THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 20' 



NOTES ON IDIOCERUS (JASSID^). 



BY C. r. BAKKR, ST. LOUIS, MO. 



There has just come into my hands (April, 1900) the paper on this 

 genus by Osborn and Ball in the Proc. Davenport Acad. Sci., Dec, 1898. 

 As some of my conclusions regarding the species of this genus do not 

 coincide with those of the above authors, it may be of interest to present 

 another view. 



Verticis, ramefitosus and striola are in the same condition Deltoceph- 

 alus Melsheimeri used to be in : different authors might readily find 

 many different forms that possibly fit the descriptions. Perhaps the 

 types ramentosus and striola are in existence. I think more harm than 

 good will come of attempts to identify these three forms without further 

 data than the mere descriptions. 



Prof. Osborn does not say that he has ever examined the type of 

 Duzei. From his description it is apparent that he has not. VanDuzee 

 described the species in MS., and returned the specimen to Provancher, 

 telling him it was new. Provancher promptly published it. This 

 description by VanDuzee has been in my hands for some time. He 

 should have published it. I quote it herewith: "Form and size of 

 lachrymalis nearly, the elytra shorter and the sides of the pronotum more 

 rounded off -than in that species. Colour brownish fulvous above, pale 

 and more yellowish beneath. Tergum, the narrow edge and hind margin 

 excepted, black ; tibife and tarsi tinged with fulvous. Elytra hyaline, 

 faintly tinged with smoky; nervures concolorous, obscure, the costal 

 yellowish. Wings faintly smoky-hyaline, iridescent, nervures brown. 

 Transverse impressed line of the scutellum black, angled. Form of the 

 facial pieces very similar to those of lachrytiialis. Last ventral segment 

 of female feebly trilobate, the median lobe the largest, lateral angles 

 retreating. Pygofers large and stout, much exceeded by the brownish 

 oviduct. Eyes black. Length 6.5 mm."' To this description Mr. Van- 

 Duzee appended the following note : " The above description was taken 

 from the very example M. Provancher founded his species on. I 

 returned the specimen to him, marked n. sp., and he described it." 



To be mere exact concerning the oviduct, it is exserted about a 

 third the length of the pygofers. If a careful comparison of this descrip- 

 tion with the description and figures of perplexiis be made, it will be 

 §eeii at once that they cannot possibly refer to the same insect. Prof, 



