408 [October, 



specimen was an adult female, full of larvse, some just escaping, some 

 just on the point of hatching, some still not fully formed in the egg. 

 I mounted the insect (losing, of course, several larvae in the process), 

 but in such a way that now there may be seen perhaps thirty larvae in 

 all stages, some inside the body, some outside. In every case the 

 dorsal lobes are visible, but in no case do they project beyond the 

 body ; and the abdominal cleft is conspicuously clear in all which do 

 not happen to be lying on their sides ; and this cleft, with the lobes, 

 can be easily made out in every Lecanid specimen which I have seen, 

 whether covered or naked. 



Very different is the larva of a Kerrnes, or of a Dactylopius, or 

 any other true Coccid. Compare, for example, with what has just 

 been said, the figure of the larval extremity of Kerrnes Bauhinii given 

 by Signoret (Ann. de la Soc. Ent. ~Fr., 1874, pi. xii), or that of the 

 larva of Kriococcus Jioherice in my " Scale Insects of New Zealand " 

 (plate xiv). Until further evidence is brought I venture to maintain 

 that the presence of an abdominal cleft with non-projecting lobes, and 

 the absence of a cleft while the lobes conspicuously project, are 

 sufficiently clear characters for " group " distinctions. 



And, if so, when we find two or three or more genera exhibiting 

 at one stage the characters of one group, while at another they exhibit 

 the characters of another group, are we not justified for the present, 

 and for the sake of convenience, in erecting an intermediate group 

 to contain them ? Mr. Morgan quotes, seemingly as adverse to me, 

 a sentence from Dr. Signoret (Ess. s. 1. Coca, p. 301), where he says 

 that Kerrnes presents in the larval state the characters of Coccidce. But 

 what is this more than what I have said in my " Scale Insects?" I fail 

 entirely to see wherein I have offended. 



I am quite at one with Mr. Morgan in desiring simplification as 

 far as possible. I have lately discovered in this country two, if not 

 three, species of Oossyparia, Sign., and I have had the opportunity of 

 examining specimens of Nidularia pulvinata, Planch., from Europe, 

 and Capulinia Sallei, Sign., from Mexico. So far, I rather incline to 

 the belief that some day it may be well to unite all these to Eriococcus, 

 but the point is not easy to decide. 



Some genera remain up to the present a puzzle, and it is difficult 

 to see where to place them ; for example, Carteria lacca, Sign., or 

 Xylococcus Jlliferus, Low. And the Uracliyscelidce have never yet been 

 fully studied, though I believe that Mr. Olliff. of Sydney, proposes to 

 work them up. 



