E. BERGROTH, ON HALYOMORPHA AND ALLIED GENERA. 
5 
My material of this group is not sufficient to base a generic revision 
upon, but the following remarks seem to be necessary. 
The type of Tropicorypha Mayr, bifida Thunb., has a rather short, api- 
cally rounded and elevated, elongately spoon-shaped orificial process, and 
differs in so many other points from all other species, that the genus is now 
justly considered monotypical. K i r ka 1 d y (Cat. Hem. 1, p. 365) was right 
in separating the Tropicorypha with long, apically pointed orificial pro¬ 
cess as a distinct genus, Boerias, fixing T. Victorini Stål as type. Later 
Jeannel, overlooking Boerias, founded the genus Halycorypha. As this 
genus includes forms both with long and with short orificial fold, it must 
be divided into two genera, which should bear the names Boerias (with 
long orificia) and Halycorypha (with short orificia). It is true that Jean¬ 
nel designated T. Victorini Stål as type of Halycorypha, and authors who 
stare their eyes out at so-called »types», without paying the slightest re¬ 
gard to the descriptions, would thus consider it a strict synonym of Boe¬ 
rias. This is, however, not the case. Jeannel gives a key to the species 
of Halycorpha known to him, in which the following characters are ascri¬ 
bed to Victorini Stål: »Angles latéraux du pronotum tres saillants, aigus, 
noirs au sommet; connexivum jaune avec une barre transversale noir ver- 
datre tres nette au bord antérieur et postérieur de chaque segment; artic¬ 
le 3 des antennes deux fois plus long que l’article 2.» These characters are 
totally at variance with Stål’s description, not even one of them fitting 
the true Victorini Stål, in which the pronotal lateral angles are but mo¬ 
derately prominent, not acute, pale, not black at apex, the entirely pale 
connexivum without a darker bar at the base and apex of the segments 
and the 3d antennal joint only a little longer than the 2d. Victorini Stål 
is a Tropicorypha (in S t å l’s sense), Victorini Jeann. (nec Stål) is a Halyo- 
morpha (sensu Stål). From the few characters quoted above it is impos¬ 
sible to know to what species Victorini Jeann. really belongs, and from 
the rest of his key it is clear that the true Victorini Stål was unknown to 
him and that the generic description not even in part could have been 
founded on that species. Such being the case, Victorini Stål can not be 
the type of Halycorpha, and I herewith designate the species cervina Germ, 
as its type. — In the same key Jeannel describes under the nam eplacida 
Walk, a species which I think cannot be W a 1 k e r’s species. He says of it: 
»angles latéraux du prothorax effaces», but according to Walker these an¬ 
gles are »prominent and slightly acute,» and in the.description of immunis 
Walk, (a synonym of placida ) they are said to be »acute, rather prominent.» 
He describes one species under the name Halydicoris Schoutedeni Bergr. 
I regret that he after seeing my description withdrew the name he had in¬ 
tended for that species, for Schoutedeni Jeann. is by no means identical 
with Halyomorpha Schoutedeni Bergr., and Jeannel has evidently not read 
my description of the connexivum with attention (»segmentorum connex- 
ivi parte interiore, fascia subcurvata antemediana rectaque apicali latius- 
culis viridi-nigris»). Although the type is not now before me, I think the¬ 
re can be little doubt that it is not a Halydicoris at all, and in the markings 
of the connexival segments it differs from all known species of this group, 
the anterior dark bar being somewhat curved (turning the convexity for¬ 
ward) and considerably removed from the base of the segments, lying 
in fact a little before the middle of the segments. Being a nomen false ci- 
