April, I92I Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society 37 



seems to be a vast difference between it and E. etrusus and E. 

 reletivus, even if considered as separate subgenera. These latter 

 being short and stout insects, with elytra much shorter than 

 abdomen, leathery and without appendix; on the other hand, it 

 compares well with E. striolus Fall, which is about the same size 

 and shape, and the elytra much longer than the abdomen, and 

 with an appendix. This latter, together with a few other Euro- 

 pean species, were at one time placed in a genus erected by Sahl- 

 berg, called Limotettix; this genus was also recognized by some 

 of our American workers, but is now considered a synonym of 

 Euscelis and it is to this group that our leafhopper belongs. In 

 Eutettix it does not fit very well as it lacks one of the main char- 

 acters on which this genus is based, namely, " A more or less 

 transverse depressed line behind the apex of vertex." This is 

 very pronounced in Eutettix lucida Van Duzee type of the genus, 

 but entirely absent in Eutettix oshorni Ball. 



It is unfortunate that the descriptions of both, the genera 

 Euscelis Brulle and Athysanus Burmeister, are not easily ac- 

 cessible ; I have not been able to consult either. It seems that this 

 group of leafhoppers could stand a very thorough review, with 

 the probable result that all our old tables and keys, both Euro- 

 pean and American, would prove to be faulty and not reliable in 

 determining the species. 



For the present it is therefore best to leave it as Euscelis stacto- 

 galus Fieber, in the subgenus Athysanus. 



In the March number of the " Bulletin of the Entomological 

 Soc. of France" (1920, pp. 82-83), Mr. E. de Bergevin has 

 published a brief note on the subject. I may add that I have 

 seen two specimens of this Athysanus stactogalus, taken at Col- 

 lege Farm, New Jersey, July, 191 5, by Mr. E. L. Dickerson; they 

 had been named Eutettix oshorni by Mr. E. P. Van Duzee. Mr. 

 Dickerson does not think they came from Tamarix, as there are 

 none of these plants on the farm. The specimens differ some- 

 what in color, being more yellowish-green and lacking the sprink- 

 ling of small, black dots, but my collection contains specimens 

 which vary to this extent even when taken from the same plant at 

 the same time. Specimens are at hand from Europe which lack 

 these markings, and compare well with Mr. Dickerson's examples. 



