42 MISC. PUBLICATION 1015, U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 



Coccus Linnaeus, 1758, Systema Xat. (Eel. 10) 1: 455-457. 



type-species : Coccus hcsperidum Linnaeus, 1758, by general acceptance. 



Neave, 1939, Xornen. Zool. 1 : 781, also cites 1767, Ed. 12 : 7, 39. The significance 

 of the later citation is not obvious at this writing. As the first established and 

 oldest valid coccid genus, Coccus has had a most involved history. At the time 

 of its establishment, and through the years since, numerous coccoid species 

 representing a wide variety of forms have been assigned to it, and a number of 

 entomologists have attempted to fix the correct type-species for the genus. 

 Fernald, 1902a : 232, 1906 : 125, gave critical consideration to the problem in rela- 

 tion to her 1903b Catalogue of the Coccidae, and decided that Sulzer, 1761, in his 

 discussion of the genus, with a reference to C. hcsperidum Linnaeus by name, 

 accompanied by an illustrated description of this insect, had set the type by 

 restriction to this single species. 



Historically, and in terms of the original Greek source of the name Coccus, its 

 type probably ought to stand as one of the originally included oak-infesting species 

 currently placed in the genus Kermes Boitard and, indeed, Westwood. 1840: 447, 

 presented this conclusion when he stated, "The type of this family (and for which, 



of course, the generic name Coccus must unquestionably be retained, ) 



is the Coccus ilicis Linn." Cockerell, 1929b : 150, arrived at the some conclusion, 

 apparently without recognition of Westwood's prior decision on the matter. 

 Cockerell made several attempts at type fixation. In 1893dd : 1044, he discussed 

 Coccus "as typified by C. cacti", with the associated discussion clearly indicating 

 that he was citing Coccus cacti of authors, not Linnaeus \_~Dactylopius coccus 

 Costa of current usage]. This association was repeated by him in his 1896b 

 Check List : 323. In 1899j : 260, after debate, he concluded that Coccus phalaridis 

 Linnaeus. 1758, must be chosen as type-species of the genus because it was the 

 only original Linnaean inclusion remaining in Coccus after division of the genus 

 by Geoff roy, 1762 (a non-binomial work) . Other attempts at type fixation include 

 Latreille, 1810: 266, 434, who gave Coccus persicae Fabricius — a non-Linnaean 

 and ineligible species — as the typical species ; Kirkaldy, 1906a : 253, who stated 

 that the type was mexicanus Lamarck, 1801 : 298, which also was not an inclusion 

 by Linnaeus in his 1758 Coccus. MacGillivray 1921 : 102, associated the name 

 Coccus with the true Mexican cochineal, using the name cacti Linnaeus for it. 



A majority of the coccid students publishing since the appearance of the Fer- 

 nald Catalogue, 1903b. have accepted C. hcsperidum Linnaeus, 1758, as the type- 

 species of the genus. Coccid workers who have recently mentioned the genus 

 with hcsperidum accepted as the type-species include: Balachowsky, 1948b: 255- 

 256, who placed it with related genera in his Lecaniini ; Borchsenius. 1937 : 75, 86, 

 1957 : 292, who placed it in his Coccini ; DeLotto, 1957 : 295, 1959 : 151 ; Ferris, in 

 Zimmerman, 1948 : 301 ; Gomez-Menor, 1937 : 254, 295. and 1948 : 82 ; Laing, 1944 : 

 93. who considered that Latreille, 1802 : 267, fixed the type of Coccus by citing 

 Coccus hcsperidum Linnaeus as an "Example;" Lindinger, 1937: 1S2, who chose 

 hcsperidum as type on a "first species listed" basis; Mamet, 1954: 48; Schmut- 

 terer, 1952: 552; and Silvestri, 1939: 716, who placed the genus in the Coccini. 

 Beyond usage by coccid specialists, there is a considerable volume of reference 

 to "Coccus hcsperidum L." in non-taxonomic literature that has appeared since 

 the publication of the Fernald Catalogue. None of the attempts at type fixation 

 reported above appear to us to comply with a rigid application of the requirements 

 of the 1961 International Code. However, the use of hesperidum Linnaeus, 1758. 

 as understood by current coccid workers, for the type-species of Coccus has be- 

 come so nearly universal that wo believe strongly that it should be accepted 

 without further questioning, and that the acceptance should date from Sulzer. 

 1 7<;i . as proposed by Fernald. 



