﻿304 



variegated and harmonious colouring in many instances, and 

 the diversity of cephalic form, seem indubitably to point to the 

 pre-eminence and isolation of the Fulgoroidea. It is also 

 worthy of notice that (as pointed out in Part I of this Bulletin) 

 t'heir Dryinid parasites are of a higher estate than those of the 

 Tetigonioidea. 



(2) Contrariwise, the humble condition of the last named, 

 proved by their imperfectly sensorized state, both in adults and 

 nymphs; the absence of tegulae, the (usually) smooth, ]3lebeian 

 head of feeble dififerentiation, and the (usually) dull coloring. 

 The only exceptions almost are the Membracidae, highly spe- 

 cialized and diversified in their prothoracic structure, neverthe- 

 less lowly as a whole; the often gaudily colored Cercopidae, 

 whic'h also 'have r&markable nymphal habits, and a few Teti- 

 goniid forms such as Stciiocofis and Kahavalii. 



(3) The Cicadoidea, highly specialized in one direction, are 

 as a whole very low. 



(4) The Membracidae are fundamentally, as s'hown by 

 Hansen, essentially Tetigonioid. 



With regard to the subdivision of the families I regret that 

 lack of time prevents mv lingering long. 



(1). Sfal's Classificafion of flic Fuh^oroidca. 



There is no doubt that Hansen's divisions by the characters of 

 the antennae, are sound; at the same time, especially when deal- 

 ing with novel uniques, it is often exceedingly difficult to de- 

 termine just what is the form of the antennal sensory organs. 

 I think the following are natural divisions: 



(1) Fulgoridac, with subfamilies I'ulgorinae, Dictyophorinae 

 and Cixiinae, corresponding to Stal's Fulgorida, Dictyopharida 

 and Cixiida; at the same time it is difficult to separate the last 

 two, except by general facies. 



(2) Poekilloptcridac, with subfamilies Ricaniinae, Poekillop- 

 terinae and Amphiscepinae, corresponding- to Stal's Ricaniida, 

 Flatida and Acanoniida. 



(3) Issidac, with subfamilies Issinae, Eurybrachyinae. and 

 TetigO'metrinae, corresponding to Stal's Issida and Eurybrachy- 

 dida. Stal separates these widely, but I think their closely 

 allied nature is established; the Issinae, via Amphisccpa, come 

 very close to the Poekillopteridae. The Tetigometrinae should 

 perhaps even form a family by themselves. Thev do not, I 

 think, establish any link between the Fulgoroidea and Tetigo- 

 nioidea, but, on the contrary, are very hig'hlv modified. 



