INTRODUCTION 
A catalogue of animals should serve practically all fields of biology. It 
should be, therefore, as complete a listing of all the records of families, 
subfamilies, tribes, genera, species, and varieties as it is possible for the 
author to assemble. The nature of the reference is of the greatest impor¬ 
tance. A student of zoogeography should be able to find a complete list of 
the regions inhabited by the various species. The student of ecology should 
be able to find references to all that is known about the life history, food 
plants, and other pertinent data. The student of economic entomology 
should be able to check the histories of those species that are suspected of 
being injurious to plants. The plant disease specialist should be able to 
check the current nomenclature of the species which are disease vectors or 
suspected of being disease vectors. Those research workers studying 
morphology, physiology, or genetics should be able to trace the develop¬ 
ment in the field of their special interest. And lastly, the student of tax¬ 
onomy should be relieved of the burden of searching for past recordings, 
and the journals which publish taxonomic papers should not have to pay 
the cost of publishing the past records and duplicating the synonymy that 
is already well known. Thus it would be necessary only to record synonymy 
which has been developed since the publication of the catalogue. 
In this as in other catalogues of the present series the family is divided 
into genera which are arranged in as nearly a phylogenetic order as our 
present knowledge will permit. The species are arranged under the genera 
in alphabetic sequence. 
The notes which follow the references are generally self-explanatory, but 
three points may be mentioned here. Such notations as “[described],” 
“[notes],” “[key],” and the like are intended to be suggestive rather than 
precise or exclusive. The notation “[error]” means not accepted in this 
catalogue. Usually the latest published synonymy is accepted, but not 
always. The notation “[comparative note]” is used to designate those 
references, often of the greatest taxonomic significance, in which two 
generic, specific, or other groups are compared. All references have been 
checked against the original save those marked with an asterisk (*), which 
have been accepted from reliable sources. Every effort has been made to 
have the references full and complete and to give an indication of the 
character of the data contained. Where the writer knows that reprints have 
been issued with different pagination, this is indicated in parentheses fol¬ 
lowing the page numbers of the original. In a few cases, where the matter 
has been reprinted under a different title with different pagination, separate 
references are given. Where authentic editions have been republished these 
in 
