ISO REPORT OF STATE GEOLOGIST. 



much beyond the tip of abdomen. Wings as long as tegmina. Sub- 

 genital styles deflexed. 



Female: Size medium, the abdomen broader than thorax, its great- 

 est breadth contained less than twice in its total length. Pronotum 

 much wider and of firmer texture than in the male; the disk a little 

 convex and with no impressions; the hind margin nearly truncate; 

 the front margin narrower, rounded; the lateral margins somewhat 

 flaring, their posterior third slightly upturned. Tegmina broad, over- 

 lapping, covering from a half to three-fourths of abdomen, their 

 apices rounded; the veins prominent. Inner wings narrow, about 

 half the length of tegmina. 



General color, chestnut brown to fuscous, the females the darker. 

 Antenniae dusky; face reddish brown in center, the margins yellow. 

 Disk of prouotum chestnut brown, margined on sides, and sometimes 

 nearly in front, with whitish y-ellow. Tegmina of male smoky brown, 

 lighter in freshly moulted specimens; those of female dark reddish 

 brown; the outer basal two-thirds (male) or one-half (female) rather 

 broadly margined with yellowish. Upper surface of female abdomen 

 very dark brown. Legs of bgth sexes pale yellowish brown. 



Measurements: Length of body, male, 21 mm., female, 16 mm.; 

 of antennae, male, 28 mm., female, 18 mm.; of pronotum, male and 

 female, 5 mm.; of tegmina, male, 22 mm., female, 6-10 mm.; width of 

 pronotum, male, 5.5 mm., female, 7 mm. 



While I have never taken the sexes in coitu, there is no doubt in 

 my mind but that the female of pennsylvanica is the roach heretofore 

 known as Blatta or {Phyllodromia) horealis Sauss., and Ectohia flavo- 

 cinda Scudd. That these last two names are synonymous has been 

 shown by Scudder.* 



As far back as May 27, 1894, 1 made the following entry in my field 

 note book: "Platamodes pennsylvanica and Eclobia fiavocincta, both 

 mature and very common beneath the bark of red oak stumps and 

 dead trees. Are the latter the females and the former the males of 

 the same species? I often think so, but as yet have no positive proof." 

 I have since on many occasions taken the two forms- together, but 

 have never seen a female of pennsylvanica nor a male of -fiavocincta, 

 unless the latter be the female of tlie former. I can find no mention 

 or description of the female of pennsylvanica in any work at my com- 

 mand. All illustrations of the species wliich liave been published are 

 of the male. 



On the other hand, all mention and descriptions of P. horealis 

 wliich note the sexes, with a single excoption. relate to the female. 



^-Psycho, IX, 1900, 100. 



