Sharp (1898), the marked divergence among the Hexapoda, as regards life-history, is between insects whose wings develop outside the cuticle (Exopterygota) and those whose wings develop inside the cuticle (Endopterygota), becoming visible only when the casting of the last larval cuticle reveals the pupa.
Hence the grouping of the orders of winged Hexapoda into the divisions Exopterygota and Endopterygota, as suggested by D.
Fragmentary as the records are, they show that the Exopterygota preceded the Endopterygota in the evolution of the class, and that among the Endopterygota those orders in which the greatest difference exists between imago and larva - the Lepidoptera, Diptera and Hymenoptera - were the latest to take their rise.
The origin of insect wings remains, therefore, a mystery, deepened by the difficulty of imagining any probable use for thoracic outgrowths, comparable to the wingrudiments of the Exopterygota, in the early stages of their evolution.
The Apterygogenea of Brauer and others, though we prefer the shorter term Apterygota) - is rendered improbable from the fact that existing Apterygota are related to Exopterygota, not to Endopterygota, and by the knowledge that has been gained as to the morphology and development of wings, which suggest that - if we may so phrase it - were an apterygotous insect gradually to develop wings, it would be on the exopterygotous system.
From all points of view it appears, therefore, probable that Endopterygota are descended from Exopterygota, and we are brought to the question as to the way in which this has occurred.
Now there are many forms of Exopterygota in which the creatures are almost or quite destitute of wings.
There are, in fact, existing forms of Exopterygota that are usually wingless, and that nevertheless appear in certain seasons or localities with wings.
We are therefore entitled to assume that the suppressed wings of Exopterygota tend to reappear; and, speaking of the past, we may say that if after a period of suppression the wings began to reappear as hypodermal buds while a more rigid pressure was exerted by the cuticle, the growth of the buds would necessarily be inwards, and we should have incipient endopterygotism.
The change that is required to transform Exopterygota into Endopterygota is merely that a cell of hypodeimis should proliferate inwards instead of outwards, or that a minute hypodermal evaginated bud should be forced to the interior of the body by the pressure of a contracted cuticle.
If it should be objected that the wings so developed would be rudimentary, and that there would be nothing to encourage their development into perfect functional organs, we may remind the reader that we have already pointed out that imperfect wings of Exopterygota do, even at the present time under certain conditions, become perfect organs; and we may also add that there are, even among existing Endopterygota, species in which the wings are usually vestiges and yet sometimes become perfectly developed.
From the thysanuroid stock of the Apterygota, the Exopterygota took their rise.
These ancient Exopterygota were synthetic in type, and included insects that may, with probability, be regarded as ancestral to most of the existing orders.
It is hard to arrange the Exopterygota in a linear series, for some of the orders that are remarkably primitive in some respects are rather highly specialized in others.
All such families - falling into the group Exopterygota as defined in the classification of the Hexapodawere separated from the Neuroptera by W.
Sub-class Exopterygota Order Plecoptera.