PROC. ENTOMOL. SOC. WASH. 
91(1), 1989, pp. 1-8 
GEOMYDOECUS (MALLOPHAGA: TRICHODECTIDAE) FROM THE 
TEXAS AND DESERT POCKET GOPHERS 
(RODENTIA: GEOMYIDAE) 
Ronald A. Hellenthal and Roger D. Price 
(RAH) Associate Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre 
Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana 46556; (RDP) Professor, Department of Entomology, Uni- 
versity of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota 55108. 
Abstract. — Geomydoecus truncatiis Wemeck and G. quadridentatus Price anS Emerson 
are redescribed and illustrated. The new species G. neotruncatus is described, with the 
type host being Geomvs personatus streckeri Davis. / t n m -i 
Key Words: lice, Geomys arenarius, Geomys personatus \ 
Since the initial revision of the pocket 
gopher lice by Price and Emerson (1971), 
most of the taxa of the louse genus Geo- 
mydoecus Ewing occurring on the host ge- 
nus Geomys Rafinesque have been the sub- 
ject of re-examination and further study and 
analysis. The principal works dealing with 
these lice are those by Price and Hellenthal 
(1975) on the Geomydoecus texamis com- 
plex, Price (1975) on the G. scleritus com- 
plex, and Timm and Price (1980) on the G. 
geomydis complex. This last work presents 
keys to the males and females of all Geo- 
mydoecus known to that time from Geomys 
gophers. It is the purpose of the present pa- 
per to complete the taxonomic study of lice 
from Geomys by considering the Geomy- 
doecus truncatus complex from the Texas 
pocket gopher, Geomys personatus True, and 
the Geomydoecus quadridentatus complex 
from the desert pocket gopher, Geomys are- 
narius Merriam. 
Quantitative data for the lice studied in 
this paper combined with host and locality 
information form part of a computerized 
pocket gopher-louse data base maintained 
at the University of Notre Dame. Counted 
or measured characters in the following de- 
scriptions are followed by the minimal and 
maximal observed values, and, in paren- 
theses, the sample size, mean, and standard 
deviation. All measurements are in milli- 
meters. In evaluating character usefulness 
for specific discrimination, critical values 
for each character were calculated at the 
point where the likelihood of single char- 
acter misidentification of the two compared 
taxa was equal, given normality and equal 
variance, and ignoring the probability of 
collection. For characters offering moder- 
ately good discriminating ability, these crit- 
ical values and the corresponding probabil- 
ities of misidentification are given. In an 
abbreviated comparative description for a 
species, quantitative data are given only for 
those characters whose means differ at a sig- 
nificance level of P < 0.01. The host dis- 
tribution map was produced by a computer 
from a pocket gopher/louse association data 
base (Hellenthal and Price 1984). The map 
projection is rectangular to simplify deter- 
mination of the latitude and longitude for 
individual collection sites. Original locality 
data expressed in miles are followed par- 
enthetically by the metric equivalent to 0.1 
km; the English figure, rather than the met- 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON 
ric, expresses the precision of the location 
estimate. Abbreviations used for host acces- 
sion numbers are KU (University of Kan- 
sas), TAM (Texas A&M University), and 
TT (Texas Tech University). Detailed de- 
scriptions of the characters and quantitative 
procedures used for (ieomydoecus lice are 
included in Hellenthal and Price (1980). 
Geomydoecus truncatus Werneck 
Figs. 1-6 
Geoiuydoecus truncatus Wenxcck, 1950; 13. 
Type host: Geomys personatus personatus 
True. 
Male. — As in Fig. 6. Temple width (TW) 
0.435-0.470 (26: 0.450 ± 0.0096); head 
length (HL) 0.325-0.360 (26: 0.338 ± 
0.0089); submarginal and inner marginal 
temple setae 0.030-0.045 (15: 0.036 ± 
0.0046) and 0.020-0.030 (24: 0.025 ± 
0.0015) long, respectively, with submargin- 
al seta positioned near inner marginal seta 
and both marginal setae blunt, spiniform 
(Fig. 3). Antenna with scape length (SL) 
0.180-0.200 (23: 0.191 ± 0.0057), scape 
medial width (SM W) 0. 1 1 0-0. 1 25 (23: 0.119 
± 0.0054), scape distal width (SDW) 0. 1 1 0- 
0.130 (23: 0.122 ± 0.0054); without pro- 
jection on posterior margin. Prothorax width 
(PW) 0.320-0.345 (26: 0.330 ± 0.0069). 
Abdominal tergal setae: I, 2; 11, 12-16 (26 
14.0 ± 1.18); III, 16-24 (26: 19.6 ± 1.68) 
IV, 19-25 (26: 22.3 ± 2.00); V, 16-25 (26 
19.9 ± 2.13); VI, 13-20(26: 15.8 ± 1.83) 
tergal and pleural setae on VII, 18-22 (26 
20.5 ± 1.21). Abdominal sternal setae: II, 
9-12 (25: 10.5 ± 0.96); III, 9-15 (26: 1 1.5 
± 1.30); IV, 1 1-15 (26: 13.2 ± 1.08); V, 8- 
12 (25: 10.1 ± 1.15); VI, 6-9 (24: 7.7 ± 
0.85); VII, 6-9 (25: 6.9 ± 0.91); VIII, 4-8 
(25: 6.1 ± 0.86). Total length (TL) 1.210- 
1 .385 (25: 1 .285 ± 0.05 1 1 ). Genitalia as in 
Fig. 5; spinose sac with 6 medium spines; 
parameral arch flattened medioposteriorly, 
width (PAW) 0.140-0.160 (23: 0.154 ± 
0.0057); endomeral plate broadly rounded, 
with small medioposterior notch, width 
(EPW) 0.075-0.090 (26: 0.085 ± 0.0037), 
length (EPL) 0.075-0.100 (24: 0.087 ± 
0.0054). 
Female.- As in Fig. 1. TW 0.475-0.500 
(23: 0.483 ± 0.0073); HL 0.310-0.345 (23: 
0.327 ± 0.0083); submarginal and inner 
marginal temple setae 0.030-0.050 (17: 
0.037 ± 0.0055) and 0.035-0.045 (22: 0.040 
± 0.003 1 ) long, respectively, with submar- 
ginal seta positioned near inner marginal 
seta (Fig. 2). PW 0.340-0.385 (23: 0.356 ± 
0.0 1 1 9). Abdominal tergal setae: I, 2; II, 14- 
18 (23: 16.3 ± 1.05); III, 20-25 (23: 22.4 
± 1.38); IV, 23-30 (23: 26.2 ± 1.95); V, 
24-28 (23: 25.6 ± 1 .08); VI, 2 1-25 (23: 23.4 
± 1 .23); tergal and pleural setae on VII, 24- 
34(23:28.4 ± 2.31). Longest seta of medial 
10 on tergite VI, 0.075-0.090 (22: 0.084 ± 
0.0040); on tergite VII, 0.090-0.120 (23: 
0.102 ± 0.0074), with 0-2 (23: 0.6 ± 0.79) 
of these longer than 0. 1 00. Longer of medial 
pair of setae on tergite VIII, 0.060-0.085 
(22: 0.073 ± 0.0070). Last tergite with 3 
lateral setae close together on each side; out- 
er, middle, and inner setae 0.070-0.095 ( 1 9: 
0.082 ± 0.0067), 0.080-0.105 (20: 0.092 ± 
0.0067), and 0.080-0.105 (19: 0.095 ± 
0.0057) long, respectively. Abdominal ster- 
nal setae: II, 9-13 (23: 10.6 ± 0.84); III, 9- 
13 (23: 1 1.5 ± 1.04); IV, 12-17 (22: 14.4 
± 1.50); V, 10-14 (22: 12.0 ± 1.21); VI, 8- 
13 (22: 10.8 ± 1.60); VII, 6-10 (22: 7.7 ± 
1.16). Subgenital plate with 1 8-23 (23:21.2 
± 1 .53) setae, with distribution and lengths 
as in Fig. 1, with 1 seta on each side dis- 
tinctly longer and thicker than others. TL 
1.165-1.410 (21: 1.271 ± 0.0525). Post- 
vulval sclerite as in Fig. 1, with 2 subequal 
short setae posterior to it on each side. Gen- 
ital sac as in Fig. 4, width (GSW) 0.200- 
0.280 (17: 0.248 ± 0.0195), length (GSL) 
0.100-0.180 (17: 0.132 ± 0.0251); with 
weak anterior papillose area and with 0-5 
(17: 2.1 ± 1.82) transverse anterior lines, 
posteriormost line, when present, situated 
0.020-0.060 (12: 0.042 ±0.0121) back from 
anterior sac margin. 
Discussion.— The male of G. truncatus is 
VOLUME 91, NUMBER 1 
Figs. 1-6. Gcoinydoirus Iruncalus. 1, Female dorsal (left) — ventral (right) view. 2. Female dorsal left temple 
margin. 3. Male dorsal left temple margin. 4, Female genital sac. 5, Male \ entral genitalia. 6, Male dorsal (left) — 
ventral (right) view. Measurements are in millimeters. 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON 
easily distinguished from all other Gcomyd- 
oecus by its uniquely shaped parameral arch; 
no other described species of this genus has 
the distinctive mediopostcrior flattening. 
The female is not as readily diflbrenliated, 
but the combination of the genital sac struc- 
ture, dimensions, and chaetotaxy features 
should separate it. 
Wcrneck (1950) described G. truncatus 
from a series of six males taken o^ Geomys 
pcrsonatus from Padre Island, Texas. This 
locality would make the host G. p. pcrsona- 
tus. the only pocket gopher that Hall ( 1 98 1 ) 
lists from there. However, we have found 
only Geomydoecus texanus texanus Ewing 
on that host. The paucity of our records 
cannot rule out the possibility that G. iriin- 
catus may also occur there, but, conversely, 
we arc unable to confirm that it does. Our 
inability to do this becomes critical since 
we have now determined that what has been 
known as G. truncatus actually consists of 
two species— one from Gconiys p. strcckeri 
Davis and the other from G. p. fallax Mer- 
riam. Price and Emerson (1971) had spec- 
imens only from G. p. strcckeri and named 
them Geomydoecus truncatus. Numerous 
subsequent collections from Gconiys p. fal- 
lax and the determination that these were 
different from the G. p. strcckeri lice raised 
the necessity of establishing which is the 
true Geomydoecus truncatus. Fortunately, 
we have been able to examine two of Wer- 
neck's paratypes and have determined that 
they are conspecific with our scries from 
Gcomys p. fallax. 
Gconiys p. fallax also has Geomydoecus 
texanus texanus occurring on it. Of the six 
gophers of this host taxon that yielded G. t. 
texanus. only one also had G. truncatus. This 
one gopher had 12 G. truncatus and only 
one specimen of G. t. texanus, raising the 
possibility that the latter might have been 
a contaminant or straggler. It appears that 
these two louse taxa, although found on the 
same host subspecies, occur in exclusive 
ranges. 
Material examined. — 2 3, Paratypes of 
Geomydoecus truncatus. ex Gcomys pcrso- 
natus. Padre Island, Texas; 53 9, 57 <J, ex G. 
p. fallax, 9 gophers from 7 localities in San 
Patricio Co., Nueces Co., and Live Oak Co., 
Texas. 
Geomydoecus neotruncatus 
Hellenthal and Price, Nkvv Species 
Type host: Gcomys pcrsonatus strcckeri 
Davis. 
Male.- Much as for G. truncatus, except 
as follows. TW 0.405-0.430 (20: 0.420 ± 
0.0053); HL 0.310-0.345 (20: 0.326 ± 
0.0077). Antennal SL 0.165-0.185 (19 
0.177 ± 0.0051), SMW 0.100-0.120 (19 
0.109 ± 0.0058), SDW 0.100-0.120 (19 
0.112 ± 0.0047). PW 0.305-0.335 (20 
0.309 ± 0.0078). Setae on stemite II, 7-1 1 
(20: 9.1 + 1.02); VI, 8-12(19: 9.5 ± 0.90). 
Genitalia PAW 0.140-0.155 (20: 0.145 ± 
0.0048). 
Female. — Much as for G. truncatus, ex- 
cept as follows. TW 0.440-0.465 (20: 0.448 
± 0.0077); HL 0.300-0.330 (20: 0.316 ± 
0.0075); inner marginal temple seta 0.035- 
0.045 (20: 0.037 ± 0.0030) long. PW 0.325- 
0.340 (20: 0.329 ± 0.0061). Tergal setae: 
II, 13-17 (20: 15.0 ± 1.23); III, 18-23 (20: 
21.0 ± 1.49); IV, 20-28 (20: 23.9 ± 1.65); 
V. 20-26 (20: 24.2 ± 1.65). Longer seta of 
medial pair on tergite VIII, 0.050-0.075 (19: 
0.062 ± 0.0068). Outer seta on last tergite 
0.060-0.085 (20: 0.075 ± 0.0057) long. 
Sternal setae: II, 8-1 1 (20: 9.7 ± 0.91); V, 
10-15(20: 13.0 ± 1.10); VI, 9-14 (20: 12.3 
± 1.22); VIL 8-1 1 (20: 9.6 ± 0.88). 
Discussion. — Both sexes of G. neotrun- 
catus are smaller than G. truncatus and tend 
to have fewer abdominal tergal setae and 
more sternal setae on the posterior seg- 
ments. For males, the critical values for dis- 
crimination and probabilities of misiden- 
tification for the best discriminating 
quantitative characters separating these two 
taxa arc the temple width 0.435 (0.034), 
prothorax width 0.320 (0.085), and scape 
length 0.184 (0.109). For females, the best 
VOLUME 91, NUMBER 1 
are temple width 0.466 (0.009), prothorax 
width 0.343 (0.081), and setae on stemite 
VII 8.69 (0.177). 
The males of both species key to G. trun- 
catiis in the first half of couplet 6 in Timm 
and Price ( 1 980), where G. neotmncatus can 
be separated by its temple width less than 
0.435 and prothorax width less than 0.320. 
The females of both species key either to G. 
truncatus in couplet 2 or G. quadridentatiis 
Price and Emerson in couplet 9. Temple 
width under 0.466 and prothorax width un- 
der 0.343 will distinguish G. neotnincatiis 
from (/'. Iruncatus; both may be separated 
from G. quadridentatiis by their shorter se- 
tae on pleurites III-IV (Fig. 1 vs. Fig. 7) and 
differences in the genital sac configuration 
(Fig. 4 vs. Fig. 8). 
Material examined. — Holotype 9, ex Geo- 
niys personatus slreckcri. 14 mi (22.5 km) 
W Crystal City, Zavala Co., Texas, 
9.II.1953, KU-52238; in collection of the 
University of Kansas. Paratypes, ex G. p. 
streckeri: 9, 7 S, same as holotype; 22 9, 17 
S, same except KU-52239 or 10.11.1953, 
KU-52245, 52246; 13 9, 11 6, E Carrizo 
Springs, Dimmit Co., Texas, 4.1.1970, TT- 
9665, 9666; 6 9, 4 3, 13 mi (20.9 km) N or 
NE Carrizo Springs, Dimmit Co., Texas, 
17.1.1970, TT-10126, 10131; 1 9, I mi (1.6 
km) SW Carrizo Springs, Dimmit Co., Tex- 
as, 23. V. 1974, TAM-27613; 5 9, 4 <?, Car- 
rizo Springs, Dimmit Co., Texas, 
24.XI.1938, TAM-789; paratypes distrib- 
uted among the United States National Mu- 
seum of Natural History, Field Museum of 
Natural History, University of Minnesota, 
and Oklahoma State University. 
Geomydoecus quadridentatus 
Price and Emerson 
Figs. 7-1 1 
Geomydoecus quadridentatus Price and 
Emerson, 1971: 240. Type host: Geoniys 
arenarius arenarius Merriam. 
Male.— Grossly as in Fig. 6. except an- 
tenna as in Fig. 10, and dorsal abdomen as 
in Fig. 1 1. TW 0.365-0.410 (80: 0.392 ± 
0.0100); HL 0.270-0.325 (79: 0.295 ± 
0.0126); submarginal and inner marginal 
temple setae 0.040-0.065 (73: 0.052 ± 
0.0051) and 0.020-0.030 (79: 0.024 ± 
0.0023) long, respectively. Antenna with SL 
0.145-0.175 (80: 0.164 ± 0.0069), SMW 
0.095-0.120 (80: 0.109 ± 0.0062), SDW 
0.115-0.150 (80: 0.135 + 0.0082); with 
prominent process on posterior margin (Fig 
10). PW 0.265-0.315 (79: 0.289 ± 0.0112) 
Abdominal tergal setae: I, 2; II, 8-16 (80 
12.2 ± 1.43); III, 14-23 (78: 18.7 ± 1.65) 
IV, 17-27 (78: 21.1 ± 2.03); V, 16-26 (78 
19.5 ± 1.90); VI, 1 1-19 (78: 15.0 ± 1.54) 
tergal and pleural setae on VII, 15-24 (80 
20.2 ± 1.69). Abdominal sternal setae: II, 
9-15 (79: 1 1.7 ± 1.49); III, 1 1-17 (79: 13.9 
± 1.39); IV, 11-19(80: 14.3 ± 1.62); V, 8- 
14 (80: 10.8 ± 1.42); VI, 6-1 1 (79: 9.2 ± 
1.13); VII, 5-9 (77: 7.3 ± 0.91); VIII, 5-7 
(79: 5.9 ± 0.51). TL 1.130-1.415(79: 1.245 
± 0.0634). Genitalia as in Fig. 9; spinose 
sac with 4 large central and 0-2 smaller lat- 
erally displaced spines; parameral arch with 
prominent medioposterior projection, PAW 
0.130-0.155 (79: 0.144 ± 0.0052); endo- 
meral plate triangular with short apical di- 
vision. EPW 0.065-0.080 (80: 0.072 ± 
0.0035), EPL 0.060-0.080 (80: 0.071 ± 
0.0049). 
Female. — Grossly as in Fig. 1 , except dor- 
sal abdomen as in Fig. 7. TW 0.400-0.470 
(80:0.439 ± 0.0122); HL 0.260-0.310 (80: 
0.283 ± 0.0098); submarginal and inner 
marginal temple setae 0.040-0.070 (78: 
0.054 ± 0.005 1 ) and 0.040-0.050 (78: 0.045 
± 0.0036) long, respectively. PW 0.280- 
0.345 (80: 0.3 1 1 ± 0.0 1 20). Abdominal ter- 
gal setae: I, 2; II, 13-19 (78: 15.2 ± 1.40); 
III, 19-27(77:21.8 ± 1.94); IV, 20-30 (77: 
24.6 ± 2.40); V, 18-28 (78: 22.5 ± 2.21); 
VI, 1 6-26 (79: 20.9 ± 2.38); tergal and pleu- 
ral setae on VII, 25-39 (80: 32.4 ± 2.95). 
Longest seta of medial 10 on tergite VI, 
0.070-0.100 (80: 0.087 ± 0.0062); on ter- 
gite VII, 0.085-0.1 15 (80: 0.102 ± 0.0069), 
with 0-6 (80: 0.9 ± 1.44) of these longer 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON 
Figs. 7-1 1. Geomydoecus quadridenlatus. 7, Female dorsal abdomen. 8, Female genital sac. 9, Male ventral 
genitalia. 10, Male ventral antenna. 1 1. Male dorsal abdomen. Measurements arc in millimeters. 
than 0.100. Longer of medial pair of setae 
on tergite VIII, 0.050-0.085 (79: 0.067 ± 
0.0082). Last tergite with outer, middle, and 
inner setae 0.045-0.075 (74: 0.058 ± 
0.0064), 0.060-0.090 (74: 0.074 ± 0.0065), 
and 0.060-0.090 (79: 0.076 ± 0.0069) long, 
respectively. Abdominal sternal setae: II, 8- 
16 (79: 11.9 ± 1.77); III, 11-17 (77: 14.3 
± 1.26); IV, 1 1-19 (79: 15.0 ± 1.75); V, 8- 
16 (78: 1 1.8 ± 1.51); VI, 7-12 (78: 9.6 ± 
1.02); VII, 6-1 1 (78: 8.8 ± 0.96). Subgenital 
plate with 18-26 (80: 21.7 ± 2.07) setae. 
TL 1.090-1.335 (79: 1.198 ± 0.0532). Gen- 
ital sac as in Fig. 8, GSW 0.175-0.255 (79: 
0.206 ± 0.0144), GSL 0.155-0.200 (77: 
0.181 ± 0.01 15), with 0-4 (79: 2.1 ± 0.82) 
curved medioanterior loops, posteriormost 
loop, when present, situated 0.040-0.105 
(78: 0.07 1 ± 0.0 1 1 5) back from antenor sac 
margin. 
Discussion. — Both sexes of (7. quadriden- 
latus are easily separated from G. truncatus 
and G. neotruncatus. Males of G. quadri- 
denlatus have conspicuously different gen- 
italia (Fig. 9 vs. Fig. 5), the antennal scape 
with a posterior process (Fig. 1 0), and dorsal 
abdominal chaetotaxy (Fig. 1 1) with longer 
setae on pleuron V, generally longer lateral 
tergal setae, and the three short setae on 
each side of the last tergite evenly spaced 
and aligned with very short seta as shown. 
Females of G. quadridentatus have a differ- 
ent line configuration of the genital sac (Fig. 
8 vs. Fig. 4) and longer pleural setae at least 
on abdominal segments III-V (Fig. 7). These 
three species of lice also are well separated 
geographically, with G. quadridentatus dis- 
tributed in north central Chihuahua, west- 
ern Texas, and south central New Mexico, 
and with G. truncatus and G. neotruncatus 
in south central Texas (Fig. 1 2). 
As originally described by Price and 
Emerson (1971), males of G. quadridentatus 
were said to have only four large genital sac 
VOLUME 91, NUMBER 1 
spines, with no mention of one or two small- 
er laterally displaced spines. However, re- 
cent examination of much larger series of 
lice than were available earlier has shown 
94 of 179 (52.5%) males with only the four 
large central spines, 46 (25.7%) with a single 
smaller additional spine, and 39 (21.8%) 
with two smaller spines as in Fig. 9. The 
percentage of gophers with no, one, or two 
smaller sac spines is essentially the same for 
all gopher populations of 6'. cjiiadndentatus 
studied. The presence of these smaller spines 
should not complicate proper identification, 
if other characters and host association are 
considered. 
There is discussion among mam malogists 
as to whether Gcomys arcnaniis is a valid 
species apart from G. bursarius (Shaw). Also 
uncertain arc the relationships among up to 
five populations ofGeoniys possessing what 
we here call Geomydoecus quadridentatus: 
1) gophers around Gran Quivera, New 
Mexico; 2) gophers around San Antonio, 
New Mexico; 3) gophers considered to be 
G. a. hrcvirosfris Hall; 4) a "river" popu- 
lation of gophers belonging to G. a. arc- 
narius; and 5) an "upland" population of 
G. a. arcnarius. We collected numerous lice 
from all five of these groups, analyzed them 
qualitatively and quantitatively, and could 
find no meaningful differences. We could 
demonstrate occasional quantatitive char- 
acter differences at a relatively high prob- 
ability of misidcntification, but these showed 
no consistent occurrence. We do not believe 
these louse populations merit taxonomic 
distinctions at this time. Speaking strictly 
from the louse standpoint, the lice from all 
five populations are sufficiently different 
from lice from Gcomys bursarius to support 
G. arcnarius as a separate taxon and suffi- 
ciently similar to each other to group all five 
gopher populations into G. arcnarius. 
Material examined. — 244 9, 267 S, ex 
Geomys arenarius arcnarius, 50 gophers 
from 1 7 localities in New Mexico, Texas, 
and Chihuahua; 67 2, 5 1 <5, ex G. a. hrcviros- 
tris. 1 5 gophers from 6 localities in New 
102 
LONGITUDE 
Fig. 12. Geographic distribution of OV'(W)n(/"f«(,v 
Iruihciliis (closed circles), (/. ncolnincaliis (open cir- 
cles), and G. quadndentalus (triangles). 
Mexico; 26 9, 22 3, ex Geomys, 7 gophers 
from 2 localities near Gran Quivera, New 
Mexico; 35 9, 28 3 ex Gcomys, 4 gophers 
near San Antonio, New Mexico. 
Acknowledgments 
We wish to thank Sebastiao J. de Oli veira. 
Curator, Fundacjao Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de 
.laneiro, Brasil, for the loan of the Werneck 
type scries. Partial support for this study 
was supplied by a grant from the National 
Science Foundation to the University of 
Notre Dame (Grant No. BSR86- 14456). 
This is published as paper 15,754 of the 
Scientific Journal Series of the Minnesota 
Agricultural Experiment Station on re- 
search conducted under Project No. Min- 
17-015. 
Literature Cited 
Hall. t:. R. 14X1. The Mammals of North America. 
2nd Ed. Vol. \. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 
NY. XV + 600 + 90 pp. 
Hellenthal, R. A. and R. D. Price. 1980. A review of 
the (ic(ii»ydoccus suhcalifonucus Complex (Mal- 
lophaga: Trichodectidae) from rliDiuoniys pocket 
gophers (Rodcntia: Geomyidac). with a discussion 
of quantitative techniques and automated taxo- 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON 
nomic procedures. Ann. Enlomol. Soc. Amcr. 73: 
495-50.1. 
. 1984. Disliihiilional associations among 
Geoinydoecus and I'hoinninydoccus lice (Mal- 
lophaga: Trichodcctidac) and pocket gopher hosts 
of the Thotnoiiiys bullae group (Kodentia: (ieo- 
niyidae). J. Med. Entomol. 21: 4.32^46. 
Price, R. D. 1975. The 6'«;/m'^«rM.v (Mallophaga: 
Trichodectidae) of the southeastern USA pocket 
gophers (Rodentia: Cieomyidae). Proc. I^ntomol. 
Soc. Wash. 77: 61-65. 
Price, K. 1). and K. C. Emerson. 1971. A revision of 
the genus (Icoinydoccus (Mallophaga: Trichodec- 
tidae) of the New World pocket gophers (Rodentia: 
Cieomyidae). .1. Med. Entomol. 8: 228-257. 
Price, R. D. and R. A. Hellenthal. 1975. A review of 
the Geoinydoecus Ic.xanu.s complex (Mallophaga: 
Irichodectidae) from (icimiys and I'appoiieninys 
(Rodentia: (ieomyidae)..l. Med. Entomol. 12:401- 
408. 
Timm, R. M. and R. D. Price. 1980. The ta.xonomy 
of Cieomydoecus (Mallophaga: Trichodectidae) 
from the Cieomys Iniisanus complex (Rodentia: 
Geomyidae). J. Med. Entomol. 17: 126-145. 
Werneck, F. L. 1950. Os Malofagos de Mamiferos. 
Parte II: Isehnocera (eonlinuavao de Trichodec- 
tidae) e Rhyncophthirina. Ed. do Inst. Osw. Cru/., 
Rio de .laneiro. 207 pp.