102 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [April, *O2 



lapponica Ectobius Westwood (Ectobia auct.), 1835. 



oblongata Pseudomops Serville, 1 83 1 . 



By considering the only two non-exotic species, orientalis 

 and lapponica, the name Stylopyga is seen to be a synonym of 

 Blatta, as Ectobius was instituted eleven years previous. An 

 examination has shown that Pseudomops antedates Thyrsoccra 

 1838, by seven years, as pointed out by Kirby (Proc. Royal 

 Dublin (n. s. ), vi, p. 561). 



The name Kakerlac Latreille (L,e Regne Animal, v, p. 175, 

 1829), has often been associated with several of the species 

 mentioned above, but on examination it is apparent that but 

 one was so associated by the describer of the genus. Three 

 species, orientalis, limbata and dccipiens, were included under 

 L/atreille's name ; the first being removed to Stylopyga in 1846, 

 while the last two were not removed until 1865, when Brunner 

 placed them in his genus Loboptera* The name Kakerlac 

 thus replaces Brunner' s genus. 



ACRYDIUM. 



The genus Acrydium Geoffrey (Hist. Abr. Ins., i, p. 390, 

 1762) as asserted by Kirby (Proc. Royal Dublin Soc. (n. s.), 

 vi, p. 592) and Kircaldy (The Entomologist, xxxiv, pp. 241- 

 243), should replace the name Tetrix L/atreille (Tcttix auct.)' 

 the types being bipunctatum L/. , and sitbnlatnm L/.f I 11 this 

 case the use of the name in connection with the large species 

 allied to Schistocerca is not allowable, Cyrtacanthacris Walker, 

 1870, being the next name used for the same. 



In a recent study of the L/innaean genus Locusta (Canad. 

 Ent., xxxiii, p. 121) the author gave L/atreille, 1804, as the 

 authority and data of Acridium (an emendation of Acrydium ), 

 but the proper adjustment of the name, as above, will cause 

 the name Locusta to fall on those insects formerly known as 

 Acridium or Cyrtacanthacris, the latter being sixteen years 

 later than Fischer's genus Stenobothrus. 



* B'irmeister placed these in his genus Polyzosteria, but that genus was 

 considerably divided by Brunner. 



t To those who would not accept Geoffrey's genera because that author 

 was not consistently binomial, it might be said that Fabricius (the next 

 author to use the name) included, but the two above-mentioned species 

 in the genus (vide Syst. Ent., p. 278, 1775). 



