114 [October, 



GloMceps. Further : " Hinterfussglied 2 langer als 3 ;" in Cyllocoris it is "Hinter- 

 fussglied 3 liiiiger als 2," in effect, in Glohiceps, the last two joints of the tarsi are 

 almost of equal length, but in Cyllocoris and also in Glohiceps jiavonotatus the third 

 joint is distinctly longer than the second. 



I pass now to the description, page 282, Gatt. 211, Globiceps, and cite here some 

 of the characters : " Kopf in Nacken mit deiitlicher Leiste." The neck in the 

 females of most of the species is without ridge, and this is the case also with the 

 male of Gl. dispar. " Fiihlerwm-zel etwas langer als der Kopf." In Gl. sphegifonnis 

 the first joint is about four times shorter than the head, and reaching not nearly to 

 the apex of clypeus ( ? ). " Fiihlerglied 2 beim Weibchen von der Halfte an nach 

 oben starker keulig." This latter determination by no means accords with Gl. Jia- 

 vonotatus, which, on the contrary, has the antennte in ^ and $ : " nur allmahlig 

 dicker," just as in Cyllocoris; but in the other species the aboTC-mentioned 

 character is common. 



From what is now said, two conclusions might be drawn : the first, that 

 the diagnoses of Fieber require an exact examination before they can be adopted as 

 right ; and the 2nd, that the limits which he has marked out are not always correct. 

 It is, therefore, not wonderful if, in a new revision of the Hemiptera of Europe 

 many genera receive modification and change of place ; nor that an author, who now 

 treats on the difiicult systematic characters of these insects, can come to other con- 

 clusions than an earlier writer, but this proceeds only from closer examinations 

 and studies.* 



Further, I find many reasons for believing that Glohiceps jiavonotatus does not 

 belong to Glohiceps, but is a true CyVncnris. In my " Revisio critica Capsinarum," 

 p. 120, I have already stated that Glob. Jiavonotatus is very different from the other 

 species, and I have therefore formed for it a special sub-genus. Dry opinio coris, which 

 was characterized thus : " Corpus supra pilosum. Caput maris etjeminae haud gloho- 

 sum, consitnile. Vertex utriusque scxus marginatus. Rostrum coxas interrnedias 

 haud superans. Pronotum confertim punctatum, callis ohtusis sed elevatis, pilosum, 

 angulis posticis productis, sub-rejlexis. Coxce posteriores distantes. Hemielytra 

 utriusque sexus completa. Mas et Jemina. consimiles ;" the charactei's, now italicised, 

 being common also to Cyllocoris. This sub-genus is, however, not accepted in the 

 " Catalogue des Hemipteres d'Europe " by Dr. Puton, but the species is still referred 

 to the genus Glohiceps. My examination has now, I think, brought to light that 



* For instance, many examples of this are to be found in the first volume of my " Hemiptera 

 Gyninocerata Europaj ;" and those, at p. 20, ante, have been made the subject of a disapi^roving re- 

 mark, coupled with the expression that "modern genera are the most unstable idealisms, d;c." 

 Before I say more, I wait for the promised further remarks, and I should be grateful for the in- 

 formation they could give ; at the same time they would furnish a greater reason for the more 

 speedy development of the system on which my arrangement is based. At present I would 

 only say that 1 also am not blind to the "idealism" of "modern genera," but I may 

 perhaps take occasion to speak of this another time. — O. M. R. 



[The remarks referred to will not appear in any definite time. We did not advert exclusively 

 to Dr. Renter's genera, although his work furnished the occasion for oiu- observations. It must 

 now suffice to say that m all cases genera are the idealisms of their authors, however natural the 

 characters adopted as their basis, and there being no absolute rule for constructing or limiting 

 genera, authors differ in estimating the generic value of the characters presented. Fieber, Stal, 

 and Reuter may hereafter be shown to have taken too narrow views of genera, or Flor and 

 Thomson be demonstrated to be too wide in theirs, yet in no case arising from any want of close 

 examination and study, but from a different jiuint of view of given factors. In the instance we 

 cited, the genus Psallus, now made to include Fieber's genera Apocreinmis, Psollus, p., Airacto- 

 toma, p., Agalliastes, p., Liops, p., is no longer Psallus of Fieb., but is the Psallus of Reuter, 

 whose name is also appended ; and if a future reviser, from another stand-point, again alter the 

 genus, and still retain the name, it will be "Psallus, Fieb., Reut., Aliquis ;" in this way genera 

 are unstable, and, as far as the name is concerned, unsatisfactory. — Eds.] 



