80 LECANIUM HESPERIDUM. 



Boiscluval briefly describes the sex thus : " Le male 

 decrit par Bouche est aussi d'uiie couleur rougeatre. 

 C'est dans les bifurcations des pousses tendres, et sur 

 les jeunes feuilles du Laurus nobilis, que ce kermes se 

 fixe." He gives no reference to Bouche's original 

 description, and I am unable to trace it. The only 

 other known reference to the male is given in the 

 ' Comptes rendus des Seances de 1* Academic des 

 Sciences' (Paris), .No. 7, February 14th, 1887, p. 449, 

 by M. R. Moniez, in an article entitled " Les males du 

 Lecanium hesperidum, et la parthenogenese." Mr. J. 

 W. Douglas* has dealt with this article at some length, 

 and as I have not seen M. Moniez 's article, I take the 

 liberty of quoting Mr. Douglas's review of it in extemo. 

 He says : " The author premises that sexual dimorphism 

 is ordinarily present in the Coccidas, the males, contrary 

 to the females, being winged and undergoing com- 

 plete metamorphoses, yet that in many species they 

 are hitherto unknown, although the females are 

 continually reproductive. Among the species having 

 this character, Lecanium liesperidiim is always cited, 

 and Leydig and Leuckart are specially mentioned 

 among those who have in vain sought for the males. 

 Then he continues : 



" ' But this species is by no means parthenogenetic ; 

 at least, I have found males in abundance in nearly all 

 the numerous females from different localities that I 

 have examined. I have always found each one 

 isolated in an ovarian cul-de-sac, those containing 

 males appearing to be mixed with those containing 

 Iarva3 of the females.' 



" The author then states that he observed several 

 stages of development. In the first there are no 

 external organs, the body appearing to be entirely 

 occupied by the 'follicules testiculaires,' as yet not 

 differentiated, the integument very thin. The second 

 stage is distinguished by having five or six folds of 

 the enveloping membrane, which doubtless correspond 



* <Ent. Mo. Mag.,' vol. xxiv, pp. 2527 (1887). 



