238 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL AND NOMENCLATORIAL NOTES ON THE RHYNCHOTA, No. 1. By G. W. Kirkaldy, F.E.S. These notes will serve as a commentary, to some extent, on the " Nomenclature of the Genera of the Ehynchota " now ap-pearing serially in the ' Entomologist.' I wish, first of all, to modify "method" No. 3 {I.e., 1900, p. 26). After considerable correspondence with my friend Mr. L. B. Prout, who is making similar studies upon the nomencla-ture of certain Lepidoptera, I have come to feel with him that a more logical method is to work out each genus independently. Fabricius was ignorant of (or ignored) Latreille's work published the previous year, and there is no doubt that the genera are co-extensive and practically identical. I have not, therefore, adopted the usual plan, in such a case, of fixing the remaining (or one of the remaining, if there are more than one) species as the type of the other genus. 1762. Geoffroy's ' Histoire abrege ' has been placed by Renter (in his ' Revisio ') among the non-Linnean works, viz. : ' Arbeiten in welchen die bimire nomenclatur nicht durchgefiihrt ist.' I have but little to say on this point, except that if such genera as those in Latreille's "Precis" — Pentatoma, Oliv., Cylindro-stethus, Fieber, &c. — are to be (as they are apparently universally) accepted, it is not logical to refuse admittance to Geoffroy's work, which was, generally speaking, far more scientifically conceived and accurate than almost any other entomological work of his century. He himself was certatnly under the impression that his work was based on Linne's system, for which he expressed the greatest admiration.* His genera are clearly defined, and in all the Linnean species redescribed Linne's nomenclature is adjoined. It appears to me quite logical to quote his " Grande Punaise a avirous " (for instance) as " Notonecta qlauca, Linn., Geoffr., 1762, Hist. abr. i. 476." In 1764, 0. F. Muller (Ins. Fridrichsdal.) confirmed all Geoffroy's Ehynchota genera, except Tetigonia, which he seems to have overlooked. ^' " Cependant I'histoire des . . . insectes est restee jusqu' a nos jours dans cette espece de confusion et c'est a M. Linnaeus, cet infatigable Naturaliste Suedois, que nous devous le premier Ouvrage metbodique sur cette matiere ... si son Ouvrage est encore eloigne de la perfection au moins doit on lui savoir gre d'avoir montre la route qu'il faut suivre " (' Discours Preliniinaire,' p. x). " A I'aide d'un ordre methodique, nous pratiquerous la meme chose sur les insectes , . . et Ton pourra trouver le nom et I'espece d'un insecte inconnu auparavant " (Z. c, xii). " Nous sommes done infiniment redevables a M. Linnaeus d'avoir chercbe le premier a ranger methodiquement les insectes, et a trouver des caracteres generiques qui les fissent plus aisement connoitre " {I. c, xiii), &c.
BioStor
