1878.] 115 



01. fiavonotatus, cannot be considered as forming a sub-genus of Olohiceps, but that 

 it is a true Cyllocoris, or at least a sub-geuus of that genus. I give the comparative 

 cliaracters of these two genera : — 



Ctllocoeis. G-lobiceps. 



Body very elongate, or almost ob- Body elongate, mostly with silvery 



long, witJwut silvery-scaled spots. Head scales. Head vertical, in J and $ dis- 



almost vertical, in <? and $ similarly similar, in $ more or less globose ; 



constructed; hucculm extended; clypeus huccidw linear ; clypeus not or scarcely 



more or less prominent. Rostrum prominent, in the same plane as the 



reaching to tlie apex of mesostemuyn. almost vertical frons. Rostrum reach- 



The first joint of antennre at least as ing to the apex of metasternum: The 



long as the head, and reaching more or first joint of antennae shorter than 



less beyond the apex of clypeus, dis- the head, and reaching not to, or very 



tinctly curved at the base ; tlie second little beyond, the apex of clypeus, 



joint in $ and $ almost similarly con- straight; the second joint, in the female, 



structed, towards the apex by degrees in- from the middle suddenly considerably 



crassated. Pronotum with the callosities thickened. Pronotum with the callosi- 



not or scarcely prominent, the base before ties prominent and mostly very convex, 



the posterior angles depressed, so that posterior angles ■not re/iectecZ. Hemielytra 



the angles appear a little reflected. He- very often abbreviated in the female. 



mielytra developed in both sexes. Meso- Mesosternum towards the apex slightly 



sternum r«*i/ convex. Metasternum with convex. Posterior coxae not distant. 



an obtuse tubercle at the exterior angle Posterior tarsi with the third joint not 



of orifice. Posterior cosce distant. longer than the second. 

 Posterior tarsi witli the third joint 

 longer than the second. 



I think that the above-mentioned characters will be sufficient to show that 

 G. fiavonotatus is not a Globiceps, but a Cyllocoris, for all the charactei's given for 

 this last genus accord with this species. I have found more than once, in the har- 

 mony of certain marks of colour, further evidence of the near affinity of some 

 species ; and wherefore should this not be the case, this accordance depending on a 

 common derivation or descent ? I have for a long time observed that the yellow 

 curieus in Gl. fiavonotatus is black, not on the apex, as in Ql.fiavomacula.tus and 

 fulvipes, but is marked with a black band before the apex, and I find that just such 

 a similar marking exists in Cyll. histrionicus. A whitish spot or line is also to be 

 found on the posterior margin of the vertex, both in Cyllocoris and Gl. fiavonotatus, 

 and the silvery scales, characteristic of Gloh'ceps, are wanting in fiavonotatus. 

 Further, this latter species shows a greater accordance in habits with Cyllocoris 

 than with the other Globiceps, for it Uves on trees (oaks), while the species of 

 Globiceps occur on low plants. 



Finally, a few words on the synonymy of this species. On account of the de- 

 scription given by De Geer of his Cimex fiavoquadrimaculatus, and which is rather 

 exhaustive, I have already (Bidrag till Nord. Caps. Synon.) regarded it as certain 

 that this description refers to ^aronofa<Ms, Boh., and not to ^aromacwZatMS, Fabr., 

 and having since, in Stockholm, examined the typical specimens of De G-eer, I found 

 my belief confirmed. Being so, it will be proper to call the species Ctllocokis 

 FLATOQTIADRIMACULATUS, De Gccr, although the name is rather long. — O. M. 

 Reftee, Berggatan 8, Helsingfors, August 12th, 1878. 



