318 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



So far, however, no really distinctive character had been given, 

 and no type had been cited, 



(c.) In Cuvier's ' Eegne Animal,' edition of 1829, vol. v. p. 232, 

 the genus is called Mo}iophleba, is said to be of Dr. Leach, and we 

 are informed that it is based on an insect from Java, with antennae 

 of about 22 joints, very hairy, and having thick and almost coria- 

 ceous wings. Still, however, the type is unnamed. 



(fL)_Next we come to Burmeister, as cited above. Here the 

 genus is properly introduced, and the first species is M. atri- 

 peiinis, Klug, from Java. It does not appear that Klug himself 

 ever published atripennis, but there is every reason to suppose 

 that it was the species known to Leach and others, and made the 

 type of the MS. genus Monophlebus. M. duhius (Fabricius) was 

 from Sumatra. 



(3.) On all grounds, therefore, M. atripennis is the type of 

 Monophlebus. This species, along with M. dubius, is placed by 

 me {loc. cit.) in a section characterized by having only two fleshy 

 caudal appendages. No female of this section has been described, 

 but we have assumed that the female must be similar to that of 

 the other sections. 



(4.) This assumption, however, proves to be unwarranted. 

 Prof. C. H. T. Townsend has lately discovered a new form of 

 Icerya {Icerya littoralis var. tonilensis, Ckll.) at Tonila in Jalisco, 

 Mexico. He sent me both sexes, and the male reached me alive, 

 having hatched m route. This male has two long hairy fleshy 

 crimson processes at the end of the abdomen, nearly as long as the 

 abdomen. The female has the regular Icerya ovisac, well-ribbed, 

 suffused with yellow at the base. 



(5.) Since it is consequently just as probable (to say the 

 least) that the females of Monophlebus atripennis and M. dubius 

 pertain to the Icerya group as that they belong to what we have 

 called Monophlebus, we find ourselves in a dilemma. I am not 

 yet prepared to use Monophlebus in place of Icerya; or of a 

 section of Icerya containing males with long caudal processes, 

 which might be regarded as a valid genus, so as to save the well- 

 known term Icerya for purchasi, &c. At the same time, we can- 

 not safely use Monophlebus in the old sense. It seems best, on 

 the whole, to provisionally recognize several genera, as follows : — 

 {a.) Monophlebus, with M. atripennis, M. diibius, and M. (?) 

 littoralis {Icerya littoralis, Ckll.). The last I will still call an 

 Icerya, pending new evidence from the Malay Archipelago. 



(/;.) Tessarobelus, with T. guei^inii, Montr., and T. championi 

 (Ckll.). 



(c.) Llaveia, with L. axin (Llave) and L. saundersii (Westw.). 

 (d). Drosicha, with D. contrahens (Walker), D. maskelli (Ckll.), 

 D. leachii (Westw.), D. burmeisteri (Westw.), D. corpulenta (Ku- 

 wana), D. craivfordi (Maskell). 



(e). Monophlebulus, with M.fuscus (Mask.). 



