105 
and as it is found in all stages in midsummer, it is probable that 
at least two or three broods occur. Its resemblance to the chinech- 
bug has led to many errors, although it could not possibly be mis- 
taken for its more destructive relative by any one who remembers 
the peculiar white X-shaped blotch on the back of the latter. The 
¢hinch-bug has also a decidedly black head and thorax, while the 
so-called “false chinch-bug’* is of a nearly uniform pale or tarnished 
brown color. 
This species was first described by P. R. Uhler in 1872 in the 
Preliminary Report of the United States Geological Survey of Mon- 
tana and Adjacent Territories, from specimens obtained in Colorado, 
although it was said also to inhabit Dakota and Canada, and has 
since been ascertained to occur in California, Kansas, ete. 
Prof. Riley’s description (from which the following is somewhat 
condensed) was published in his Fifth Report as State Entomologist 
of Missouri, in 1873, under the name of Nysius destructor, and re- 
peated under the same name in the supplement to his report, in 
1881,t Riley’s and Uhler’s species having been maintained as dis- 
tinct until now. In reply to a recent letter of inquiry, Mr. Uhler 
writes me under date of February 18, 1$84: 
“A very close comparison of Riley’s Nysius destructor with my N. 
angustatus, (Hayden’s Report on Montana, p. 406,) induces me tu place 
itasa synonym of the latter. ‘There are only minor variations of color 
and structure to separate them. But I now have long series of 
both extremes with imtermediate varieties from many localities— 
West and North.” 
Little has been added to Prof. Tiley’s original account of the 
habits and injuries of the species. 
Larva.—*Dingy yellow, with more or less distinct longitudinal dark 
lines, especially on head.” 
Pupa. (Plate X, Fig. 5, b.) “Same color, with more distinct red 
and brown longitudinal lines, and two little tooth-lke pale yellow 
processes at inner base of hemelytra pads, indicating the wings; the 
abdomen paler than the rest of the body.” 
Imago. (Fig. 5, ¢.) “General color grayish brown. Head more or 
less distinctly pubescent; the surface usually brown, with a distinct 
black, longitudinal line each sid, broadening on the crown, but 
generally leaving the orbit of the eyes pale; these lines sometimes 
more diffuse and oceupying the whole surface, except a median 
brown spot at base of crown, and a narrow, paler spot on the clypeus; 
ocelli piceous; rostrum piceous, paler at the base and reaching to 
hind coxe; antenne either pale yellowish brown or darker brown, 
the torulus and first joint darkest. ‘Thorax ‘with the pronotum 
narrowing anteriorly, the sides slightly sinuate, irregularly and more 
coarsely punctate than the head, more or less pubescent, dingy 
yellow or brown, wilh a transverse black band near the anterior 
edge; also five more or less distinct longitudinal dark lines, the 
This vernacular name had been applied to another common species by Fitch (his 
Anthocoris pseu o-chinche, which is now ealled Triphleps insidiosus, Say), long before 
Riley vsed it for this; but as it seems more appropriate to this species, lL have allowed it 
to stand inthis connection, | ee : s 
+United States Entomological Commission, Bulletin No. VI, p. 74. 
ats 
