﻿130 
  PROCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  NATIONAL 
  MUSEUM 
  vol.67 
  

  

  these 
  last 
  two 
  authors 
  were 
  not 
  selecting 
  genotypes. 
  Because 
  of 
  ex 
  

   2>ost 
  facto 
  considerations 
  we 
  credit 
  them 
  with 
  so 
  doing 
  when 
  they 
  

   accidentally 
  mention 
  but 
  one 
  species 
  for 
  a 
  genus, 
  but 
  essentially 
  we 
  

   are 
  putting 
  a 
  false 
  construction 
  on 
  their 
  work. 
  Their 
  system 
  of 
  

   citing 
  illustrations 
  of 
  genera 
  was 
  followed 
  by 
  much 
  later 
  authors 
  

   (as 
  for 
  instance 
  Fieber, 
  1866) 
  ; 
  Stal 
  who 
  named 
  more 
  genera 
  than 
  

   any 
  other 
  hemipterist 
  described 
  many 
  of 
  them 
  without 
  any 
  species, 
  

   and 
  never 
  made 
  a 
  practice 
  of 
  naming 
  genotypes; 
  Reuter 
  also 
  still 
  

   later 
  paid 
  little 
  or 
  no 
  attention 
  to 
  type 
  designation. 
  In 
  fact 
  conscious 
  

   selection 
  of 
  genotypes 
  is 
  a 
  comparatively 
  modern 
  development 
  in 
  

   taxonomy 
  and 
  it 
  is 
  only 
  in 
  the 
  most 
  recent 
  catalogues 
  that 
  an 
  effort 
  

   has 
  been 
  made 
  to 
  indicate 
  definite 
  type 
  fixations 
  for 
  all 
  the 
  genera 
  in 
  

   large 
  groups 
  of 
  insects. 
  

  

  In 
  the 
  light 
  of 
  these 
  facts 
  what 
  probability 
  is 
  there 
  that 
  Fabricius 
  

   in 
  1803 
  or 
  earlier 
  as 
  in 
  1794 
  (as 
  some 
  authors 
  claim) 
  took 
  action 
  that 
  

   we 
  can 
  consider 
  as 
  genotype 
  fixation? 
  The 
  answer 
  is 
  there 
  is 
  no 
  

   probability 
  whatever 
  that 
  such 
  was 
  the 
  case. 
  Going 
  further 
  into 
  

   the 
  matter 
  it 
  should 
  be 
  said 
  in 
  this 
  connection 
  that 
  the 
  works 
  of 
  

   Fabricius 
  have 
  been 
  viewed 
  in 
  an 
  entirely 
  different 
  way 
  than 
  those 
  

   of 
  the 
  other 
  early 
  authors. 
  The 
  latter 
  are 
  credited 
  with 
  type 
  fixa- 
  

   tion 
  only 
  when 
  they 
  chanced 
  to 
  name 
  a 
  single 
  species 
  as 
  an 
  illustra- 
  

   tion 
  of 
  a 
  genus 
  or 
  in 
  connection 
  with 
  the 
  description 
  of 
  a 
  new 
  genus. 
  

   Fabricius 
  had 
  only 
  one 
  such 
  instance 
  in 
  the 
  Systema 
  Rhyngotorum 
  

   (1803), 
  but 
  in 
  numerous 
  cases 
  he 
  gave 
  a 
  preponderantly 
  structural 
  

   description 
  of 
  one 
  of 
  the 
  species 
  in 
  a 
  genus 
  (not 
  a 
  repetition 
  of 
  the 
  

   generic 
  characters 
  as 
  has 
  been 
  stated) 
  and 
  in 
  most 
  of 
  these 
  instances 
  

   he 
  italicized 
  the 
  names 
  of 
  the 
  different 
  anatomical 
  parts 
  described. 
  

   The 
  statistics 
  in 
  the 
  m'atter 
  are: 
  45 
  genera 
  are 
  recognized 
  in 
  the 
  

   Systema 
  Rhyngotorum, 
  of 
  which 
  30 
  have 
  species 
  with 
  special 
  struc- 
  

   tural 
  descriptions, 
  and 
  all 
  but 
  2 
  of 
  these 
  have 
  the 
  italicized 
  words. 
  

   If 
  Fabricius 
  had 
  been 
  intentionally 
  indicating 
  genotypes 
  it 
  is 
  highly 
  

   probable 
  he 
  would 
  have 
  given 
  all 
  the 
  genera 
  uniform 
  treatment 
  : 
  in- 
  

   stead 
  of 
  only 
  two-thirds 
  of 
  them. 
  Further 
  light 
  can 
  be 
  had 
  by 
  

   tracing 
  the 
  matter 
  back 
  to 
  the 
  Entomologica 
  Systematica 
  (vol. 
  4, 
  

   1794). 
  Kirkaldy 
  finding 
  some 
  of 
  the 
  chiefly 
  structural 
  descriptions 
  

   of 
  species 
  in 
  that 
  work 
  logically 
  accepted 
  them 
  as 
  being 
  as 
  good 
  in- 
  

   dications 
  of 
  genotypes 
  as 
  those 
  in 
  the 
  Systema 
  Rhyngotorum. 
  Other 
  

   hemipterists 
  do 
  not 
  agree 
  with 
  him, 
  but 
  the 
  so-called 
  type 
  fixations 
  

   in 
  the 
  earlier 
  work 
  stand 
  or 
  fall 
  with 
  those 
  in 
  the 
  later, 
  as 
  they 
  have 
  

   exactly 
  the 
  same 
  basis. 
  In 
  both 
  works 
  the 
  descriptions 
  in 
  ques- 
  

   tions 
  are 
  merely 
  more 
  structural 
  than 
  others 
  (compare 
  genus 
  Mem- 
  

   bracis 
  for 
  instance), 
  and 
  neither 
  work 
  gives 
  them 
  for 
  all 
  the 
  genera, 
  

   nor 
  uniformly 
  so 
  far 
  as 
  italicization 
  is 
  concerned. 
  

  

  