Diadasia rinconis, subsp. opuntiœ, nov.—♀. About 15 millim long, varying to 13 millim.; tegulæ light reddish-brown, varying to darker; wing-nervures piceous, second submarginal cell variable, but always small and usually very narrow, and narrowed above; third submarginal cell long, very strongly elbowed at end; labrum with only a few scattered hairs, or sometimes more hairy; mesothorax strongly and quite densely punctured, much more so than in rinconis; scutellum closely punctured; abdominal bands as in rinconis, with curved anterior margins; hair at apex of abdomen yellowish fuscous.

Xiphidium gracillimum, sp. nov.—Very slender. Brown above, face and sides greenish, wing veins purple; a conspicuous dark brown middorsal stripe on the head and pronotum, bordered by broad pale bands, sometimes with dusky or purplish markings on the cheeks, sides of pronotum and middle of face. Antennæ brown, extremely long and slender. Eyes very prominent, in side view circular in outline. Fastigium of the vertex ascending, strongly advanced (about the length of the eye seen from above), very narrow (about one-fourth the distance between the eyes), its sides parallel or slightly convergent. Lateral lobes of the pronotum usually triangular in outline by the exceptional reduction of the anterior ventral angle and the straightening of the posterior margin, which forms a line with the hind margin of the posterior process, the humeral sinus distinct but shallow.

Form and size abour as in D. Citri; pink, distinctly segmented, with a slight covering of mealy powder; caudal tassels short but well-developed; lateral fringe of tassels very short, irregular, but plainly visible in fresh specimens. Females full of young show no signs of producing ovisacs.

Orthezia lasiorum, n. sp.—♀. About 2 millim, long; pale orange; ovisac (in specimens seen) not very long; two very long median white caudal lamellœ, about two-thirds length of body, curving over ovisac, but not attached to it. Dorsum covered with waxy secretion, but it is so easily deciduous that I have never found an adult with it sufficiently in place to describe. Middle leg with femur + trochanter 300 μ, tibia 240, tarsus (without claw) 180. Antennæ 7-jointed, the last joint with a terminal spine; joints measuring in μ: (1.)75–90. (2.)72–75.(3.)84–95. (4.)60. (5.)48.(6.)45.(7.)120–129. I have never found one with 8 joints, though I should expect such to occur.

Prof. Smith has been to London, and now radically changes the synonymy in the genus Acronycta, which I had hoped was to have been finaliy settled in the revision which was published by him and myself. The chanses involve the identification of three of Guenée's species and one of Walker's. As to impleta, Walk., we must accept Smith's identification as luteicoma, G. & R. I would suggest that the type ought now to be destroyed, lest future changes in the synonymy result. Guenée described eighteen species of Acronycta from North America, of which the larvæ of six were mentioned. In a genus like Acronycta, where the imagoes are so similar as not to be readily differentiated by description, while tire larvæ are very diverse, the larval descriptions are relatively important. Of the three species now changed (clarescens, Gn.; hamamelis, Gn.; brumosa, Gn.), two have original larval descriptions. As to clarescens I have no comment, especially as Grote's first identification is now restored. But the others are different. Hamamelis, formerly referred to an oak-feeding species (inclara, Smith), is now transferred to afficta, Grt. But Guenée's description contradicts afflicta in the colour of the hind wings, whereas it fits well the species named subochrea by Grote, better even than it fits inclara, and to this the larva also applies. As to brumosa, Smith says (Revision, p. 118) “the original description will fit either one of two or three species.” The characterization of the larva should then be allowed to prevail and the name be referred to inclara.

[In 1891 Mr. Chas. Robertson wrote (Tr. Am. Ent. Soc., XVIII., 49); “After careful study, I have been unable to determine more than two of Smith's species” of Andrena; and went on to explain that Smith's descriptions omitted certain characters which were necessary for the exact determination of the species. It is probable that Mr. Robertson did not have before him many of Smith's species, and hence, naturally, could not recognize them in his material; but it is nevertheless true that the determination of Smithian Andrenœ from the description alone is often a matter of great uncertainty.

The following table of the forms related to Lecanium must be regarded as provisional, pending a thorough study of the different stages of the now very numerous described species.

I do not wish by this title to imply that there is not to be another phase to this experiment, but owing to climatic differences between Ohio and South Africa, whereby our winter months are their summer months, the export side of the problem came first. Next autumn, in South Africa, but spring rvith us, the tide of transportation will set in in the other direction.