28 Tra)isactions. — Zoology. 



and that in L. fuscipennis the ring is " hidden by a good deal 

 of pubescence." The character is therefore one \Yhich ought 

 perhaps to be considered generic ; but in the absence of in- 

 formation as to such genera as Porphyropliora, Ortonia, and 

 others, in which I can find no definite statements as to the 

 anogenital ring, I have hesitated to include it above as 

 generic. 



In outward appearance, to the naked eye, a live female of 

 L. zealandica might be easily taken for a Coslostoma ; but the 

 presence of the rostrum and mentum at once distioguishes it 

 from that genus. The winged form of the male, both in colour 

 and size, resembles somewhat that of Icerya purchasi ; but 

 the character of the eyes is a clear distinction. Another some- 

 what distinctive character is the claw, with its single digitule, 

 in both sexes. 



Genus Monophlebus, Leach. 



Monophlebus crawfordi, Maskell. Trans, of Eoy. Sec. 



South Austraha, 1887-88, p. 108. 



Mr. A. Koebele, in the account of liis " Trip to Australia 

 to investigate the Natural Enemies of the Fluted Scale," pub- 

 Kshed by the United States Department of Agriculture, 1890, 

 mentions that he found at Melbourne many specimens of 

 M. craicfordi, and procured from them a number of parasitic 

 flies. He gives a figure of the Coccid, with an enlarged figure 

 of the antenna, in which I notice only eight joints (surely an 

 error?). He states also (p. 20) that the insects were under 

 loose bark of various Eucalypti, " embedded in cottony matter, 

 and the single (often 2ia.) long, w^liite, setous, anal hairs 

 sticking out." In a footnote to the same page he observes 

 that these long hahs are not mentioned in the description of 

 the insect which I originally published. Of course, as I have 

 not had the opportunity of observing these insects in their 

 natm-al houie, Australia, I may have missed seeing this par- 

 ticular character : it is possible that these anal setae may have 

 been broken off from my specimens. Yet in all the number 

 (perhaps forty or fifty) which I examined (both alive and 

 dead) there was not the least indication oi anything of the 

 sort. And Mr. Crawford, of Adelaide, tells me that, in some 

 two hundred observed by him, he has seen no long anal setae. 

 Moreover, I received about April last, from Mr. A. S. Ollifi", 

 of Sydney, a very fine specimen, alive, of M. craicfordi. This 

 I placed in a glass-covered box, where it has remained ever 

 since, and it is even yet (30th September) not dead, though so 

 long confined. It has excreted a few long, very thin, cottony 

 thi-eads from various parts, aiid seems as if it would cover 

 itself with cotton. But I have seen no trace of a long anal 

 seta. 



