Maskell.— On Coccidae. 45 



identical with D. amygdali, Tryon ("Keport on Insect and 

 Fungus Pests, Queensland," 1889, p. 89). I have very care- 

 fully compared these specimens with those of D. lanata 

 which were sent to me several months ago by Mr. Cockerell, 

 and with the description and figures of the same insect given 

 in " Insect Life," May, 1894. As the result, I am able to say 

 that in all essential or important characters the two are 

 identical. I have not been able to distinguish the two dorsal 

 "distinct impressed subdorsal lines" mentioned in "Insect 

 Life," nor am I quite clear as to the meaning of the term ; 

 and in some of my Australian specimens, though not in all, 

 the median terminal lobes are not as distinctly incised on their 

 margins as in the figure (No. 14) on page 292 of the same 

 work. On the other hand, there are rather more orifices, 

 sometimes, in the two posterior lateral spinneret-groups than 

 in those described by either author ; for two specimens 

 observed show thirty-eight orifices in these groups. There is 

 a character mentioned in the descriptions of D. lanata — ■ 

 " scale covered with a thin layer of the outer skin of the 

 bark " — which is clearly visible in my Australian specimens, 

 although it is not there as conspicuous as on my specimens of 

 D. lanata, probably because these are on Capsicum, which 

 seems to have a thicker skin than Peach : however, there is 

 no difficulty in recognising it. All the differences which I 

 have just mentioned are of very slight, indeed of no, import- 

 ance. The male puparium is quite identical. 



Mr. Tryon published his report, including a description of 

 D. amygdali, in 1889. The description of D. lanata appeared 

 in 1892 (I have already remarked, ante, on the error of gender 

 in the specific name). The latter must consequently give way 

 to the former. 



The common peach is not a native of Australia, and D. 

 amygdali, which seems not to occur in that country on any 

 other plant, must be an importation from elsewhere. The 

 authors of "Insect Life " think that it is a West Indian species, 

 and that it has spread from the islands to California, Georgia, 

 and as far north as Washington. If one might judge from the 

 ordinary courses of communication, the insect would seem to 

 have come to Australia either from California or else, via 

 Panama, from Jamaica, where it is found upon a great variety 

 of plants. I have not yet heard of it on peaches in New 

 Zealand. 



Genus Mytilaspis. 



Mytilaspis casuarinse, Maskell. N.Z. Trans., vol. xxv., 

 1892, p. 209. 



Specimens of this insect on Casuarina with very slender twigs 

 (C. eguisetifolia ?) have much narrower puparia than those on 



