38 i Vi^^ ruary, 



WEST INDIAN C O C C I D M. 



BY T. B. A. COCKERELL, F.Z.S., 



With Descriptions of New Species by A. C. F. MORGAN, F.L.S. 



The species discussed below were found on cocoa-nut leaves sent 

 to the Institute of Jamaica by Dr. F. A. Sinclair, who gathered them 

 at Catherine Hall Estate, near Montego Bay, on December 17th, L891. 

 Somewhat earlier specimens had been received from the same source, 

 through Mr. W. Fawcett, F.L.S. , head of the Botanical Department. 

 On receiving the specimens, I made a preliminary examination of them, 

 and shortly after sent some, together with notes and sketches, to Mr. 

 D. Morris, Assistant-Director at Kew Gardens. These were for- 

 warded, through Mr. J. W. Douglas, to Mr. Morgan, at Oporto, who 

 was so kind as to work them out in detail, and prepare the descriptions 

 of two new species. 



(1). Mttilaspis buxi. Sign. 



There is a very small scale in great abundance on the leaves, which I believed 

 would prove identical with the Diaspis vandalicus, Galvez, of Cuba (see " Insect 

 Life," vol. ii, p. 278 ; vol. iii, p. 296). In my examination of the specimens, I found 

 what appeared to me to be a Chionaspis, which I accordingly called Chionaspis 

 vandalicus. Some of the leaves were sent to Mr. Morgan, who found thereon no 

 Chionaspis, but Mytilaxpis buxi, and the new species described below as Diaspis 

 tentaculatus. The <? scales, which I had considered to belong to Chionaspis vanda- 

 licus, Mr. Morgan thought referable to the Diaspis. 



On hearing this, I examined a cocoa-nut palm in Kingston, and found thereon !^ 

 scales and white tricarinated S scales clustered together in such a manner as to leave 

 no doubt that they were one species. This was certainly not the new Diaspis, and 

 could be nothing but Chionaspis ; so specimens were forwarded to Mr. Morgan for 

 his opinion. The reply came that they were indeed Chionaspis, the same species as 

 I had sent before from a tree with pinnate leaves in Kingston, and that they were 

 very much like C. minor, Masteil. 



Mr. Morgan had written to Mr. Maskell about this Ch. minor, sending him a 

 drawing of my species, and under date 14th May I hear from him : — " I have also 

 had the satisfaction of receiving from Mr. W. M. Maskell, of New Zealand, an 

 answer to my enquiry, relative to the species which I suggested might prove to be 

 Chionaspis minor, Mask. Mr. Maskell writes : ' from the drawing which you 

 enclose I think that your insect from Jamaica is clearly my Chionaspis minor. The 

 contiguous median lobes, the arrangement of the marginal spines, and the numbers 

 of orifices in the groups are so similar that the identity is manifest.' Therefore, I 

 think, the above opinion may be considered conclusive, as Chionaspis minor is Mr. 

 Maskell's own specie8> and he identifies it, from a drawing. It is interesting to note 

 the existence of the same species in two countries so far from each other as New 

 Zealand and Jamaica ! whilst up to the present it does not appear to have been 

 observed in any other locality." 



