﻿art. 
  20 
  THE 
  APHID 
  GENUS 
  AMPHOROPHORA 
  MASON 
  17 
  

  

  Agr. 
  Farm. 
  Bull. 
  804, 
  1918, 
  p. 
  28.— 
  Das, 
  Mem. 
  Indian 
  Mus., 
  vol. 
  6, 
  

  

  no. 
  4, 
  1918, 
  pp. 
  165, 
  273.— 
  Haviland, 
  Ent. 
  Month. 
  Mag., 
  1918, 
  p. 
  201 
  — 
  

  

  Davidson, 
  Journ. 
  Econ. 
  Ent., 
  vol. 
  11, 
  no. 
  3, 
  1918, 
  p. 
  289. 
  — 
  Essig 
  and 
  

  

  Kuwana, 
  Proc. 
  Cal. 
  Acad. 
  Sci., 
  vol. 
  8, 
  no. 
  3, 
  1918, 
  p. 
  35.— 
  Wilson 
  and 
  

  

  Vickery, 
  Trans. 
  Wis. 
  Acad. 
  Sci. 
  Arts 
  and 
  Letters, 
  vol. 
  19, 
  pt. 
  1, 
  1918, 
  

  

  pp. 
  49, 
  97.— 
  Jackson, 
  Scott. 
  Nat., 
  1918, 
  p. 
  85; 
  1919, 
  p. 
  159.— 
  Swain, 
  

  

  Univ. 
  Cal. 
  Pub. 
  Tech. 
  Bull., 
  vol. 
  3, 
  no. 
  1, 
  1919, 
  p. 
  82.— 
  Takahashi, 
  Rev. 
  

  

  Formosa 
  Agr. 
  no. 
  182, 
  1921, 
  p. 
  63.— 
  Del 
  Guercio, 
  Redia, 
  vol. 
  14, 
  1921, 
  

  

  p. 
  109. 
  

   Siphonophora 
  laclucae 
  (Linnaeus) 
  Thomas, 
  8th 
  Rept., 
  111. 
  State 
  Ent., 
  1879, 
  

  

  p. 
  60. 
  

   Nectarophora 
  laclucae 
  (Kaltenbach) 
  Oestltjnd, 
  Minn. 
  Geol. 
  and 
  Nat. 
  Hist. 
  

  

  Surv. 
  Bull. 
  4, 
  1887, 
  pp. 
  85, 
  91.— 
  Hunter, 
  Iowa 
  Agr. 
  Exp. 
  Sta. 
  Bull. 
  

  

  60, 
  1901, 
  p. 
  115. 
  

   Siphonophora 
  laclucae 
  (Kaltenbach) 
  Williams, 
  Univ. 
  Nebr. 
  Spec. 
  Bull. 
  1, 
  

  

  1891, 
  p. 
  16. 
  — 
  Schouteden, 
  Ann. 
  de 
  la 
  Soc. 
  Entom. 
  Belg., 
  vol. 
  44, 
  1900, 
  

  

  pp. 
  115-119. 
  

   Macrosiphum 
  laclucae 
  (Kaltenbach) 
  Sanborn, 
  Kans. 
  Univ. 
  Sci. 
  Bull., 
  vol. 
  3, 
  

  

  no. 
  8, 
  1906, 
  p. 
  240. 
  

   Macrosiphum 
  laclucae 
  Schrank? 
  Davis, 
  Bull. 
  111. 
  St. 
  Lab. 
  Nat. 
  Hist., 
  vol. 
  

  

  10, 
  1913, 
  p. 
  109. 
  

   Amphorophora 
  laclucae 
  (Kaltenbach) 
  Quaintance 
  and 
  Baker, 
  U. 
  S. 
  Dept. 
  

  

  Agr. 
  Farm. 
  Bull. 
  1128, 
  1920, 
  p. 
  30.— 
  Blanchard, 
  Physis, 
  vol. 
  5, 
  no. 
  20. 
  

  

  1922, 
  p. 
  207.— 
  Patch, 
  Conn. 
  State 
  Geol. 
  and 
  Nat. 
  Hist. 
  Surv. 
  Bull. 
  

  

  no. 
  34, 
  1923, 
  p. 
  301. 
  

  

  The 
  synonymy 
  of 
  this 
  species 
  is 
  somewhat 
  involved 
  but 
  is 
  ex- 
  

   plained 
  as 
  follows: 
  

  

  Aphis 
  ribis 
  Linnaeus, 
  based 
  on 
  Linnaeus's 
  description 
  in 
  Fauna 
  

   Sueca 
  refers 
  to 
  Reaumur 
  (vol. 
  3, 
  pi. 
  22, 
  figs. 
  7-10) 
  incorrectly, 
  as 
  

   the 
  plant 
  there 
  shown 
  is 
  mountain 
  maple 
  and 
  not 
  Rihis. 
  It 
  should 
  

   refer 
  to 
  plate 
  24, 
  figure 
  4, 
  which 
  is 
  a 
  gooseberry 
  leaf 
  with 
  character- 
  

   istic 
  pseudogalls. 
  This, 
  then, 
  is 
  Myzus 
  ribis 
  (Linnaeus). 
  

  

  Aphis 
  laclucae 
  Linnaeus 
  cites 
  only 
  Reaumur 
  (pi. 
  22 
  figs. 
  3-5). 
  

   Reaumur 
  described 
  two 
  forms, 
  a 
  green 
  and 
  a 
  bronze 
  one, 
  which 
  are 
  

   evidently 
  a 
  Macrosiphum, 
  being, 
  as 
  Reaumur 
  says, 
  like 
  the 
  rose 
  

   species. 
  Miiller 
  in 
  hi? 
  translation 
  of 
  Linnaeus, 
  1774, 
  also 
  indicates 
  a 
  

   Macrosiphum. 
  Midler 
  also 
  says 
  that 
  Linnaeus 
  considers 
  Reaumur's 
  

   lettuce 
  as 
  cultivated 
  lettuce, 
  whereas 
  Reaumur 
  had 
  in 
  mind 
  wild 
  

   lettuce. 
  Kaltenbach 
  refers 
  to 
  this 
  also. 
  This 
  is 
  immaterial, 
  how- 
  

   ever, 
  since 
  both 
  the 
  Macrosiphum 
  and 
  the 
  Amphorophora 
  live 
  on 
  

   both 
  wild 
  and 
  cultivated 
  lettuce. 
  

  

  Aphis 
  laclucae 
  Kaltenbach 
  is 
  based 
  on 
  Kaltenbach's 
  description, 
  

   but 
  he 
  also 
  cites 
  Reaumur 
  (pi. 
  22, 
  figs. 
  3-5), 
  as 
  did 
  Linnaeus. 
  Since 
  

   Linnaeus' 
  species 
  is 
  different 
  from 
  Kaltenbach's 
  and 
  since 
  Linnaeus 
  

   based 
  his 
  species 
  entirely 
  on 
  Reaumur, 
  Kaltenbach 
  erred 
  in 
  citing 
  

   Reaumur. 
  He 
  should 
  also 
  have 
  used 
  another 
  name, 
  since 
  lactucse 
  

   was 
  preoccupied 
  by 
  Linnaeus. 
  

  

  Most 
  of 
  the 
  older 
  writers 
  cite 
  Reaumur 
  and 
  Linnaeus 
  and 
  give 
  

   no 
  descriptions 
  of 
  their 
  own. 
  Walker 
  seems 
  to 
  have 
  confused 
  the 
  

   43328— 
  25f 
  2 
  

  

  