482 Pomona Colleok Journal of Entomology 



homoloma and Mp.inlioinotoma, both to the ginus Carsldara and to each other, 

 and tliat, instead, he phieed one in one subfamily and the others in another. The 

 actual relationship of Kuwayama's genera here mentioned cannot be truly as- 

 certained until more is known about the cephalic, tiioracic and genital characters. 

 From his meagre descriptions and figures, however, it seems highly probable 

 that his Mesohomotoma is congeneric with Carsidara Walker, and that all these 

 genera are certainly Carsidarlnae. Although the genus Freysuila Alcman, de- 

 scribed by E. A. Schwarz in 1897 (Proe. Ent. Soc. Washington, Vol. IV, p. 196) 

 is said to have no post-tibial spurs, nevertheless the deeply excised and strongly 

 birostrate vertex, the unusually long antenns and the form of the wing place this 

 genus without doubt with the Carsidarlnae. Mr. Schwarz mentions its similarity 

 to Homotovia and Rhinopsylla, which probably would indicate that the genus 

 Homotoma, also, belongs in this subfamily. Although tlie genus is unknown to 

 me in nature, I have little doubt but that it should be included with the above men- 

 tioned genera, from the descriptions given of it. 



It is exceedingly interesting and an unquestionable fact that Rhinopsylla and 

 probably Bactericera must be removed from Triozinae to this subfamily. The 

 striking resemblance to these other genera in the peculiar birostrate appearance 

 of the head and the presence of the post-tibial spur, and other characters of greater 

 importance place all these genera in a remarkably homogeneous supergroup, in 

 spite of venational differences heretofore thought to be primary. It is interesting 

 to note that Riley overlooked the similarity in head structure between his Rhino- 

 psylla and Carsidara and stated in connection with his description that "the re- 

 markable formation of the head removes Rhinopsylla not only from the other 

 genera of this subfamily but from all Psyllid* hitherto described." 



The following table of genera of this subfamily is based chiefly on purely artifi- 

 cial characters since none others are available for the genera not represented in 

 these collections. As soon as further knowledge of these other genera is available 

 the true generic lines can be drawn and synopses made for them. In the interest 

 of the study of this family it is strongly urged that such knowledge may be made 

 available, especially in the form of clear and complete detailed drawings. 



Description of Subfamily 

 Vertex very deeply excised in front at median suture, strongly birostrate. An- 

 tennae attached to apex of rostrate lobes ; two basal segments very large and long ; 

 flagellum usually very long and slender. Facial cones entirely wanting; antennal 

 bases sometimes swollen slightly. Anterior ocellus more or less visible from above, 

 usually on dorsal surface. Labrum small, posterior ; rostrum usually very long 

 and slender. Thorax often quite narrow. Propleurites very long; epimeron largely 

 visible. Posterior tibia usually distinctly spurred at base; spur sometimes more 

 or less reduced. Wings very transparent and shining, usually very distinctly angu- 

 late at apex; vein furcation scarcely diehotomous, the branches lateral instead of 

 terminal. 



Table of Genera 



A. Cubital petiole wanting: fourth fureal terminating at or near apex of wing. 

 Post-tibial sj)ur small. 



