March, 1919.] McATEE ! BeRYTID.E (HeTEROPTERa) . 83 



thorax and elytra, with a score for instance along the outer border 

 of each elytron. 



With respect to this latter point Stal misread the original descrip- 

 tion and by inserting in his generic diagnosis " margin of abdomen 

 spinose " has misled others. What Signoret really says in the origi- 

 nal description is : " Elytra having on the longitudinal veins of the 

 corium and along the outer margin a large number of spines ; with 

 respect to the latter one observes, at least a score which, viewing the 

 insect from above, appear to pertain to the abdomen, but which in 

 reality belong to the outer border of the elytra." 



The connexivum, therefore, is unarmed, not long-spinose as stated 

 by Van Duzee 3 in his remarks objecting to Barber's allocation 4 in 

 Jalysus of Ashmead's Hoplinus multispinus. 



Let us take Ashmead's description in connection with the type 

 specimen which is still in existence and see whether the species is 

 identifiable. The original description is herewith reproduced: 



" Length .20 inch. Pale yellowish brown, tarsi and terminal an- 

 tennal joint, black. Head armed with three spines, one median on a 

 line with base of antennae, prominent but blunt, and one on each side 

 just back of antennae. There is a prominent acute spine at base of 

 scutellum, two short sharp spines at tip of abdomen, and one on each 

 pleura, extending and slightly curving over at base of elytra. Pro- 

 thorax long, narrowed before, more than twice the length of the 

 width at base, punctured, with a slight median carina, the narrow 

 transverse portion just before the middle impunctured. The legs are 

 long and thin, the posterior femora reaching beyond the tip of the 

 abdomen." 



Discussing this description, it must be admitted at once that the 

 notes on color and structure of the antennae, thorax and legs bring 

 out nothing to prevent the insect being considered a Jalysus (as here- 

 tofore understood). There remains as a bone of contention, only the 

 spines. Ashmead misunderstood or gave little heed to the characters 

 of Hoplinus as derived from the description of the genotype, and 

 subsequent writers have scarcely improved upon his attitude. In his 

 description of multispinus Ashmead's statement that there is a spine 



3 Can. Ent., Nov., 1914, p. 381. 



4jouRN. X. V. Ent. Soc, 19, 1911, p. 24. 



