The first attempt to separate the species given under Coccus in the 10th edition of the Systema Naturæ of Linneus, was made by Geoffroy, in his Histoire Abregée des Insectes, Vol. 1. (1762), where he placed a part of them under Chermes and left adonidum and phalaridis, with his new species ulmi, under Coccus. Of these species only phalaridis was given under the genus Coccus by Linneus in his 10th edition, and is therefore the only species that could be regarded as the type of Coccus so far as Geoffroy is concerned.

To whom should a species be credited: to the author who names it a variety and declares positively that it is not distinct from another, which he considers the stem, or to the author who first points out the specific characters and establishes its distinctness?

In 1875 Dr. A. Speyer, in his paper on “Europäisch-amerikanische Verwandschaften,” gives first, a list of American species which he cousiders distinct from European forms, a list of species occurring in both countries, a list of questionable forms, and then elaborates these lists by a series of notes. In the list of species common to both countries, he enumerates Hydroecia nictitans, and afterwards points out somer minor differences in the series before him, noting that Guenée had previously errumerated most of them. On page 152 of the volume he speaks as follows: “Als eigene Art wird sich die amerikanische Nictitans von der europaischen nicht trennen lassen, da ein völlig durchgreifender Unterschied zwischen beiden fehlt. Eine ausgezeichnete Varietat bildet sie aber jedenfalls.”

Since the publication of my last contribution on the Massachusetts Cocciæ, in 1899, no iess than 34 other species have been found to inhabit Mass., some of which appear to be of recent introduction and new to the United States; and while the larger portion has been recorded from other States, we have found several interesting new species hitherto not known to science. I have abandoned in part the citation of the geographical distribution and many of their food-plants, as time will not permit me to consult some of the literature. I have included an additional check-list and the Bibliography. In the original check-list several species are listed whose names have since been changed as follows.

The Coccidæ herein descirbed were collected by Professor L. Bruner in 1867 and 1898. I examined the collection with more than ordinary interest, as practically nothing was known of the Coccidæ of the Argentine or Paraguay. The flora of the southern part of South America resembles in many respects that of the arid region of North America, and it was therefore not wholly unexpected that this resemblance should extend to the Coccidæ. The collection is too small to show how far such a resemblance may extend, but the species of Orthezia and Lichtensia, at least, are entirely representative of North American types.

Mr. E. Dwight Sanderson, Entomologist of the Delaware Agricultural Experiment Station, Newark, Del., has been appointed Professor of Entomology at the Agricultural and Mechanical college of Texas. His address is now College Station, Brazos Co., Texas.

Anotia Kirkaldayin.sp.– Form and general appearance of Amalopota Fitchi, but broader and less definitely marked. Form of A. Burnetii, but with a sharp head and blunter elytra. Length, including elytra, 6.5 mm.

Vertex slightly broader than in Burnetii, inclined upward, nearly flat, not rounding over at apex as in that species; elytra broader toward apices than in Burnetii; venation very similar, but with the median nervure not forked beyond the cross-vein, and the first branch of the postcostal nervure coming off close tot he cross-vein and at nearly right angles to the nervure. Costal appendix larger than in Burnetii, obliquely truncate posteriorly.

Among Hymenoptera which I sent to Provancher in 1855 was a sawfly which he determined as Nematus malacus, Nort. As it did not correspond to the description of that species, it was set aside with some undetermined material. While rearranging my Nematidæ, I recently examined the insect to ascertain its position, and found that it had simple claws. As it has not the appearance of Gymnonychus, I was somewhat puzzled until, on examining the wings, I found the lanceolate cell was widely contracted as in the subfamily Cladinæ, instead of petiolate as in the Nematinæ. The insect, therefore, must be placed in the genus Anoplonyx, which Marlatt has separated from Camponsicus, which has bifid claws. As no representatives of these genera were known to Marlatt when he published his Revision of the Nematinæ (Technical Series No.3; Dept. Agric, U.S., 1896), the following description of this Canadian form is submitted:

Most of the material upon which the following descriptions are based belongs to the National Museum, and the species are here described at the request of the curator, Dr. W. H. Ashmead.

Eutettix pannosa, n. sp.–Resembling saucia and scaber in general appearance, smaller, darker, and with longer vertex and more generally reticulate elytra. Length, ♀ 4.5 mm., ♂ 4 mm; width, ♀ 1.5mm., ♂ 1.25 mm.

Vertex right angled, apex blunt, three-fifths as long as its basal width, two thirds as long as the pronotum, half longr on middle than against eye, disc slightly sloping, flat, with the apex elevated. Face retreating, forming an acute angle with the vertex, front rather broad. Elytra rather short, comirressed at the apex, venation weak, irregniarly reticulate, the second cross nervure sometimes present.

It is very curious and interesting to observe the waves of insect life that annually pass over this district. For instance, some four years ago the genus Acronycta was strongly represented in some ten or twelve species. The following sesson that genus almost disappeared, and its place was taken by the old genus Agrotis, with its now nutnerous subdivisions. Last year the various species of the genus Carneades were certainiy in the ascendant, and occasionally there comes a year like this, when perhaps only an odd species or two show up in any quantity, as was the case more particularly with Carneades pitycltrous, and while most of the great geuera lvere almost entirely absent, one's labours were rewarded by the capture of a ferv specimens of species comparatively rare hereabouts.

Mr. Ashmead has written thus of the Xyelidæ: “ the imagoes appear very early in the year, or in February, March and April, Deposit their eggs and then disappear, the consequence being that very few are taken, and only a few of the common forms are known.” Of the genus Xyela, as now restricted only one North American species, X. minor, Norton, has been described.

On May 1st of the present year, as we were going up to our classes in the Normal University at Las Vegas, N.M., my wife picked a small insect off my coat. It was at once transfered to the bottle which is never absent from the entomologist's person, and upon inspection later, proved to be a new species of Xyela, herewith described:

It was with interest that I read the article by Mr. Frank E. Lutz in the April number of the Canadian Entomologist entitled “Labels.”

It is not so very many years ago (perhaps thity) that we were satisfied if specimens sent to us only bore a State label, the State label as first used being nothing more or less than a coloured disk, a different colour for each State. A few years more, and we have the abbreviated State labels – N.J. for New Jersey, Can. for Canada, etc. Not long after, we asked our friends to mark the label in such a mnner that we might know from what part of the State the insect came. Then it was that the collector with pen and ink would mark the label in one of the corners, or perhaps make a mark in the centre, thus designating as to what part of the State the insect had come from. This was not a bad plan, and to-day may such labeled specimens can be seen in the “Horn Collection.” as well as other collections in New York and Philadelphia.

Pamphila barbara, sp. nov.

Habitat: Bolivia. Expanse: 1 12 inches.

Head, thorax and abdomen abovd, dark brown; below, gray. Antennæ dark brown, with white annulations at base of each joint. Club brown, white near base.

General colour of upper surface blackish brown. Hind Marginal fringe of ground colour.

Upper side of fore wing has an indistinct white dot in apical area. Near centre of wing, under the end of discoidal space, are two prominent white dots, the upper being under median, the other being in next lower interspace, larger than the first and somewhat nearer base.

The specimens on which this paper is based are in the collection of the University of Nebraska, unless otherwide stated. Especial acknowledgments are due to Prof. Cockerell for specimens and suggestions, to Prof. Titus for specimens, and to Prof. Bruner for overseeing my work.

Halictus Montanus, n. sp. –Female: Black, head closely coarsely and deeply puncutred on the vertex, coarser along the inner orbits, less closely on the face below the antennæ clypesu sparsely and more coarsely punctured, fringed with golden hair at the apex; mandibles black, reddish at tips; antennæ black flagellum dark brownish beneath towards tip; pubescence of head and thorax griseous, slightly tinged with ochraceous on the thorax, thin on the disc of mesothorax, dense on pleura and cheeks; thorax closely and rather coarsely punctured; base of metathorax enclosed and finely rugose, truncation finely roughened and with large punctures; tegulæ large, testaceous, and with punctures anteriorly; wings slightly yellowish, clouded apically; nervures and stigma bright testaceous; legs black, tarsi and hind tibiæ behind ferruginous; pubescence of legs slightly ochraceous, on inner side of tarsi and hind tibiæ golden; inner hind tibial spur with many short blunt teeth; abdomen black, very finely punctured, apical margins of segments with yellowish-white hair bands, bases of segments 2–4 also showing slight hair bands; pubescence at base of first segment griseous, on discs of other segments black, not showing plainly except from the sides. Length, 12–14 mm.

Dactylopius Wheeleri,n. sp.– ♀ flesh colour, covered with a white, fluffy material, elongate oval,1¾ mm. long, 1 broad ½ high, convex, very flat beneath. Segmentation distinct. Boiled in potash, they turn brown; transferred to cold water, the internal juice becomes colourless. Pressed under cover-glass, the skin is colourless, with several long hairs anteriorly and on the caudal region above the anal ring and caudal tubercles. Anal ring normal, with six stout bristles. Caudal tubercles very prominent, with two long bristles 120 and 260 μ long. Legs stout, front leg coxa 140. Femur and trochanter 220. Tibia 148. Tarsus 100 μ long. Claw thin, sharp, with a distinct tooth near the end. Tibia and tarsus have several short hairs. Digitules of tarsus and claw very small. Labium small. Rostral loop exceedingly long.

“Ecology,” as it is coming to be universally considered, is the science of cause. It is constantly asking “Why?” and not until we can answer “because,” have we solved a problem in Ecology. It is the capping stone of the other branches of biological investigation. Morphology describesan organ or character; physiology shows us how it works and what it does; ecology, building on these, tells how and why the character or organarose. It, then, must be considered as more than the o1d Natural History. Although the value of the latter cannot be overestimated, more must sooner or later be done.

As Mr. Grote has done me the honour to make certain criticisms on some of my recent papers, I would ask space for a brief reply.

In regard to Gortyna Ærata,I have no doubt that it has an alternative food-plant, but possibly it may never be discovered. Mr. Bird has made the same point, that as burdock is an introducted species it could not be the original preferred food-plant of any American species. But, while I admiit that an introduced species could not be the original food-plant of an American insect, I see no reason why it should not be the preferred food since its introduction, just as Doryphora Decemlineata prefers the potato to its original food-plant.

In the course of identifyin a series of Diptera received by Dr. L.O. Howard, and collected in Mexico and New Mexico by Mr. C. H. T. Townsend, a number of new forms were encountered, and as manuscript names of these will soon be sent out it is desirable that these forms should be duly characterized; accordingly, the descriptions are presented for publication herewith.

Through the great kindness of a friend, I have received cocoons of Callosamia angulifera. These are stemless, and at once distinguishable from those of C. promethea. This character bears out the theory (see Can. Ent. for April, p. 94) that C.angulifera is the older, more generalized form in the genus. In my work on the Saturnians, June, 1896, I tried to show that the stemmed cocoons of Philosamia, Attacus and C. promethea were specializations and a more modern development, and gave probable reasons for acquirement of the habit of fixing the cocoon to the branches, so that it might not fall with the leaf in the autumn(1.c., pp. 15–16; also Plate 1.)

Macrocera immaculata, n. sp. – ♂ ♀. Head yellow, vertex brownish; antennæ dark brown, the two basal joints yellow. Thorax dark yellow, with the anterior margin and humeri light yellow. Abdomen dark brown, shining, with a wide yellowish posterior margin on each segment. Legs yellow, slightly brownsish at the tips of the femora, tibiæ and tarsi; legs and abdomen in the male with fine black hairs, which are less conspicous in the female. Wings yellowish hyaline, with a slight brownish stigma and very fine hairs. Length of body 5 mm., the antennæ and posterior legs each about double the length of the body.

On June 1st, 1901, while on a mosquito hunt with Mr. J. Turner Brakeley, at Lahaway, we investigated the little pools around the head of a swamp spring. The water was very cold, and our object was, mainly, to ascertain wheter Aedes larvæ occured in such localities, where pitcher plants were in the vicinity.

In the course of our dipping I found a very odd little wriggler, altogether different from anything I had ever seen befor, and soon Mr. Brakeley found the same thing. We took only a few of them at that time, and from their minute size I assumed they must be very yound. I afterward sent a specimen to Dr. Howard, and he appeared as much at sea concerning its location as I was. It seemed to be a Culicid larva, without much doubt; but that was as far as we could get. The specimens were about an eight of an inch in length, light reddish in colour, and very hairy in appearance. The head was very broad, and from it the body taped gradually to the short obtuse anal siphon.