68 
Transactions of the Boyal Society of South Africa. 
To fulfil this purpose I feel that such a catalogue should be sufficiently 
comprehensive to obviate the necessity of constantly referring to other 
papers on the group, and for this reason I propose to include several 
sections which have already been treated by previous workers. 
The arrangement of Subfamilies does not follow the plan usually 
adopted, nor is it chosen to illustrate possible phylogenetic relationships. 
Owing to experiments now being conducted for the control of mealy-bugs, 
I was asked to deal w^ith this Subfamily (Pseudococcinae) first. I have 
also included the Ortheziinae, Coccinae, Monophlehinae, and Margarodinae 
because they resemble mealy-bugs — in some measure at least — in some 
stage of their existence. Thus, the Ortheziinae and Coccinae always 
resemble the Pseudococcinae more or less closely ; this is also true of 
the Monophlehinae during their early stages, and the adult $ $ of 
2Iargarodes, after leaving the cysts, simulate subterranean mealy-bugs. 
Types. — I wash to emphasize the desirability of establishing an 
Imperial Collection of Coccidae similar to the U.S. National Collection 
at Washington D.C. 
I feel that the needs of workers in the Colonies at least demand the 
centralization of as many types as possible in London. They should 
be deposited in the British Museum (Natural History), where they would 
be properly stored and safeguarded, and at the same time be available for 
all purposes within the usual restricted sphere of type material of all kinds. 
All necessary arrangements might w^ell be left to the Imperial Bureau 
of Entomology. 
The Imperial Collection should not be restricted to types alone, but 
should contain specimens of all the Coccidae of the different Colonies, 
determined by recognized authorities. This would involve the duplication 
of many species, but the collection would be all the more valuable, as 
it would illustrate the slight variations — which do occur — due to local 
conditions. 
