592 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [November, 



aspis. He also, following Signoret and Comstock, thinks that 

 Aspidiotus circulai'is Fitch may be this same insect. Conclud- 

 ing, he says that while circularis having priority might rightly 

 hold, if the species be the same, and if not then harrisi, " 3^et 

 as there is uncertainty about the former and the latter is inap- 

 propriate * * * it will be most convenient to maintain the 

 name Diaspis ostrecsformis .'^ Relative to this, it is enough to 

 say that Walsh's description and figure of " Coccus (?) harrisV 

 afterwards called Aspidiotus harrisis, exactly applies to Chion- 

 aspis furfurus , and, as already indicated, \h& circularis of Fitch, 

 is with little doubt Aspidiotus ancylus, or at least could not be 

 referred to this Diaspis. 



We find this Diaspis newly described by Del Guercio in 1894 

 (II Naturalista Ciciliano, p. 142) as Aspidiotus Pyricola, sp. nov. , 

 from specimens found on pear at Florence, Italy. The status of 

 Pyricola was first indicated by Saccardo* and has been confirmed 

 by a careful examination made by the writer. 



The old confusions, however, did not entirely disappear, as 

 indicated by articles by Saccardo,* and Berlese and Leonardi,t 

 and an anonymous author, % in which the various errors made 

 by Signoret are adhered to relative to the species described by 

 Curtis and Fitch. 



Cockerell in his discussion of this species (Bull. 6, Tech. 

 Sen, Div. Ent., U. S. D. A., 1897, p. 4, fig. i) adopts Del 

 Guercio' s name pyricola for this Diaspis on the ground that 

 both Signoret' s and Boisduval's names are based on misidenti- 

 fications with older descriptions. 



The extended and voluminous literature of this Diaspis is 

 concluded with an a.ssignment of a new name for it by Dr. 

 Horvath,|| who .suggests for it the name Diaspis fallax, on the 

 ground that vSignoret in de.scribing it believed it to be identical 

 with the Aspidiotus de.scribed by Curtis. 



It will be noted (i } that this Diaspis has been twice referred 

 to in connection with descriptions and figures to older species 

 with which it has no connection ; (2) that several species with 



* RIvitta Pat. Veg. Iv, p. 53, 1893. 



t Rivlsta Hat. Veg. vil, {>. if,i, 1896. 



I Anon. (/-rit*. (. Pflan.), p. 80, 1893. 



I Revue d Entomologle, vol. 16, p. 93, 1897. 



