OF THE FAMILY COCCIDAE 



set. scla 



subapical seta 



t 



tendon-like apodeme 





scl 



seutellum 



tar 



tarsus 





self 



scutellar foramen 



tb 



tentorial bridge 





scls 



scutellar setae 



tdgt 



tarsal digitule 





scp 



scape 



teg 



tegula 





set 



scutum 



tegs 



tegular setae 





sctse 



scutal setae 



tib 



tibia 





ser 



subepisternal ridge 



tibs 



tibial spur 





sp 2 



mesothoracic spiracle 



tp 



triangular plate 





sp 3 



metathoracic spiracle 



tr 



trochanter 





spl 



sensillum placodeum 



udgt 



ungual digitule 





ss 



suspensorial sclerite 



vhs 



ventral head setae 





Stllj 



prosternum 



vmcr 



ventral part of midcranial 



ridge 



stn.. 



basisternum <>! mesosternum 



vps 



ventropleural setae 





stn :) 



metasternum 



vs 



ventral sclerite 





stn,s 



prosternal setae 



vse 



ventral simple eye 





stn 2 s 



basiternal setae 









GENERAL MORPHOLOGY 



The first serious attempt to study the morphology of the male of the Coccidae was 

 made by Putnam (1879) in his paper on Pulvinaria innumerabilis. Apart from 

 morphological observations, he suggested that the shape and proportions of the 

 seutellum (which he called apodema) would be of some value in distinguishing the 

 species of Pulvinaria. After Putnam's work, attention was shifted almost com- 

 pletely to the female, but some authors, e.g. Moulton (1907), Silvestri (1919a, 1919b, 

 1920), Cusciana (1931), Hadzibejli (1955), Kawecki (1958b) and Husseiny & Madsen 

 (1962) included brief descriptions of the male when describing the females of single 

 species. Newstead (1903), Green (1904-1909), Leonardi (1920), Sulc (1932) and 

 Borchsenius (1957) each dealt with a series of females from definite localities ; 

 they included short descriptions of the males available and usually gave a general 

 account of the male of the family. Of all these, the works of Sulc and Borchsenius 

 are the most significant. Sulc's interpretation of the thoracic structures is fairly 

 accurate, and he pays special attention to the eyes, halteres and chaetotaxy of the 

 head in differentiating the species studied. Borchsenius' paper contains a number 

 of inaccuracies concerning the homologies of the various structures, but he describes 

 and illustrates the differences in the head, 3rd and 10th antennal segments, seutellum 

 and terminal abdominal segments (including the genital segment) in the species that 

 he studied. A small number of workers, namely Pesson (1941), Durr (1954), Habib 

 (1956) and Bustshik & Saakjan-Baranova (1962) devoted papers to the description 

 of the males of individual species, but their descriptions are rather superficial and 

 contain many inaccuracies. Jancke (1955), Ezzat (1956) and Theron (1958) made 

 comparative studies of the males of a number of families ; each of them included one 

 member of the Coccidae : Physokermes piceae, Pulvinaria ericicola and Parthenole- 

 canium pomeranicum (described as Eulecanium taxi) respectively. While Ezzat and 

 Jancke contributed little that is morphologically significant, Theron gave a very 

 detailed and accurate account, and was the first to make a comprehensive study of 

 the pleural region. 



