INTRODUCTION 



A catalogue of animals should serve practically all fields of biology. 

 It therefore should be as complete a listing of all the records of fami- 

 lies, subfamilies, tribes, genera, species, and varieties as it is possible 

 for the author to assemble. The nature of the reference is of the great- 

 est importance. A student of zoogeography should be able to find a 

 complete list of the regions inhabited by the various species. The 

 student of ecology should be able to find references to all that is known 

 about the life history, food plants, and other pertinent data. The 

 student of economic entomology should be able to check the histories 

 of those species that are suspected of being injurious to plants. The 

 plant disease specialist should be able to check the current nomencla- 

 ture of the species which are disease vectors, or are suspected of being 

 disease vectors. Those research workers studying morphology, physi- 

 ology, or genetics should be able to trace developments in the field of 

 their special interest. And finally, the student of taxonomy should 

 be relieved of the burden of searching for past recordings, and the 

 journals which publish taxonomic papers should be relieved of pub- 

 lishing past records and duplicating synonymy that is already well 

 known. Thus, it would be necessary to record only synonymy that 

 has been developed since publication of the catalogue. 



In this, as in other catalogues of the present series, the family is 

 divided into genera which are arranged in as nearly phylogenetic 

 order as our present knowledge will permit. The species are arranged 

 under the genera in alphabetic sequence. 



The notes which follow the references are generally self-explana- 

 tory, but three points may be mentioned here. Such notations as 

 "[described]," "[notes]," "[key]," and the like are intended to be 

 suggestive rather than precise or exclusive. The notation "[error]" 

 means not accepted in this catalogue. Usually, the latest published 

 synonymy is accepted, but not always. The notation "[comparative 

 note]" is used to designate those references, often of the greatest 

 taxonomic significance, in which two generic, specific, or other groups 

 are compared. All references have been checked against the original 

 save those marked with an asterisk (*), which have been accepted 

 from reliable sources. Every effort has been made to have the refer- 

 ences full and complete and to give an indication of the character of 

 the data contained. Where the writer knows that reprints have been 



