2 
BULLETIX 276^ U. S. DEPAETMEXT OF AGKICULTUKE. 
SYNONYMY. 
This aphis seems to have been first authentically described under 
the name ApMs pisi hj Kaltenbach. in 1843 (5)/ altbough. two years 
previous Boyer de Fonscolombe (3) described a species under the 
name ApMs onohrychis, which, is still doubtfully considered synony- 
mous with. pi,si as will be noted later. Kaltenbach. placed Schrank's 
Aphis ulmariae as a synonym of pisi, although tliis arrangement on 
the part of that author is not compreliensiblej since he was doubtless 
aware of its priority over pisi. In 1855 Koch (6) redescribed pisi 
and placed it ia the genus Siphonophora, no mention beiag made of 
ulmariae, although in the appendix of this work (p. 328) Kalten- 
bach's remarks iaclude the following: 
Siph. gei Koch ist, nach Herrich-Schaffer's richtiger Vermuthung. meine Aphis 
Pisi Kalt. und Aph. Onohrychis B. de Fonsc. Der altere Sclirank'sche Name Aph. 
Ulmariae verlangt jedoch von alien Dreien das Prioritatsrecht. 
The name p>'^s^ adopted by entomologists almost universally 
until comparatively recent years when ulmariae was more or less 
generally accepted. 
In 1909 Dr. N. A. Cholodkovsky (9) pubhshed the results of liis 
studies on SipTwnopTiora pisi and related species, definitely setthng 
the identity of pisi, and for the first time poiated out that the 
Aphis ulmxiriae of Schrank, which he here placed in. the genus 
Siphonophora, could hardly be the pisi of Kaltenbach. He therefore 
concluded that three species had heretofore been confused with pisi, 
namely Macrosiphum pisi, which he had fomid on garden peas (JPisum 
sativum), sweet pea (Lathyrus odoratus) and Medicago; M. ulmariae 
auct., which occurs on meadow-sweet {Spiraea ulmaria) ; and J/. 
caraganae Cholod. on Caragana arhorescens, and gives biological and 
morphological differences to separate the thi-ee. Later, m the same 
year and ia the same pubhcation, Dr. A. Mordwilko (10) gives a 
lengthy treatise on this insect, which he calls 2Iacrosiplium pisi Kalt., 
and the related species. Eight supposedly distinct species are con- 
sidered and a table illustrating differences of the foUowuig species is 
given: 21. pisi, J/, cholodkovslcyi, J/. portschinsJcyi, M. ononis, J/, gei, 
and M. urticae. Three species occur on Sjnraea ulmaria, namely, the 
ulmariae of Schrank, which he considers as belonging to the genus 
Aphis; M. cholodlcovslcyi, a name given for the species referred to by 
Cholodkovsky and other authors discussing a Macrosiphum on Spiraea 
ulmaria; and J/, portschinshji, a new species. The author is evi- 
dently not settled on the identity of M. ononis Koch, although at 
the end of the paper he states that ''apparently the last species 
{ononis Koch) must also be recognized as distinct." Jiiid, finally, 
21. onohrychis B. do Fonsc. is questionably placed as a synonym oi 
Numbers (1 to 12) in piirentheses refer to the Bibliography of European Literature, p. 55. 
