26 • 



in length. These brushes are raised and spread out when the insect 

 is touched. (Fig. 8.) 



In studying this remarkable insect and comparing its characters 

 with those of the various subfamilies hitherto described, I have been 

 greatly puzzled to refer it to its proper position. On the one hand, it 

 is closely related to the genus Coelostoma, though very different in all 

 its characters from other Monophlebinae, at least as far as the genera 

 Monophlebus and Icerya are concerned, while on the other hand there 

 appears to be also a relationship with certain genera of the Brachys- 

 celinge, and at the same time a wide divergence from the genus 

 Brachyscelis itself, the characters of which, as represented in Brachys- 

 cells conica, I have had the opportunity to examine in a female. These 

 considerations place it undoubtedly in the Acanthococcidse, somewhere 

 near the genus Eriococcus. These acanthococcid characters of Bra- 

 clvyscelis conica are the large and distinct anal ring, surrounded by 

 numerous long and stout bristles, and the abnormally elongated and 

 slender anal tubercles. 



Since the characters of the two known species of Xylococcus and 

 those of the species of Coelostoma are unique and unlike those of all 

 other subfamilies of Coccidae, as far as known to me, I propose to erect 

 for the accommodation of these two genera the subfamily Xylococcinse, 

 which properly may be placed between the MonophlebinaB and the 

 Acanthococcinse. They differ from the Monophlebinre in the absence 

 of legs and antennae in the intermediate stages of the female and partly 

 so in the male; the absence of a rostrum in the mature female; the 

 highly developed stigmata of the abdominal segments; the strongly 

 chitinous character of several of the terminal segments of the abdomen, 

 and the presence of a highly organized and chitinous anal tube, which 

 is capable of being projected out of and of being withdrawn into the 

 body. 



In the true Monophlebinae the legs and antennse, as well as the ros- 

 trum, are present in all stages; the abdominal stigmata are wanting 

 or not observable; the end of the body is not chitinous; the anal open- 

 ing simple and the anal tube absent. 



From the Coccinae they differ not only in the characters mentioned 

 above, but also by the absence of anal tubercles, except minute ones in 

 the young larvae, and the absence of a true anal ring with its accom- 

 panying bristles. 



THE PEACH LECANIUM. 



[Lecanium nigrofasciatum n. sp.) 



By Theo. Pergande. 



Lecanium persicw Mod.— Murtfeldt, Bull. 32, Div. of Ent. U. S. Dept. Agr. 1894, 



p. 41. 

 Lecanium persicw Mod. — Howard, Yearbook U. S. Dept. Agr. 1894 (1895), p. 270. 



This handsome little species has been known to the writer since 1872, 

 when it was discovered upon peach trees at Hillsboro, Mo., and since 



