300 NEW YORK STATE MUSEUM 



form is Gmel.) ; Noxious, beneficial and other insects of New York 

 state, ist and 2d rep'ts. 1856. p. 31-38. 



Walsh, B. D. III. state hortic. soc. Trans. 1868. Separate as 

 report of acting state entomologist, p. 34-53 (general account, as 

 Aspidiotus conchiformis). 



Le Baron, William. Chalcideous parasite of the appletree bark 

 louse. Am. ent. and bot. 1870. 2:360-62 (parasites, description and 

 habits ofAphelinus mytilaspidis). 



Osborn, Herbert. Entomological notes for the year 1882. la. state 

 hortic. soc. Trans. 1882. 1883. p. 212-13 (brief notice). 



Riley, C. V. Insects of Missouri. 5th rep't. 1873. p. 73-96 (gen- 

 eral account, described as Mytilaspis pomicorticis). 



Comstock, J. H. U. S.dep'tagric. Rep't of ent. 1880. p. 325-26 

 (synonymy, characters, life history). 



Lintner, J. A. Injurious and other insects of New York. 4th 

 rep't. 1888. p. 114-20 (general account). 



Howard, L. O. Some scale insects of the orchard. U. S. dep't agric. 

 Yearbook. 1894. p. 254-59 (general account). 



Lowe, V. H. Inspection of nurseries and treatment of infested 

 nursery stock. N. Y. agri-c. expt. sta. Bui. 136. 1897. p. 576-82 

 (general account). 



Lochhead, William. San Jose and other scale insects. Ont. dep't 

 agric. Toronto. 1900. p. 40-41 (brief account). 



Scurfy bark louse 



Chionaspis fiirfnra Fitch 



PLATE 2 



This common and destructive species is not an imported insect, like 

 the preceding form, but the two occupy in New York state nearly the 

 same rank as pests of considerable economic importance. The scurfy 

 bark louse frequently appears in large numbers, specially on recently set 

 fruit trees, which occasionally become so covered with the pest as to 

 look at a little distance as if they had been whitewashed. Closer inspec- 

 tion shows the infested trees to be nearly covered with dirty white, scurf- 

 like patches, and it is from this that the popular name of the insect has 

 been derived. 



