i)f) PROCEEIUXGS OF rilE SATIOS'AL MISKI'M. vol.xx. 



l)y liUtrL'ille' in 1.Hl'."> torslu»rt-wiiij;r«l Acridisiiis witli a prostenial spine, 

 without sjKM'incation of spccit's. Its i»t»xt use was by tlio same author 

 in 1820^ in its pioper Latin form, and tin* Kuropean spefitvs now known 

 as I'('Zotrtti.i' peth'stris and l'lotyphi/m(( ijiontar vtivirvi] to it. Tiie same 

 two species, and these only, are aj^ain referred to I'tHlisind by Serville' 

 iu !.s;il,and to the same as a sub^jjcnus of Arri<liunj l)y tiie same writer 

 iu 18,')t).' IJurmeister,'" however, in 18M>, refers these same s|»eeies, and 

 thesi^ only to a new jienus lUzittitt'w^ to whieh he f;ives as a syn(Miyiii 

 ^'IVxlisma i.atreille ex i>arte/' In ilurmeister's view tln^ otiier portion 

 of Latreille's {^cuus included such species as Stenohothnm parallel us 

 and Cliri/xoclnaon (liHpar.^ But these latter species are ex(dude<l by 

 Latreille's d«^linition,and in his writings 1 can not lind that he has ever 

 mentioiH'd any other species as appertaining to the genus than the two 

 first nuMitioned above. 



The only other authors who had at this time employed the term were 

 r.rulh'' in 1.s;5l*, wIio (as <|Uoted by Fischer) referred to it only species 

 of Stethophynni and StenohothrnH; Ileyer," who in l.S.'i.'i ( ?) emjdoyed it 

 for Clirj/stpchraon tlispar ; Stephens,'' who in 1S3."> had referred pcdcstriH' 

 only to it; and Costa,'" who in 18.56 had referred to it four supposed 

 new species — appulum, contpanum, calahrumy an<l conintKuis, the first 

 two ol'whicii are now regarded as synonyms of .Icr/f/Z/^w aeiiiiptium L.^ 

 the third as probably a rami)hagus, and the last as ffiornac. Jn view 

 of the limitation of the genus by Serville (if Latreille ever intended 

 its greater extension), this action of Brulle and of Costa has no force, 

 and hence, if the name rczoleitlx can be retained at all, it must be by 

 regarding one of the two original species as the type of Pezotettid', the 

 other of lUxlhma. 



As far as I can discover, the first author to refer the two species to 

 distinct genera was Fiebei," who in June, 18.13 referred (liornac to his 

 new genus Pelecyrhis^ and pedcstris to PoHismn. Also in 18")3, but 

 later, his introduction being dated November, II. Fischer '- referred the 

 former species to his new genus Plat}fplu/ma and the latter to Pezotettlr. 

 Fischer has been generally followed, but it is plain that PhitypJn/mn 

 must give way to I'dcct/eliis, which in its turn must yield prec«*dence to 

 Pezofettix, of which (fiornae becomes the type, while pcdestria becomes 

 the type of Podisnia. 



'Fjvni. Xat., p. 115. 

 'C'uvier, Kigiie Aiiini., V, p. IHS. 

 =Rev. Moth. Orth., pp. i»8-yj>. 

 ^Hist. Nat. (►rth., pp. i 79-t)><l. 

 Hieriiiar, Zeitschr. Ent., II, p. 51. 



'^Compare Haiulb. Ent., II, ]>. {M){\ where " I'odisma Latreille ex parte'' is given as 

 the e(|ixivaleiit of certain unnamed (livisions. 

 "Exp. Moroe. 



•■'Gemiar, Faun. Ins., fasc. 17. 

 "Illustr., Mand., VI, p. L'9. 

 '"Faun. Reg. Nap., p}). 43-48. 

 " Lotos. Ill, p. 119. 

 »20rth. Eur., pp. 369,374. 



