Il8 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [April, '07 



tibiccn of Linne in Tettigonia, cites Marian's Ins. of Surinam 

 as before, and also Brown's Jamaica, pi. 43, f. 15. This figure 

 which has been examined by Mr. Grossbeck may or may not 

 be a species of the forms we have called tibicen, but it certainly 

 does not seem to be the species figured by Madame Merian. 



In 1778, De Geer, in his Insects, III, 212, pi. 32 (not 22 

 as usually cited), figures his lyricen. He cites tibicen Linn, as 

 the same species, and credits Mme. Merian with the name 

 lyricen or "Herman." He adds to his diagnosis the statement 

 that the species is found in America "septentrionale" as well as 

 "meridionale" and gives a detailed description of his material 

 from New Jersey and Pennsylvania both as larva and adult, 

 including the singing and egg-laying habits of the adult. There 

 is no doubt that De Geer had a North American insect before 

 him and there is no reasonable doubt that this was the exact 

 form that Prof. Osborn has so recently described as C. fulvula. 

 The figure is excellent and the description is accurate in all 

 details. There can be no reasonable doubt as to the identity of 

 lyricen De G. 



In 1790, Olivier in the Enc. Meth., 749, refers to tibicen 

 Linn., cites lyricen De Geer as a synonym, and quotes Merian 

 as to the habits of the species and the damage done in coffee 

 plantations. 



As a new species he describes C. opercularis from the Isle 

 of Java and cites Stoll, pi. 13, A and B, for a representation of 

 the species. This figure of Stoll is utterly unlike anything that 

 I know from North America, and is certainly incapable of 

 being twisted into a resemblance to our "tibicen" or even the 

 tibiccn of Linne. 



In 1794, Fabricius in the Ent. Syst, IV, 18, again refers to 

 tibicen, as before, but adds the reference to De Geer, giving 

 America meridionale as the habitat. On p. 19 he describes 

 Tettigonia ran c gat a, habitat in Carolina, just after scptcii- 

 dcciin, and says of it that it is of the size and build of the 

 preceding, i. e., septendecim. There is nothing in this, and 

 nothing in the subsequent description that refers to any resem- 

 blance or relation to tibiccn. 



In 1803, Fabricius in the Syst. Rhyng., p. 35, cites tibiccn 



