256 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



(Lam. ) ), but this is not available, the species being non-Lin- 

 nean. In fact, I cannot find that the type of Coccais has ever 

 been fixed, or that any species but the true Linnean cacti is 

 available. 



In a recent publication {" Homopteren aus Nordostafrika ge- 

 sammelt von Oscar Neumann " (Zool. Jahrb., Abth. fiir Syst., 

 xix. pp. 761-82, pi. 44 (1903) ), Dr. A. Jacobi criticises my usage 

 of Tetigonia, Geoffroy (p. 779), and proposes a new name — 

 ' Tettigoiiiclla. I regret that I cannot accept this. It is true that 

 the name "'Tetigonia " is very near the dermapterous genus 

 Tcttigonia, Linne, but not more so than, say, Chrysocoris (Hemi- 

 ptera) and Chrysocorys (Lepidoptera), both of which are generally 

 accepted. Geoffroy nowhere refers to Linne' s genus, and indeed 

 mentions that he has used the word for the " procigales " be- 

 cause other authors have employed it for these insects. As to 

 the validity of the Geoffroyan genera, there is not the unanimity 

 for their rejection that Dr. Jacobi supposes ; in Hemiptera I 

 mention the names of Champion (also a coleopterist !), Cockerell, 

 Mrs. Fernald, Horvath, E. Saunders, and Stul, among those who 

 accept them ; and in fact — especially when genera like Cylindro- 

 stethus and the other extra-European genera founded by Fieber 

 in the * Europiiischen Hemiptera,' and the Latreillean genera of 

 the 'Precis' (1796), openly erected without any species, are 

 universally accepted — I fail to see how they can be rejected. In 

 the case of 'Tetigonia it was omitted by Miiller (1764), but again 

 maintained by Geoffroy in Fourcroy's ' Entomologia Parisiensis ' 

 (1785). Thirty-three species are included therein under Cicada 

 (pp. 184-93), but on p. 193 he differentiates Tetigonia with two 

 ocelli from Cicada with three, and adds in a footnote to the 

 latter, " Adduntur hie caracteres Cicadce verce Gallo-provincialis, 

 nostrse Cicadse Tetigonia vocatae oppositi." 



The following synonymy will summarize the above : — 



1. Aphis, Linne, 1758 ; type samhuci, Linn., Latreille, 1802. 



2. Chermes, Linne, 1758 = Psylla, Geofl'r., 1762 ^ Homo- 

 toma, Guerin, tyTpeJicus, Linn., Lamarck, 1801. 



3. Coccus, Linn., 1758 -= Llaveia, Signoret, 1875 ; type cacti, 

 Linn., Kirkaldy, 1904. 



4. Calymmata, Costa, 1828 = i| Chermes, Geoffroy, 1762, nee 

 Linne ; = [j Coccus, Fernald, 1903, nee Linne. 



5. Dactylopius mexicanus (Lamarck) = Coccus mexicanus, 

 Lam., 1801 = Coccus cacti, auctt. = Dactylopius coccus, 

 Costa, Fernald. ^:> 



o 6. Tetigonia, Geoffroy, 1762 ^ Tettigoniella, Jacobi, 1903 ; 

 O type viridis (Linne), Latr. 



A few other notes on Mrs. Fernald' s Catalogue are as 

 follows : — 



P. 18. To Drosicha add Drosycha, Signoret (5), v. 351 (1875). 



