potato plant louse. 25 1 



Description of Nectarophora Solanifolii Ash mead. 



It will be evident to anyone interested in Aphididae that 

 solanifolii is quite possibly open to the synonomic honors so 

 common to the genus Nectarophora. As the question cannot 

 be satisfactorily settled for this species without straightening 

 out N. pisi ( !) and perhaps all the other nondescript green 

 and pink Nectarophora, the writer modestly though regretfully 

 refrains from offering any elucidating suggestions, at present. 

 Utmost care has been taken and will be taken in the future 

 work proposed for this species, to be positive that the data 

 recorded for N. solanifolii refers to one species only so that 

 at least it may be certain that the observations add nothing to 

 synonymic confusion. 



A considerable mass of mounted material of this species 

 collected during 1904-1905 was kindly determined through the 

 courtesy of the U. S. Bureau of Entomology by Mr. Pergande 

 as Macrosiphum (Nectarophora) solanifolii Ashmead. Doctor 

 Fletcher acknowledges the same authority for the name of the 

 species abundant upon potato in Canada mentioned in his report 

 for 1904. 



The original description made for specimens found on Sola- 

 tium jasminoiales for this species appeared in the Canadian 

 Entomologist, Vol. 14, 1882, pages 92-93, and may be quoted 

 for the apterous viviparous form: 



"Siphonophora solanifolii n. sp. 



"Wingless female. — Length .12 inch. Elongate ovate and of 

 a pale yellowish green color ; beak short, not reaching middle 

 coxae, pale, tip black; antennae 7- jointed, slightly reaching 

 beyond abdomen, situated on large tubercles, pale greenish, 

 joints infuscated, 6th joint shortest, dark, 7th longest, brown; 

 eyes red ; honey tubes very long, reaching considerably beyond 

 abdomen, slightly thickened at base, infuscated at tip; style 

 short, conical, greenish, coxae shining and yellowish, feet black." 



Mistake as to the identity of the so-called male is evident 

 from the original description of this form and is therefore 

 omitted. "Antennae hardly reaching to middle of abdomen" 

 and "honey tubes rather short" could not, in light of further 

 acquaintance with this form, be expected to apply to a male of 

 the genus under consideration. 



