mentone, Cannes, Hyères,
and Marseilles, but thus far, I only know of the true _N. cæmentaria_
at Montpellier.
The latter spider is rather bolder than the former, and I frequently
saw it at Montpellier watching at the slightly raised door, with the
tips of the claws projecting from the nest, and it rarely failed to
resist most vigorously any attempt of mine to force the door open.
During the summer of 1873, I received two specimens of trap-door
nests from California. Both of these nests were of the cork type and
nearly entire, wanting only a small portion of the base of the tube;
they most closely resembled one another and were probably the work
of the same spider. For one of these, coming from the San Joaquin
valley, between the Calaveras and the Tejon, I have to thank M. J. C.
Puls, a Belgian entomologist residing at Ghent; and for the other,
containing the spider which had constructed it _alive within its
tube_ (!), I am indebted to Mr. G. H. Treadwell of San Francisco. The
former nest is drawn at fig. A, Plate XV., and the spider[134] from
the latter at fig. B of the same plate.
[Footnote 134: This spider, which proves to be a new species, is
described below (p. 260) as _Cteniza Californica_.]
[Illustration: _Plate XV._]
Mr. Treadwell had carried this spider and its nest, with the block
of earth in which it lay, all the way from Visalia, a town about 350
miles south of San Francisco, where he had taken it; the nest and
spider travelled safe to London enclosed in an empty cocoatina tin,
4-1/2 inches deep, and 2-3/4 across.
The nest was then entire, for these spiders appear to make singularly
shallow tubes; and it might have remained so up to the present day
had it not been for the rash curiosity of a chambermaid in the London
hotel where Mr. Treadwell was staying, who, smitten with a great
desire to learn what the heavy little box which came from the land of
gold might contain, proceeded to examine the earth, when the sudden
appearance of the spider frightened her so much that box and nest and
all were thrown with a crash upon the floor.
Were it not for this unlucky incident I might have seen a complete
specimen of this curious nest; but as it was, though the spider
miraculously escaped uninjured, the bottom of the nest was pounded
into dust, and only the upper portion remained intact.
Both this nest and that sent to me by M. Puls, were of the true cork
type, and presented a solid door with a bevelled edge, fitting into
the correspondingly bevelled lip of the tube, and shutting flush with
the surface of the ground. The lining of the tube was strong and
thick, but soft and silky to the touch.
The tube itself in Mr. Treadwell's specimen, when intact, cannot have
measured more than 3-1/2 inches in length; and we learn from Dr.
Lanzwert, who collected the other specimen, that the average length
of these nests does not exceed three inches. Dr. Lanzwert, writing
in one of the local papers[135] of "The Mygales or Ground Spiders,"
says, "the poisonous black tarantulas, so well known to naturalists,
are extremely common in California, but only in places upland, or
lowland which are very hot and dry. Their principal haunts are the
San Joaquin valley, between the Calaveras and the Tejon. A similar
species from the coast is not only smaller than the interior variety,
but the colours are much deeper. They both make a curious habitation
under the ground, composed of a glutinized, web-worked purse, about
three inches long, and which is furnished with a tightly-fitting lid
which they can open or shut at pleasure, and which is as cunning a
piece of insect architecture as is to be found in nature. These ugly
loathsome Californian spiders are often mentioned by thoughtless
scribes as carrying no more danger than a common wasp, like the
species of Italy, but it is well known that several persons, young
and old, have lost their lives in this State from the bite of such
tarantulas as are met with in our coast and interior country. Their
enemy in the Tulare valley is an immense shining black wasp,[136]
fully an inch long, which will pounce upon them, and after a short
battle drag the tarantula along in the most valiant style of heroic
conquest. These interior tarantulas are often seen measuring two
inches in the spread."
[Footnote 135: _The Evening Bulletin_ for Oct. 25, 1866.]
[Footnote 136: This insect was probably not a true wasp, though
belonging to an allied family; it may perhaps have been a _Pepsis_,
certain species of which genus Mr. Bates informs me he has frequently
seen near Santarem on the Amazon, hawking over the ground where the
huge trap-door spiders lived, and suddenly pouncing down upon one of
these creatures, often many times larger than themselves, when, after
paralysing their victim with their sting, they would deliberately saw
off the legs before dragging away the bodies!]
Mr. Treadwell was quite as much impressed as Dr. Lanzwert with the
belief that the bite of these spiders is fatal, but it does not
appear that either of these gentlemen have obtained conclusive
evidence in support of this allegation.
I have occasionally been bitten by the trap-door spiders in South
France, but have never experienced the slightest subsequent
inconvenience, nor was there any trace of inflammation or poisoning
about the punctures which they made. Mr. Blackwall[137] has made a
very careful set of observations on this head, and has caused some of
the largest species of British spiders to bite his finger and wrist
until the blood flowed, without the slightest ill effects. He also
inoculated himself at the same time with the poisonous secretion of
the spider and with that of the wasp; when the latter wound became
extremely painful, while the former was not perceptibly aggravated.
Mr. Blackwall obtained the spiders' poison by causing a spider to
seize a slip of clean glass with its mandibles, when a small quantity
of a liquid showing a slightly acid reaction was deposited.
[Footnote 137: Mr. J. Blackwall, _Researches in Zoology_, ed. 2, 1873;
chapter on "The Poison of the Araneidea," pp. 240-256.]
Mr. Treadwell informed me that these Californian trap-door spiders
leave their nests in the daytime, and may be seen walking by the
roadside, though they are always prepared to hurry back to their
nests on the approach of danger.
I received the spider which I have represented at fig. B, Pl. XV.,
p. 198 (_Cteniza Californica_), from this gentleman alive, and still
within the remaining portion of her nest, on the 6th of July, 1873.
She then had the legs and cephalothorax of a brownish-black, and
the abdomen of a dull, uniform, dusky chocolate brown, but with an
indistinct median line near the anterior end on the upper side,
intersected at right angles by a shorter line. Mr. Treadwell said,
however, that when captured, this spider was much darker, and of a
pitchy black colour. The hairs all over the body were short, but
especially so on the abdomen, which had the appearance of cloth or
felt.
This creature in many ways recalls _Cteniza fodiens_ of Corsica, and
in a less degree the _Cteniza_ of Mentone and San Remo.
We find not only the same general form of body, but also the same
claws furnished with only one tooth, instead of many as in _Nemesia_,
and other distinctive features; and it is interesting to observe in
the nest that the more semi-circular form of the door and the wider
hinge also connect it rather with _Cteniza_ than with _Nemesia_.
Here, as in all spiders yet observed in cork nests, we find the habit
of resisting any attempt to open the door, and many a time when I
have wished to raise the lid in order to drop in flies or other
food, I have been obliged to desist because the bending blade of my
penknife showed that I should injure the nest if I used greater force.
No doubt the shallowness of the nest is an advantage to its occupant
in one way--namely, that it enables the spider to start up at the
shortest notice, and cling on to the door.
It is curious to find that, far as California is removed from the
Riviera, the same habits of construction and self-defence are common
to the spiders of both countries, and that the bond of kinship sets
time and space at defiance.
I kept this spider all through the summer and early autumn at
Richmond (Surrey), sprinkling the nest from time to time with water,
and constantly supplying its inhabitant with flies, wood-lice,
grasshoppers, earwigs, and other similar dainties. She did not,
however, seem eager for food, and the insects provided for her, and
actually placed within the nest, were often turned out again almost
untouched.
When I placed living insects, such as grasshoppers, for example,
within the nest over-night, she would often allow them to remain
there unharmed, so that I found them ready to escape on opening the
door the following morning.
I never saw her leave the nest of her own free will, and when I made
her come out and set her to run in the garden, she began at once to
seek for a place to hide in, hobbling along in an ungainly way and at
a slow pace.
She must, however, have left the nest on more than one occasion,
unseen by me, for she deposited several clusters of eggs at various
times upon the under-surface of the gauze net which was fastened over
the mouth of the box in which she was imprisoned.
The first of these groups of eggs was laid during the night between
the 12th and 13th of July, and formed a raspberry-shaped cluster
attached to the gauze.
I have represented this cluster of the natural size at fig. B, 6, and
magnified at fig. B, 7, on Plate XV., only in an inverted position,
for they really hung downwards from the under side of the net.
These eggs were greyish white or pale brown, and varied in shape from
globose to oblong.
All were very small, the largest only measuring 1/2 line in its
greatest length, but it is doubtful whether any of these eggs were
fertile, and, though they appeared full and plump, many presented an
irregular and fissured surface.
A fortnight later (July 27) another cluster of eggs was laid, and
this time between the hours of five and eight P.M. When the lamp was
brought in at the latter hour, I perceived what I took to be a drop
of water hanging from the gauze cover above and rather in front of
the spider's door, the very position occupied by the cluster of eggs
previously described. On closer inspection this proved to be a drop
of a pellucid colourless liquid, in which some thirty eggs floated.
One egg was laid on the gauze at some distance from the main group,
and several were also attached to the inside of the tin box.
At midnight I found that the drop had coagulated and contracted, and
by the following morning the mass was quite dry and resembled the
former group, only that it was not quite so convex.
Some of the eggs forming this cluster were much larger than any in
the preceding one, and one measured as much as a line in length by
half a line in breadth. This group is shown magnified at fig. B, 8,
Plate XV., and some of the separate eggs more highly magnified at
fig. B, 9.
Between this date and the end of November when the spider died, eggs
were laid on seven distinct occasions--viz., on July 31, August 11,
15, 31 (when I again found the eggs floating in a drop of liquid,
having been deposited on the gauze between two and half-past four
o'clock in the afternoon); September 9 (23 eggs laid on the earth
near the entrance to the nest); September 19 (about 30 eggs on the
gauze), and November 4 (about 30 eggs on the gauze).
Thus, between July 13 and November 4, this spider laid nine clusters
of eggs, all but one of which were placed on the same part of the
gauze cover, above and a little in front of the door, and the total
number of eggs deposited cannot have been less than 250. It is
difficult to understand why she should have laid these eggs outside
the nest, unless indeed she knew them to be sterile, and so treated
them as refuse. I can scarcely believe that such a procedure is in
accordance with the ordinary habits of these spiders; for, if the
eggs and young are habitually exposed, then the perfect concealment
of the nest would lose one of its most important uses. When we
remember that there are minute hymenopterous insects which lay their
eggs within the eggs of the spiders, we can see how important it
may be that the entrance to a nest, which is at once nursery and
stronghold, should be closed by a well-fitting door, and one which
may exclude, not only the larger and more powerful enemies of the
full-grown spiders, but also the tiny and almost imperceptible
assailants of the eggs and young.
This Californian spider was always careful to eject from the nest
the remains of insects with which I had supplied her, and, as she
did so deliberately and by day as well as by night, I had frequent
opportunities of watching her. Sometimes, if not alarmed by any
sudden movement, she would remain for one or two minutes at the mouth
of the nest with the door partly raised, and I was glad to seize
these opportunities for making some experiments, with a view to
learning whether she would prove as sensitive to sound as she did to
other vibrations and to the sight of moving objects.
Placing myself so that the partly-opened door screened me from her
view, I was able to approach close to the nest without causing her
alarm, and to make different sounds and noises at distances varying
from three to fourteen inches.
In no case, however, did she pay the slightest attention; and neither
shrill and sudden whistling, deep chest and buzzing sounds, an octave
of piercing notes struck upon brass bells, my best imitation of
the whirring of the fern owl, or finally, the angry hum of a large
humble-bee imprisoned in a paper box, and held within three inches of
the door of the nest, appeared to produce any kind of effect. This
surprised me, I confess, for, though I am aware that no auditory
apparatus has as yet been discovered in spiders, I can scarcely
believe that they stand at so great a disadvantage as creatures would
seem to do which lack the power of hearing.
These experiments must not, however, be taken for more than they are
worth; and the results obtained may have been due rather to apathy
in the individual spider than to a want of perception in the race
generally. In any case they suggest the need of further experiment
and observation in this direction.
In October I carried this Californian spider out with me to Mentone,
and she lived there and appeared plump and well until the end of the
following month, when she suddenly died, having laid one more group
of eggs in the interval. On examination, I found a dark brown spot on
one side of the abdomen, and this, I think, probably indicates that
her death was caused by some insect of the ichneumon family, which
had laid its eggs within the spider's body, after having stabbed it
at the place indicated by the discolouration.
Not very long before this melancholy event occurred, I had put the
spider to some inconvenience in order to secure her portrait from
life, to effect which I took her from her nest and placed her in a
deep china saucer.
She exhibited the strongest dislike to exposure, and sought to hide
herself even under a fold of blotting-paper which lay in the saucer
with her. I also noted that she appeared quite incapable of walking
up the sides of the saucer, and it would therefore seem that she was
destitute of the viscid hairs which enable some spiders to traverse
glazed and polished surfaces.
Seeing this anxiety on the part of the spider for concealment, it
came into my mind that, perhaps, if she were placed on the surface
of a pot full of garden mould she might excavate a tunnel in order
to hide herself from view. This I accordingly did in the evening of
November 15, and on the following morning I was delighted to find
that she had commenced to dig and was still at work.
In little more than an hour's time the hollow had become about the
size of half a walnut, and resembled in its nearly semi-circular
outline and size the surface of the door of her own nest. I was
greatly pleased to be able to watch the creature at the work of
excavation, a sight which I believe no naturalist has ever had before.
The legs took no part in the digging, and the palpi were but little
used, the mandibles and their fangs being the implements chiefly
employed. As soon as a little earth had been loosened and gathered
up, the spider walked up to the edge of her excavation and deposited
there her mouthful of particles of earth, separating and working the
mandibles up and down in the effort to part with the pellet, which
had been carried between the fangs and the mouth-organs. Each pellet
was very small, and the operation appeared to be excessively tedious
and laborious. I had expected to see the spider scrape out large
quantities of earth at a time, and either drag it backwards or kick
it out behind her as a terrier does when working at a rabbit-burrow;
but no, every little pellet removed was carried forwards, and
deposited separately on the "tip."
On the two following days, the 17th and 18th November, the spider
remained almost inactive, and brooded over the cavity she had made,
and which still remained too shallow to conceal or even contain her.
At 4 P.M. on the latter day I made a hole for her in the earth, and,
after some indecision, she took possession of it. Next day, however,
finding that she remained motionless in the hole which I had made,
and displayed no apparent intention of either lining it with silk or
furnishing it with a door, I replaced her in her own nest.
Within a few days after this date I found her dead at the bottom of
her tube, and at first I was inclined to fear that the treatment
to which she had lately been subjected might have caused her end.
When, however, I detected the brown spot on the side of the abdomen,
described above, and which so strongly recalled the marks frequently
observable in caterpillars attacked by ichneumons, I came to the
conclusion that she had really died from the internal injuries caused
by the gnawing of these cruel parasites; and that the eggs, laid long
before by one of these insects, had been hatched within her body
and developed into larvæ, which, living upon her tissues, had at
length destroyed some vital part. It is surprising that a creature,
carrying within itself such a fatal brood, should not only live,
but be capable of undergoing such adventures and misadventures as
this travelled spider endured with seeming indifference; but similar
facts are familiar to all those who have attended to the rearing of
caterpillars, and the frequent disappointment caused by the death of
apparently sound specimens which have been attacked in this way is
but too well known.
It would appear that _Cteniza Californica_ is peculiarly amenable to
captivity, and indeed to captivity of the strictest kind.
My specimen lived during all the time she was in my possession
in a cocoatina tin, a cylindrical box 4-1/2 in. deep and 2-3/4
in. in diameter, which always stood among the books and papers on
my writing-table. It is probable that those trap-door spiders
which inhabit nests with short tubes, and which therefore can be
transported nest and all, would be less disconcerted by imprisonment
than is the case with other kinds living at the bottom of a long
burrow which it is almost impossible to carry away entire. This is
borne out by what has been related (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 122) of
the habits of _Cteniza ionica_ in captivity, which not only endured
to have its nest set upside down in a flower-pot, but actually
furnished the inverted base of the tube with a door appropriate to
its new position.
Canon Tristram (the well-known author and naturalist) was so kind
as to send me two trap-door nests from Palestine for inspection;
these were small cork nests, the doors of which resembled those
of the Mentonese _Cteniza_ (_Ct. Moggridgii_), but the tubes were
exceedingly short, and that of the more perfect specimen, as I gather
from Canon Tristram, measured only two inches and an eighth in length
when entire.
The nests of _Cteniza ionica_ are but little longer, and that of the
Mentonese _Cteniza_, though never so shallow as these, are far less
deep than those of _Nemesia cæmentaria_, the builder of the typical
cork nest.
And now we will leave the nests of the cork type and their
inhabitants, and turn to the more intricate group of nests belonging
to the wafer type. Following the order indicated in the diagrams, we
will begin with the simplest type of all, fig. C, and afterwards take
the remaining types one after the other, advancing until we reach the
most complex type, G. The nest represented diagrammatically at fig.
C, in Plate XIV., is shown of the natural size in Plate XVI., with
the spider (_Nemesia Simoni_, Camb.) which constructs it (fig. A 1).
[Illustration: _Plate XVI._]
It belongs to the single-door unbranched wafer type, of which one
example has already been described in the West Indian nest (see _Ants
and Spiders_, p. 79, fig. B in woodcut); for, though this latter has
a shorter tube and a much stouter silk lining than is the case with
its European representative, there does not appear to be sufficient
difference to justify their separation as distinct types.
This, which is the simplest known form of trap-door nest, is quite
new to Europe, and the spider inhabiting it proves also to be one
hitherto undescribed; it has received from Mr. Pickard-Cambridge,
the name of _Nemesia Simoni_,[138] being so called in honour of M. E.
Simon, the well-known arachnologist.
[Footnote 138: Mr. Pickard-Cambridge describes _N. Simoni_ at p. 297
below. This species is remarkably well characterized, an assertion
rarely to be made in the case of those _Nemesias_ of which, as in the
present instance, the female only is known. The elevated, rounded,
and glabrous caput at once distinguishes it, not to speak of other
peculiarities. Mr. Pickard-Cambridge alludes to the presence, in the
specimens forwarded to him in spirits, of two singular indentations
on either side of the caput (fig. A 3, Plate XVI.). I did not observe
this when these spiders were alive, but I remember that the caput of
one of these spiders which had been injured in capture contracted and
expanded spasmodically, presenting a painful resemblance to laboured
breathing. I have not observed this in other spiders.]
During last May (1874) we spent a few days at Bordeaux on our
homeward route. While there my sister was fortunate enough to
discover a single nest of this type when we were out together on a
spider-hunt near the little village of Lormont, which is situated on
the opposite bank of the river to that on which the city stands. We
subsequently found these nests in tolerable abundance in a deep shady
lane near a restaurant called Mon Répos, on the same side of the
river, but rather farther up.
Here the hedge banks were high, and the soil was composed of a fine
even-grained loam of great depth, which permitted the spiders to
carry their tubes very far down, some of them attaining a length of
15 inches.
This made it very difficult to follow them throughout their whole
course and so to assure oneself of the real structure of the nests,
but I succeeded in doing this in twelve instances.
In every one of these I found the tube cylindrical and unbranched
throughout, and destitute of any trace of a lower door.
This deficiency alone distinguishes the present type from that to
which the nest of _Nemesia Eleanora_ belongs; the latter being of the
_double-door_ and the former of the _single-door, unbranched wafer
type_.
But perhaps it may be asked whether it is safe to assume that because
twelve examples of this nest were found to correspond in structure,
and were tenanted by the same occupant, that therefore all the
Bordeaux nests in which this particular spider might be found would
present similar peculiarities.
I greatly hope that other naturalists will put this question to the
test of actual investigation on the spot, but I do not hesitate to
assert my conviction that this will prove to be the case.
The result of my experience among the nests of the other _Nemesias_,
scores of which I have carefully examined in many widely separated
localities, shows that a given spider is invariably associated with
a fixed type of nest.
Thus, Cannes is from fifty to sixty miles distant from San Remo, but
the nests of _N. cæmentaria_, _N. Manderstjernæ_, and _N. Eleanora_
show precisely the same characteristics in either place.
Moreover, the twelve nests referred to were not all taken from one
restricted locality at Bordeaux, but were found presenting the same
characteristics and occupied by the same spider in three distinct
habitats, distant some miles from one another. In two nests several
young spiders were found with the mother, and, in one case where the
family consisted of twenty-three young ones, I observed that they
were not all equally small, and some had nearly attained one-third of
their full size.
This agreed with the fact that no very small nests were observed, and
it seems probable that the young are not turned out of their nursery
quite so early as some of their relations are at Mentone. This,
however, varies perhaps in accordance with changes of climate and
local conditions.
We failed to detect any other type of nest at Bordeaux than the one
described above: and even the cork nests, which we had shortly before
seen in such abundance at Montpellier, were apparently absent.
Bordeaux is by far the north-westernmost point in Europe[139] at
which any spider constructing a true trap-door nest has as yet been
discovered; and the fact that they exist in a climate so different
from that of the Riviera and of the whole Mediterranean region,
leads me to hope that their range may in reality be much more widely
extended than has hitherto been supposed to be the case.
[Footnote 139: Cork nests have however been mentioned as occurring in
the neighbourhood of Lyons, which lies in nearly the same parallel of
latitude with Bordeaux.]
A glance at the vegetation of this district will suffice to show how
little there is that betokens either a warm or dry winter climate;
for here the myrtles, oranges and olives are left far behind, and in
their place we see tall hedgerow elms, and poplars bearing mistletoe
on their branches.
Here therefore we are met by the question, How do these Bordeaux
spiders contrive to live under conditions so different from those to
which their relations on the Riviera have adapted themselves? How do
they bear the cold and damp of the long winter, and how is it that
one frail upper door suffices to protect their nest from molestation?
The thick coating of dead leaves, which covered the banks even when
we found them, no doubt aids largely in their concealment, and the
colder climate probably diminishes the number of their enemies, but
their means of subsistence are most likely also less abundant and
their period of active life shorter.
The next type we have to consider is a totally new one, and may be
distinguished as the _single-door branched wafer nest_. I detected
this nest at Montpellier but a few days before the visit to Bordeaux
alluded to above.
Circumstances unfortunately prevented me from following up my
discovery as closely as I could have wished, and it appears moreover
that this nest is far less common at Montpellier than the typical
cork nest (_Nemesia cæmentaria_).
[Illustration: _Plate XVII._]
I hope therefore that other naturalists will make further
investigations, and especially that they will endeavour to secure the
male.
I obtained twelve spiders and thoroughly followed the course of
ten nests; I opened thirteen more nests, but failed to trace their
structure satisfactorily.
The upper part of this nest is shown of the natural size in Plate
XVII. with the spider (_Nemesia suffusa_, Camb.[140]) which constructs
it. This is again a wafer nest without any lower door, and this
absence of a lower door alone distinguishes it as a type from the
branched nest represented at F in the diagram, just as the same
deficiency separated the Bordeaux type from that at fig. E.
[Footnote 140: We have again in this instance an exemplification of
the rule that a new type of nest indicates the presence of a new
spider, and hitherto, this rule has proved without exception. Mr.
Pickard-Cambridge's description of _N. suffusa_ will be found at
p. 295, below. Its slender proportions, cylindrico-ovate abdomen,
marked with narrow linear chevrons, and caput without, or almost
without, any median line or marking, form some of its more striking
characteristics.]
In this new single-door branched type, the branch makes a more or
less acute angle with the main tube, and reaches the surface of the
ground, but is there closed by a layer of particles of earth slightly
bound together with silk, forming an immovable cover or thatch. This
cover constitutes, however, but a slight obstruction and could easily
be torn away by the spider if she needed to use this passage as a way
of escape.
These nests were tolerably plentiful at a place called Les Mourines,
a short distance from Montpellier, where they were mixed with cork
nests in the steep hedge banks. The nests were from 8 to 10 inches
deep, and, as in all the trap-door nests which I have examined, were
tenanted by the female alone. It seems strange that this spider,
building as she does a nest apparently but poorly furnished either
for concealment or defence, should be able to enter into competition
with _N. cæmentaria_, whose solid, closely-fitting door appears so
perfectly contrived for both. It will probably be found, however,
when we are better acquainted with their respective ways of life,
that they are really more nearly on a footing than they seem to be
at first sight. I detected the remains of ants and the elytra of a
beetle in one of these branched single-door nests. Now these may also
be found in cork nests, so that _Nemesia suffusa_ evidently competes
with _cæmentaria_ for its food, and this is of course the main cause
of contention between all living creatures.
It is possible, that, if we knew all the uses to which the branch
is put by the spider which constructs it, we should find that the
advantages derived in the way of security from the existence of this
second passage, counterbalance those possessed by the cork nest,
which, though so perfectly closed, has only the one tube, and no
other possible way of escape.
It may perhaps be no more than a coincidence, but we can scarcely
avoid commenting upon the fact, that, just as this Montpellier wafer
nest is simpler in construction than any found along the Riviera, so
in like manner is the Bordeaux nest simpler than that of Montpellier.
It thus becomes tempting to ask whether, in the case of these wafer
nests, we shall not discover that the colder and damper climates are
the homes of the builders of the simpler types, while the warmer and
drier ones, where more food, more enemies and more competitors are
found, are reserved for the architects of the more complicated nests.
Doubtless naturalists will soon discover wafer nests on the slopes
of the Pyrenees, as for example at Pau and other winter stations in
South-western France; and perhaps the coast of the Bay of Biscay may
also yield specimens, even to the north of Bordeaux. If so, this
curious speculation as to whether there is any relation between
simplicity of structure and warmth of climate, will be put on its
trial.
About the very time when I was engaged in digging out these new wafer
nests at Montpellier, the celebrated arachnologist, Dr. L. Koch of
Nuremberg, had just published[141] an account and figure of a very
remarkable nest which he had received from Australia, and which,
though differing both in form and proportions from the Montpellier
nest, may nevertheless perhaps be referred to the present single-door
branched wafer type.
[Footnote 141: Dr. L. Koch, _Arachniden Australiens_, 10te. Lieferuug,
Nurnberg, 1874, tab. xxxvii. fig. 3, p. 484.]
This Australian nest, the exact habitat of which is not mentioned, is
constructed by a spider now described for the first time under the
name of _Idioctis helva_. The nest has a wafer-door about the size
of a sixpence, closing a vertical tube less than half an inch long,
which meets and opens into a horizontal tube about three inches in
length, and forms with it what may be roughly likened to the figure
of a capital T inverted, thus, ┹.
The upstroke of the T is however, very short, and one of the arms is
longer than the other, and curved downwards at its extremity. This
is, as far as I know, the first recorded example of a wafer-nest from
the Antipodes, and it may be regarded as one of the first fruits of
a harvest which lies ready for the reaping of any naturalist resident
in those parts. Hitherto the only nests which I have seen or heard of
from Australia were of the cork type (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 132).
Next in order to the single-door branched wafer comes the
_double-door unbranched wafer_ type, which is the simplest of all
the nests possessing two doors. This habitation, the work of _N.
Eleanora_, has been already described (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 106),
and I have not much to add to the account there given.
Perhaps some of my readers may remember that, while I was actually
engaged on the proofs of _Ants and Spiders_ I had one of these
_Eleanora_ spiders in captivity, and that I gave an account (p. 148)
of her behaviour up to the latest moment possible. She had been
captured on October 23, 1872, and placed, together with five young
ones found with her in the nest, on the surface of some earth in
a medium-sized flower-pot covered over with gauze. The young ones
soon made nests for themselves in the earth, each furnished with its
little door, but the mother roamed about on the surface of the soil,
and it was not until she had been twenty-one days in captivity that
she commenced spinning a silk cell.
This cell in twelve days' time presented the form of a rude figure
of 8, and had an aperture at either end; it was just large enough to
contain the spider when the legs were extended; its upper surface
was attached to the gauze covering of the pot, and its lower to the
earth. It was at this stage that the record was broken off, and I
will now relate the remainder of the history.
Four days before the cell was commenced, the spider had covered
the under surface of the gauze with a semi-transparent film of a
substance resembling varnish, which formed a band about three inches
long by half an inch wide, close to where the rim of the flower-pot
threw the most shade. It was at one extremity of this band that the
silk-cell was formed, but it is important to note that this band of
varnish was longer than the cell, which only measured an inch and a
quarter from end to end, for we shall see that the layer of varnish
was apparently laid with a view to further operations.
In four days after the completion of the cell its form was modified,
and, during the next ten days (up to December 21st), the spider
gradually thickened the walls, and made the form of the cell more and
more cylindrical, sometimes closing and at other times opening the
extremities.
Between December 14th and 25th, she lengthened out the cell by
spinning a cylindrical silk tube in prolongation of one end, and this
tube followed the course of the band of varnish, the whole measuring
three-and-a-half inches in length by about half an inch in diameter.
It would appear therefore from the correspondence in length between
the band of varnish and this silk tube, that she had contemplated
the construction of the latter when she first commenced her work on
November 3rd.
On January 19th the silk tube parted from the gauze, leaving only
the enlarged end which formed the cell still adhering to it. On the
following day I observed the very curious fact that when I sprinkled
the nest with water, as it was my custom to do every morning, the
tube, which had become somewhat flaccid since it had lost its
attachment to the gauze, gradually recovered its perfect shape. This
was repeated for eleven days, until on the morning of the twelfth
day (January 31st), finding the tube completely collapsed, instead
of merely sprinkling water over it, I drew a large camel-hair brush
loaded with water along its whole length, when the tube started up,
and almost instantaneously regained its cylindrical form.
This morning the spider had left her cell, and was roaming about
the pot when I wetted the tube, thus proving that she was in no way
concerned with its movements, which were no doubt due to hygrometric
action.
Between this time and February 25th, I constantly restored the tube
to its shape by wetting it in the way above described, but on this
day it remained very flaccid, and only expanded partially. For some
days previous to this date, the spider had left the tube when it
collapsed, and only returned to it again when it had resumed its
shape. On the following day I found the entire silk tube and the cell
again collapsed and lying flat upon the ground, and this time water
failed to produce its previous effect.
The spider then became very restless and excited, and I observed
that the door of one of the little nests constructed by one of her
five offspring which had been imprisoned in the same pot with her,
had been torn off, and thrown on one side, and there could be little
doubt but that the mother had been guilty of this very un-maternal
action. By the evening she had pulled up her collapsed tube from
its attachment to the earth, and had coiled it in a confused heap.
Seeing this, and fearing that, in her distress and excitement, she
might do further damage to the young spiders, which had up to that
time thriven well, I made a cylindrical hole for her in the earth,
supposing that she would at once take possession of it. On the
following morning, however, the mother spider had advanced some way
in building another figure-of-8 cell, rising the shrivelled silk of
her previous dwelling as a foundation.
In twenty-four hours this second cell was complete, and closely
resembled the former one, save that the smaller end of the 8 was
turned in the opposite direction, but, on examining it, I found to my
surprise that it was empty! The spider had taken possession of the
hole I had made for her, which she had at first refused to notice,
and was busily employed in lining it with silk and furnishing it with
a covering composed of silk with earth and fragments of moss woven
into the surface. By mid-day the aperture was completely closed, but
there was no moveable door. From this time (February 28) up to April
12, the spider lived in this hole, which she eventually furnished
with a distinct wafer-door, and, as I found on opening the nest, with
a typical lower door also. This latter was not neatly made, but still
it possessed all features the essential which characterize these
lower doors in the nests of _N. Eleanora_.
So this captive _Nemesia Eleanora_ lived in a flower-pot in my
bedroom for more than five months and a half, during which time she
absolutely refused to burrow or to attempt any kind of excavation,
but passed the greater part of that period on the surface of the
earth in a silk tube ending in an oblong enlargement, utterly unlike
her normal habitation. Finally, when I had done the digging for her,
she furnished the cylindrical hole I had bored in the earth with a
silk lining, and made it secure with her own two typical doors.
The figure-of-8 cell which she constructed at first, and subsequently
modified until it became the oblong enlargement of the tube alluded
to above, was totally unlike any form of trap-door spider's nest
known to me; but in its ultimate shape (which resembled that of the
glass part of a thermometer with an oblong bulb, save that it was
curved and not straight), I think we may trace some resemblance
to the silk tube which is made by _Atypus_, and of which a figure
is given at A, Plate XIII., p. 183; the mouth of the tube made
by my captive was, however, open. It is curious, also, when we
recall this resemblance, to note that Mr. Brown has recorded, in
his observations alluded to above (p. 185), that the tube of one
of the nests of _Atypus_, which he brought home in a collapsed
state, showed a somewhat similar tendency to become distended. For,
on opening the box in which they had been carried, he perceived a
movement throughout the tube as if it were becoming inflated, and
though this inflation appeared to subside shortly after, yet the
following morning the tube had recovered its cylindrical shape. I
am tempted to believe, though this is mere conjecture, that the box
in which these tubes were put contained moisture, and that their
apparent inflation was due to the same hygrometric action which, was
displayed in the tube of _N. Eleanora_. I regretted that I was unable
to continue my observations on this captive spider, as it would have
been interesting to know how long she would have lived contentedly
and in good health under the conditions described above, but I left
Mentone at the end of April, and was unable to take her alive with me
to England. When removed from her nest in the pot on April 12, she
appeared in perfect condition, and I placed her in a hole which I
made for her among some stones in a garden at the back of the house,
hoping to find her again on my return to Mentone in the autumn; this
hope was, however, not destined to be realized.
I shall, however, have occasion to speak again of the young captives
of this species (_N. Eleanora_), in the concluding remarks which will
follow these detailed accounts of the nests and their occupants, when
the behaviour of captive trap-door spiders generally will be treated
of.
The next type of trap-door nest is one to which I have found it
difficult to assign a descriptive name, and I am compelled for the
present to speak of it as the _Hyères double-door branched wafer_
nest.
One of its most distinctive features is found in the shape of the
lower door, fig. F 1, Plate XIV., and figs. A 1, A 2, Plate XVIII.,
which may be said to be double, presenting two crowns, one of which
fits into the main tube and the other into the branch, but I could
not see my way to employing this character in naming the type.
The nest is, however, quite distinct from all the others, and is
inhabited by a new species of trap-door spider (_N. congener_,
Camb.[142]). The characteristic portions of this nest are shown
in Plate XVIII., and fig. A 3, in the same Plate, represents its
occupant.
[Footnote 142: Mr. Pickard-Cambridge's description will be found at
p. 292, below. In its characters this female spider (the male is
unknown) most nearly resembles _N. cæmentaria_, but differs, among
other points, in markings and in having one or more spines on the
genual joint of leg, these spines being almost always absent in the
same joint in _cæmentaria_. The nests of the two species are totally
unlike.]
The hedge-banks near Hyères, and also about the railway station
of the same name, which is some 4 miles from the town itself, are
frequently tenanted by this spider. During a short stay there in
May, 1873, I secured a large number of specimens, and verified the
structure of the nest by a careful examination of thirty-eight
examples. The nest is invariably branched and furnished with a lower
door, but the branch is of variable length, usually short, and never,
as far as I could detect, quite reaches the surface. In some cases
this branch was so short that it could scarcely contain the spider,
and, under these circumstances, it is not easy to conceive any other
use for it than that of retaining the lower door when not in use. It
may, however, enable the spider to take up a rather better position
when engaged, as she frequently is if disturbed, in keeping the main
tube closed by pressing the lower door upwards with her feet, for
then her head points downwards, and her abdomen rests in the branch.
[Illustration: _Plate XVIII._]
I have seen her in this attitude on several occasions when I had cut
out a block of earth similar to that figured in the plate. The lower
door is quite unlike that of either of the other two double-door
wafer nests, being wedge-shaped, tapering from below upwards to
the hinge, which is always placed at the point of bifurcation of
the tubes, and having two crowns separated from each other by the
gusset-like web of silk which connects the door on either side with
the lining of the main tube, one of these crowns fitting into and
closing the main tube, while the other fits into the aperture of the
branch.
The wedge-shaped structure of the door is seen in its most
exaggerated form in the nests of the younger spiders (figs. B,
B 1, Plate XVIII.), and becomes less so in the older and larger
ones (figs. A 1, A 2). I have even seen some of these lower doors,
evidently made by old spiders, which were so much flattened as to
bear a considerable resemblance to that of _N. Eleanora_.
The main tube of the nest is from 10 to 12 inches long, and usually
enters the earth almost horizontally, bending downwards from the
point at which the branch joins it, and where the lower door is
hung. This causes the lower door to lie nearly horizontally when not
in use, and its lower crown probably serves, by fitting into the
aperture of the branch, to sustain it in this position and prevent it
from falling forward. The point of bifurcation is placed, as a rule,
much nearer to the entrance of the nest, than it is in the two other
branched nests, and occurs usually within two inches of the surface
of the earth; so close is it indeed that, on lifting the upper door
and looking in, one may frequently see the lower door move across
and close the passage down the main tube, pushed by the spider from
below. This frequently enabled me to secure the spider without having
to follow her to the bottom of the nest; and, when fortune favoured
me, I secured a block of earth by one rapid sweep of the knife (a
common table-knife), which furnished me at once with a good specimen
of the nest and of its occupant.
When the spider has once fairly determined upon resistance, it is
scarcely possible to make her retreat without destroying the nest,
and, in one case, when I tried to push the lower door down from
above, while she was pressing it upwards from below, I found that,
without crushing my opponent, I could not succeed.
There were probably young in the nest on this occasion, for I have
frequently found them in the nests with the mother at this season. In
no case did I even catch a glimpse of the male, and this sex is at
present unknown.
The young spiders make their nests at an early age, and there can
be no doubt that _N. congener_ enlarges its dwelling from time to
time as growth demands, just as the trap-door spiders at Mentone
do. Indeed in one of these new Hyères nests I found, outside the
main tube and some way above the existing lower door, a former
and disused lower door much smaller than the one then in use, and
which had evidently belonged to the nest at a previous stage of its
development. I have observed this before in the nests both of _N.
Manderstjernæ_ and _N. Eleanora_.
This new type is strictly intermediate between the double-door
unbranched wafer nest constructed by _N. Eleanora_, and the
double-door branched wafer with the descending cavity which I am now
about to describe.
This latter nest, the work of _N. Manderstjernæ_, Auss.[143]
(formerly called _N. meridionalis_), has already been partially
made known by the figures and description given of it in _Ants and
Spiders_ (Plates IX., X., and XI., pp. 98, 100, and 104); but I have
to confess, with great regret, that when these illustrations and
descriptions were published, I was not fully acquainted with the true
structure of this nest, having overlooked the existence of a short
descending cavity which leaves the main tube a little above and on
the opposite side to the ascending branch. This cavity is always
present, but the very largest and oldest spiders usually allow it to
become filled up with remains of food and particles of earth, and
sometimes even spin silk across its entrance, in which case it can
only be traced on very close examination.
[Footnote 143: This spider was described by Mr. Pickard-Cambridge at
p. 101 in _Ants and Spiders_, under the name of _N. meridionalis_,
Costa. This name has now to be abandoned for reasons given in full
by Mr. Cambridge at p. 283, below. It would appear that a spider
discovered by M. Simon in Corsica corresponds more closely with the
_N. meridionalis_ of Costa than our spider of the Riviera does.
Moreover, since _Ants and Spiders_ was written I have had the good
fortune to obtain at Mentone four male examples of our supposed
_meridionalis_, and these prove to possess the same characters as
those assigned by Prof. Ausserer to a male spider which was captured
at Nice, and named by him _N. Manderstjernæ_. This specimen is now
in the possession of Dr. L. Koch, to whom I am much indebted for
having kindly entrusted it to me for examination. This enabled Mr.
Pickard-Cambridge to assure himself of the specific identity of his
_N. meridionalis_ with _N. Manderstjernæ_, which latter name it must
for the future bear.]
It was from an old nest such as this, in which the descending cavity
had been closed up, that the large drawing at fig. A on Plate IX.
of _Ants and Spiders_ was made, and this figure, therefore, still
remains substantially correct.
But in the case of the other illustrations--namely, fig. B, Plate
IX., fig. A, Plate X., and figs. B and B 1, Plate XI., where nests of
young spiders, or of spiders which, though adult, have not attained
the maximum size, are represented, this descending cavity, though
overlooked by me, should have been shown, for it must certainly have
existed.
Its presence was first observed by the Honourable L. G. Dillon, who
detected it when tracing the course of the main tube upwards from
below. I had always followed the tube from above downwards, and in
so doing must have unwittingly filled up the descending cavity (the
existence of which I was far from suspecting) with detached particles
of earth.
I will own that, when Mr. Dillon first showed me this new feature, I
hoped that it might prove to be something accidental and exceptional;
and it was only after careful examination of a large series of nests
of all sizes, that I gradually and almost unwillingly admitted that
this descending cavity formed an important feature in the typical
structure of the nests.
I now see, however, that the presence of this cavity adds
considerably to the interest of the structure as a whole, and places
its architect quite at the head of all the builders of trap-door
nests. This type should now be called, for the sake of distinction,
the _double-door, branched, cavity, wafer_ nest, to avoid confusion
with the _Hyères branched nest_.
I am now about to endeavour to atone for my past oversight by giving
new illustrations (Plate XIX., figs. A and B) and descriptions of
this very remarkable nest; while I would at the same time beg the
indulgence of my readers for past and present shortcomings, reminding
them that the interest which attaches to structures of this kind is
proportioned to the complexity and subtlety of their contrivance,
and, therefore, to the difficulty we experience in properly
understanding and describing them.
[Illustration: _Plate XIX._]
It will be seen by a reference to Plate XIX.,[144] figs. A and A 1,
that in addition to the cylindrical branch, which mounts upwards,
there is a shorter branch which leaves the main tube on the opposite
side (on the left as seen in the Plate), and takes a downward course.
Now this descending branch, which is barely more than an inch in
length, is a cavity of variable form, being sometimes cylindrical,
and sometimes egg- or even watch-shaped,[145] but there is one
particular in which it never varies, and that is the position of its
elliptic orifice. This orifice is always situated on the opposite
side of the main tube to that on which the ascending branch leaves
this latter, so that the whole nest, when seen in section, presents
the figure of a St. Andrew's cross, only with arms of unequal length.
[Footnote 144: A nest of a scarcely half-grown spider is here
represented in order that sufficient space might be gained to show
the lower door in its two positions. The perfect cavity is still
found in nests of much larger dimensions, and occasionally, indeed,
in nests of almost the maximum size.]
[Footnote 145: I take the liberty of coining a word to replace
"lenticular," the form of a watch being more familiar than that of a
lens.]
But the most remarkable point is that, when the lower door is pushed
across so as to close the main tube (as shown in fig. A, Plate XIX.),
it will invariably be found to lie in such a position that its
lower extremity exactly meets the lower lip of the orifice of the
descending cavity, when it will be seen that the semi-cylindrical
surface of the lower door then coincides with, and appears to
continue and form part of, the lower wall of the descending cavity
on the one side, and of the corresponding wall of the main tube on
the other. When the upper portion of the main tube is thus united
to the cavity the two combine to form what appears like a short,
independent unbranched nest.
Now, if we fancy ourselves an insect entering the nest in search
either of the spider, her eggs, or young, I think it is plain that,
when the lower door is in this position (fig. A), we should probably
walk straight down to the bottom of the cavity, expecting to find our
prey there, and should then return by the way we came, impressed with
the belief that we had explored the whole nest, the secret of the
lower door remaining undiscovered.
Whether this imaginary case may, or may not, represent what really
takes place, is of course mere conjecture; but the constant
occurrence of this beautiful adaptation of the various parts to
one another, surely points to the conclusion that this is no mere
coincidence, but rather a subtle contrivance having some very
definite use and meaning.
We must admit, however, that it is difficult to conceive why, if this
structure is of such great utility, it should be abandoned by the
oldest and largest spiders.
Among the possible answers to this question I think that one of
the more probable is that this arrangement may have been specially
devised for protection against some enemy which the aged spiders have
ceased to fear.
Indeed it is not unlikely that these aged spiders may have come to a
time of life when they no longer lay eggs, and so do not need to keep
up all the defences which they employed when they had families to
protect.
Since my attention was drawn to the existence of this cavity in the
dwellings of _N. Manderstjernæ_ I have never noted the presence of
young in those nests in which the cavity was filled up and disused;
but then I have only exact records with reference to this point in
the case of seven nests.
In these seven nests, however, there was no free cavity, and there
were no young spiders, though it was at the season when it was common
to find young in the nests.
The question, therefore, remains open, and further observations
on this head would be very acceptable. I detected the _débris_ of
insects, and especially the horny coats of ants, in the descending
cavity, in many nests; and in some of the oldest, where it had become
completely blocked up, these remains still indicated its former
outlines and position.
The nests of _N. Manderstjernæ_ at Cannes correspond both in respect
of the cavity and of their other characteristics with those at
Mentone. _N. Manderstjernæ_ occurs pretty abundantly at San Remo in
the olive-grounds east of the Sanctuary, but I can say nothing as
to whether the nests there possessed the cavity or not, for, when
I was there, I was not aware of its existence. I obtained a single
example of _N. Manderstjernæ_ and its nest at Hyères, and this is the
westernmost point at which this species has as yet been detected.
We have now passed in review all the seven known types of true
trap-door nest, and have taken note also of the lower and more
rudimentary forms of nest, such as that of _Atypus_, and the funnel
nest of _Cyrtauchenius elongatus_, neither of which is furnished with
a door.
Among the true trap-door nests, those of the cork type stand in a
measure alone, being distinguished from all the others by their solid
surface doors, composed of many layers of silk and earth; and we do
not at present know of any intermediate forms linking the cork and
wafer types together. But among the various nests which represent the
wafer type the case is different, for here the types naturally fall
into a progressive series, such as that represented in the diagrams
(Pl. XIV., p. 193).
If we try to picture to ourselves the stages through which the most
complicated wafer nest--namely, that of the _double-door, branched,
cavity_ type (Diagram G 1) may have passed in the course of its
development from a simpler ancestral form, we should _à priori_
expect to find precisely such structures as the _Hyères double-door
branched_ nest (Diagram F), and the _single-door branched_ nest
(Diagram D) forming successive halting-places in the advance from the
primitive _single-door, unbranched_ nest (Diagram C).
The _double-door unbranched_ type may in like manner find its
prototype in the same original single-door unbranched nest (C), which
we may look upon as the parent idea, from which all these structures
have been derived.
Bearing this in mind, and remembering that kinship between living
creatures is not only revealed to us by likeness in structure and
colour, but also by similarity in habits and instincts, it becomes
of interest to trace any resemblance that may exist between these
wafer-nests and the dwellings constructed by _Lycosa narbonensis_,
a species belonging to the allied family of _Lycosidæ_, and which
closely resembles the true _tarantula_[146] of Southern Italy.
[Footnote 146: In the United States, and indeed in the New World
generally, it seems to be the custom to call all the larger "ground
spiders," and especially the trap-door spiders, Tarantulas, but
these, in fact, form a distinct group by themselves, belonging to the
family _Lycosidæ_.]
I first made the acquaintance of _Lycosa narbonensis_ near the
glass-works west of Cannes, where this spider may not rarely be found
living in tubular burrows in sandy clearings among the pine woods
along the shore (_Pinus pinea_, the stone pine).
I have already (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 146), alluded to an account
given by M. Léon Dufour of his observations on the nest and habits of
the true tarantula (_Lycosa tarentula_), which he discovered in Spain.
The nests of _L. narbonensis_ at Cannes resembled those described by
M. Dufour, but the cylindrical, subterranean burrows were apparently
shorter. It was extremely difficult to trace their course, on account
of the loose sand which poured into the tubes and choked them up, and
I only succeeded in doing so completely in one case, when I stuffed
the tube with cotton-wool before proceeding to dig. Here the open
tube, which was quite simple, and about 1 inch in diameter, descended
vertically for 3-1/4 inches, and was then suddenly bent so as to
become horizontal, terminating shortly afterwards in a triangular
chamber, the floor of which measured 2 inches across at the widest
part, and was strewed with the remains of beetles and other insects.
The nest was lined throughout with coarse silk, which had a blackish
hue, owing to the presence of the filaments of what I believe to have
been some undeveloped fungoid growth. The mouth of the tube was open,
and frequently surmounted by a short tubular prolongation, commencing
at the surface of the ground, which formed a sort of chimney about an
inch high and from an inch to an inch and a quarter across; this was
composed of fibres of plants, pine-needles, and especially of a large
branching lichen, very common in the neighbourhood of the nests, and
all these materials were woven together and kept in place by a few
threads of silk spun here and there.
It was not every nest that was furnished with a chimney, nor were
all the chimneys equally complete, for in some cases they consisted
merely of a small rim or one-sided lip, while in others they
resembled little birds' nests, and were sufficiently firm and compact
to permit of my carrying them away. It appeared to me that these
chimneys served as screens to prevent the loose sand from being swept
into the burrows by the winds which rage over that open seashore
plain, and that they were more or less complete in proportion as
the exposure was greater or less, and the sand looser or more bound
together.
I captured eight of these spiders, and here, as in the trap-door
group, the female alone inhabited the nest.
Besides this habit, they have other points in common with trap-door
spiders; such, for example, as the resemblance which exists between
this nest and that of _Theraphosa Blondii_ from Brazil (see p. 188,
above), and between the chimney of this Tarantula and the aërial
prolongation of the tube sometimes found in nests of the wafer type.
But perhaps the most suggestive point of resemblance consists in
the habit which this Tarantula possesses of covering and closing
the aperture of the nest during the winter with a thin layer of
materials, similar to those of which the chimney is composed,
and, like them, bound together with silk. This is, in fact, an
immovable wafer-door, and precisely resembles those which I have
seen constructed by _Nemesia Manderstjernæ_, and _N. Eleanora_, when
captive and placed in an artificial hole in the earth.
The tubes are, as has been already stated, open during the spring,
and we may suppose that the spider, on the approach of warm weather,
wakes up from her winter lethargy, and tears away this concealing
thatch. But if one of these spiders should by chance happen to free
this silk-woven thatch by cutting round some three-fourths of its
circumference, so as to leave it still attached to the rim of the
aperture of the nest by the remaining quarter, she would then have
made for herself a veritable, though rather rude trap-door of the
wafer kind.
It is most likely, however, that the spider knows what she is about
and that a door to her dwelling would be the reverse of an advantage
to her, for she is more powerful and swifter than the generality of
European trap-door spiders, and, as she probably lives by leaping out
upon and hunting her prey, she no doubt needs to have the entrance to
her nest free of all encumbrance.
I am indebted to the Rev. W. G. Brackenridge for evidence of the very
interesting fact that _Lycosa narbonensis_ closes her nest at Cannes
in the winter.
I was aware that Latreille stated that the Tarantula possessed this
habit,[147] and I was anxious to know whether the species which I had
detected at Cannes, inhabiting as it did open nests in the month of
May, would also exhibit this curious custom. Being unable to visit
Cannes myself during the winter, I applied to Mr. Brackenridge,
who, on the 28th of January last (1874), secured a very perfect
specimen of the aërial portion or chimney of one of the nests having
the orifice closed in the way above described, and most kindly
transmitted it to me.
[Footnote 147: P. A. Latreille, Mem. Soc. Hist. Nat., Paris (an. VII.
de la République), p. 124: "L'araignée _tarentule_ ferme aussi son
habitation, mais cet opercule n'est pas mobile, et n'est construit
que pour l'hiver."]
I have, on a very few occasions, found the doors of a wafer or cork
nest spun up during the winter at Mentone, and on digging have
discovered the spider alive, though partially torpid, inside; but
this is quite an exceptional event. I should much like to know,
however, whether this becomes the rule in the case of the nests of
those trap-door spiders which inhabit climates less favoured than
that of Mentone.
In my concluding remarks in _Ants and Spiders_ I called attention to
the importance which attaches to a knowledge of the food and manner
of feeding of any creature whose life-history we may wish to study,
and I would now once more press the subject on the attention of my
readers. For the range and distribution of a species largely depends
upon the nature of its food, and this will also be an indication
of the rivals with which it has to compete in the struggle for
existence; the times and seasons of its activity, and in many cases
even the structure and position of its dwelling-place will be
governed by this same all-important question of food-supply.
I have now detected the remains of insects, and of ants especially,
in the nest of every species of trap-door spider which I have
examined _in situ_; very frequently, however, one may open several
nests in succession without finding any of these _débris_, and at
other times they will only be detected beneath the existing bottom of
the tube, layers of silk having been spun over successive layers of
refuse.
The horny coats of ants form by very far the largest proportion of
these remains, and I have lately been much struck by the number of
instances in which, while digging out ants' nests at Mentone, I
have found trap-door nests (especially those of _N. Manderstjernæ_
and _N. Moggridgii_) in their midst, the tubes often traversing the
very heart of the ants' colony and coming into close contact with
the galleries and chambers of the ants. The doors in these instances
had almost always escaped my notice, and, indeed, they so closely
resembled the surface of the ground that even when I knew, from
having accidentally cut across the tube below ground, that one of
these doors must lie near a given spot, yet I could only discover it
by following the passage from below upwards. This perfect concealment
is doubtless of essential importance to the spiders' success in life,
for, if they once alarmed the whole colony of ants and let them know
the exact whereabouts of their lurking-place, they would soon learn
to avoid it.
But, as it is, the work of opening the door, snatching in an ant, and
closing it again, is but the affair of a second or two, and before
the companions of the victim have time to realize the nature of the
phenomenon, the gaping earth has closed again and become once more,
to all appearance, part of the solid and trustworthy ground.
I have seen _N. Manderstjernæ_ snatch at insects in this way during
the daytime, and I well remember how I started on one occasion when,
as I was looking fixedly at a small blue gnat which I had taken for a
moth, I saw the earth suddenly open and one of these spiders partly
emerge, make a swift stroke at the insect, and withdraw again as
swiftly.
I have found the remains of ants, of beetles of many species
and different sizes, of wood-lice (_Oniscus_), and of earwigs
(_Forficula_) in the nests of _N. Eleanora_ and _N. Manderstjernæ_,
and the wings of a large green field-bug in the nest of the former.
I have only once detected traces of food in the dwellings of
_Cteniza Moggridgii_, and these consisted of minute fragments of the
integuments of insects, none of which were certainly recognisable,
though I believe that they partly consisted of the coats of a small
species of ant. The rarity or complete absence of the wings of
insects which habitually fly rather than crawl on the ground, and
my inability to discover either snares or any evidence that these
spiders ever leave the nest, lead me to believe that they live (at
any rate from October to May) by dragging into their nests any
insects which approach within reach.
Ants, earwigs, beetles, and wood-lice are precisely the very
creatures which would fall a prey to the spider without obliging her
to leave her nest, and it is accordingly their remains that we find.
On one occasion, however, at Montpellier, my sister detected _N.
cæmentaria_ in the act of devouring a fair-sized caterpillar, to
obtain which there is some reason to think she must have left her
nest. We were out together on the 8th of May last (1874), hunting for
the new wafer nests of that district, under the kind guidance of M.
Lichtenstein, when my sister called our attention to a caterpillar,
the body of which partly projected from the tube of a cork nest (_N.
cæmentaria_), and prevented the lid from closing.
On closer examination we found that the spider was in the act of
devouring the caterpillar, and had already sucked out the juices from
the anterior portion, while the middle and posterior parts of the
body still resisted, and the legs clung tenaciously to the lip of the
nest.
M. Lichtenstein told us that this larva, which when entire must have
been rather more than an inch long, was that of the mullein moth
(_Cucullia verbasci_).
It was not full grown, and as there were no mullein plants within
some two feet of the nest and this caterpillar will not leave the
plant on which it feeds unless compelled, it would seem as if the
spider must have gone afield in order to capture it. It is possible,
nevertheless, that the caterpillar may have fallen within reach of
the spider when blown off the mullein leaves by the wind.
I have, unfortunately, but few details to give of the nocturnal
habits of the trap-door spiders. It would appear, however, that they
are more active by night than by day, and that it is more common
to find their doors ajar at night, with the spiders posted on the
look-out at the narrow opening. This is borne out by my observations
on captive spiders, to which I shall allude shortly.
When at Hyères on the 11th of May, 1873, the evening being very
warm and a bright moon shining, I went at 8:30 P.M. with my father
and sister to see what the spiders would be doing on a hedge bank
where we had previously marked five cork and eight wafer nests. The
moonlight did not fall upon this spot, but I was provided with a
lantern, and by its light the nests at first appeared to be tightly
closed, but we soon perceived first one and then another with the
door slightly raised, ready to close on the smallest alarm, whether
from a footfall or from the flickering of the lamp. When the light of
the lantern was steady it did not appear to frighten the spiders in
the least, even when brought to within a few inches of the door,[148]
and this enabled me to watch them very closely. On either side of
the raised door of one of the wafer nests I could see the feet of
the spider projecting, and just at that moment I caught sight of a
beetle close at hand, feeding on the topmost spray of some small
plant below. Using every precaution, I contrived to gather the spray
without shaking off the beetle, and gradually pushed it nearer and
nearer to the nest. When it almost touched the lip of the nest the
door flew open, and the spider snatched at the beetle and dragged it
down below.
[Footnote 148: This had been observed before both by my father and Mr.
Dillon when watching the trap-door spiders at night at Mentone.]
For a few seconds the door remained tightly closed, and then, to our
great surprise, was suddenly opened again, and the beetle was cast
alive and unharmed out of the nest. I immediately secured the insect,
which proved to be the common _Chrysomela Banksii_.[149]
[Footnote 149: I am indebted to Mr. F. Smith for the name.]
I cannot doubt that this beetle was distasteful in some way to the
spider, for it was neither so large nor so powerful as many beetles
the remains of which I have found in the spiders' nests, and,
besides, it did not escape from the nest, but was distinctly rejected
by its captor.
This shows that this spider does not know instinctively what insects
to reject and what to take.
This little episode was scarcely ended when I espied a wood-louse
(_Oniscus_) walking down the bank, not far from another of these
wafer nests. By a little guidance I managed so to turn its course
that this unsuspicious crustacean went straight to the very point I
wished, and made as if it would walk over the spider's door; but no
sooner was it well within reach than, quick as thought, the spider
clutched it and dragged it in. No rejection followed on this capture,
and, though I could not actually witness the conclusion of this
adventure, I do not doubt that it ended in a tragedy and a supper.
In these two cases, as in all those previously noted, the spiders did
not leave the nest nor allow the door to close behind them, but kept
it propped up on the abdomen and hindmost pair of legs. In this way
the act of seizing their prey, and that of withdrawing into the nest,
were almost simultaneous.
In no case did we see any of these spiders out of their nests, and
their behaviour by night appeared to be the same as by day, only that
they were bolder and more on the alert.
The spiders in the cork nests (_N. Moggridgii_) resisted our attempts
to raise their doors just as rigorously as in the daytime.
All the spiders which I have kept in captivity have shown themselves
more active at night than during the day, and I imagine that
experience has taught them that fewer of their enemies are then
abroad, while ants, beetles, wood-lice, and other creatures upon
which they prey are quite as nocturnal as themselves.
I brought back to England some young cork and wafer spiders from
Hyères, and one adult cork (_N. Moggridgii_). The latter was placed
in a small tin box, with moss and a little earth at the bottom, on
the evening of May the 10th, 1873, and by next morning she had made
a silk tube through the moss, carrying up earth from below for the
purpose of strengthening its walls on the outside. On the 13th of May
the tube was furnished with a perfect door.
I hoped that this spider might lay eggs in her prison,[150] and
therefore broke up her nest from time to time after my return to
London in order to search for them. Between the 27th of May (when her
nest had been transferred into a box of earth) and the 6th of October
I destroyed her dwelling four times, and after each demolition
she furnished the cylindrical hole which I bored for her with a
lid, having thus made five doors since her capture. I got no eggs
however, though the spider appeared in perfect health.
[Footnote 150: Strange to say, though I have opened so many nests
at different seasons of the year, and found young apparently quite
recently hatched, I have never been able to find the eggs of a
trap-door spider.]
Neither this spider nor the true _N. cæmentaria_ of Montpellier
appears to have any idea of digging a hole when placed on soft earth
if they are adult; and the same thing is true of _N. Manderstjernæ_
and _N. Eleanora_, but the young of all these spiders readily
excavate nests for themselves.
I have once seen a nearly full grown, and probably adult, _Cteniza
Moggridgii_ make a perfect tube and furnish it with a moveable door
in a single night when confined under gauze on moist earth, but this
is the only instance (except that of _Cteniza Californica_, recorded
above) in which I have known an adult trap-door spider excavate or
attempt to do so.
These _Ctenizas_ seem to be peculiarly able to adapt themselves
to circumstances, for two young ones, which I sent by post to M.
Lucas at the Jardin des Plantes in Paris in little wide-mouthed,
cylindrical, blue glass bottles, not only lined the bottles with silk
but also closed them at the mouth with a door fitting accurately
into a bevelled lip, in the manufacture of both of which fragments
of moss, the only material at their disposal, were used in place
of earth.[151] It is curious to see how quickly the young trap-door
spiders, both of the cork and wafer kinds, when taken from the
nest of the mother, will make their own perfect little dwellings
in captivity, and I have known them construct tube and door within
fifteen hours.
[Footnote 151: M. H. Lucas, in _Bull. des Séances de la Soc. Entom. de
Fr._ No. 27 (1874), p. 101.]
I have watched the proceedings of the young spiders, when taken from
the mother's nest, in the following species: _Nemesia Manderstjernæ_,
_N. Eleanora_, _N. congener_, and _N. Moggridgii_, the three first
constructing wafer, and the last a cork nest. All of these very young
spiders will excavate their own tubes and bring out pellets of the
earth, which closely resemble those carried out from their galleries
by the ants.
As has been stated before, the young brood, while still in the
mother's nest, will often comprise individuals of different
sizes, and though the majority are no larger than the baby-spider
represented at Fig. B 2, Pl. IX., _Ants and Spiders_, some may
occasionally be found that are fully twice as large.
The little nests which they make in captivity vary accordingly in
size. Thus, out of sixteen young taken from the mother's nest (_N.
Eleanora_), eleven, three days after capture, had made nests in the
earth of a flower-pot, and the wafer doors of six of these nests
measured 2 lines across, of four 2-1/2 lines, and of one 3 lines. The
first nests of another similar lot of young _Eleanora_ spiders had
wafer doors measuring respectively 2, 2-1/2, 2-1/2, 3 and 3 lines. In
another case when I captured fourteen young (the entire brood found
in the nest of the mother, _N. Manderstjernæ_), after the lapse of
five days every one of them had made a nest, but these were smaller
and more uniform, ten of the wafer doors measuring 2 lines across,
one 1-1/2, and one 2-1/2.
These little spiders need to be kept constantly supplied with flies,
which should be killed and placed near their nests; they are often
so greedy that they will attempt to drag a house-fly entire down
their tubes for which it is much too large, when the door is pushed
open, and the fly remains sticking in the entrance to the nest with
its legs up in the air. One may even feed these spiders oneself by
approaching carefully and, without causing any vibration, pushing the
fly, placed on the end of a pencil, within reach of the spider.
I have given my reasons before (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 127) for
believing that the trap-door spiders do not as a rule desert
their nests, but enlarge them from time to time to meet their own
requirements of growth; showing, by a comparison of the measurements
of the doors of eight nests in April with those of the same nests in
the following October, that all had increased in size.
Subsequent observations have confirmed this; I find that the young
spiders taken from the mother's nest enlarge their nests in captivity
in a precisely similar way.
Thus, for example, the wafer doors of three young _Eleanora_ spiders,
made within a few days after their removal from the mother's nest
on February 20th, 1873, and first measured on February 28th, had
increased between that date and Nov. 29th following from 2 to 4
lines, 2-1/2 to 4 lines, and 2-1/2 to 6 lines respectively.
It is unfortunate that the male and female spiders are
undistinguishable when very young, as it would be interesting to
know whether the males construct nests before they take to their
adult life, during which they roam from place to place and hide under
stones.
In one case fourteen young spiders, forming this entire family taken
with a female _N. Manderstjernæ_, made nests; so that unless all of
these were females, we have evidence here to prove that the males do
commence life by building nests for themselves.
I kept the male _Cteniza Moggridgii_, for ten days on damp earth in
captivity, but he made no attempt to excavate or spin, and wandered
restlessly about, scarcely touching the flies[152] with which I
supplied him.
[Footnote 152: I habitually fed my captive spiders with common
house-flies, and it was curious to see how entirely the latter were
wanting in any instinctive fear of even the largest spiders. They
would creep between the spiders' legs, causing them to start as
if electrified, and frequently it was not until the flies, after
repeating this annoyance several times, actually walked up to and
almost touched the fangs of the spider, that they were punished for
their ignorance and presumption.]
Seeing this I could not venture to prolong his captivity, as I feared
to risk injuring a specimen which was quite unique and which there
was little likelihood of my being able to replace. It is rather
curious that M. Simon should also have found one male, and one
only, of the closely-related _Ct. fodiens_ of Corsica, and that his
specimen should be, like mine, the only one known.
Bearing in mind the curious problems which arise as to the affinities
of the flora and fauna of the Alpes Maritimes with that of Corsica,
the fact that the species of _Cteniza_ which is found at Mentone,
though allied to, is yet distinct from the insular species, gains a
new interest.
We ask ourselves whether the Corsican species sprang from that of the
Alpes Maritimes, or _vice versâ_; or again, whether both diverged
in remote times from a common ancestor. Questions such as these
cannot be answered at present, but I hope the day may come when the
geographical distribution of the various existing forms of life will
be traced with sufficient accuracy to enable us to follow on the
map the lines along which affinity travels; and thus point out at
once the probable relationship between two given forms, and also the
route by which they reached their present stations. Records of local
varieties, and the careful discrimination between forms which have
small but permanent points of difference, thus acquire an importance
which they would not otherwise possess.
The geographical distribution of trap-door spiders is of peculiar
interest on account of the sedentary habits maintained during
life by the females. Most animals are capable of travelling long
distances, or of being accidentally transported from place to place
in such a way that colonies are frequently established far away from
the parent settlement, and we are left in the dark as to whence
they came and who are their nearest relations. But, in the case of
spiders inhabiting true trap-door nests, this is not so; they begin
life immediately on leaving the parent nest by making homes for
themselves near at hand which they will not desert, and there is no
likelihood of their being accidentally carried from place to place
unless occasionally by running water. Thus it happens that whenever
we find the same trap-door spider at two distant localities, we may
feel tolerably sure that the species has travelled from one to the
other by gradual extension, and that, either now or in times past, it
occupied all the intervening country.
For instance, we find _Nemesia Eleanora_ at Mentone, and again at
Cannes, while it has not yet been detected at Nice, Antibes, nor any
other intermediate point; but according to this hypothesis, this
species either does actually live, or has done so formerly, along
the whole intervening line. I will now enumerate the species alluded
to in the preceding pages and indicate briefly the habitats which
they are known with certainty to occupy.
I. _Atypus piceus_, Sulzer (ex Simon). The builder of the tubular
nest the silk lining of which is figured at A in Pl. XIII. It is
stated by M. Simon[153] to be common in all the centre, east, and west
of France, but it remains doubtful whether this exact form is found
in England or not, the true characters and habits of the English
species being still uncertain.
[Footnote 153: l.c. sup., p. 183.]
II. _Cyrtauchenius elongatus_, Simon, constructing the funnel type of
nest. It inhabits the neighbourhood of Fez in Morocco.
III. _Cteniza Moggridgii_, Cambridge (formerly described under the
name of _Ct. fodiens_[154]), one of the many builders of a nest of
the cork type; I have hitherto found this spider only at Mentone and
San Remo. It will probably be discovered in shady valleys in the
neighbourhood of Nice.
[Footnote 154: _Ants and Spiders_, p. 89.]
IV. _Ct. fodiens_, Camb. (_Ct. Sauvagii_, Rossi ex Simon): large nest
of cork type; inhabits Corsica. It has been said that the species
found near Pisa (_Ct. Sauvagii_) is the same as that which is so
common in Corsica, but it is desirable to have further confirmation
of this.
V. _Ct. Californica_, Camb.--Large nest of cork type. Found near
Visalia, about 350 miles south of San Francisco, by Mr. G. Treadwell.
VI. _Nemesia cæmentaria_, Latr.--Nest of cork type. Only known with
certainty to inhabit the neighbourhood of Montpellier.
VII. _N. Moggridgii_, Camb. (formerly described under the name of _N.
cæmentaria_, Latr.[155])--Nest of cork type; is found at San Remo,
Mentone, Cannes, Hyères, and Marseilles. Its range probably extends
some distance to the eastwards, but I doubt whether it does so
towards the west, for there I think it likely that it will be found
to be replaced by the typical _cæmentaria_.
[Footnote 155: _Ants and Spiders_, p. 92.]
VIII. _N. Simoni_, Camb.--Nest of the single-door unbranched wafer
type, discovered at Bordeaux in May, 1874.
IX. _N. suffusa_, Camb.--Nest of single-door branched wafer type,
discovered at Montpellier in May, 1873.
X. _N. Eleanora_, Camb.--Nest of double-door unbranched wafer type;
is found at San Remo, Mentone, Cannes, Vaucluse near Avignon. M.
Simon says[156] he has also found it at Digne, in the Basses Alpes.
[Footnote 156: E. Simon, _Aranéides nouveaux du Midi de l'Europe_, in
"Mém. Soc. Roy. Sc. de Liège," 2^{me}. ser. tom. v. p. 30.]
XI. _N. congener_, Camb.--Nest of double-door branched wafer type;
discovered at Hyères in May, 1873.
XII. _N. Manderstjernæ_, Koch, in Ausserer (formerly described under
the name of _N. meridionalis_, Costa).[157]--Nest of double-door,
branched, cavity wafer type; is found at San Remo, Bordighera,
Mentone, Nice, Cannes, and Hyères (apparently very rare at the
last-named place).
[Footnote 157: _Ants and Spiders_, p. 101.]
XIII. _N. meridionalis_, Costa.--Structure of nest doubtful (see
description in _Ants and Spiders_, p. 138). Found near Naples and
in Ischia. M. Simon has discovered a spider in Corsica which he
considers the same as that described by M. Costa under the name
of _meridionalis_, but it seems desirable, in order thoroughly to
establish this conclusion, that specimens of the spiders and their
nests from these distant habitats should be compared together.
We can scarcely suppose that the real geographical distribution of
the above-named twelve species is as restricted as it would appear to
be from the above enumeration, and there is little doubt, I think,
that many more habitats will be added in time. Indeed, our knowledge
of the habits and distribution of these spiders can only as yet be
said to be in its infancy, the whole subject being, for the most
part, new and untrodden ground.
But, it may be asked, what are the chances in the future for the
discovery of undescribed spiders and types of nests: and what reward
of this kind may the travelling naturalist expect in order to
compensate him for the time and pains which such a search demands,
and which must divert him in a great measure from making other
collections?
The reply is not doubtful.
Europe alone, most probably, contains many trap-door spiders the
specific characters and habits of which are at present unknown; and
as for the warmer regions of other parts of the globe, we only know
enough to lead us to surmise that still stranger and more startling
discoveries await us there.
Dr. L. Koch's description of the very remarkable branched-wafer
nest from Australia, alluded to above (p. 217), and the fragmentary
specimens of giant cork-nests from the same country exhibited at
the British Museum, give us a hint of what the Antipodes will some
day reveal to us; while a stray allusion to a trap-door nest found
near Lake Dilolo, in Southern Africa, by Livingstone,[158] affords
an indication of their existence in another quarter of the globe.
Hitherto but little importance has been attached by naturalists to
the study of the nests of trap-door spiders, but a knowledge of their
structure is often of the greatest assistance, and will, I venture to
predict, be found to afford a clue leading to the discovery of many
new species; for it not unfrequently happens that, while two spiders
appear so much alike as to pass for representatives of the same
species, their nests are totally dissimilar and proclaim them, as in
fact they are, quite distinct from one another. For an example of
this we have only to turn to the seven species of _Nemesia_, treated
of in the foregoing pages, of which six construct dissimilar nests,
and only two, building nests of the cork type, make them alike,
though the general resemblance between the spiders themselves is
extraordinarily close. Thus far, indeed, it will be seen that no two
distinct species of European trap-door spider make wafer nests of the
same type, each kind of wafer nest having its own peculiar spider.
[Footnote 158: "A large reddish spider (_Mygale_), named by the
natives 'sclàli,' runs about with great velocity. Its nest is most
ingeniously covered with a hinged cover or door, about the size of a
shilling, the inner face of which is of a pure white silky substance
like paper, while the outer one is coated with earth precisely like
that in which the hole is made, so that when it is closed it is
quite impossible to detect the situation of the nest. Unfortunately
the cavity for breeding is never seen except when the owner is out,
and has left the door open behind her."--_Dr. Livingstone_, _from_
"_Popular Accounts of Travels in South Africa_," chap. xvii. p. 221.]
This strikes me as a very curious fact, and I await with interest the
discovery of new species of wafer-building spiders in order to learn
whether this will continue to hold good or not.
That such discoveries will be made I entertain no doubt; indeed, I
have reason to believe that, even at Mentone, where perhaps more
pairs of eyes have been at work searching for trap-door spiders than
anywhere else, new species still remain to be detected. In April,
1873, the surface door of a wafer-nest together with a very small
portion of the tube was brought to me from the summit of the Aiguille
mountain, near Mentone. I was greatly surprised to learn that a
trap-door spider could live in such a situation, for the earth on
that plateau, which has an elevation of 4032 feet above the sea, is
always frozen hard for weeks and even months together during the
winter, and snow frequently lingers there. The spider, therefore,
which endures these conditions is scarcely likely to be of the
same species as any one of those inhabiting the lower country. The
trap-door spiders of these spurs of the Maritime Alps, are probably
of distinct species from those of the plains, but they are absolutely
unknown at present.
Then the males of several species, as, for example, those of _Nemesia
Simoni_, _N. suffusa_, _N. congener_, and _N. Moggridgii_, have yet
to be discovered; while of the habits of the males in general we know
little or nothing.
Indeed, there is no one species with the habits of which we can
say we are thoroughly acquainted, and we must admit that up to the
present time these ingenious little architects have been at least as
successful in concealing themselves from the intrusion of naturalists
as from the attacks of their proper enemies.
Surely these trap-door spiders, which have lain quiet in the earth
century after century, have hidden themselves long enough from our
inquisitive admiration, and the time has now come for us to seek them
out and learn their ways.
SPECIFIC DESCRIPTIONS OF TRAP-DOOR SPIDERS,
BY
THE REV O. PICKARD-CAMBRIDGE.
Genus Cteniza, Latr.
Cteniza Moggridgii, sp. n., Plate XX., fig. A, p. 254.
_Cteniza fodiens_ (Camb.)? ♀ in _Harvesting Ants and Trap-door
Spiders_, J. T. Moggridge, 1873, p. 89, Plate VII., excluding
synonyms there quoted.
Adult male length 5-1/2 lines, length of cephalothorax 3 lines,
breadth 2-1/2.
The cephalothorax is of a short, broad-oval form, its length being
only half a line greater than its breadth; it is flattened-convex
above, and depressed near the margins, the _caput_ (when looked
at in profile) scarcely rising above the level of the thorax.
At the junction of the caput and thoracic segments is a deep,
circularly-curved indentation, or fovea, the curve of which is
directed backwards; the extremities of this indentation are continued
obliquely forwards on either side, forming the normal ones which
indicate the junction of the caput and thorax. Rather more than
one-third of the distance between the above curved indentation and
the fore margin of the caput is a very perceptible and deep but
narrow, slightly curved, transverse indentation which divides the
caput into two distinct parts; the curve of this indentation is
directed forwards. The normal thoracic indentations are well marked,
but not very strong; the surface of the thorax, though shining,
appeared under a lens to be covered with fine rugulosities. Its
colour is yellow-brown; a large triangular patch on either side
of the caput being tinged with orange, and the rest suffused with
dark brown. The caput is of a dark reddish yellow-brown, showing
(in spirit of wine) two longitudinal bars, or strong lines, of a
clearer orange yellow-brown colour; its surface is glossy, though,
under a lens, the sides of the fore part are very finely striated or
rugulose. These lines begin behind the extremities of the hinder row
of eyes, and gradually converge to a point at the thoracic junction;
the ocular region and central longitudinal line of the fore-segment
of the caput have some long and very prominent black bristles.
When alive, the cephalothorax appears to have been suffused with a
purplish hue, corresponding to that of the abdomen and other parts.
[Illustration: _Plate XX._]
The _eyes_ form a rectangular figure, whose fore side is a little
shorter than the hinder one, and whose transverse, or longest,
diameter is as nearly as possible double the length of its shortest
one; the eyes of the central or fore-central pair are small, and
separated by a diameter's distance from each other. The hind laterals
are the smallest of the eight, and each is almost contiguous to the
hind-central nearest to it, this latter being of a sub-triangular
form, and separated from the fore-central on its side by an interval
equal to that which divides the two fore-centrals, but less than
that which separates each fore-central from the fore-lateral on its
side. Looked at as in two transverse rows of four each, those of
the foremost row are darkish coloured, while those of the hinder
row are pearly white. Omitting the eyes of the hind-central pair,
the remaining three on either side form as nearly as possible an
equilateral triangle.
The _legs_ are long, moderately strong, their relative length being
4, 1, 2, 3. They are of a dark brown colour, generally paler on the
under sides, furnished with hairs, fine bristles, and spines; the
latter are numerous and strong beneath the metatarsi and tibiæ of
the first and second pairs; on those of the third pair they are less
strong and more uniformly disposed; on those of the fourth pair they
are fewest and least conspicuous. The genual joints of the third
pair have some strongish spines on the outer side; the right leg has
eight, the left nine. The toothing of the superior tarsal claws does
not appear to be uniform on the different legs of the same example;
on those of the fourth pair there were five teeth; on those of the
first pair eight or nine, with two others, quite rudimentary, towards
the point of the claw; and even on one of the fourth pair of legs one
of the claws had six, the other five teeth. The tarsal claws of the
second pair are toothed throughout nearly their whole length with
from eight to ten teeth; on _one_ of the third pair the teeth were
but five or six, while on the other there were on one claw but three
ordinary teeth and a much stronger one a little way off in front of
them, on the second claw only a single strong tooth about the middle,
and a smaller one close to its base.
The _palpi_ are long and rather slender, measuring rather over
six lines in length; they are similar in colour to the legs, and
excepting a few--from twelve to fourteen--short strong spines on
the upper side of the extremity of the digital joint, furnished with
hairs only. The cubital joint is more than half the length of the
radial; this latter is equal in length to the humeral joint, and
nearly as long as the femora of the first pair of legs. The digital
joint is short, of an oblong oval form, broadest at its extremity.
The palpal organs consist of a nearly spherical corneous lobe,
prolonged at its fore extremity into a long, slender, tapering,
beak-like spine, curving upwards (_i.e._, with its point near to the
radial joint), and inwards.
A broad, conspicuous, shining, corneous band, of a deeper red-brown
than the rest, runs round the middle (or equatorial line) of the
spherical portion of these organs, covering the greater part of their
surface.
The _falces_ are of moderate length and strength, and of ordinary
form. They are similar in colour to the legs, and furnished in front,
chiefly on their inner edges, with hairs, and at their extremities
on the inner sides, with a few, but not very strong nor conspicuous,
short spines; their under side (along which the fang lies) is toothed
on the inner edge only; the fang is strong and curved, but presents
nothing remarkable in form, nor could I detect either denticulation
or serration.
The _maxillæ_ are strong, straight, divergent, with a small prominent
point at the inner extremity of each; they are as strong, but not so
long, as the basal (coxal) joints of the legs of the first pair, of a
yellow-brown colour, furnished with hairs, but with no spines of any
sort or size.
The _labium_ is similar in colour to the maxillæ, and somewhat
quadrate in shape, rounded at the apex; it is furnished with hairs
only.
The _sternum_ is of a sub-pentagonal form, much broader behind than
in front; its colour is dull yellowish-brown, and it is furnished
with hairs, leaving two largish, bare, round, slightly impressed
patches, not far from each other, in a transverse line near the
middle.
The _abdomen_ is short-oval in form, and very convex above; it
projects a little over the base of the cephalothorax, and its upper
side is of a purplish grey-brown hue, mottled with a pale dull
whitish-yellow, and furnished sparingly with hairs. The sides and
under side are of a uniform dull whitish-yellow. The _spinners_ (four
in number) are, as usual, of very unequal size, those of the superior
pair longish, strong, three-jointed, and up-turned, the inferior
pair short but stout, consisting of one joint only and pretty close
together.
The _female_ (as it is conjectured to be) of this species was
described, in the work to which the present publication is
supplementary, from examples found at Mentone. There is little doubt
now but that it is not _Ct. fodiens_, Walck., but whether or not
identical with the male above described is not absolutely certain.
I think myself (with Mr. Moggridge, see p. 195) that it is so, in
spite of some differences in the relative size of the eyes, the
toothing of the under side of the falces, and the denticulation
of the tarsal claws. With regard to the eyes and falces, I am not
inclined to lay special stress upon these differences. It is found
that in other groups of spiders whose cephalothorax varies very
markedly in development in the two sexes, differences of this nature
occur. In the present genus, the male has an almost flat caput,
while the female has a strongly elevated one; and with respect to
the variation in the tarsal claws, no special weight can be attached
to it in the present instance, since these claws are not uniformly
denticulated in the different feet of the same individual. Another
difference is the absence in the male of sundry small but distinct
tooth-like spines at the apex of the labium and the inner corner of
the base of the maxillæ; the female is also wanting in regard to the
very characteristic transverse indentation which divides the caput
of the male into two parts. I can, however, trace in the female the
slightest possible corresponding depression, scarcely amounting to an
indentation, and placed rather nearer to the junctional thoracic pit.
With regard to the differences between this species and _Ct.
Sauvagii_, Latr. (_Ct. fodiens_, Walck.), size alone would suffice to
distinguish them; two females of the latter now before me measuring
13 lines in length; while the male (_Aran. nouv. ou peu connus du
Midi de l'Europe_, par Eugène Simon, Mém., Liège, 1873) measures 8
lines (17 mm.) and the female rather over 14 lines (30 mm.), the
fore-central eyes in the female of _Ct. Sauvagii_ appeared to be
smaller than those in _Ct. Moggridgii_ and placed rather farther
forwards, but the eyes in both are otherwise remarkably similar
both in size and position. The males, however, cannot be confounded
inasmuch as, according to M. Simon, no trace of any transverse
indentation on the caput exists in _Ct. Sauvagii_.
The denticulation of the tarsal claws in the females of both species
is similar, but M. Simon does not mention this portion of the
structure of the male he describes of _Ct. Sauvagii_.
The adult male of _Ct. Moggridgii_ above described, was found behind
the stones of an old wall at Mentone, but not in any kind of nest.
Nest-making, and excavating for that purpose, is, probably, no part
of the work of the adult males in this and other allied genera, and
hence we can see a reason for differences in the development of the
caput, and the denticulation of the falces. The usual habitat of the
females and their nests is in damp and shady spots, whereas _Ct.
Sauvagii_ constructs its nests in dry exposed banks.
_Habitat._ Mentone and San Remo.
Cteniza Californica, sp. n., Plate XV., fig. B, p. 198.
Adult female; length very nearly 14 lines; length of the
cephalothorax, 5-1/2; greatest breadth of ditto, 5; breadth of fore
part of caput, 4 lines; length of caput rather over 3 lines.
The _cephalothorax_ of this spider is rather broader in proportion to
its length than that of _Ct. Sauvagii_, Walck., Sim. = _Ct. fodiens_,
Walck. The convexity, or elevation, of the caput is also less, but
that of the thorax is greater, so that (when looked at in profile)
the profile line of the two forms a tolerably even and continuous
slope, interrupted only by the thoracic fovea; the profile, however,
of the occiput is curved.
The thoracic fovea, or junctional indentation, is strong, deep, and
semilunar in form, the horns of the crescent pointing forwards; the
other normal indentations are well marked, but those which divide
the caput from the first thoracic segment do not unite with the
extremities of the junctional fovea, being in this respect unlike
_Ct. Moggridgii_, but more like _Ct. Sauvagii_. The _clypeus_,
although transversely impressed, yet slopes forward more gradually
than in either of those species, its breadth is about equal to that
of the ocular area, or amounts to half that of the facial space. The
colour of the cephalothorax, taken from the specimen preserved in
spirit of wine, is a deep reddish-yellow brown, gradually getting
paler towards the margins. When alive, I understand that the general
colour of the whole spider was a dark blackish chocolate brown, the
legs and cephalothorax being darker than the abdomen; there are a few
prominent bristly hairs in the medial line both before and behind the
ocular area.
The _eyes_ form a narrow transverse oblong figure, its length being
about two and a half times its width, and its fore side is a little
the shortest; the fore-lateral eyes are large and oval, and by far
the largest of the eight; the rest do not differ much in size, though
perhaps the hind laterals, which are also oval, are a little the
largest; the longest diameter of these, however, is less than half
the longest diameter of the fore laterals. The interval between the
fore and hind laterals is small, only equal to the shortest diameter
of the hind lateral; and this interval is nearly double that which
separates each hind lateral and the hind central nearest to it. The
hind laterals and hind centrals form an almost perfectly straight
line, the former being very slightly indeed within the straight line
of the former; the intervals which separate the fore centrals from
each other, and each of them from the fore lateral on its side, are
as nearly as possible equal, though very slightly, if at all, less
than that which separates each of them from the hind central on its
side: the interval which separates the fore laterals is double the
length of the longest diameter of one of them.
The _legs_ are short and very strong; they are like the cephalothorax
in colour, but paler underneath the femora; this joint in the third
pair is proportionally much stronger than in the other legs; all are
furnished with hairs, bristles, and spines, a group of erect bristles
among the rest occupies the fore part of the upper side of the
metatarsi of the first and second pairs; strong spines of different
lengths are thickly placed beneath and on the lower part of the sides
of the tibiæ tarsi and metatarsi of the first and second pairs. On
the tarsi and metatarsi of the third and fourth pairs similar spines
are distributed more uniformly over the whole surface of the joints,
and on the genual joint of the 3rd pair there is one short strong
spine near its extremity on the outer side, those on the tibiæ both
of the third and fourth pairs being confined to a few on the outer
side, and towards the lower side only. Each tarsus terminates with
three claws, of which the two superior ones have a single strong
tooth towards the base on the lower side.
The _palpi_ are rather long, strong, and similar in colour to the
legs. They are furnished with hairs, bristles, and spines; of the
latter the radial and digital joints have some short and strong ones,
pretty thickly grouped along both their outer and inner sides; the
digital joint ends with a single untoothed claw.
The _falces_ are strong and massive, more so than in _Ct. Sauvagii_,
but of normal form. They are furnished with hairs and bristles, and
with strong spines near their inner extremities on the upper side;
the fangs are strong, folded along the under side of the falces in a
furrow which is toothed along either edge. The colour of the falces
is a rich deep red-brown.
The _maxillæ_ are strong, straight, divergent, with a prominent point
at the inner extremity, and some very short, strong, tooth-like
spines at their base; their colour is dull yellow-brown, and, with
the labium and sternum, they are thickly clothed with short strong
hairs.
The _labium_ is dark yellow-brown, tipped slightly with black; it is
of a somewhat semilunar form, and has a few very short tooth-like
spines near its apex.
The _sternum_ is of a rough oval form, broadest behind and shorter
and broader in proportion than that of _Ct. Sauvagii_ and _Ct.
Moggridgii_; its colour is dull yellow-brown, and it is destitute of
the two shining bare patches conspicuous in both those species.
The _abdomen_ is large, short-oval, broadest behind and very convex
above; it is of a dull yellowish-brown colour, thickly mottled with
minute dark points seen through a lens to be little rings, from the
centre of each of which springs a bristly hair; the underside is
paler; the spinners and spiracular openings are normal. As observed
above, the colour of the abdomen was rather different in life; it
was then of a deep blackish chocolate brown, with an indistinct
longitudinal line along the middle of its fore part on the upper
side, intersected by a similar line at right angles; but these lines
soon disappeared after death; the specimen had been in spirit of wine
some months before the present description was made.
A single example, with its tubular nest of the cork-lid type, was
received alive from California in 1873, and appears to have been
hitherto undescribed; though no larger than _Ct. Sauvagii_, it is yet
a stouter and more massive spider, and may readily be distinguished
by the large size of its fore-lateral eyes, the narrower ocular area
arising from the far greater proximity to each other of the eyes of
each lateral pair, the less convexity of the caput, and the greater
convexity of the thorax, as well as by its being altogether a darker
coloured spider, and having shorter stouter legs.
_Habitat._ Visalia, 350 miles south of San Francisco, California.
Gen. Nemesia, Savigny.
Nemesia Cæmentaria, Plate XIX., fig. B, p. 229.
_Mygale cæmentaria_ (Latr.) _Hist. Nat. des Crust._ t. vii. p. 164.
--♀--Walck., _Hist. Nat. des Ins. Apt._ 1, p. 235.
---- ---- _Cuvier's Règne Animal_, ed. Paris. 20 vols. 18--? Pl I.,
_A. Dugès del._ ♂ _et_ ♀.
Adult female, length 7 to 9 lines.
_Cephalothorax_ oval, truncated and almost equally broad at each
end; the upper surface is moderately convex, the caput elevated a
little above the rest, and equally rounded on the sides and upper
part; the profile of the whole cephalothorax forms a general sloping
slightly curved line, broken by the thoracic junctional pit or
fovea, which is narrow but strong, and gently but equally curved, the
convexity of the curve directed forwards; the thorax next to this
fovea is rather gibbous, but not over any great extent of surface;
the other normal indentations are tolerably strong; the colour of the
cephalothorax is yellow-brown, darkest on the sides of the caput,
and along the thoracic indentations, palest on the margins, forming
a pale marginal border indistinctly vandyked on the inner edge. The
surface is clothed, but not densely, with yellowish-grey adpressed
hairs; there are a few black bristles in a straight transverse
line, directed forwards from the lower margin of the clypeus; also
a few more bristles curved and of various lengths before and behind
the ocular area, their points meeting over this area, and a row of
strong, nearly erect ones in a longitudinal central line from the
ocular area to the junctional fovea; besides these are a few more,
finer and less conspicuous, along the middle both of the caput and
thorax; the colour on either side and in front of the ocular area is
orange yellow-brown, and joining with this a broad band of the same
runs backwards from the ocular area to the thoracic fovea. The band
begins as wide as this area, it then directly enlarges a little, and
thence tapers slightly and gradually to its termination, forming a
truncate wedge, with the margins rather irregular, but on the whole
a little curved. This band is not immaculate, there being two dark
yellow-brown tapering lines or bars along the greater part of its
length; these bars begin from each outer pair of eyes of the hinder
row, and tapering to a fine line, converge to the thoracic fovea,
but do not quite meet. It is important to note the exact form and
distribution of the central band and these tapering bars, as their
differences from the character of the similar part in another closely
allied species are strongly specific; the above description holds
good in above twenty examples before me.
The _eyes_ are in two transverse lines, forming an area whose length
is rather less than 2-1/2 times its width; the foremost line is
curved, and the curve directed backwards, the hinder one is also
curved and in a similar direction, but less strongly, looking
laterally the extreme margin of the four eyes of the hinder row forms
a straight line. Considered as in pairs, those of the fore-central
pair are separated by an interval equal to that which separates
each from the fore-lateral and hind-central nearest to it; the
fore-laterals are divided by about two and a half diameters; they are
the largest of the eight, only slightly however, in some examples,
larger than the hind-laterals. Each of them is separated from the
hind-lateral on its side by not quite half the diameter of the
latter, and each hind-lateral is very nearly but not quite contiguous
to the hind-central on its side; the hind-centrals are roughly
rounded, smallest of the eight, though in some examples equal in size
to the fore-centrals, and are separated from the fore-central nearest
to it by about one diameter, which gives a clue to the absolute
distance between the eyes of the foremost pair. The four lateral eyes
are oval, the fore-centrals round; those of the foremost row are
darkish coloured, while those of the hinder row are pearly white.
Although it is of great importance to observe as accurately as
possible the relative position and size of the eyes, yet we must be
prepared to find exceptions to the rule derived from the most exact
measurements in any individual instance.
In the present species the above conclusions, as to position and
size, are drawn from a consideration and comparison of 20 examples,
and are, it is believed, pretty true, but yet in one example, one
of the hind central eyes was but half the size of the other, and
in another example one of the same eyes was but one-fourth of that
of the other, a mere dot in fact, and the relative size of the
respective lateral eyes of the two rows do not appear to maintain
exactly the same proportions in all individuals. The height of the
clypeus appeared to be as nearly as possible half that of the facial
space.
The _legs_ are strong, moderately long, their relative length 4,
1, 2, 3, though in some examples those of the second and third
pairs are equal in length; in others, those of the third pair are
slightly longer than those of the second; here again, as with the
eyes, although the relative proportion of the legs of spiders is an
important specific point, and in general tolerably reliable, yet
accurate observation and measurements prove that there are small
differences in individual instances. The legs are yellow-brown
in colour, furnished with hairs, bristles, and a few spines. The
outer sides of the genual joints of the third pair are destitute of
spines; in two instances only out of 20, this joint had a single, not
very conspicuous, spine. The superior tarsal claws have 4-5 minute
pectinations underneath near their base.
The _palpi_ are moderately long and strong, and similar in colour
and general armature to the legs; they terminate with a single,
strong, sharply curved untoothed claw.
The _falces_ are of a deep black red-brown colour, strong and
prominent, and flat, but not cut away, on their inner sides; they are
furnished on their upper sides with black bristles and yellowish-grey
hairs, disposed in longitudinal lines; these bristles are strongest
and most numerous on the inner margin of the upper side, increasing
in strength forwards where, near the extremity, are some strong
spines.
On the inner edge of the under side of each falx is a row of teeth,
and each fang is also denticulate or finely serrate, beneath towards
its hinder part.
The _maxillæ_ are strong, cylindrical, and divergent; and each has a
small bluntish angular prominence at the extremity on the inner side;
their inner margin has a thick fringe of pale reddish hairs, the fore
surface being clothed (as ordinarily) with dark bristly hairs, and
there are a few black minute tooth-like spines in a line (sometimes
in a small group) near the inner corner of their base.
The _labium_ is short, broad, its breadth nearly double its length,
and the upper corners rather rounded off; there are some strongish
bristles, mostly towards the apex, but no tooth-like spines nor
denticulations.
The _sternum_ is oval, rather convex, broadest towards the hinder
part, which is pointed at this extremity but hollow-truncate before.
The _abdomen_ is sparingly clothed with hairs; it is of a stoutish
regular oval form, and of a dull brownish yellow colour; its
fore extremity on the upper side is thickly blotched with deep
blackish-brown, and the whole length spanned by a series of about
five curved, or slightly angular, stoutish bars or chevrons,
formed of more or less confluent, dark, blackish-brown blotches
and markings; a more or less indistinct line of a similar nature
also divides the fore part of the upper side of the abdomen
longitudinally. There is some variety in the extent, depth, and
distinctness of these markings, but the figures given (Pl. XIX., p.
229, figs. B, B 1) show the appearance of an average example.
It must be remembered that this description is made from examples
in spirit of wine, and that in life the markings (especially on the
cephalothorax) are often considerably obscured by the hairs on the
surface; when seen through spirit the actual tints of colour are
sometimes misrepresented, but the characteristic markings are seen
more distinctly.
The lower part of the sides and the underside of the abdomen are of a
uniform pale dull brownish-yellow; the spinners of the superior pair
are short, strong, and 2-jointed; those of the inferior pair are very
minute, and near together at the base of, and almost between, the
others.
Adult and immature females were found in 1873-4 abundantly at
Montpellier in France, in unbranched tubular nests closed at the
surface with a close-fitting "cork" lid.
In _Harvesting Ants and Trap-door Spiders_, p. 92, a spider
inhabiting similar nests, and found commonly at _Cannes_ and Mentone
was described as _N. cæmentaria_, Latr. The subsequent discovery
however of a very closely allied, but certainly distinct, species
in abundance at Montpellier (the locality in which the original
_N. cæmentaria_, Latr., was found) makes it more than probable that
the _Montpellier_, and not the Mentone, species is the true _N.
cæmentaria_. Certainly as yet no other species more likely than this
to be the one described by Latreille has been found at Montpellier;
in fact, the one here described is the common one found there, and
alone answers to Latreille's character of having a nest with a lid of
the cork type.
It has become therefore necessary now to record the Mentone species
under another name, and under that name, "_N. Moggridgii_" (p. 273)
will be noted the specific differences by which the two species may
be at once distinguished from each other.
The male of the spider here described has not been yet found. A
description is given (p. 276) of a male spider, _Nemesia incerta_
(no doubt closely allied), found by M. Eugène Simon at Digne;
but reasons will be given why it is not probable that this Digne
spider should be, as conjectured by M. Simon, the male of the
Montpellier species. Whether the _N. carminans_ (Latr.) is the male
of _N. cæmentaria_ (Latr.) or not, is another question, and one
surrounded with some obscurity and difficulty. Latreille described
_N. cæmentaria_ (female) from Montpellier, and _N. carminans_ (male)
from Aix in Provence; the latter being specially characterized by a
bifid point to the prolongation of the palpal bulb; L. Dufour appears
subsequently to have considered _N. carminans_, Latr. (male) to be
the male of _N. cæmentaria_, and Latreille appears to have agreed
with L. Dufour upon this, _vide_ Walck. _Ins. Apt._, i. p. 236; but
Dufour afterwards (_Ann. Gen. Sc. Phys._, tom. v. Bruxelles, 1820,
p. 103) introduced an element of confusion into the question by
describing _N. carminans_ as having the point of the palpal organs
simple, "nullement bifid," and throwing out a suggestion that it
might be the male of _N. Sauvagii_, Latr., (= _N. pionnière_ or
_fodiens_, Walck.) Latreille upon this (_Vues générales sur les
Aranéides, Acad. Roy. des Sc._, 1830, pp. 64, 65) explains Dufour's
suggestion as an inadvertence, but takes no notice of the difference
of the form of the palpal organs as described by him; at the same
time however Latreille explains why, probably, Walckenaer "still
considers (in his _Faune française_) _N. carminans_ to be a distinct
species." We may conclude from this that Latreille never altered
_his_ opinion that his own _N. cæmentaria_ and _N. carminans_ were
the two sexes of the same species; and we shall probably rightly
agree with Walckenaer that Dufour had another species before him,
which he wrongly (l.c.) described as _N. carminans_.
Subsequently again a male and female spider, evidently of one
species, were figured by Dugès to illustrate _N. cæmentaria_ male and
female in Cuvier's _Règne Animal_--Edition in 20 vols. not numbered
and without date, published in Paris, "_accompagnée de Planches par
une réunion de disciples de Cuvier, MM. Audouin, Blanchard, Deshayes,
Aleide d'Orbigny, Doyère, Dugès, Duvernoy, Laurillard, Milne Edwards,
Roulin, et Valenciennes_." Of these figures, that of the male has the
point of the palpal organs distinctly bifid, and the nest figured is
of the cork-lid type.
On the whole it may be concluded that the male of the true _N.
cæmentaria_, Latr., will be found to have the bifid point to the
palpal organs, but the question cannot be considered settled until
further researches at Montpellier and Aix (in Provence) shall have
furnished _males_ of the _N. cæmentaria_ now described, and _females_
of the bifid pointed male--_N. carminans_, Latr.--for of course it
is possible that Latreille's _first_ views of the distinctness of
_cæmentaria_ and _carminans_ may be the correct ones.
The characters of the species now described accord so well with
the figures of the female in Dugès' plate (above mentioned) that
little doubt can be entertained of _their_ identity, and if so there
would seem to be little doubt also, but that further research at
Montpellier will reveal a male similar to the male figured by Dugès.
_Habitat._ Montpellier, France.
Nemesia Eleanora.
_Syn. Nemesia Eleanora_, Cambr., male and female, in _Harvesting Ants
and Trap-door Spiders_, by J. T. Moggridge, p. 180, Pl. XII. and
woodcuts, p. 109.
_Nemesia Alpigrada_ (Simon) male, _Aranéides nouv. ou peu connus du
Midi de l'Europe_, 2^e Mémoire. Liège, 1873, 2^e sér. t. v. p. 27
(separate copy.).
There is but little to add to the descriptions given (l.c. _supra_).
It must however be noted that the spines on the outer side of the
genual joints of the third pair of legs, then supposed to be a
characteristic of the present species only, are now found to exist
in several others, with some small exceptions in regard to number,
and also in respect to strict uniformity, on both legs of the same
individual. In _N. cæmentaria_ (p. 264), however, there is rarely
found even a single spine on either of these joints; and not one out
of ten examples of another species, _N. Simoni_ (p. 297), had even
one of these spines.
Shortly after the publication of _Harvesting Ants and Trap-door
Spiders_ the male of this species was described by M. Simon (l.c.)
from two examples taken at Vaucluse near Avignon.
_Habitats._ San Remo, Mentone, Cannes, Vaucluse near Avignon, and,
according to M. Simon, Digne, Basses Alpes.
Nemesia Moggridgii, sp. n., Plate XIX., fig. C, p. 229.
_Syn. Nemesia Cæmentaria_, Cambr., in _Harvesting Ants and Trap-door
Spiders_, (by J. T. Moggridge), p. 93, Pl. VIII.
This spider is exceedingly closely allied to the foregoing and was
thought to be the true _N. cæmentaria_, Latr., until subsequent
researches at Montpellier (the locality where Latreille's types were
found) have resulted in the belief that the Montpellier, rather
than the Mentone species, is that described by him. At present the
females only of the two species are known, and these may readily be
distinguished by the pattern on the caput.
In the foregoing (the _Montpellier Spider_) a broad orange
yellow-brown band runs from the ocular area to the thoracic
fovea, tapering gradually to that part, where it is truncated,
forming a wedge with the point cut off. This wedge-shaped band is
charged with two longitudinal, more or less distinct, dark brown
irregularly-tapering lines, running throughout its whole length and
converging towards each other but not touching.
In the _Mentone Spider_ there are three orange-yellow-brown
well-defined bars or longitudinal lines between the ocular area
and the thoracic fovea; the central bar tapers and reaches from
the eyes to the fovea, the lateral ones never more than two-thirds
of the distance from it to the eyes, diverging a little from the
central bar as they run forwards. These two lateral bars are not
straight, _i.e._, their margins are more or less notched or roughly
angular, forming in some examples a line of a somewhat zigzag or bent
character. It may perhaps be observed that when the two dark brown
lines which run along the broad orange-yellow-brown band on the caput
of the Montpellier spider, are well marked, this also leaves three
longitudinal yellow lines, somewhat similar to those just described
in the Mentone species, but there is this difference even then (and
it is constant throughout a long series of examples), the lateral
lines in the Montpellier spider _always run through to the eyes_,
equalling in length the central line, while in the Mentone spider the
_lateral bars never reach the eyes_, always stopping short of the
ocular area, by one-half, or nearly so, of their length.
Another distinction which appears constant is the form of the
thoracic fovea; in the Montpellier species this forms a slight
but uniform curve; in the Mentone spider it is more sharply bent
at the apex (or centre of the curve), forming in most examples a
bluntish-angular line.
In the eyes there appears to be but little reliable difference; if
there be any at all constant, it seems to be that in the present
(Mentone) species the fore-laterals are constantly smaller than the
hind-laterals, and sometimes smaller than the fore-centrals. A close
examination, however, of the relative size and position of the eyes
in a series of examples, lowers one's estimation of the _absolute_
value of this character in the determination of the species of
_Nemesia_; still it is a specific character not by any means to
be overlooked, though to be used guardedly, and often with great
reservation.
In regard to other characters and general description there seems but
little to add to the description given (l.c. _supra_), except that
the labium has no denticulations at its apex and the outer sides of
the genual joints of the third pair of legs are generally without
spines. Occasionally (in one example out of sixteen) there is a
single spine on this joint, of either the right or left leg. In this
character, however (differing from several others described below),
the Montpellier spider agrees with that from Mentone.
In both spiders, the fangs of the falces are (in some instances at
least) denticulated. Also in regard to the relative lengths of the
legs, like those of the Montpellier spider, the second and third
pairs of the Mentone species are not constant in their relative
proportions, though the differences either way are very slight, and
there is often no difference whatever.
The nest and habits of the two species appear to be nearly, if not
quite, similar.
In naming the present species (at the suggestion of M. Eugène
Simon) the writer of these descriptions gladly testifies to his
appreciation of the great value attaching to Mr. Traherne Moggridge's
investigations of the habits of the closely-allied species of this
very difficult, though most interesting group of spiders.
M. Eugène Simon (_Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr._ 1873, Bull, c.), perceiving
the difference between the present species and the one known to
himself as _N. cæmentaria_, Latr., concludes it to be identical with
_N. meridionalis_, Sim. Examples, however, of this latter, from M.
Simon's cabinet, show that they are very distinct.
On _N. meridionalis_, Sim., see p. 289; and on _N. cæmentaria_, Sim.,
p. 280, M. Simon has, I understand, subsequently admitted the error
of his conclusion, published l.c. _supra_.
_Habitat._ San Remo, Mentone, Cannes, Hyères, and Marseilles.
Nemesia incerta, sp. n., Plate XIX., fig. D, p. 229.
Adult male, length slightly above 4-1/2 lines.
_Cephalothorax_ oval, truncate at each end; moderately convex
above, the profile line forming a pretty even, sloping, curved
line, but flattish in the middle near the thoracic fovea, which is
of a strongly curved form; the other normal indentations are not
strong, though fairly defined; the colour of the cephalothorax is
yellow-brown, palish and clothed with yellowish-grey adpressed hairs
on the margins, and inclining to orange on the caput. The clypeus
is somewhat steep, about equal to half the height of the facial
space, and the sides of the caput are dark blackish-brown, leaving
a longitudinal, central reddish orange-brown band tapering to the
thoracic fovea.
The upper and hinder part of the thorax is strongly suffused with
brown, leaving broad but irregular pale lateral margins; there is a
group of strong bristles directed forwards from the margin of the
clypeus, and two or three more in the median line behind the ocular
area.
The _eyes_ are on a strongish oblong dark brown transverse
tubercular eminence; the fore-laterals are rather smaller than
the hind-laterals, and the fore-centrals are larger than the
hind-centrals, the latter being much the smallest of the eight; the
interval between those of each lateral pair is about equal to, or
slightly larger than, the diameter of one of the fore-central eyes;
the intervals between the four eyes of the front row are equal, each
interval being equal to the diameter of one of the fore-centrals;
and each hind-central eye is separated from the fore-central nearest
to it by as nearly as possible a similar distance, and from the
hind-lateral on its side by a very small but distinct interval.
The _legs_ are rather long, strong, of a brownish-yellow colour,
suffused with blackish-brown on the upper sides of the femora, and
furnished with hairs, bristles, and spines. Those of the hinder
(fourth) pair were wanting, the relative lengths of the others
being 1, 2, 3; 2 and 3 being very nearly equal. The spines are not
numerous, being disposed mostly on the tibiæ and metatarsi of the
third pair; some, however, had been evidently broken off; all the
tarsi were without spines; each tarsus ends with three claws, the
superior pair with several--6-8?--teeth on their under sides.
The tibial joint of each of the first pair is short, no longer than
the genual joint, but it is strong and enlarged gradually beneath
to its fore extremity, where it ends in a strong, sharp-pointed,
tapering red-brown curved spine, directed downwards, forwards, and
inwards. Each tarsus of the first and second pairs is pretty thickly
fringed just below on each side along its whole length, with short
strongish hairs of an even length.
On the outer side of the genual joint of the third pair (left leg)
are three spines in a longitudinal row; the other leg of this pair
was wanting.
The _palpi_ are moderately long, and similar in colour and general
armature to the legs; the radial joint is strong, a little tapering
forwards, and somewhat curved underneath towards its hinder part;
its length is about double that of the digital joint, and from its
fore extremity on the upper side, three strong, somewhat sessile,
spines of equal length, and directed forwards issue, in a straight
transverse line.
The palpal organs consist of a roundish corneous bulb drawn out into
a longish, tapering, curved, sharp-pointed spine, the point being
very fine, gradual, and directed outwards.
The _falces_ are strong, prominent, of a deep red-brown colour,
furnished above with dull greyish-yellow hairs mixed with dark
bristles, and disposed in longitudinal stripes; and near the upper
extremity on the inner side are four strongish spines.
The _maxillæ_ are strong, divergent, cylindrical, with a small
angular prominence at their inner extremity; they are furnished with
hairs, but no denticulations, and there is a strong fringe of reddish
hairs on their inner margins. The maxillæ are of the same colour as
the palpi.
The _labium_ is short and broad; its breadth double its height and
its apex rounded. Its junction with the _sternum_ appeared to be
about at right angles. It is darker in colour than the maxillæ, but
with a paler apex; its surface is furnished with bristly hairs, but
there are no denticulations at its apex. _Sternum_ oval, truncate
before, pointed behind, furnished with bristly hairs, and of the same
colour as the legs.
The _abdomen_ is of an oblong-oval form, truncate before, and
tolerably convex above; it is of a pale dull yellowish colour clothed
with yellow-grey hairs, among which are a good many prominent
dark bristly ones; the fore part of the upper side is irregularly
marked with black-brown; following this towards the hinder part,
and reaching half way or more to the spinners, is an indistinct
longitudinal central line of the same colour, throwing off numerous
short lateral lines at right angles; towards either side of the
hinder two-thirds of the abdomen are several oblique black-brown
lines extending more or less over the sides; one, about the middle,
extends farther over the sides than the rest, and almost unites with
a curved deep black-brown transverse line crossing the under side of
the abdomen a little way in front of the spinners.
The under side of the abdomen is similar in colour to the upper
side, and, besides the transverse dark line above mentioned, there
is another touching the anterior margins of the posterior spiracular
plates; the superior pair of spinners are short and strong; the
inferior pair small, and in the ordinary position, but apparently not
(proportionally) so small as in the females of some other species.
A single adult male was received for examination from M. Eugène
Simon, by whom it was found at Digne (Basses Alpes, France). M. Simon
conjectures that it may be the male of _Nemesia Moggridgii_ (p. 273),
but some slight differences in the size and positions of the eyes,
and in the pattern on the cephalothorax, and on the under, as well
as the upper, side of the abdomen, lead me to believe that it is of
a different, and hitherto undescribed species, though probably very
closely allied to some others, especially to _Nemesia Manderstjernæ_
(_N. meridionalis_, Cambr., described, p. 283); in the present
species however the hind-lateral eyes are much larger in proportion
than in _N. Manderstjernæ_.
_Habitat._ Digne, Basses Alpes, France.
Nemesia dubia, sp. n., Plate XIX., fig. E, p. 229.
Syn. _Nemesia cæmentaria_, Simon, _Aranéides nouv. ou peu connus du
Midi de l'Europe_, Mém. Liège, 1873 (separate copy), p. 24.
Adult male, length 5-1/2 lines to 6 lines.
M. Eugène Simon (l.c.) describes, as _N. cæmentaria_, Latr., both
sexes of a spider found by himself in the Pyrenees and Spanish
mountain regions.
Languedoc and Provence are also given as localities, but it is not
clear that he has himself found it in these latter parts, certainly
not the male.
Two examples of this sex, found in the Pyrenees, and received from M.
Simon, are now before me; these correspond, so far, very exactly to
the description he gives (l.c.); the female I have not seen.
If the position assumed (p. 271) on Latreille's own authority, that
the true male of _N. cæmentaria_, Latr., (_N. carminans_, Latr.), has
a bifid point to the prolongation of the palpal bulb, it is clear
that the present species is distinct from that of Latreille.
M. Simon describes this palpal bulb as having its extreme point
"simple et plus effilée" (_i.e._ more slender than in the preceding
species he has described _N. meridionalis_). That the examples now
before me, agreeing exactly with this description, are not the males
of the species above described by myself as _N. cæmentaria_, Latr.,
from numerous females found at Montpellier, appears to me clear,
not only because I assume that of the true _N. cæmentaria_, Latr.,
males will be found to have the point of the palpal bulb bifid, but
because the position of the eyes is markedly different in M. Simon's
Pyrenean males and the Montpellier females. In the latter the eyes
of the front row are separated from each other by equal intervals,
in the former the interval between those of the central pair is
very perceptibly greater than that between each and the lateral of
the same row nearest to it. The interval also between each of the
fore-central eyes and the hind-central on its side is proportionally
much less.
It appears therefore necessary to characterize _N. cæmentaria_ (Sim.
l.c.) by some other name, for if eventually it should be found that
Latreille has erred in _N. carminans_ (with the _bifid point_ to the
palpal bulb) being the male of his _N. cæmentaria_, and that the
Montpellier species has a male with a _simple point_ to this part,
even then the present spider cannot retain its name (_cæmentaria_),
being distinct from the females found at Montpellier.
It is possible, of course, that the present species may hereafter
be found, perhaps abundantly, at Montpellier; in that case it
will have to be decided which of the two is most likely to be the
species described by Latreille. In that eventuality it seems to me
that the spider, above described from Montpellier, would be more
probably Latreille's species, for one of its specific characters is
a tolerably distinct and bold series of, not more than, five dark
angular bars along the middle of the upper side of the abdomen,
agreeing exactly with Dugès' figures in the _Règne Animal_ of Cuvier,
quoted above (p. 271); while in M. Simon's Pyrenean spider, the
abdominal pattern of the female described by him, does not agree
with this: "il est orné d'une fine ligne noire longitudinale, un peu
ondulée, présentant de nombreuses ramifications, s'étendant sur les
parties latérales" (l.c. p. 26). The males before me accord with
this description, though (as M. Simon also remarks) the "série de
fins accents bruns transverses" is "peu visibles et souvent effacés"
(l.c., p. 25); in one example this pattern is fairly distinct, in the
other it is scarcely recognisable.
The present is a larger spider than _N. incerta_ (the male found by
M. Simon at Digne); it is also less distinctly marked both on the
cephalothorax and abdomen. The position of the eyes is different,
and so also is the palpal bulb; in that species the spine describes
a simple curve with a strong outward direction; in the present it
is slightly but perceptibly _sinuous_, and its general direction is
_parallel to the radial joint of the palpus_; the spines also at the
upper fore extremity of the radial joint are 5-6 in number instead of
three. The outer side of the genual joint of each of the legs of the
third pair has three spines; that on the left side, however, of one
example, has four. The palpal bulb also appears to be proportionally
smaller than that of _N. dubia_, or of _N. Manderstjernæ_, Auss. (_N.
meridionalis_, Cambr.)
Another difference may here be noted between the present species and
the Montpellier _cæmentaria_. M. Simon (_in lit._) separates his _N.
cæmentaria_ from all others by the length of the patella and tibia
(genual and tibial joints) of the fourth pair of legs, exceeding in
length that of the cephalothorax and falces.
This character has not been found to exist in several females of the
Montpellier species, minutely measured by Mr. Moggridge; in them the
length of the cephalothorax and falces were found to exceed that of
the genual and tibial joints of the fourth pair of legs, by from
1-1/2 to 2 mm.
In regard to the relative length of the legs of the present species
this was 4, 1, 2, 3 in the one example examined, and 4, 1, 2-3 in the
other, both being males.
It is a matter of regret that nothing, as yet, has been accurately
observed in regard to the particular type or form of the nest of _N.
dubia_.
_Habitat._ Pyrenees and Spanish mountain regions.
Nemesia Manderstjernæ, Plate XX., fig. B, C, p. 254.
Syn. _Nemesia Manderstjernæ_, Auss. ♂, _Beitr. zur Kenntn. der
Arachn. Fam. der Territelariæ_, p. 54.
_Nemesia meridionalis_, Cambr. (female), _Harvesting Ants and
Trap-door Spiders_, by J. T. Moggridge, p. 101. Plates IX. X. XI.
Adult male, length 6-1/4 to 7-1/2 lines.
Since the publication of the description of _N. meridionalis_,
Cambr. (♀ l.c. _supra_), I have had an opportunity of examining an
adult example of each sex of a _Nemesia_, described about the same
time by M. Eugène Simon as _N. meridionalis_, Costa, in _Aranéides
nouv. ou peu connus du Midi de l'Europe_, p. 21 (separate copy).
The species described by M. Simon was found by himself abundantly
in Corsica. He also gives Italy and Provence as localities, but the
former of these two is, I conclude, given as being _Costa's_ locality
for the spider described by this latter author in _Fauna d. Regn.
Napl. Arachn._, p. 14; the other locality (Provence) would seem to
have been doubtfully given. On careful examination of the Corsican
examples (male and female), and on comparing them with the male and
female of _N. meridionalis_, Cambr., as well as the description and
figure given by Costa, I feel no doubt but that M. Simon is right in
according to the Corsican species M. Costa's name--_meridionalis_. It
agrees, I think, decidedly better, on the whole, with Costa's figure
and description than the species to which (l.c.) I had allotted the
specific name _meridionalis_ conferred by that author. Nor had I any
hesitation in accepting the determination made by M. Simon, in _Bull.
Ent. Soc. Fr._, 1873, sér. v. tom. 3, c.; that my _N. meridionalis_
♀ is the female of _N. Manderstjernæ_, Auss., the more especially
as since the publication of my description I have received from the
same locality (Mentone) not only the male of the spider described by
myself (l.c.), but also the type of M. Ausserer's description of _N.
Manderstjernæ_ (found at Nice), and believe these to be identical in
species. There is, indeed, a difference in the, apparent, relative
positions and colour of the eyes of the two spiders, but no more than
may be well accounted for by the condition of M. Ausserer's type
(most kindly lent to me for examination by its owner, Dr. Ludwig
Koch); this example is much shrunken, having the appearance of having
been allowed to get dry and then to have been again immersed in
spirit. This would (I have frequently found it so in other spiders)
cause even the hard integument of the cephalothorax to contract,
and so cause the eyes to shrink up together into a closer group, as
well as to sink down into the cuticle, making some of them appear
smaller than they really are. Alternate drying and wetting again in
spirit would also account for the yellowish brown colour of the eyes,
whereas in the male of the Mentone spider the eyes of the hinder
row are pearly grey, and of the front row dark grey. Beyond these
differences I can find no distinction between them.
The male of the present species is very nearly allied to both _N.
incerta_ (p. 276) from the Pyrenees, and _N. dubia_ (p. 280) from
Digne, of both of which, as remarked (l.c.), the male sex alone
is known to me; it is, however, larger than either, more richly
coloured, and more distinctly marked. In all three species the
elongated portion of the palpal bulb has a simple point, but in
the present spider it is not drawn out so finely and gradually:
some portion of its extremity being, though very fine yet really,
cylindrical, and not tapering off into a hair-like termination; the
general direction of the palpal bulb is parallel with the radial
joint, but the point which is equally curved is directed outwards
and a little downwards; the radial joint has four spines at the
fore extremity on the upper side (in one of the examples there were
however seven on the radial joint of the right palpus), and the
genual joint of each leg of the third pair, in both examples from
Mentone as well as in M. Ausserer's example from Nice, has three
spines on its outer side. This character was not remarked upon in
the description of _N. meridionalis_ ♀ (Cambr. l.c.). It is not
invariable in a long series of female examples; occasionally one
is found with four spines on one of these genual joints, in others
there is occasionally but one spine and sometimes (but rarely)
none; perhaps in this case broken off? I am inclined to attach
some importance as a specific character to the number, presence,
or absence of these spines on the outer side of the genual joint
of the third pair of legs; not that it is an invariable character,
few, if any, specific characters are absolute and invariable, nor
that it is of more importance than the armature of other portions
of the different legs, but as being more easily observed and less
liable to injury than the larger and more numerous spines on other
parts. Equally useful in specific determination are the spines at the
fore-extremity on the upper side of the radial joint of the palpus.
This, however, applies only to the male, whereas the character
derived from the spines on the genual joints of the third pair of
legs applies to both sexes.
Another character by which the present species (♀) may be
distinguished from _N. dubia_ (_N. cæmentaria_, Sim.) is that the
former is rather narrower at the fore-extremity of the caput, which
is also less elevated, being almost equally level with the thorax.
The description of the female given (l.c. _supra_) needs but little
addition. It may be noticed, however, that the central longitudinal
tapering orange band on the caput is faintly continued to the extreme
hinder margin of the thorax, and the thoracic fovea is rather sharply
curved. The intervals between the eyes is the same as in those of _N.
Moggridgii_, though their absolute size in some examples appeared to
be smaller. In both sexes there are several small, black, tooth-like,
tubercular spines on the inner side of the base of each maxilla, but
none at the apex of the labium.
The colour of the _cephalothorax_ in the male is bright-reddish
orange-yellow; a large portion of the sides of the caput, and the
ocular area also, is black-brown; the middle of the thorax is
distinctly marked with black-brown lines radiating to the thoracic
fovea.
Other, less deep, brown markings are mixed with these radiating
lines; there are a few prominent bristles in front of the ocular
area, a single longitudinal line of erect bristles along the middle
of the orange band from the eyes to the thoracic fovea, and the whole
cephalothorax is more or less clothed with greyish-yellow adpressed
hairs.
The _falces_ are of a deep blackish red-brown colour, longitudinally
striped with yellow-greyish hairs mixed with dark bristles; and there
are some strong spines at the fore extremity on the inner side.
The _abdomen_ is oval, tolerably convex above, of a dull, pale,
straw colour, suffused with brown at its fore extremity, whence an
indistinct central longitudinal band tapers to a point rather more
than half way to the spinners; on either side of this band are some
oblique, lateral, brown lines, which become broken chevrons, between
the termination of the central band and the spinners. The sides are
obscurely and irregularly marked with brown, and the under side is
of a uniform dull straw-yellow; the abdomen is clothed thickly with
mixed yellow-grey and dark hairs; the upper side is furnished also
with strong, nearly erect bristly black ones.
Each _tarsus_ terminates with three claws; those of the superior pair
are pectinated beneath, but the number of teeth appears to vary in
the different legs, from six to eight. The tibial joint of the first
pair is of the same character as that in the males of other species:
it has a strong black curved spine directed inwards from the fore
extremity of the under side, and a short bluntish-conical, but very
distinct prominence at the same extremity on the inner side, not far
from the base of the curved spine, Plate XX., fig. B 4 and C; the
colour of the legs is yellow, tinged with orange, the upper sides of
the femora being nearly black; the palpi are similar in colour, the
upper side of the humeral joints being suffused with a blackish hue.
The relative length of the legs is not constant; in one example it
was 4, 3, 1, 2, in the other 4, 1, 2, 3, 2 and 3 being very nearly
equal. Similar variations are also found in the legs of the female.
In regard to the nest of this species, researches made subsequently
to the publication of _Harvesting Ants and Trap-door Spiders_
have proved it to be of rather a different form from that there
represented; thus in the main tube, just before the inner door is
reached, there is a descending branch running off from the main
tube at the same angle as the ascending branch, but in an opposite
direction; in the older and larger nests the descending branch
becomes choked with débris; it is more distinct in the nests of the
younger spiders, and is always more or less distinctly traceable.
_N.B._--In the above details there have been only one or two special
distinctions observed between the two male examples examined. It
should however be noted that in one (the one captured behind a stone
wall) the ocular area was slightly narrower in proportion to its
length, and the interval between the eyes of each lateral pair rather
less.
_Habitat._ San Remo, Bordighera, Mentone, Cannes, and Hyères.
Nemesia Meridionalis, Plate XVII., fig. B, p. 215.
Syn. _Nemesia meridionalis_, Costa, _Fauna d. Regn. Napl. Arachn._,
p. 14, Pl. I., figs. 2, 3.
---- ---- Simon, _Aranéides nouv. ou peu connus du Midi de l'
Europe_, Mém. Liège, 1873 (separate copy), p. 21.
Adult male, length 6-3/4 lines (14 mm.), female adult, length 10-1/2
lines (22 mm.).
The examination of an adult example of each sex of this spider
received from M. Simon, by whom they were found in Corsica, leads
me to conclude that we have here the true _N. meridionalis_, Costa,
as certainly at least as it is possible at present to identify the
species by the insufficient description and figures given by this
author.
The _eyes_ appear to be less closely massed together than in _N.
Manderstjernæ_, but in other respects no particularly tangible
difference is to be noted; the interval however between the eyes of
each lateral pair is perhaps rather greater. Between the male and the
female of the present species there is a decided difference in the
relative position of the eyes. In the female the fore-centrals are
nearer together than each is to the fore-lateral on its side, while
in the male, the fore-centrals are wider apart than each is from its
fore-lateral. I have also noted a similar difference in regard to _N.
Manderstjernæ_. The fore-centrals are also smaller in the female than
in the male.
The two species, although bearing such great general similarity to
each other, may be at once distinguished by several very tangible
differences. First in regard to the _male_. The _cephalothorax_ of
_N. meridionalis_ has the whole caput of an almost uniform dark brown
colour, two slender yellow lines beginning, one a little way behind
each lateral pair of eyes, and converging rather quickly towards each
other, run on nearly parallel, but in close proximity together to
the thoracic fovea. The centre of the thorax is also dark brown, the
brown portion formed by radiating confluent patches, rather than by
distinct lines as in _Manderstjernæ_. The curve of the thoracic fovea
is sharp, in fact more in the form of a straight line with the ends
bent down.
The _cephalothorax_ is of nearly one uniform level and convexity
above; the caput being a little more rounded than the thorax; the
eye eminence seemed to be rather higher than in _N. Manderstjernæ_,
and the _clypeus_, which is steepish, is impressed in the middle and
exceeds in height half that of the facial space; on the lower margin
of the _clypeus_ is a transverse row of several strong prominent
bristles. There were no bristles behind the eyes, and no appearance
of any having been broken off there (the female, however, has a
single longitudinal row on the caput). The lateral and hinder margins
of the cephalothorax, however, are, in the male (but not in the
female) clothed with black bristles and bristly hairs.
The _palpi_ are longer than in _Manderstjernæ_. The radial joints
have, at the upper fore extremity of each, five spines, _three_ in
front in a transverse line, and _two_ immediately behind them. The
palpal bulb is more globular, and the spiny production, which is not
very long, springs from it more suddenly, and is _strongly sinuous_,
its sharp tapering point directed outwards. The strong sinuosity of
this part distinguishes it at once both from _N. Manderstjernæ_ and
all other known European males with a simple point to the palpal
organs.
The _legs_ are longish and strong; their relative length 4-1, 3, 2
(male); 4-1, 2, 3 (female); they are furnished with hairs, bristles,
and spines. These do not appear to call for special notice, except
that each genual joint of those of the third pair has two spines on
its outer side in both sexes.
The superior tarsal claws are denticulated, but the denticulations
differ in number and strength, not only in the two sexes and in the
different legs, but in some instances in the two superior claws of
the same leg. The denticulations seemed to be more numerous in the
female than in the male.
The _abdomen_ is elongate oval, and of a straw yellow colour. In
the _male_ the fore part of the upper side is irregularly black
brown, followed by an irregular somewhat broken longitudinal central
bar, and some broken oblique lines and portions of chevrons. In
the _female_ the fore part is less densely blackish, the central
longitudinal line is obscure, but the oblique lateral lines are more
distinct and less broken, but none are quite united so as to form
chevrons, though the two or three nearest to the spinners almost do
so.
The upper side is furnished with numerous strong nearly erect black
bristles.
The _labium_ has a row, of bristles only, at its apex.
The markings of the cephalothorax in the female are very nearly like
those of that sex in _N. Manderstjernæ_; the tapering orange yellow
band, however, behind the eyes appears to be rather bolder, as in
that species this band also is faintly traceable quite to the hinder
thoracic margin. The inner corner of the base of the maxillæ, in both
sexes, has several minute tooth-like black spines.
The form of the cephalothorax in the female differs from that of
the male; in the latter sex (male) it is narrower before and rather
rounded behind; in the former sex (female) it is broadest before and
more distinctly hollow-truncate behind; the caput is also rounder and
more elevated. In the female the tarsi and metatarsi of the two first
pairs of legs have close set brush-like hairs beneath; these are
wanting in the two hinder pairs, and also almost entirely wanting on
the two first pairs in the male.
Various other characters, both peculiar and differential, are noted
in regard to this species by M. Simon (l.c.). It is to be regretted
that this painstaking observer did not note more exactly the form and
type of its nest; from his description of it, however, it appears to
be branched, but whether the door is of the wafer or cork type, or
whether it has an inner door or not, is not mentioned.
_Habitat._ Corsica.
Nemesia Congener, sp. n., Plate XVIII., fig. A, p. 225.
Adult female, length 9 lines (19 mm.).
In general appearance, colours, and markings this spider bears
great resemblance to _N. cæmentaria_. The eyes, however, appeared
to be smaller, and the hind-centrals also smaller in proportion to
the rest. The pale margins of the cephalothorax are in the present
species generally confined to some rather indistinct pale patches.
The central orange band from the eyes to the thoracic fovea is,
especially in immature examples, often only a simple tapering line;
in others it is larger, and often composed of three converging narrow
orange bands, which form, in some examples, a broad central tapering
band, marked with two longitudinal dark lines. The thoracic fovea is
curved, but not sharply.
The _abdomen_ is broadish oval, of a dull clay colour, marked with
dark brown lines, and markings on the sides and upper side. In
some examples these form a longitudinal central series of curved
or slightly angular lines; in others but little trace of regular
chevrons can be seen.
In the present spider there is also a longitudinal pale yellowish
patch on the inner upper margin of the falces near their base; they
are furnished with hairs in longitudinal bands, and spines, like
others of the genus.
The _legs_ are moderately long, strong, and furnished with hairs and
bristles, and, sparingly, with spines. The genual joints of the third
pair have some spines on the outer side, varying from one to three in
different examples. The tarsi and metatarsi of the first and second
pairs, as well as the radial and digital joints of the palpi, have
strong lateral brush-like fringes of close-set sooty black hairs. The
superior pair of tarsal claws are denticulated, but not uniformly
either in strength, number, or position.
No doubt this will prove a very troublesome spider to distinguish
with certainty from _N. cæmentaria_, but the almost constant presence
of a spine or spines on the outer face of the genual joint of the
third pair of legs seems to be a good distinguishing character; in
no one example out of nine carefully examined could I detect their
absence altogether, while a single spine even on _N. cæmentaria_ is
rare.
In the present species five examples had three spines on each of
these joints; two had two spines on each; one had a single spine on
each; another had one on one side, two on the other.
The nest, however, is very characteristic and peculiar. It is of the
wafer-lid type, and so cannot, from even the outside, be mistaken
for that of _N. cæmentaria_, which is of the cork-lid type; it is,
moreover, branched below, while that of _N. cæmentaria_ is a single
unbranched tube. It has also an inside door, or valve, of very
remarkable construction, having two perfect cork-like faces, securely
shutting off either the branch, or the main tube just above the
branch, at pleasure. By this latter character it is distinguished
also from the tube of _N. Manderstjernæ_, as well as by the absence
of a second short branch or cavity, lately discovered in the nest
of this last spider. Examples of this spider were found, not
unfrequently, but invariably in such nests as that above described,
at Hyères.
The female sex only has yet been met with.
_Habitat._ Hyères.
Nemesia Suffusa, sp. n., Plate XVII., fig. A, p. 215.
Immature female, length 7-1/2 lines (15-1/2 mm.).
Although no example was quite adult, this species may readily be
distinguished from all others yet known to me, by its more elongated
form, particularly the cylindrico-ovate form of the abdomen.
The _cephalothorax_ is oval, broadest towards its posterior
extremity, where it is rounded, the fore-margin being truncated; the
caput is well rounded and convex, and the thorax perhaps more so
than in other species, so that when looked at in profile there is a
considerable dip or hollow at the thoracic fovea; this fovea forms a
slight curve. Except that the lateral margins are rather broadly pale
towards the hinder part (though the pale portion is ill-defined),
the whole of the cephalothorax is of a uniform dull yellowish-brown
colour; the extreme lateral margin is marked by a black line, and
in one or two examples there was an indistinct yellowish central
longitudinal line from the eyes to the thoracic junction, having a
single row of prominent bristles upon it. The whole surface of the
cephalothorax is fairly clothed with dusky yellowish-grey adpressed
hairs: the ordinary grooves and indentations are well marked.
The _eyes_ are on the usual eye eminence, which is perhaps rather
more elevated than ordinary, and its summit black; their position
is ordinary. It may, however, be noticed that the fore-centrals are
placed more forward than in most of the other known species; the
fore-centrals are about _equally_ separated from each other, and
from the fore-laterals nearest to each respectively; they are also
separated from the hind-central nearest to each, by an interval
not differing much from that between each other; the hind-centrals
are distinctly oval, or rather somewhat semilunar in form, smallest
of the eight (except in one example, when they were almost, if not
quite, as large as the fore-centrals), and at their hindermost point
very near, but not quite contiguous, to the hind-laterals. The eyes
of each lateral pair (of which the hinder is very nearly equal in
size to the fore one), are very near, but not quite contiguous, to
each other; the interval between them is narrower than that between
the corresponding eyes in almost any other yet described species.
The _legs_ are neither long nor very strong; their relative length is
4, 1, 2, 3, though between 2 and 3 there is in different examples the
same variation observed in other species; sometimes they are equal,
and sometimes one, and then the other, very slightly the longest:
their colour is pale yellowish, and they are furnished with hairs,
bristles, and spines, but the latter are not numerous, and appeared
to be both longer and slenderer than usual; the genual joints of the
third pair have spines, from one to three on the outer side, for the
most part, three; the superior tarsal claws are pectinated (but not
uniformly on all the legs) beneath their hinder portion.
The _falces_ are strong, and similar in colour to the cephalothorax,
but they do not appear to call for any special remark.
The _maxillæ_ have a few minute tuberculiform black teeth at their
base on the inner side, and, with the _labium_ (which has no hairs at
its apex) and _sternum_, are similar in colour to the legs.
The _abdomen_ is of an elongated, or cylindrico-ovate form, of a
dull drab-yellowish colour, with a central, longitudinal, irregular,
rather chocolate-brown bar on its upper side, and 6 to 7 well-defined
lateral oblique slightly curved lines of the same colour and touching
the central line; between these lines are some other irregular, but
similarly coloured, markings.
The sides are almost immaculate, and the underside quite so; the
spinners are ordinary.
About 10 examples (all immature) were found at Montpellier in
branched tubes closed at the entrance with a wafer-lid. The branch
arises some way below the entrance and runs up to the surface at an
acute angle with the main tube; there is no lower door, and thus this
tube forms the type of a new form of nest, being branched, with a
wafer-lid, but without a lower door.
This species cannot be confused with _N. cæmentaria_, which is found
abundantly in the same locality; both the general form, colours,
markings, and nest readily distinguish it from that species.
_Habitat._ Montpellier.
Nemesia Simoni, sp. n., Plate XVI., fig. A, p. 211.
Adult female, length rather more than 9-1/4 lines (20 mm.).
This spider is of a proportionally broader and stouter form than
others of the genus _Nemesia_, and the cephalothorax (which is
entirely glabrous and destitute of adpressed hairs) has the caput
more rounded and elevated than in any other species of _Nemesia_
known to me, approaching _Cteniza_ in these respects.
The _cephalothorax_ is oval, truncate, and about equally broad at
each end; the ordinary grooves and indentations are strong; besides
the groove which indicates its union with the thorax, the caput has
an indented or pinched-in appearance towards its hinder part on each
side. Except that this was present in all the examples examined (ten)
it might have been taken to be accidental.
The colour of the cephalothorax is dark brown tinged with yellow,
darkest on the sides of the caput, which is divided longitudinally
by a narrow, dull, orange-yellow line, and lightest on the margins
towards the hinder part; the thoracic fovea is curved, but more
deeply indented and the indentation is wider at each end than in
other species, the ends being a little turned back: there is a single
longitudinal row of long erect bristles along the central line of the
caput, and a few more on the lower margin of the clypeus.
The _eyes_ form a narrower oblong area than usual, owing chiefly
to their small size and to those of each lateral pair being almost
contiguous to each other, separated only by an interval equal to that
which divides each hind-lateral from the hind-central nearest to it.
The hind-centrals are smallest of the eight, and vary in form, being
round, semilunar, or roughly wedge-shaped, differing at times in the
same example. The eye eminence is less elevated than in most species,
and this brings the fore-centrals nearer to the straight line of the
fore-laterals; these last are the largest of the eight. The height of
the clypeus exceeds half that of the facial space.
The _legs_ are short and strong; their relative length 4, 1, 3, 2,
or 4, 1, 2, 3, or 4, 1, 2-3; they are of a brownish yellow colour,
deeper on their fore-sides, furnished with hairs, bristles, and
spines, the latter not very numerous nor unusually strong; there
are no spines on the outer sides of the genual joints of the third
pair; the tarsal claws are longish and strong. Those of the superior
pair have but one, two, or three pectinations on their underside; on
some of the legs I could not detect any. There seemed to be no more
uniformity in the tarsal-claw pectinations in this species than in
others. The tarsal and metatarsal joints of the legs of the first
pair have a fringe of close-set short blackish hairs on either side,
as also have the digital joints of the palpi, these being similar to
the legs in colour and armature; the humeral joints are very deep but
narrow, being apparently bent and hollowed on their inner sides to
allow of meeting well over the falces.
The terminal palpal claw has two teeth towards its base on the
underside. I could not ascertain satisfactorily whether this is
or not a uniform character in all examples; in one example these
denticulations were very plain, but they seemed to be wanting in
others.
The _falces_ are very strong and massive, round in their profile,
and very roundly prominent near their base on the upper side. They
are of a rich deep black-brown colour, glossy, and furnished along
their inner margins with black bristles and hairs, and with strong
spines at their extremity on the upper side. The fang is strong, and
the outer margin of the groove in which it lies when at rest has some
strong teeth.
The _maxillæ_ are strong, of normal form, but very convex on their
outer surface.
The small tuberculous teeth noticed at the base on the inner side of
the maxillæ of all the other species I have examined, were visible
(though with difficulty) in this species also.
The _labium_ is broader than it is high, convex on its face, and
rounded at the apex; it is (as also are the _maxillæ_ and _sternum_)
of the same colour as the legs, and clothed with numerous strong
bristly hairs.
The _abdomen_ is short-oval, and strongly convex above; it is of a
dull clay-coloured brown tinged with chocolate, and along the centre
of its upper side is a series of six strong angular bars or chevrons
of a dark chocolate-brown colour, and pretty distinctly defined,
though, when examined closely, broken in parts.
The intervening spaces between the angular bars and the sides have a
few irregular markings of a similar colour; and they are connected
by a longitudinal central line of the same hue running through their
apices.
The abdomen is very sparingly clothed with hairs and fine bristles;
the superior pair of spinners are strong; those of the inferior pair
very small and short.
Examples of this fine and very distinct spider were found at Bordeaux
in simple unbranched tubes, covered with a wafer-lid, running down
very deep into the earth, in some cases as much as fifteen inches
into an exceedingly hard soil, making it a work of great labour and
care to get them out without injury.
This species can scarcely be confused with any other yet known; its
short robust form, short legs, more elevated caput, general dark
colour, distinct angular bars on the abdomen, and almost contiguous
lateral eyes, as well as the form of the nest, will readily
distinguish it.
It is with great pleasure that I connect with this spider the name of
my most kind friend and brother arachnologist, Monsieur Eugène Simon,
to whom I am so greatly indebted for much information and numerous
examples of rare spiders.
I must not conclude these descriptions without expressing my sense of
obligation to Mr. Moggridge for so kindly allowing me to add them to
the far more popular, and more interesting, portion of this volume,
in which the _habits_ of these spiders are recorded.
Descriptions of _colour_, _form_, and _structure_ are but dry
details, though very necessary for the determination of species; and
in the present case it is very important as well as interesting to be
able to conclude with some certainty that differences of type in the
tubular nests of the spiders Mr. Moggridge has observed so closely
and accurately, are joined to well-marked specific differences
obtained from those other characters above mentioned, and which it
has been my endeavour to detail as fully and faithfully as possible.
INDEX TO SUPPLEMENT.
PART I.--HARVESTING ANTS.
Alyssocarpus, seeds of, collected by ants, 175
Amphisbæna, found in nests of Lauba ants, 177
_André_ (M. Ernest), on number of species of ants found in Europe,
160 (note)
_Arabia_, custom in, relative to ants, 176
Atta, species of, found in Europe, 160 (note);
_barbara_, 158;
found in Palestine, 165;
_megacephala_, 160;
_structor_, 158;
experiment with, 172;
found harvesting at Cadenabbia, 159
_Cadenabbia_, harvesting ants at, 159
Camponotus _sylvatica_, 178
Cicendela, capturing ants, 164
Coluocera _attæ_, found in ants' nests, 177
_Cricket_ (Gryllus _myrmecophilus_), found in ants' nests, 178
_England_, do ants harvest in, 159 (note)
_Formic acid_, experiments with, 173
Formica _erratica_, 164;
_nigra_, collecting violet seeds, 159 (note)
Gryllus _myrmecophilus_, found in ants' nests, 178
_Hindoos_, custom of scattering rice for ants, 176
_India_, observations in, 175
_Insects_ found in ants' nests, 177
_Jews_, laws treating of rights over ants' stores, 165
_King_ (Dr.), observations in India, 175
_Lizards_ capturing ants, 162
_Misna_, allusion to harvesting ants in, 165
_Montpellier_, harvesting ants at, 160
_Nests_, quantity of seeds contained in, 170
_Palestine_, harvesting ants in, 165
Pheidole _megacephala_, 160
Pterocles _exustus_, feeding on seeds collected by ants, 175
_Robin_ eating ants, 163 (note)
_Seed-stores_ of ants, Jewish laws about, 165
_Seeds_, intervention of ants necessary to prevent germination of, 172;
non-germination of in granaries, 171
_Wakefield_ (Mr.), on ants collecting violet seeds, 159 (note)
PART II.--TRAP-DOOR SPIDERS.
_Ants_ form a large part of food of trap-door spiders, 237
Atypus _bleodonticus_ (Sim.), 183 (note);
_piceus_ (Sulzer), nests of, 182-3, 248;
species of in England, 181, 185
_Australia_, nest of wafer type from, 217
_Bates_ (Mr. H. W.), on the nest of _Theraphosa Blondii_, 188
_Beetle_ (Chrysomela _Banksii_) rejected by trap-door spider, 241
_Blackwall_ (Mr. J.), on the poison of spiders, 201
_Bordeaux_, new type of nest at, 211
_Brown_ (Mr. Joshua), discovery of _Atypus_ in England, 185
_California_, trap-door spider from, 198-9;
habits of in captivity, 203, &c.;
indifference to sounds, 206
_Captive spiders_, habits of, 203, 218, 242-6
_Caterpillar_ (larva of Cucullia _verbasci_), eaten by trap-door
spider, 239
_Cell and tube_ made by _N. Eleanora_, 218;
hygrometricity of, 220
_Chrysomela Banksii_, distasteful to trap-door spider, 241
_Cork nest_, 193;
structure of door of, 193
Cteniza _californica_ (Camb.), 198, 202, 248;
description of, 260;
eggs laid by, 203;
habits of in captivity, 203, &c.;
indifference to sounds, 206;
mode of excavating, 208;
_fodiens_ (Walck.), 195, 248, 259;
_ionica_, 210;
_Moggridgii_ (Camb.), 196;
description of, 254;
habits of in captivity, 243, 246
Cucullia _verbasci_, larva of, eaten by trap-door spider, 239
Cyrtauchenius _elongatus_ (Sim.), nest of, 189, 248
_Diagrams_ representing different types of nest, 193
_Earwig_ (_Forficula_) eaten by trap-door spiders, 238
_Eggs of_ Cteniza _californica_, 203
_Enemies of spiders_, 200, 205
_Enlargement of nests_, 245
_Excavation_ of trap-door nests, 208, 243-4
_Food of trap-door spiders_, 237-9, 241;
mode of procuring, 238
_Funnel type_ of nest, constructed by _Cyrtauchenius elongatus_, 189
_Geographical distribution_, 247-9, 250
_Hyères_ double-door, branched wafer type, 223
Idioctis _helva_ (L. Koch), nest of, 217
_Koch_ (Dr. L.), on nest of _Idioctis helva_ from Australia, 217
_Lanzwert_ (Dr.), on trap-door spiders in California, 199
_Latreille_ (P. A.), on the nest of Lycosa _tarentula_, 236
Lycosa _tarentula_, nests of at Cannes, 233;
nests closed in the winter, 235
_Montpellier_, Nemesia _cæmentaria_ at, 196, 198;
_N. suffusa_ at, 215
Nemesia _cæmentaria_ (Latr.), 195-6, 249;
description of, 264;
_congener_ (Camb.), 224, 249;
description of, 292;
_dubia_ (Camb.), description of, 280;
_Eleanora_ (Camb.), 218, 249, 272;
_incerta_ (Camb.), description of, 276;
_Manderstjernæ_ (Auss.), 226, 249;
description of, 283;
_meridionalis_ (Costa), 227, 250;
description of, 289;
_Moggridgii_ (Camb.), 197-8, 249;
description of, 273;
_Simoni_ (Camb.), 211, 249;
description of, 297;
_suffusa_ (Camb.), 215, 249;
description of, 295
_Nests enlarged_, not deserted, 245
_Nocturnal habits_ of trap-door spiders, 240
_Oniscus_ (wood-louse) eaten by trap-door spider, 241
_Poison_ of spiders, 200-1
_Simon_ (M. E.), on _Atypus piceus_ (Sulzer), 182;
on Cyrtauchenius _elongatus_ (Sim.), 189
_Tarantula_, 233, 235
_Theraphosa Blondii_, nest of, 188
_Wafer nests_ of single-door unbranched type, 193 (note), 211;
of single-door branched type, 193, 214;
of double-door unbranched type, 193, 218;
of Hyères double-door branched type, 193, 223;
of double-door branched cavity type, 193, 228
_Wood-louse_ (Oniscus) eaten by trap-door spider, 241
_Worms_ the food of _Atypus_, 182, 186
THE END.
LIST OF WORKS
PUBLISHED BY
L. REEVE & CO.,
5, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, W.C.
=NEW SERIES OF NATURAL HISTORY FOR BEGINNERS.=
∵ A good introductory series of books on Natural History for the
use of students and amateurs is still a _desideratum_. Those at
present in use have been too much compiled from antiquated sources;
whilst the figures, copied in many instances from sources equally
antiquated, are far from accurate, the colouring of them having
become degenerated through the adoption, for the sake of cheapness,
of mechanical processes.
The present series will be entirely the result of original research
carried to its most advanced point; and the figures, which will be
chiefly engraved on steel, by the artist most highly renowned in each
department for his technical knowledge of the subjects, will in all
cases be drawn from actual specimens, and coloured separately by hand.
Each work will treat of a department of Natural History sufficiently
limited in extent to admit of a satisfactory degree of completeness.
_The following are now ready_:--
British Insects; a Familiar Description of the Form, Structure,
Habits, and Transformations of Insects. By E. F. Staveley.
Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured Steel Plates, engraved from Natural
Specimens expressly for the work by E. W. Robinson, and
numerous Wood-Engravings by E. C. Rye, 14_s._
British Butterflies and Moths; an Introduction to the Study of our
Native Lepidoptera. By H. T. Stainton. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured
Steel Plates, containing Figures of 100 Species, engraved from
Natural Specimens expressly for the work by E. W. Robinson, and
Wood-Engravings, 10_s._ 6_d._
British Beetles; an Introduction to the Study of our Indigenous
Coleoptera. By E. C. Rye. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured Steel Plates,
comprising Figures of nearly 100 Species, engraved from Natural
Specimens, expressly for the work, by E. W. Robinson, and 11
Wood-Engravings of Dissections by the Author, 10_s._ 6_d._
British Bees; an Introduction to the Study of the Natural History
and Economy of the Bees indigenous to the British Isles. By W.
E. Shuckard. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured Steel Plates, containing
nearly 100 Figures, engraved from Natural Specimens, expressly
for the work, by E. W. Robinson, and Woodcuts of Dissections,
10_s._ 6_d._
British Spiders; an Introduction to the Study of the Araneidæ found
in Great Britain and Ireland. By E. F. Staveley. Crown 8vo, 16
Plates, containing Coloured Figures of nearly 100 Species, and
40 Diagrams, showing the number and position of the eyes in
various Genera, drawn expressly for the work by Tuffen West,
and 44 Wood-Engravings, 10_s._ 6_d._
British Grasses; an Introduction to the Study of the Grasses found
in the British Isles. By M. Plues. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured
Plates, drawn expressly for the work by W. Fitch, and 100
Wood-Engravings, 10_s._ 6_d._
British Ferns; an Introduction to the Study of the Ferns, Lycopods,
and Equiseta indigenous to the British Isles. With Chapters
on the Structure, Propagation, Cultivation, Diseases, Uses,
Preservation, and Distribution of Ferns. By M. Plues. Crown
8vo, 16 Coloured Plates, drawn expressly for the work by W.
Fitch, and 55 Wood-Engravings, 10_s._ 6_d._
British Seaweeds; an Introduction to the Study of the Marine Algæ
of Great Britain, Ireland, and the Channel Islands. By S. O.
Gray. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured Plates, drawn expressly for the
work by W. Fitch, 10_s._ 6_d._
=Other Works in preparation.=
=BOTANY.=
The Young Collector's Handybook of Botany. By the Rev. H. P.
Dunster, M.A. 66 Wood-Engravings, 3_s._ 6_d._
The Natural History of Plants. By H. Baillon, President of the
Linnæan Society of Paris, Professor of Medical Natural History
and Director of the Botanical Garden of the Faculty of Medicine
of Paris. Translated by Marcus M. Hartog, B. Sc. Lond., Scholar
of Trinity College, Cambridge. Super-royal 8vo. Vols. I. to
III., with 1300 Wood-Engravings, 25_s._ each.
Domestic Botany; an Exposition of the Structure and Classification
of Plants, and of their uses for Food, Clothing, Medicine, and
Manufacturing Purposes. By John Smith, A.L.S., ex-Curator of
the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured Plates
and Wood-Engravings, 16_s._
Handbook of the British Flora; a Description of the Flowering
Plants and Ferns indigenous to, or naturalized in, the British
Isles. For the Use of Beginners and Amateurs, By George
Bentham, F.R.S., President of the Linnæan Society. New Edition,
Crown 8vo, 12_s._
The Illustrated British Flora, a Description (with a
Wood-Engraving, including dissections, of each species) of the
Flowering Plants and Ferns indigenous to, or naturalized in,
the British Isles. By George Bentham, F.R.S., President of the
Linnæan Society. Demy 8vo, 2 vols., 1295 Wood-Engravings, from
Original Drawings by W. Fitch, 35_s._
British Wild Flowers, Familiarly Described in the Four Seasons.
A New Edition of "The Field Botanist's Companion." By Thomas
Moore, F.L.S. Demy 8vo, 24 Coloured Plates, by W. Fitch, 16_s._
Outlines of Elementary Botany, as Introductory to Local Floras.
By George Bentham, F.R.S., President of the Linnæan Society.
Second Edition, 2_s._ 6_d._
British Grasses; an Introduction to the Study of the Gramineæ of
Great Britain and Ireland. By M. Plues. Crown 8vo, with 16
Coloured Plates by W. Fitch, and 100 Wood-Engravings, 10_s._
6_d._
The Botanical Magazine: Figures and Descriptions of New and Rare
Plants of Interest to the Botanical Student, and suitable
for the Garden, Stove, or Greenhouse. By Dr. J. D. Hooker,
C.B., F.R.S., Director of the Royal Gardens, Kew. Royal 8vo.
Published Monthly, with 6 Plates, 3s. 6d. coloured. Annual
Subscription, 42_s._
Re-issue of the Third Series in monthly vols., 42_s._ each; to
Subscribers for the entire series, 36_s._ each.
The Floral Magazine New Series, enlarged to Royal 4to. Figures and
Descriptions of the choicest New Flowers for the Garden, Stove,
or Conservatory. Monthly, with 4 beautifully Coloured Plates,
3_s._ 6_d._ Annual Subscription, 42_s._
First Series complete in 10 vols., with 560 beautifully Coloured
Plates, £18 7_s._ 6_d._
Laws of Botanical Nomenclature adopted by the International
Botanical Congress, with an Historical Introduction and a
Commentary. By Alphonse de Candolle. 2_s._ 6_d._
The Tourist's Flora; a Descriptive Catalogue of the Flowering
Plants and Ferns of the British Islands, France, Germany,
Switzerland, Italy, and the Italian Islands. By Joseph Woods,
F.L.S. Demy 8vo, 18_s._
Contributions to the Flora of Mentone, and to a Winter Flora of the
Riviera, including the Coast from Marseilles to Genoa. By J.
Traherne Moggridge, F.L.S. Royal 8vo. In 4 parts, each, with 25
Coloured Plates, 15_s._, or complete in one vol., 63_s._
Flora Vitiensis; a Description of the Plants of the Viti or
Fiji Islands, with an Account of their History, Uses, and
Properties. By Dr. Berthold Seeman, F.L.S. Royal 4to, Parts I.
to IX. each, 10 Coloured Plates, 15_s._ Part X., 25_s._, or
complete in one thick vol., cloth, £8 5_s._
Flora of British India. By Dr. J. D. Hooker, C.B., F.R.S., &c.;
assisted by various Botanists. Parts I. and II., each 10_s._
6_d._ Published under the Authority of the Secretary of State
for India in Council.
Flora of Tropical Africa. By Daniel Oliver, F.R.S., F.L.S. Vols
I. and II., 20_s._ each. Published under the authority of the
First Commissioner of Her Majesty's Works.
Handbook of the New Zealand Flora; a Systematic Description of the
Native Plants of New Zealand, and the Chatham, Kermadec's, Lord
Auckland's, Campbell's, and Macquarrie's Islands. By Dr. J. D.
Hooker, F.R.S. Complete in one vol., 30_s._ Published under the
auspices of the Government of that colony.
Flora Australiensis; a Description of the Plants of the Australian
Territory. By George Bentham, F.R.S., President of the Linnæan
Society, assisted by Ferdinand Mueller, F.R.S., Government
Botanist, Melbourne, Victoria. Vols. I. to VI., 20_s._ each.
Published under the auspices of the several Governments of
Australia.
Flora of the British West Indian Islands. By Dr. Grisebach, F.L.S.
37_s._ 6_d._ Published under the auspices of the Secretary of
State for the Colonies.
Flora Hongkongensis; a Description of the Flowering Plants and
Ferns of the Island of Hongkong. By George Bentham, P.L.S. With
a Map of the Island, and a Supplement by Dr. Hance. 18_s._
Published under the authority of Her Majesty's Secretary of
State for the Colonies. The Supplement separately, 2_s._ 6_d._
Flora Capensis: a Systematic Description of the Plants of the Cape
Colony, Caffraria, and Port Natal. By William H. Harvey, M.D.,
F.R S., Professor of Botany in the University of Dublin, and
Otto Wilhem Sonder, Ph.D. Vols. I and II., 12_s._ each. Vol.
III., 18_s._
Flora of Tasmania. By Dr. J. D. Hooker, F.R.S. 2 vols. Royal 4to.
200 Plates, £17 10_s._, coloured. Published under the authority
of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty.
On the Flora of Australia, its Origin, Affinities, and
Distribution; being an Introductory Essay to the "Flora of
Tasmania." By Dr. J. D. Hooker, F.R.S., 10_s._
Genera Plantarum, ad Exemplaria imprimis in Herbariis Kewensibus
servata definita. By George Bentham, F.R.S., President of the
Linnæan Society, and Dr. J. D. Hooker, F.R.S., Director of the
Royal Gardens, Kew. Vol. I. Part I. Royal 8vo, 21_s._ Part II.,
14_s._; Part III, 15_s._; or Vol. I. complete, 50_s._ Part IV.
(being Vol. II. Part I.) 24_s._
Illustrations of the Genus Carex. By Francis Boott, M.D. Folio, 600
Plates. Part I., 10_l._ Parts II. and III., each 5_l._ Part
IV., 10_l._
Illustrations of the Nueva Quinologia of Pavon, with Observations
on the Barks described. By J. E. Howard, F.L.S. With 27
coloured Plates by W. Fitch. Imperial folio, half-morocco, gilt
edges, 6_l._ 6_s._
The Quinology of the East Indian Plantations. By J. E. Howard,
F.L.S. Folio, 3 Coloured Plates, 21_s._
Revision of the Natural Order Hederaceæ, being a reprint, with
numerous additions and corrections, of a series of papers
published in the "Journal of Botany, British and Foreign." By
Berthold Seemann, Ph.D., F.L.S. 7 Plates, 10_s._ 6_d._
Icones Plantarum. Figures, with Brief Descriptive Characters and
Remarks, of New and Rare Plants, selected from the Author's
Herbarium. By Sir W. J. Hooker, F.R.S. New Series, Vol. V. 100
Plates, 31_s._ 6_d._
Orchids: and How to Grow them in India and other Tropical Climates.
By Samuel Jennings, F.L.S., F.R.H.S., late Vice-President of
the Agri-Horticultural Society of India. Royal 4to. In Monthly
Parts, with 4 Coloured Plates, 5_s._ each.
A Second Century of Orchidaceous Plants, selected from the
Subjects published in Curtis's "Botanical Magazine" since the
issue of the "First Century." Edited by James Bateman, Esq.,
F.R.S. Complete in 1 Vol. royal 4to, 100 Coloured Plates, 5_l._
5_s._
Monograph of Odontoglossum, a Genus of the Vandeous Section of
Orchidaceous Plants. By James Bateman, Esq., F.R.S. Imperial
folio, complete in 6 Parts, each with 5 Coloured Plates, and
occasional Wood-Engravings, 21_s._, or in one vol., half
morocco, gilt edges, 7_l._ 7_s._
Select Orchidaceous Plants. By Robert Warner, F.R.H.S. With Notes
on Culture by B. S. Williams. Folio, cloth gilt, 6_l._ 6_s._
Second Series, Parts I. to X., each, with 3 Coloured Plates,
10_s._ 6_d._
The Rhododendrons of Sikkim-Himalaya; being an Account, Botanical
and Geographical, of the Rhododendrons recently discovered in
the Mountains of Eastern Himalaya, by Dr. J. D. Hooker, F.R.S.
By Sir W. J. Hooker, F.R.S. Folio, 30 Coloured Plates, 4_l._
14_s._ 6_d._
=FERNS.=
British Ferns; an Introduction to the Study of the Ferns,
Lycopods, and Equiseta indigenous to the British Isles.
With Chapters on the Structure, Propagation, Cultivation,
Diseases, Uses, Preservation, and Distribution of Ferns. By M.
Plues. Crown 8vo, with 16 Coloured Plates by W. Fitch, and 55
Wood-Engravings, 10_s._ 6_d._
The British Ferns; Coloured Figures and Descriptions, with Analysis
of the Fructification and Venation of the Ferns of Great
Britain and Ireland. By Sir W. J. Hooker, F.R.S. Royal 8vo, 66
Coloured Plates, 2_l._ 2_s._
Garden Ferns; Coloured Figures and Descriptions, with Analysis
of the Fructification and Venation, of a Selection of Exotic
Ferns, adapted for Cultivation in the Garden, Hothouse, and
Conservatory. By Sir W. J. Hooker, F.R.S. Royal 8vo, 64
Coloured Plates, 2_l._ 2_s._
Filices Exoticæ; Coloured Figures and Description of Exotic Ferns.
By Sir W. J. Hooker, F.R.S. Royal 4to, 100 Coloured Plates,
6_l._ 11_s._
Ferny Combes; a Ramble after Ferns in the Glens and Valleys of
Devonshire. By Charlotte Chanter. _Third Edition_. Fcap. 8vo, 8
Coloured Plates by Fitch, and a Map of the County, 5_s._
=MOSSES.=
Handbook of British Mosses, containing all that are known to be
natives of the British Isles. By the Rev. M. J. Berkeley, M.A.,
F.L.S. Demy 8vo, 24 Coloured Plates, 21_s._
Synopsis of British Mosses, containing Descriptions of all the
Genera and Species (with localities of the rarer ones) found in
Great Britain and Ireland. By Charles P. Hobkirk, President of
the Huddersfield Naturalist's Society. Crown 8vo, 7_s._ 6_d._
=SEAWEEDS.=
British Seaweeds; an Introduction to the Study of the Marine Algæ
of Great Britain, Ireland, and the Channel Islands. By S. O.
Gray. Crown 8vo, with 16 Coloured Plates, drawn expressly for
the work by W. Fitch, 10_s._ 6_d._
Phycologia Britannica; or, History of British Seaweeds, containing
Coloured Figures, Generic and Specific Characters, Synonyms
and Descriptions of all the Species of Algæ inhabiting the
Shores of the British Islands. By Dr. W. H. Harvey, F.R.S. New
Edition. Royal 8vo, 4 vols. 360 Coloured Plates, 7_l._ 10_s._
Phycologia Australica: a History of Australian Seaweeds, comprising
Coloured Figures and Descriptions of the more characteristic
Marine Algæ of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, South
Australia and Western Australia, and a Synopsis of all known
Australian Algæ. By Dr. Harvey, F.R.S. Royal 8vo, 5 vols., 300
Coloured Plates, 7_l._ 13_s._
Nereis Australia; or, Algæ of the Southern Ocean, being Figures
and Descriptions of Marine Plants collected on the Shores of
the Cape of Good Hope, the extratropical Australian Colonies,
Tasmania, New Zealand, and the Antarctic Regions. By Dr.
Harvey, F.R.S. Imperial 8vo, 50 Coloured Plates, 2_l._ 2_s._
=FUNGI.=
Outlines of British Fungology, containing Characters of above a
Thousand Species of Fungi, and a Complete List of all that have
been described as Natives of the British Isles. By the Rev. M.
J. Berkeley, M.A., F.L.S. Demy 8vo, 24 Coloured Plates, 30_s._
The Esculent Funguses of England. Containing an Account of their
Classical History, Uses, Characters, Development, Structure,
Nutritious Properties, Modes of Cooking and Preserving, &c. By
C. D. Badham, M.D. Second Edition. Edited by F. Currey, F.R.S.
Demy 8vo, 12 Coloured Plates, 12_s._
Illustrations of British Mycology, comprising Figures and
Descriptions of the Funguses of interest and novelty indigenous
to Britain. By Mrs. T. J. Hussey. Royal 4to. Second Series, 50
Coloured Plates, £4 10_s._
Clavis Agaricinorum: an Analytical Key to the British Agaricini,
with Characters of the Genera and Subgenera. By Worthington G.
Smith, F.L.S. Six Plates. 2_s._ 6_d._
=SHELLS AND MOLLUSKS.=
Elements of Conchology; an Introduction to the Natural History of
Shells, and of the Animals which form them. By Lovell Reeve,
F.L.S. Royal 8vo, 2 vols. 62 Coloured Plates, £2 16_s._
Conchologia Iconica; or, Figures and Descriptions of the Shells
of Mollusks, with remarks on their Affinities, Synonymy, and
Geographical Distribution. By Lovell Reeve, F.L.S. Demy 4to, in
double Parts, with 16 Coloured Plates. 20_s._
A detailed list of Monographs and Volumes published may be had.
Conchologia Indica; Illustrations of the Land and Freshwater Shells
of British India. Edited by Sylvanus Hanley, F.L.S., and
William Theobald, of the Geological Survey of India. 4to, Parts
I. to VI., each with 20 Coloured Plates, 20_s._
The Edible Mollusks of Great Britain and Ireland, with the Modes
of Cooking them. By M. S. Lovell. Crown 8vo, with 12 Coloured
Plates, 8_s._ 6_d._
=INSECTS.=
Harvesting Ants and Trap-door Spiders; Notes and Observations on
their Habits and Dwellings. By J. T. Moggridge, F.L.S. Coloured
Plates, 10_s._ 6_d._
British Insects. A Familiar Description of the Form, Structure,
Habits, and Transformations of Insects. By E. F. Staveley,
Author of "British Spiders." Crown 8vo, with 16 beautifully
Coloured Steel Plates and numerous Wood-Engravings, 14_s._
British Beetles; an Introduction to the Study of our Indigenous
Coleoptera. By E. C. Rye. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured Steel Plates,
comprising Figures of nearly 100 Species, engraved from Natural
Specimens, expressly for the work, by E. W. Robinson, and 11
Wood-Engravings of Dissections by the Author, 10_s._ 6_d._
British Bees; an Introduction to the Study of the Natural History
and Economy of the Bees Indigenous to the British Isles. By W.
E. Shuckard. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured Steel Plates, containing
nearly 100 Figures, engraved from Natural Specimens, expressly
for the work, by E. W. Robinson, and Woodcuts of Dissections,
10_s._ 6_d._
British Butterflies and Moths; an Introduction to the Study of our
Native Lepidoptera. By H. T. Stainton. Crown 8vo, 16 Coloured
Steel Plates, containing Figures of 100 Species, engraved from
Natural Specimens expressly for the work by E. W. Robinson, and
Wood-Engravings, 10_s._ 6_d._
British Spiders; an Introduction to the Study of the Araneidæ found
in Great Britain and Ireland. By E. F. Staveley. Crown 8vo, 16
Plates, containing Coloured Figures of nearly 100 Species, and
40 Diagrams, showing the number and position of the eyes in
various Genera, drawn expressly for the work by Tuffen West,
and 44 Wood-Engravings, 10_s._ 6_d._
Curtis's British Entomology. Illustrations and Descriptions of
the Genera of Insects found in Great Britain and Ireland,
containing Coloured Figures, from Nature, of the most rare and
beautiful Species, and, in many instances, upon the plants on
which they are found. 8 vols. Royal 8vo, 770 Coloured Plates,
£28.
=Or in separate Monographs.=
_Orders._ _Plates._ £ _s._ _d._
Aphaniptera 2 0 2 0
Coleoptera 256 12 16 0
Dermaptera 1 0 1 0
Dictyoptera 1 0 1 0
Diptera 103 5 3 0
Hemiptera 32 1 12 0
Homoptera 21 1 1 0
Hymenoptera 125 6 5 0
Lepidoptera 193 9 13 0
Neuroptera 13 0 13 0
Omaloptera 6 0 6 0
Orthoptera 5 0 5 0
Strepsiptera 3 0 3 0
Trichoptera 9 0 9 0
"Curtis's Entomology," which Cuvier pronounced to have "reached the
ultimatum of perfection," is still the standard work on the Genera
of British Insects. The Figures executed by the author himself, with
wonderful minuteness and accuracy, have never been surpassed, even if
equalled. The price at which the work was originally published was
£43 16_s._
Insecta Britannica; Vol. III., Diptera. By Francis Walker, F.L.S.
8vo, with 10 Plates, 25_s._
=ANTIQUARIAN.=
Bewick's Woodcuts. Impressions of Upwards of 2000 Woodblocks,
engraved, for the most part, by Thomas and John Bewick;
including Illustrations of various kinds for Books, Pamphlets,
and Broadsides; Cuts for Private Gentlemen, Public Companies,
Clubs, &c.; Exhibitions, Races, Newspapers, Shop Cards, Invoice
Heads, Bar Bills, &c. With an Introduction, a Descriptive
Catalogue of the Blocks, and a List of the Books and Pamphlets
illustrated. By the Rev. T. Hugo, M.A., F.R.S.L., F.S.A. In one
large volume, imperial 4to, gilt top, with full-length steel
Portrait of Thomas Bewick. £6 6_s._
The Bewick Collector and Supplement. A Descriptive Catalogue of the
Works of Thomas and John Bewick, including Cuts, in various
states, for Books and Pamphlets, Private Gentlemen, Public
Companies, Exhibitions, Races, Newspapers, Shop Cards, Invoice
Heads, Bar Bills, Coal Certificates, Broadsides, and other
miscellaneous purposes, and Wood Blocks. With an Appendix of
Portraits, Autographs, Works of Pupils, &c. 292 Cuts from
Bewick's own Blocks. By the Rev. Thomas Hugo, M.A., F.S.A. 2
vols. demy 8vo, price 42_s._; imperial 8vo (limited to 100
copies), with a fine Steel Engraving of Thomas Bewick, £4 4_s._
The Supplement, with 180 Cuts, may be had separately; price,
small paper, 21_s._; large paper, 42_s._
Sacred Archæology; a Popular Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Art
and Institutions, from Primitive to Modern Times. Comprising
Architecture, Music, Vestments, Furniture Arrangement, Offices,
Customs, Ritual Symbolism, Ceremonial Traditions, Religious
Orders, &c., of the Church Catholic in all Ages. By Mackenzie
E. C. Walcott, B.D. Oxon., F.S.A., Præcentor and Prebendary of
Chichester Cathedral. Demy 8vo, 18_s._
A Manual of British Archæology. By Charles Boutell, M.A. 20
Coloured Plates, 10_s._ 6_d._
Man's Age in the World according to Holy Scripture and Science. By
An Essex Rector. 8_s._ 6_d._
The Antiquity of Man; an Examination of Sir Charles Lyell's recent
Work. By S. R. Pattison, F.G.S. Second Edition. 8vo, 1_s._
=MISCELLANEOUS.=
=International Series of Elementary Text Books on Natural Science.=
Zoology. By Adrian J. Ebell, Ph.B., M.D. Part I.: Structural
Distinctions, Functions, and Classification of the Orders of
Animals, 1_s._
Lahore to Yarkand. Incidents of the Route and Natural History of
the Countries traversed by the Expedition of 1870, under T.
D. Forsyth, Esq., C.B. By George Henderson, M.D., F.L.S.,
F.R.G.S., and Allan O. Hume, Esq., C.B., F.Z.S. With 32
Coloured Plates of Birds, 6 of Plants, 26 Photographic Views,
Map, and Geological Sections, 42_s._
On Intelligence. By H. Taine, D.C.L. Oxon. Translated from the
French by T. D. Haye, and revised, with additions, by the
Author. Part I. 8_s._ 6_d._ Part II. 10_s._, or, complete in
One Volume, 18_s._
The Young Collector's Handy Book of Recreative Science. By the Rev.
H. P. Dunster, M.A. Cuts. 3_s._ 6_d._
The Gladiolus: its History, Cultivation, and Exhibition. By the
Rev. H. Honywood Dombrain, B.A. 1_s._
The Birds of Sherwood Forest; with Observations on their Nesting,
Habits, and Migrations. By W. J. Sterland. Crown 8vo, 4 Plates.
7_s._ 6_d._ coloured.
The Naturalist in Norway; or, Notes on the Wild Animals, Birds,
Fishes, and Plants of that Country, with some account of the
principal Salmon Rivers. By the Rev. J. Bowden, LL.D. Crown
8vo, 8 Coloured Plates. 10_s._ 6_d._
The Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. _Samarang_, under the command
of Captain Sir Edward Belcher, C.B., during the Years 1843-46.
By Professor Owen, Dr. J. E. Gray, Sir J. Richardson, A. Adams,
L. Reeve, and A. White. Edited by Arthur Adams, F.L.S. Royal
4to, 55 Plates, mostly coloured, £3 10_s._
A Survey of the Early Geography of Western Europe, as connected
with the First Inhabitants of Britain, their Origin, Language,
Religious Rites, and Edifices. By Henry Lawes Long, Esq. 8vo,
6_s._
The Geologist. A Magazine of Geology, Palæontology, and Mineralogy.
Illustrated with highly-finished Wood Engravings. Edited by S.
J. Mackie, F.G.S., F.S.A. Vols. V. and VI., each, with numerous
Wood-Engravings, 18_s._ Vol. VII. 9_s._
The Stereoscopic Magazine. A Gallery for the Stereoscope of
Landscape Scenery, Architecture, Antiquities, Natural History,
Rustic Character, &c. With Descriptions. 5 vols., each complete
in itself and containing 50 Stereographs, £2 2_s._
Everybody's Weather-Guide. The Use of Meteorological Instruments
clearly Explained, with Directions for Securing at any time
a probable Prognostic of the Weather. By A. Steinmetz, Esq.,
Author of "Sunshine and Showers," &c. 1_s._
Sunshine and Showers: their Influences throughout Creation. A
Compendium of Popular Meteorology. By Andrew Steinmetz, Esq.
Crown 8vo, Wood-Engravings, 7_s._ 6_d._
The Reasoning Power in Animals. By the Rev. J. S. Watson, M.A.
Crown 8vo, 9_s._
Manual of Chemical Analysis, Qualitative and Quantitative; for the
Use of Students. By Dr. Henry M. Noad, F.R.S. New Edition.
Crown 8vo. 109 Wood-Engravings, 16_s._ Or, separately, Part
I., 'QUALITATIVE,' New Edition, new Notation, 6_s._; Part II.,
'QUANTITATIVE,' 10_s._ 6_d._
Phosphorescence; or, the Emission of Light by Minerals, Plants,
and Animals. By Dr. T. L. Phipson, F.C.S. Small 8vo, 30
Wood-Engravings and Coloured Frontispiece, 5_s._
Meteors, Aerolites, and Falling Stars. By Dr. T. L. Phipson, F.C.S.
Crown 8vo, 25 Woodcuts and Lithographic Frontispiece, 6_s._
The Artificial Production of Fish. By Piscarius. Third Edition.
1_s._
Live Coals; or, Faces from the Fire. By L. M. Bodgen, "Acheta,"
Author of 'Episodes of Insect Life,' etc. Dedicated, by Special
Permission, to H.R.H. Field-Marshal the Duke of Cambridge.
Royal 4to, 35 Original Sketches printed in colours, 21_s._
Caliphs and Sultans; being Tales omitted in the ordinary English
Version of "The Arabian Nights' Entertainments," freely
rewritten and rearranged. By S. Hanley, F.L.S. 6_s._
=SERIALS.=
The Botanical Magazine. Figures and Descriptions of New and Rare
Plants of interest to the Botanical Student, and suitable
for the Garden, Stove, or Greenhouse. By Dr. J. D. Hooker,
F.R.S. Monthly, with 6 Coloured Plates, 3_s._ 6_d._ Annual
Subscription, post free, 42_s._
Re-issue of the Third Series in monthly vols., 42_s._ each; to
Subscribers for the entire Series, 36_s._ each.
The Floral Magazine. New Series, enlarged to Royal 4to. Figures
and Descriptions of Select New Flowers for the Garden, Stove,
or Conservatory. Monthly, with 4 Coloured Plates, 3_s._ 6_d._
Annual Subscription, post free, 42_s._
Orchids: and How to Grow them in India and other Tropical Climates.
By Samuel Jennings, F.L.S., F.R.H.S., late Vice-President of
the Agri-Horticultural Society of India. In Monthly Parts, with
4 Coloured Plates, 5_s._ each Part.
Select Orchidaceous Plants. By Robert Warner. 3 Coloured Plates,
10_s._ 6_d._
Conchologia Iconica. By Lovell Reeve, F.L.S., and G. B. Sowerby,
F.L.S. In Double Parts, with 16 Coloured Plates, 20_s._
Conchologia Indica. The Land and Freshwater Shells of British
India. In Parts, with 20 Coloured Plates, 20_s._
=FORTHCOMING WORKS.=
St. Helena. A Physical, Historical, and Topographical Description
of the Island, including its Geology, Fauna, Flora, and
Meteorology. By J. C. Melliss, C.E., F.G.S., F.L.S.
Genera Plantarum. By Bentham and Hooker. Vol. II.
Flora of India. By Dr. Hooker and others.
Natural History of Plants. By Prof. Baillon.
Flora Australiensis. By G. Bentham. Vol. VII.
Flora of Tropical Africa. By Prof. Oliver.
Flora Capensis.
London: L. REEVE & CO., 5, Henrietta St., Covent Garden.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Supplement to Harvesting Ants and Trap-Door Spiders" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.