AN ANNOTATED LIST OF GENERIC NAMES OF THE COCCOIDEA 51 



Cryptoparlatores Takagi, 1960, Insecta Matsumurana 23 : 71. 

 A lapsus for Cryptoparlatorea Lindinger. 



Cryptoparlatoria Kuwana, 1917, A Check List of the Japanese Coe- 

 cidae, p. 18. 



An emendation of Cryptoparlatorea Lindinger. MacGillivray, 1921 : 248, 253, 

 481, used both spellings. Balachowsky, 1958b: 315, who used this spelling, 

 placed the genus in his Parlatorina. 



Cryptoparlatyrea Lindinger, 1934, Ent. Anz. 14 : 15. 

 A lapsus for Cryptoparlatorea Lindinger. 



Cryptophyllaspis Cockerell, 1897, U.S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent,, Tech. 

 Ser. 6 : 14. 



type-species : Aspidiotus occultus Green, 1896, by original designation and 

 lnonotypy. 



Leonardi, 1897a : 375, may have antedated Cockerell's publication of this name 

 when he published a brief note on the disposition of various names that 

 Cockerell had presented in a letter addressed to Leonardi. He placed Crypto- 

 phyllaspis as a synonym of Aspidiotus Bouche, and Lindinger, 1937, 183; Ferris, 

 1941e : 35, 37 ; and Balachowsky, 1948b : 273, have accepted this synonymy. 



Cryptorhizococcus Green, 1918, Ann. Appl. Biol. 5: 150, nomen 

 nudum; Lindinger, 1937, Ent, Jahrb. 46: 183. 



type-species : Cryptorhizococcus oleariae Green, 191S, by subsequent desig- 

 nation of Lindinger, 1937 : 183. 



Both these names lack nomenclatorial and zoological status. 



Cryptoripersia Cockerell, 1899, in Ehrhorn, Canad. Ent, 31: 5; 

 Cockerell, 1899, Canad. Ent. 31 : 278. 



type-species : Ripcrsia arizonensis Ehrhorn, 1899, by original designation 

 and monotypy. 



Ferris, 1953a: 307, 310, stated that arizonensis was a synonym of Bipersia 

 trichura Cockerell, 1901, but the exact opposite should have been stated. Ferris 

 placed this as an aberrant genus in the Pseudococcidae. 



Cryptoselenaspidus Lindinger, 1910, Ztschr. f. Wiss. Insektenbiol. 

 6:259. 



type-species : Cryptoselenaspidus serra Lindinger, 1910, by monotypy. 



Its proposer suggested that the second stage of this insect shows a similarity 

 to the adult of Selenaspidus silvaticus Lindinger. The adult female remains 

 enclosed within the second stage. Despite this implied relationship, the genus 

 was not considered by Mamet, 1958a, in his review of the Selenaspidus complex, 

 nor was it mentioned by Balachowsky, 1958b, in his coverage of the remaining 

 aspidiotine genera from central Africa. Available information on it is confined 

 to the original description. 



