288 [November, 



Now, as to Ps. subnebiilosus, Steph. In my Monograpli I gave 

 this as a distinct species. Upon studying my description o£ it, by the 

 light of my new experience, it became doubtful to me whether it did 

 not really apply to quadrhnaculatus, and a re-examination of the single 

 Stephensian type shows it is really a (J of that species (jnaculipennis, 

 Steph., is the ? ). But the suhiehulosus of Kolbe is not separable 

 from Ps. bifasciafus, Latr., and has so been considered by him in later 

 writings. 



Confusion between quadrimaculatus and bifasciatus is not possible, 

 on account of the smaller size and polished black thoracic lobes of the 

 former, and the distinct type of neuration in the latter. Confusion 

 with Ps. bipunctatus, L., is more easy, and I find that a Swiss speci- 

 men sent to me by Meyer-Diir as bipunctatus is really quadrimaculatus. 



I have a ^ insect taken by me some ten years ago near Geneva, 

 which was submitted to Herr Kolbe, and was returned by him as 

 " Ampliifjerontia cdgrotn, n. sp.," but no description was published of 

 it. In this the antez'ior-wings want even the dark pterostigmatical 

 spot, the space indicating the pterostigma being simply filled-in with 

 pale grey (excepting at the base), and the only markings are the two 

 dark points before alluded to. I now think this is only a condition of 

 quadrimaculatus, of which species a $ was taken at the same place. 



A few remarks on Amphigerontia, Kolbe, conclude these notes. 

 In " Psyche," iii, p. 272, Dr. Hagen says the genus "cannot stand 

 by the characters assigned to it." I think it cannot stand if made 

 to include all the species placed in it by Kolbe, but it may, I think, do 

 so if limited to Ps. bifasciatus, in which the transverse nervule joins 

 the forked vein (my terminology) beyond the outer superior angle of 

 the discoidal cell,* and not at, or before it, as is the case in the other 

 species. In Kolbe's original definition of Amphigerontia (" Monogr. 

 deutsch. Psociden," 1880) one point was that the discoidal cell is 

 quadrangular, whereas in Psocus (as restricted by him) it is more or 

 less pentagonal. Both conditions exist in nearly all the species of 

 Amphigerontia (excepting bifasciatus) and in Psocus : in Ps. quadri- 

 maculatus this variability is very marked. But in the "Anhang" to 

 Eostock's " Netzfliigler Deutschlands " (1888), Kolbe has very con- 

 siderably modified the characters of both genera (still, however, 

 retaining the same species as before), and uses a terminology for the 

 neuration in Psocidcs, differing in many respects from that in his 

 original work ; moreover, some fresh points of neural structure are 

 alluded to, which seem to me of scarcely generic value. I repeat that 



* Kolbe's fig. i (Monogr.) explains this structure very clearly. 



