22 BULLETIN UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SUEVEY. [Voir. 



Aphidians, and is very generally distributed over the eastern portion of 

 the United States, 



SiPIIONOPHORA FEAGARIiE?, Koch, var. IMMACULATA, Eiley.* 



According to Professor Eiley, this form is similar to S. frarjanai 

 Koch, differing chiefly in lacking the ro^Y of minute black spots on each 

 side of the back, and in the head of the apterous females not being black, 

 but yellowish. IS'ovember, Kansas City, Mo. 



* Professor Thomas omits this species in Ms " List of the Apliidini which have heeu 

 heretofore named," &c. As the great merit of a list is completeness, the following 

 enumeration of omitted species may serve as a supplement to that author's x^aper : 



S'lplionoplwra fragarim var. immaculata Eiley, Eural World, December, 1875. 



A})his quercifoUi Walsh, Ent. Soc. Phila. i, December, 1862, Genera of N. Am. 

 Aphidse. 



Aphis carduella Walsh, 1. c. 



Aphis tritici Fitch, 1861, (loc. ignot.). Eeferred to in Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de France, 

 1867, p. 26, Library Catalogue. 



A2)his rubecula Haldm. Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. vol. i, p. 168, 1844. 



Aphis hicolor Haldm. 1. c. p. 168. 



Aj^his marginipennis Haldm. 1. c. p. 168. 



Aphis pilosa Haldm. 1. c. p. 169. 



Aphis discolor Haldm. 1. c. p. 169. 



Aphis verticolor Eaf. Am. Monthly Mag. and Critical Eeview, i, p. 361, 1817. 



Aphis furcipes Eaf. 1. c. i, 361. 



Aphis rhodryas Eaf. 1. c. iii, 15, 1818. 



Aphis diplepha Eaf. 1. c. iii, 15. 



Aphis Greasier Eaf. 1. c. iii, 17. 



Aphis gihhosa Eaf. 1. c. iii, 17. 



Aphis xanthelis Eaf. 1. c. iii, 17. 



Aphis annulipes Eaf. 1. c. iii, 17. 



Aphis ambrosia Eaf. (nee Thos.) iii, 17. 



Aphis acaroides Eaf. 1. c. iii, 17. 



Callipterus mucidus Fitch, N. Y. Eept. iii, § 20. 



Callipterus castanem Fitch, 1. c. ii, § 199. 



Calliptems bella (Walsh), Aphis bella Walsh, 1. c. 



Calaphis betuleUa Walsh, 1. c. 



AVhether or not the writings of Eafinesque on the Aphidldce are deserving of credence 

 and acceptance is a question which I do not propose to discuss ; I however think that 

 such of his species as are named in accordance with the binomial rule should be placed 

 in the same list as the early descriptions of Fitch, and, like them, should be held subject 

 to recognition. The recognition of these imperfectly described species is little more 

 than a matter of courtesy, and mere courtesy would never prevail on us to burden the 

 nomenclature of the Aphididw with such sesquipedalians as Aphis melampyrum-lati- 

 folium, &c. 



Eaiinesque's statement that A. diervilla-luteaa^dA. erigeron-philadel2)hicumhaY6'bent 

 antennae, on account of which he erects the genus Loxerates, would make me doubt 

 whether they belonged to the Aphididce, but his mentioning the nectaries in the de- 

 scription of the latter species places the matter beyond doubt. It is probable that the 

 antennaj are merely bent back over the body, as in many species of Siphonophora. Cla- 

 doxits Eaf. does not belong to the Aphididce. Inclusive of Eafinesque's binomial species 

 (and excluding the trinomial ones), the described Aphididce of the United States amount 

 in all to 166 species, 107 of which belong to the Aphidince. 



