MasxeLL.—On New Zealand Coccide. . 121 
of Agriculture in Greece. Mr. Comstock, who adopted my name for the 
insect, in his Report on the Coccide of the United States, seems to have 
been equally unaware with myself of the description of Gennadius. I have 
always thought that this insect must have been originally introduced from 
Europe. 
2. Aspidiotus sophore, sp. nov. 
Fig. 1. 
The puparium is normal in shape, flat and nearly circular, of a bluish- 
grey tint ; diameter about +; inch. 
The female resembles generally A. nerii or any other of the genus, 
having a peg-top shape, the abdominal segments shrinking up into the 
thoracic portion after gestation. There are five groups of spinnerets, of 
which the upper group has four orifices, the remainder seven or eight. In 
some specimens only four groups are to be made out. The edge of the 
abdomen ends in two conspicuous median lobes, and at each side for a little 
distance are a number of scaly serrated hairs resembling those of A. nerit. 
From Sophora tetraptera. 
Only a few species of Aspidiotus are reported as having five groups of 
spinnerets, the normal number being four, and some having no groups. 
The present insect seems to resemble generally A. oxyacantha or A. tilia, 
Signoret; but differs in the arrangement of the hairs on the edge of the 
abdomen. 
Genus Poliaspis, mihi. 
(Trans., vol. xii., p. 293. 
Mr. Comstock, in a monograph of the Diaspide (Second Rep. of the 
Dep. of Entomology of the Cornell University Experiment Station, 1883, 
p. 126), which he has kindly sent me, adopts this genus, and describes a 
new American species of it; but remarks that he is “ far from feeling sure 
that the genus will prove to be a natural one.” I would urge that it has at 
least as good a claim as the kindred genus Leucaspis, which Mr. Comstock 
admits without remark. Dr. Signoret, in a letter to me, says of my genus 
Poliaspis—“ I think this genus is distinct. 
Genus Mytilaspis, Targioni-Tozzetti. 
(Trans., vol. xi., p. 192.) 
1. Mytilaspis pyriformis, mihi. 
(Trans., vol. xi., p. 192: vol. xiv., p. 215.) 
Mr. Comstock (loc. cit., p. 125) asks whether this insect is really a 
Mytilaspis, and seems inclined to refer it rather to Chionaspis. I find that 
in my former papers I have omitted to observe that the male puparium is 
not greatly different from that of the female, though from my placing it 
under Mytilaspis I inferred this. The male puparium of Chionaspis is quite 
different. 
