I02 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [April, 'o2 



lapponica Eciobius Westwood {Edobia auct.), 1835. 



oblongata — Pseudomops Serville, 1 83 1 . 



By considering the only two non-exotic species, orientalis 

 and lapponica, the name Styhpyga is seen to be a synonym of 

 Blatta, as Edobius was instituted eleven years previous. An 

 examination has shown that Pseudomops antedates Thyrsocera 

 1838, by seven years, as pointed out by Kirby (Proc. Royal 

 Dublin (n. s.), vi, p. 561). 



The name A'^at^'^r/ar Latreille (Le Regne Animal, v, p. 175, 

 1829), has often been associated with several of the species 

 mentioned above, but on examination it is apparent that but 

 one was so associated by the describer of the genus. Three 

 species, orientalis, limbata and decipiens, were included under 

 Latreille's name ; the first being removed to Styhpyga in 1846, 

 while the last two were not removed until 1865, when Brunner 

 placed them in his genus Loboptera.^ The name Kakerlac 

 thus replaces Brunner' s genus. 



AGRTDIUH. 



The genus Acrydimn Geoffroy (Hist. Abr. Ins., i, p. 390, 

 1762) as asserted by Kirby (Proc. Royal Dublin Soc. (n. s.), 

 vi, p. 592) and Kircaldy (The Entomologist, xxxiv, pp. 241- 

 243), should replace the name Tetrix Latreille {Tettix auct.) 

 the types being bipimctatum Iv., and subnlatum I^.f In this 

 case the use of the name in connection with the large species 

 allied to Schistocerca is not allowable, Cyrtacanthacris Walker, 

 1870, being the next name used for the same. 



In a recent .study of the Linnaean genus Locusta (Canad. 

 Ent., xxxiii, p. 121) the author gave Latreille, 1804, as the 

 authority and data of Acridium (an emendation of Acrydium) , 

 but the proper adjustment of the name, as above, will cause 

 the name Locusta to fall on those insects formerly known as 

 Acridium or Cyrtacanthacris, the latter being sixteen years 

 later than Fi.scher's genus Stenobothrus. 



* Bitrmeister placed these in his genus Polyzostcria, but tliai ^enus was 

 considerably divided by Brunner. 



t T(j those who would not accept Geoflroy's genera because that author 

 was not consistently binoniiai, it mJKht be said that Fabricius (the next 

 author to use the name) included, but the two above-mentioned species 

 in the genus (vide Syst. Ent, p. 378, 1775). 



