1918.] BASHAMBAR Das: The Aphididae of Lahore. 193 
Cornicles clavate only on their distal halves which are dark brown; the narrow 
proximal part is of the body colour; the vasiform tip is black and reaches to the base 
of the cauda. — 
Cauda edged with black, raised upwards; anal plate black and narrow. 
The genital armature is of the usual form, consisting of two black “ claspers ”’ 
bounded by hoop-like ridges behind and laterally ; a light yellow penis projects coni- 
cally from between their posterior ends medially. 
On the ventral surface there is a row of depressions along the lateral grooves. 
Legs, rostrum, etc. like the alate female. 
Measurements :— 
Body ace & = 150x050 mm. 
Antennae a a AO. 
Cornicle MERE N eee OFZ A 
Wing expanse .. se 2 re OO} a 
The specimens were collected from the ventral surface of peach leaves (Prunus 
persica) on young plants near Chhota Ravi on 28th December, 1913, along with 
migrant alate females depositing young ones. 
Life-history.—This species therefore appears to have the same life-history as most 
other plant-lice, parthenogenetic reproduction continuing during the year; in Decem- 
ber alate migrants and males return to the peach and in all likelihood lay eggs there 
which ought to hatch in the spring. After one or two generations on peaches the 
alate females must again probably return to aquatic plants. 
Enemies.—Besides the usual predaceous insects and spiders we have reared the 
parasite Tviox from this species. The dead Aphid is raised upon a tent-like cocoon 
formed by the larva inside ; the imago emerges from one side of the cocoon and not 
_ through a hole cut into the body of its victim, as do other Braconid and Chalcid 
. parasites. 
Systematic.—The water-lily Aphid possesses small frontal tubercles, well seen in 
the apterous viviparous female, but not so distinct in the alate female. The presence 
or absence of these tubercles was taken as the chief character for separating the club- 
cornicled genera Rhopalosiphum and Siphocoryne. As this very character here is a 
contestable point, some writers place it under one genus and others under the other. 
In most of the earlier works the species is described under Rhopalosiphum. But if we 
accept van der Goot’s emended definition of Siphocoryne, in which he includes only 
those species that lack sensoria on the antennal articles of the apterous viviparous 
female, then this Aphid very rightly belongs to Siphocoryne. On other grounds also 
the trend of opinion is to regard it as belonging to this genus. However, some 
authorities, like Prof. Theobald, still hold to the old view of grouping it under Rho- 
palosiphum. Van der Goot has further thought it desirable to bring it under a new 
genus altogether, on account of the presence of lateral tubercles on the abdominal 
segments, which are absent in the type-species S. xyloster, S. foeniculi, etc. He pro- 
poses to call this new genns Siphonaphis. It is still a point to be settled whether we 
