NO. 2 OPINIONS 78 TO 81 23 



(* Curtis, 1835 (Brit. Ent. vol. 12, pi. 548. 569) says: 548: " Acanthia .... 

 Type of the Genus, Cimex littoralis Linn." and 569: " Cimex .... Type of 

 the Genus, Cimex lectularms Linn.") 



(*Westwood, 1840, vol. 2, Synopsis, p. 119, designates saltaloria Linn, as type 

 of Acanthia . . . ., and p. 120 C. Icclularins as type of Cimex; but saltaloria 

 is not cited as an original species by Fabricius in 1775.) 



In 1843 Amyot & Serville (Hist. Nat. Ins. Hcmipteres, p. 310-313) give a 

 good discussion of the case in hand, stating that Fabricius by dividing Cimex 

 into three genera definitely removed lectidarius to Acanthia. They attribute 

 all our present difficulties to Olivier's (1789) arbitrary reversal of the Fabri- 

 cian genera calling Acanthia Fabr. '' Ciiiicx," and Cimex L., Fabr. " Pentatoma." 

 They further recite Latreille's reversals of opinion in 1797 and later, first 

 accepting Acanthia for Icctularia and later Cimex. They treat Acanthia with 

 only Icctularia. 



(* Reuter (Wien. Ent. Zeitung, 1882, 301-306) discusses the case in detail 

 and accepts lectidarius as type of Cimex; on basis of Fabricius (1803) he 

 accepts littoralis as type of Acanthia. He argues that Fabricius (1803) defi- 

 nitely designated types by his method of comparison (chef de file).) 



In 1899, Kirkaldy (The Entomologist, p. 219) overlooking Clinocoris, and 

 considering the bedbug without a generic name, proposed Klinophilos (* tod. 

 Cimex lectidarius, and he took bidens Linn., as type of Cimex. — C. W. S.). 



(*Blanford (1903, Nature, 200) changes Klinophilos to Clinophilus and 

 Adopts lectulariiis as type of Cimex on basis of the Linnaean rules. Kirkaldy 

 (1904, Nature, 465), replying to Blanford, claims that (on basis of elimination) 

 lectularius is excluded from being taken as type of Cimex and that Latreille 

 (1797) restricted Acanthia to "littoralis and its congeners"; Kirkaldy accepts 

 Clinocoris, instead of his Klinophilos, for the bedbug. Blanford (1904, Nature, 

 464), replies that the generic name was taken from a species in the Linnaean 

 genus that was called Cimex in classical Latin. The only species that can be 

 clearly identified with the Latin name appears to be C. lectularius L. and he 

 accepts this as type of Cimex on basis of the Linnaean rules.) 



In 1905, Kirkaldy (The Entomologist, vol. 38, p. y6, 78) withdrew Klino- 

 philos, accepting Clinocoris, and gave further proof on pp. 304-306. 



In 1908, Reuter (Ent. men. Mag., vol. 44, p. 27) reviewed the situation and 

 agreed^ with Kirkaldy (1899) that littoralis should be type of Acanthia, bidens 

 type of Cimex, and lectularius of Clinocoris. 



Kirkaldy, 1909 (Cat. Hemiptera (Heteroptera) vol. i, p. xxvi-xxviii), again 

 insists that Fabricius 1803 named bidens as type of Cimex, but says that 

 Latreille 1804 named {zosterae Latr.) =salfatorius L. as the type of Acanthia. 



(*Apstein, 1915a, 158, (Nomina Conservanda) designates lectularius as 

 type of Cimex.) 



(*Van Duzee (1917, Catalog. Hemipt., 285) accepts lectidarius as type of 

 Cimex on basis of Lamarck (i8oia, 293), Latreille (i8ioa, 257, 433), Laport 

 (1832, 51) and Westwood (1840), all of whom he quotes as " names lectularius 

 type." He also accepts lectularia as type of Acanthia on basis of Fabr. (1803, 



^Reuter quotes (in part erroneously) Kirkaldy, 1899, p. 219, as follows: 

 "I therefore see no alternative to adopting the name Acanthia for littoralis 

 (*& c." in original of K. but omitted by R. — C. W. S.) as Kirkaldy has 

 already done in his monograph of the palaearctic species." 



