142 Memoirs of the Indian Museum. (Vor DE 
eggs are sterile and never hatch; this is due to the males often being produced much 
in advance of the females, which thus do not get a chance of mating and deposit un- 
fertilised ova. 
[A summary of the systematic position of the Aphididae and an account of their general ana- 
tomy has been withheld from this paper, in order to diminish its size. The uames for the different 
parts of the aphid-body, as used in this paper, are sufficiently indicated in the drawing (fig. I) at the 
beginning of this introduction. The student of Aphididae may find more elaborate particulars on aphid- 
anatomy, etc. in several recent publications of European and American writers (Tullgren, Mordwilko, 
Bomerierc) mba ved. Gril: 
All the knowledge we possess of Indian plant-lice is confined to a few stray 
notices in the Indian Museum Notes published up to 1903. A summary of these, with 
Previous work on Aphids Some additions, is given by Lefroy in Indian Insect Life, p. 
in India, 747 (1910), with a list of twenty-one definitely recorded 
Indian species, including even those that occur outside the plains. Besides these 
eleven more are listed for the tropics by van der Goot in a paper on two undescribed 
Javanese Aphids, published in Holland in 1912. Otherwise there is rarely ever a 
reference to Indian forms in European or American literature. 
The identifications in the Indian Museum Notes in almost all cases are by 
Buckton, who appears to have been, at the time the specimens were submitted to him 
Vale or Bucktonts from alent, either preoccupied by other work, or to have 
HOMES: _ given up doing the Aphids. 
Though later methods of description have necessitated a the nl rewriting 
(being undertaken at present by Prof. Theobald) of even his monumental work on 
British Aphids—the latest complete monograph of the family—yet the accounts he 
furnished of Indian insects are too summary to be of much value, and are accompanied 
in most cases by indefinite and incorrect illustrations. An overhastiness is apparent 
in proposing new genera and species, and against their too brief characterisation a 
protest was entered at that time by W. W. Frogatt in the Indian Museum Notes, 
Vol, no. 3, p, rer clic Ceylonia theaecola, new genus and new species, (Indian 
Museum Notes, II, p. 34) for instance is the same as Toxoptera auranti, Koch 1847, 
reviewed by Buckton himself in British Aphids, vol. IV. Chaitobhorus maculatus 
(Buckton) is identical with Callipterus trifolii (Monell); Lachnus fuliginosus, Buckton, 
is created out of mixed material of Lachnus viminalis (Boyer) and Dryobius persicae 
(Cholod.), and so on. 
The additional species listed by Lefroy are determinations by H. Schouteden, 
whose correspondence I was kindly permitted to examine at the Agricultural Research 
Institute at Pusa. Unfortunately all duplicates of the speci- 
mens sent to Schouteden were altogether lost, as they could 
be found nowhere in the collections. Therefore a verification of the names of these 
aphids is practically impossible except indirectly. Aphis adusta (Zehnt.), for 
example, we now know to be a synonym of A. maidis (Fitch). A. cardui, L. on 
Vicia sp. and A. rumicis on Vigna catjang are probably both A. medicaginis 
(Koch). 
The list by Lefroy. 
