Editors: Dug Miller & Gary Miller Systematic Entomol. Lab. Plant Sciences Institute Agric. Res. Service, USDA Building 005, Room 137 BARC-West, Beltsville, MD 20705-2350 USA FAX 01 301-504-6482 dmiller@sel.barc.usda.gov

This is a new section for "The Scale". Three discussion papers are presented in preparation for the meetings in Padua. Please take the time to read these perspectives on the higher classification of the Coccoidea-Coccinea and the Homoptera-Hemiptera and be prepared to enter into the discussion.

Hemiptera or Homoptera; Coccura, Coccinea or Coccoidea?

Michael Kosztarab

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA

We have to make up our minds about the appropriate higher taxonomic categories where our subjects of study, the scale insects, belong. Coccidologists currently include various taxonomic ranks above the family level in the titles of their papers, book chapters and books. In a review of article titles for 1999 in The Scale, some of us even use Homoptera in one paper and Hemiptera in another of two papers published during the same year.

It surely looks contradictory in the eyes of other entomologists and library catalogers. They must be saying, "Why can't we make up our minds?" And, they are right. Those colleagues, publishing in the United Kingdom or in the former British Commonwealth countries, normally use Hemiptera, while those of us in the United States usually use Homoptera. Which of these is the correct higher taxonomic category to be included in the titles of our future papers? Should we use Homoptera as an order, or as a suborder name under Hemiptera? Let us debate this issue and agree on a standard and use it in the future. Upon agreement, let's inform journal editors and our professional societies on the appropriate standardization. The Coccidology session on this topic at ISSIS-IX in Padua this year could serve as a milestone in the establishment of standardization of the higher category name that includes the scale insects.

The other higher taxonomic category name to be standardized for all scales, after debating and probably voting on it in Padua, could be the future use of the superfamily name Coccoidea, or the suborder name Coccinea or even the already proposed order name Coccura.

Before our debate, some colleagues may want to consult other Sternorrhyncha specialists about the highest taxonomic category names already used for scale related groups, e.g. for all aphids, whiteflies, and adelgids.

Our decision in selecting the appropriate higher taxonomic rank and category name for inclusion of all scale insect families should be based on comparisons with related groups (aphids, whiteflies, adelgids, etc.) on a large variety of criteria of taxonomic value. Some of my cited literature sources are found in former scale bibliographies and in issues of The Scale. Other bases for deciding the status of the taxa might be: morphology (e.g. number of tarsal segments, of claws, etc.), in both adult males (Boratynski & Davis 1971; Giliomee 1990) and females, and their immature stages (Williams, D.J. 1986); formation of protective covers (Stoetzel 1976); comparative ultrastructure of wax-producing glands (Foldi 1991); polymorphism (Takagi 1990), including host-induced polymorphism (Liu et al. 1989); their unique sperm (Robison 1977); their life cycle (male and female development) and biology, including host-plant specificity; ecology (Beardsley & Gonzalez 1975); adaptations (Gullan & Kosztarab 1997), e.g., egg-protecting methods; genetics, including their unique chromosome systems (Brown 1977; Nur 1980); phylogeny (Miller & Miller 1993; 1993c), including molecular phylogeny and records from fossil scales (Koteja 1990); behaviour, including their unique honeydew droplet disposing mechanism and associated structures (Danzig 1983, 1986), and finally, their associated unique endosymbionts (Tremblay 1977, 1989).

Input on this subject from colleagues before ISSIS-IX, especially from those not able to attend the meeting, is welcomed and when permitted will be cited.

CATEGORY, NAME AND AFFILIATION OF SCALE INSECTS

Jan Koteja

Institute of Applied Zoology, Krakow, Poland

It is a very good idea to devote some time for a special debate at the ISSIS in Padua, to discuss scale insects, the object of our love and study, particularly concerning their name, category, and placement with other bugs. I would like to add my own opinion regarding the suggestions presented by Michael Kosztarab1).

1. It should be strongly emphasized that names and taxa, nomenclature and systematics, belief and information, are independent to some extent. A few examples:

a. The name "Hemiptera" (Homoptera, Sternorrhyncha, etc.) in paper titles is a bit of information that helps people unfamiliar with scale insects to place these creatures. They do not necessarily reflect our opinion on the status and relationships of the scales. The application of any of these names largely depends on the periodical in which the article is published. No wonder various names are included in paper titles by the same author in the same time frame!! For coccidologists it would be enough to mention just the family to which the object of study belongs.

b. Names, obviously, refer to objects. With the change of objects (or our knowledge of them), names also change. Thus, one day we call the object " a nice girl", and later " a distinguished lady". And nobody wonders about our unstable minds. In fact, all objects are in statu nascendi. Currently, results of some investigations have demonstrated that groups united in Homoptera may not be related2); and we are confused and wonder if we should use the name Homoptera. With the discovery of DNA (and other) differences within "homopterans" the position and relationships of scale insects did not change; (on the other hand, these differences are a problem for students of the "auchenorrhynchans'). Thus, the information (in a title) that scale insects are "homopterans"', i.e., certainly not heteropterans, is correct. As an alternative the taxon and name Sternorrhyncha (aleyrodids+psyllids+aphids+coccids) has been suggested. However, only a few zoologists are familiar with this name and the monophyly of this group is questioned3).

c. Authors of the code of zoological nomenclature strongly emphasize that the nomenclatural rules do not limit the freedom of researchers or their eventual taxonomic decisions. The code refers to formal features of names and not to the zoological merit of taxa. This point is very difficult for many zoologists to understand.

2. We distinguish "lower" and "higher" taxa, i.e. taxa of various levels or categories; species being the lowest, kingdom the highest. How many levels are between them? Many!!! Use of Hennigian methods gives many levels; too many! Being aware of this evidence, authors of the Code limited the rules to three levels: species, genus and family categories; the superfamily, subfamily, tribe and subtribe being family-group categories. Russian paleoentomologists4) extended the rules to higher categories, and changed Coleoptera into Scarabaeiformes, Hemiptera into Cimicomorpha etc. etc., i.e., names derived from nominal genera. This idea and procedure has not been generally accepted, fortunately.

3. The classification of taxa between superfamily and order is like a volcano with permanent eruptions, depending on new discoveries achieved by means of new methods or reinterpretation of 'old' data. And this is "normal" in science. We cannot decide whether "Homoptera", "Aphidiformes", "Coccomorpha" and the like are "correct" names, categories or taxa by means of "common agreement" or voting! It is a question of scientific belief of individual researchers, under the conditions that they know what they are talking about. Often various "specialists" propose new higher level classifications and introduce new names but they can hardly recognize scale insects and aphids in the field. Unfortunately, knowledge of scale insects, their true nature and diversity, is extremely poorly known among entomologists. For instance, most paleoentomologists believe that wingless fossils (including evident crawlers!) are females, winged forms - males - without being aware of the existence of 'larvae' and apterous males.

4. Currently, in various disciplines, scale insects are considered a family, superfamily, cohort or suborder5). The question is what category would we, the coccidologists, like to ascribe to these insects. Most of us prefer a superfamily level with the obligatory (Code!) name Coccoidea. The next lower category is family, i.e. Ortheziidae, Coccidae, Diaspididae etc. Note that with this concept we are devoid of the freedom to recognize higher (than family) formal groupings of the scale insects. How, then, can we express the evidence that armoured scales are definitely different from other scales, that ortheziids and matsucoccids are much more closely related to each other than they are to pseudococcids or coccids, etc. etc.? The only possibility is to lower the status of well established and currently accepted families into subfamilies, subfamilies into tribes and so on. Please remember that we are still beginners in this field (our knowledge of the "margarodids" is very poor!). I am quite certain that a formal category between family and superfamily will be urgently needed in the near future.

5. Balachowsky, Bodenheimer and Borchsenius were aware of this problem and ascribed to the scale insects a category slightly higher than superfamily (Coccinea or similar), and divided them into two (archeococcids and neococcids) or three (by distinguishing the diaspidids as a separate branch) taxa and placed them higher than the family category. These branches received a formal superfamily status (Orthezioidea, Coccoidea) in further application. This resulted in the confusing or misleading usage of the superfamily name Coccoidea, either as covering all scale insects or only a group of them.

6. Similar conditions occur in other sternorrhynchans (the aphids, aleyrodids and psyllids), except that the coccids are many, many times more abundant and diverse in all aspects. Superfamilies have also been recognized within each of these groups, for instance Aphidoidea and Phylloxeroidea (or Adelgoidea) in the aphids.

7. It is somewhat surprising and strange that coccidologists (including myself) have never dealt with the systematics or phylogeny of hemipterans except scale insects. I do not know of even a single modern original concept proposed by a coccidologist that considers the phylogeny of sternorrhynchans and places the scale insects among them. Instead, we worry about the feelings and opinions of librarians who may wonder about the usage of different names and categories referring to scale insects in paper titles. Maybe it is a kind of modesty.

8. It is necessary to distinguish between taxa and names that are governed by the Code, and associated with nominal genera and species and type specimens, on one side, and various rankles taxa and vernacular names, on the other. In the former group we are obliged to follow strictly the nomenclatural rules; in the latter, we don't need to worry about the category of taxon (group, clade, lineage, branch etc.) or suffix of the name. In my papers, I refer to the scale insects as "Coccinea", a taxon higher than a superfamily. The name could be as well Coccina, Coccodea, Cocciformes or Coccomorpha; it makes no difference to me, and the Code of Zoological Nomenclature does not govern these names.

9. In English the vernacular name of the object of our study is "scale insects" or, currently, a name derived from the scientific superfamily name Coccoidea - "coccoids". However, only some dozen years ago "coccids", derived from the family name Coccidae, was commonly used, and still is used in some languages, for instance the Russian "kokcidy" (not "kokkoidy"). Respectively, the science on scale insects is "coccidology", and not "coccoidology". Since the category and name of the scale insects may change (guaranteed by the freedom of research), the vernacular name of scale insects would also have to be changed which is a nonsense procedure. For this reason I would suggest the traditional name "coccids" for all scale insects in general papers and add "sensu stricto" (s. str.) in cases when we mean the Coccidae (soft scales). This provides a kind of vernacular stability for the name of scale insects. It avoids the instability that would be caused if the vernacular name was altered each time an author changed the rank or name of the scales.

10. Conclusions:

a. Coccidologists should be more concerned with research on scale insect relationships within sternorrhynchans, and should not only rely so heavily on the suggestions of other entomologists. Scale insects are a large and extremely diverse group and are worth study in this respect.

b. We should not worry about the name of scale insects included in paper titles. They certainly are hemipterans. "Homoptera" (although paraphyletic) is more informative for more readers; "Sternorrhyncha" may be more useful in specialized journals. With time, Sternorrhyncha will certainly replace Homoptera.

c. I would suggest considering the scale insects as a taxon (slightly) higher than superfamily, named Coccinea or something similar; with respect to other members of the Sternorrhyncha.

d. Rankles taxa and informal names should be more widely used in any phylogenetic research, both within the scale insects and sternorrhynchans.

e. I prefer "coccids" as a vernacular name equivalent to "scale insects" rather than "coccoids".

Footnotes

1) I am referring to the manuscript kindly submitted by Prof. Michael Kosztarab.

2) Gullan P., 1998, Why the taxon Homoptera does not exist, VIIIth ISSIS, Abstracts.

3) Shcherbakov D.E., 2000, The most primitive whiteflies (Hemiptera; Aleyrodidae...) from the Mesozoic of Asia..., Bull. Nat. Hist., Geology Ser., 56: 29-37. A piece from this paper: "... "Paleontological evidence supports the classification of Homoptera proposed by Börner... and developed by Hennig and Schlee who group whiteflies with psyllids separating them from aphids plus coccids. The fossil record indicates that these two lineages were separate from the very beginning, so, instead of the polyphyletic [sic! JK] 'Sternorrhyncha', two subordinal units within Hemiptera s.l. are used: Aphidinea (including Aphidomorpha and Coccomorpha) and Psyllinea (including Psyllomorpha and Aleyrodomorpha)... In contrast, molecular phylogenies of Hemiptera... show the whiteflies lineage in a variable position, .... even as sister group of psocids....but never as a sister group of psyllids.... so the morphological and paleontological evidence should not be discredited simply in favour of novel molecular techniques."

4) I mean students from the Arthropod Laboratory at the Paleontological Institute RAS, Moscow. Members of this excellent team, especially Dr A.P. Rasnitsyn, Dr D.E. Shcherbakov and Dr Y.A. Popov, discovered many scale insect fossils in various world collections.

5) Hennig (1981, p. 254 and other) uses the name "Coccina" for the scale insects (respectively "Aphidina" for aphids, etc.), without defining its category. The name "Coccidomorpha" (at superfamily level) was perhaps first used by Bekker-Migdisova (In Rodendorf, 1962) to contain "Coccina" and fossil scale insects. Strümpel (1983) uses "Aphidiformes" (= Aphidomorpha) as an infraorder to contain scale insects and aphids each as superfamilies Coccoidea or(!) Coccina, respectively Aphidoidea, and "Sternorrhyncha" as a hemipteran suborder. Shcherbakov (1990, 2000) considers Aphidinea (with Coccomorpha and Aphidomorpha) as a hemipteran suborder. (1981) includes to the Aphidina (sic!) also Psylloidea and Aleyrodoidea. Heie (1981) recognized several superfamilies within aphids (Aphidodea, in Aphidomorpha Homoptera), later (1999), only two. The group and name Sternorrhyncha is questioned by Hennig, Schlee and Shcherbakov on the grounds of the fossil record (cf. 3)). According to Williams (1969) the name "Coccinea" was first used by Baier 1938, and "Coccaria" by Atkinson 1885, but I do not know the context.

Do we need to change the rank of the higher taxa of scale insects (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea)?

Penny Gullan, University of California, Davis, USA (pjgullan@ucdavis.edu)

Dug Miller, Systematic Entomology Laboratory, PSI, USDA, Beltsville, Maryland, USA (dmiller@sel.barc.usda.gov)

At the next International Symposium of Scale Insect Studies (ISSIS), to be held in Padua, Italy, there will be a special session on the classification of scale insects with emphasis on questions concerning the rank of higher taxa. This session is being organized by Professor Michael Kosztarab, who has published a preliminary discussion document in this issue of The Scale. We wish to present some additional views, with the intention of providing balance to the ensuing deliberations. However, we agree with the sentiments expressed by Professor Kosztarab that we must consider users of taxonomic names, and thus we should promote the stability of names. We also must strive to achieve an evolutionary classification of scale insects.

Several issues require consideration:

1. Should the name Homoptera be used as a higher taxon for the scale insects?

This question is integrally related to the next question, although the answer to this first question is extremely clear-cut from a phylogenetic perspective. The taxon Homoptera is paraphyletic and as such is an unnatural unit (in an evolutionary sense) and should be abandoned as a formal name. The paraphyly of the Homoptera has been demonstrated by assessment of morphological data (e.g. Carver et al., 1991; Zrzavy, 1992) and by phylogenetic analysis of nucleotide sequence data (e.g. von Dohlen & Moran, 1995; Campbell et al., 1995), as reviewed by Gullan (2001). Even Hennig (1981, p. 239) questioned the monophyly of the Homoptera. Hence authors of papers on scale insects should be using the ordinal name Hemiptera and/or subordinal name Sternorrhyncha (see below) to refer to taxonomic ranks above scale insects. This brings us to the next point.

2.What should be the rank of the taxon containing all scale insects?

Should it remain superfamily Coccoidea, or should it become suborder Coccinea, infraorder Coccodea (e.g. Maw et al., 2000), or even order Coccura. As Professor Kosztarab suggests, coccidologists cannot decide this alone as the rank given to scale insects has repercussions for all other sternorrhynchans and for all other hemipterans. The monophyly of the Sternorrhyncha, containing the aphids, scale insects, jumping plant lice and whiteflies, is undisputed (see Schaefer, 1996, especially pp. 6-7) and current molecular evidence most strongly supports the Sternorrhyncha as the sister group of all other hemipterans (e.g. von Dohlen & Moran, 1995; Sorenson et al., 1995). Relationships among the other hemipteran groups is presently a matter of much controversy. For nomenclatural stability, Sternorrhyncha should be retained as a suborder. This name has been in use for a long time, including in textbooks (e.g. Borror et al., 1989; Carver et al. 1991; Gillott, 1995), and refers to a natural phylogenetic unit. If the Sternorrhyncha were to be elevated to ordinal status, then their sister group, the so-called Euhemiptera - currently a rankless clade (Sorenson et al., 1995), also could become an order, and the taxon Hemiptera would disappear (redefining Hemiptera to exclude Sternorrhyncha would be confusing, but is another option). However the Hemiptera is a well-defined monophyletic group, and all bugs are recognized readily by entomologists. Such changes would disrupt all users, only to allow the scale insects to be a suborder. We argue that it is unnecessary and undesirable to elevate them to suborder status and, further, that there is absolutely no justification for the scale insects to be an order in their own right. The possession of many unique features is irrelevant to the question of rank - what is important is the relationships of scale insects to their relatives, the rank of their relatives, and the stability of names and rank.

Systematists specializing in the other three sternorrhynchan groups almost universally refer to their groups as superfamilies. The sister group of scale insects is the aphids and so the rank of aphids is relevant to that of scale insects. Internationally renowned aphidologists, such as Roger Blackman, Victor Eastop, Carol von Dohlen, Nancy Moran, Georges Remaudière and Manya Stoetzel, who are either systematists or phylogeneticists or both, all use the three-family system for aphids. That is, only families Aphididae, Adelgidae and Phylloxeridae are recognized and are placed within the superfamily Aphidoidea. Refer to any of the following recent papers or books: Blackman & Eastop (2000), Eastop (1995), Remaudière and Remaudière (1997), or von Dohlen & Moran (2000). A minority of workers use a multi-family, two-superfamily classification for extant aphids (e.g. Heie, 1999; Maw et al. 2000), but even Heie uses the names Hemiptera and Sternorrhyncha. Similarly, among psylloid researchers, the group is universally recognized as a superfamily, Psylloidea, by the active systematists. Refer to any of the following recent publications: Burckhardt (1994) Burckhardt et al. (1999), Burckhardt and Basset (2000), Hollis and Martin (1997) or Hodkinson and Bird (2000). No whitefly systematist has ever suggested that Aleyrodoidea (with a single family, Aleyrodidae) is anything but a superfamily. Refer to recent publications by Campbell et al. (1994), Martin (1999), Martin et al. (2000) or Russell (2000), although Louise Russell continues to use "Homoptera". Thus there is no precedent among the other sternorrhynchans for abandoning the superfamily rank.

Within the superfamily rank, coccidologists are free to recognize formal or informal higher taxa within the Coccoidea. Taxonomists in some other insect orders, e.g. the Lepidoptera, refer to clades at higher levels without necessarily specifying the rank of those clades, e.g. the lepidopteran groups Myoglossata, Neolepidoptera, Apoditrysia, etc. (Nielsen and Common, 1991) or they simply write the word "clade" before a taxon name, e.g. clade Coelolepida (e.g. Kristensen, 1998). Thus, the monophyletic neococcoid (or neococcid) group does not have to have a specified rank. We cannot give named ranks to every monophyletic group -- there are simply not enough ranks in the traditional taxonomic hierarchy to do so.

3. What is the appropriate rank of the higher taxa (currently subfamilies or in some cases tribes) within Margarodidae sensu lato?

This question was not raised by Professor Kosztarab, but Dr. Yair Ben-Dov is considering it in relation to the compilation of data on margarodid genera for ScaleNet. Also Dr. Imré Foldi, who is working on a revision of the genera, is interested in the higher classification of margarodids for his work. Dr. Jan Koteja (1974a,b) proposed a phylogeny and classification of the scale insects that, among other things, gave family rank to a number of groups currently placed as subunits of the Margarodidae. More recently, he has described several new families (e.g. Koteja, 2000a) and presented fossil data to suggest that archaeococcoids (= archeococcids = at least margarodids senso lato plus ortheziids) represent the relics of an ancient radiation (e.g. Koteja, 1990, 1996, 2000a,b, 2001). He recognizes a number of families, such as Matsucoccidae, Steingeliidae, Monophlebidae, Pityococcidae, etc., for taxa that most other coccidologists recognize as margarodid subfamilies or tribes, following Morrison (1928). The morphological disparity of the various margarodid s.l. higher taxa, their great age in the fossil record (e.g. Koteja, 2000a,b, 2001) and also the difficulty of reconstructing their interrelationships (Gullan & Sjaarda, 2001) all suggest that we should re-examine the higher classification of margarodids. Perhaps this is something that we could discuss fruitfully at the next ISSIS.

References cited

Blackman, R.L. and Eastop, V.F. (2000) Aphids on the World's Crops. An Identification and Information Guide. 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester.466 pp.

Borror, D.J., Triplehorn, C.A. and Johnson, N.F. (1989) Introduction to the Study of Insects . 6th ed. Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia. 875 pp.

Burckhardt, D. (1994) Psylloid pests of temperate and subtropical crop and ornamental plants (Hemiptera, Psylloidea): a review. Entomol. (Trends in Agricultural Science) 2: 173-186.

Burckhardt, D. and Basset, Y. (2000) The jumping plant-lice (Hemiptera, Psylloidea) associated with Schinus (Anacardiaceae): systematics, biogeography and host plant relationships. Journal of Natural History 34: 57-155.

Burckhardt, D., Santana, D.L.Q., Terra, A.L., de Andrade, F. M., Penteado, S.R.C., Iede, E.T., Morey, C.S. (1999) Psyllid pests (Hemiptera, Psylloidea) in South American eucalypt plantations. Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen Entomologischen Gesellschaft 72: 1-10.

Campbell, B.C., Steffen-Campbell, J.D. and Gill, R.J. (1994) Evolutionary origin of whiteflies (Hemiptera: Sternorryhncha: Aleyrodidae) inferred from 18S rDNA sequences. Insect Molecular Biology 3: 73-88.

Campbell, B.C., Steffen-Campbell, J.D., Sorensen, J.T. and Gill, R.J. (1995) Paraphyly of Homoptera and Auchenorrhyncha inferred from 18S rDNA sequences. Systematic Entomology 20: 175-194.

Carver, M., Gross, G.F. and Woodward, T.E. (1991) Hemiptera. In The Insects of Australia. A Textbook for Students and Research Workers, Vol. I, 2nd ed. (CSIRO), pp. 429-509. Melbourne University Press, Carlton.

Eastop, V.F. (1995) Aphids, plants and other organisms. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology 34: 1-8.

Gillott, C. (1995) Entomology. 2nd ed. Plenum Press, New York and London. 798 pp.

Gullan, P.J. (2001) Why the taxon Homoptera does not exist. Entomologica 23 (in press).

Gullan, P.J. and Sjaarda, A.W. (2001) Trans-Tasman Platycoelostoma Morrison (Hemiptera: Coccoidea: Margarodidae) on endemic Cupressaceae, and the phylogenetic history of margarodids. Systematic Entomology 26 (in press).

Heie, O. (1999) Aphids of the past (Hemiptera, Sternorrhyncha). pp. 49-55. Proceedings of the First Palaeoentomological Conference, Moscow, 1998, AMBA, Bratislava.

Hennig, W. (1981) Insect Phylogeny (translated and edited by A.C. Pont). John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

Hodkinson, I. D. and Bird, J. (2000) Sedge and rush-feeding psyllids of the subfamily Liviinae (Insecta: Hemiptera: Psylloidea): a review. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 128: 1-49.

Hollis, D. and Martin, J. H. (1997) Jumping plantlice (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) attacking avocado pear trees, Persea americana, in the New World, with a review of Lauraceae-feeding amongst psylloids. Bulletin of Entomological Research 87: 471-480.

Koteja, J. (1974a) Comparative studies on the labium in the Coccinea (Homoptera). Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Rolniczej w Krakowie 89:1-162.

Koteja, J. (1974b) On the phylogeny and classification of the scale insects

(Homoptera, Coccinea) (discussion based on the morphology of the mouthparts). Acta Zoologica Cracoviensia 19: 267-326.

Koteja, J. (1990) Paleontology. In World Crop Pests, Volume 4A, Armored Scale Insects: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control (D. Rosen, Ed.), pp. 149-163. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Koteja, J. (1996) Scale insects (Homoptera: Coccinea) a day after. In Studies on Hemipteran Phylogeny (C.W. Schaefer, Ed.), pp. 65-88. Proceedings of Thomas Say Publications in Entomology, Entomological Society of America, Lanham, Maryland.

Koteja, J. (2000a) Scale insects (Homoptera, Coccinea) from Upper Cretaceous New Jersey amber. In Studies on Fossils in Amber, with Particular Reference to the Cretaceous New Jersey (D. Grimaldi, Ed.), pp. 147-229. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koteja, J. (2000b) Advances in the study of fossil coccids (Hemiptera: Coccinea). Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne 69: 187-218.

Koteja, J. (2001) Essays on coccids (Hemiptera: Coccinea). Paleontology without fossils? Prace Muzeum Ziemi 46: 41-53.

Kristensen, N.P. (1998) The homoneurous Glossata. In Handbook of Zoology. Part 35. Lepidoptera, Moths and Butterflies. Vol. 1: Evolution, Systematics and Biogeography (N.P. Kristensen, Ed.), pp. 51-63. Walter de Gruyter GMBH & Co., Berlin, New York.

Martin, J.H. (1999) The Whitefly Fauna of Australia (Sternorrhyncha: Aleyrodidae). A Taxonomic Account and Identification Guide. CSIRO, Canberra. 197 pp.

Martin, J.H., Mifsud, D. and Rapisarda, C. (2000) The whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) of Europe and the Mediterranean Basin. Bulletin of Entomological Research 90: 407-448.

Maw, H.E.L., Foottit, R.G., Hamilton, K.G.A. and Schudder, G.G.E. (2000) Checklist of the Hemiptera of Canada and Alaska. National Research Council Research Press, Ottawa, Canada, 220 pp.

Morrison, H. (1928) A classification of the higher groups and genera of the coccid family Margarodidae. United States Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin 52: 1-239.

Nielsen, E.S. and Common, I.F.B. (1991) Lepidoptera. In The Insects of Australia. A Textbook for Students and Research Workers, Vol. II, 2nd ed. (CSIRO), pp. 817-915. Melbourne University Press, Carlton.

Remaudière, G. and Remaudière, M. (1997) Catalogue of the World's Aphididae. Homoptera: Aphidoidea. Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Paris. 473 pp.

Russell, L.M. (2000) Notes on the family Aleyrodidae and its subfamilies: redescription of the genus Aleurocybotus Quaintance and Baker and description of Vasdavidius, a new genus (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 102: 374-383.

Schaefer, C.W. (Ed.) (1996) Studies on Hemipteran Phylogeny. Proceedings of Thomas Say Publications in Entomology, Entomological Society of America, Lanham, Maryland. 244 pp. [NB. the postscript, pp. 6-7, of Schaefer's introduction]

Sorensen, J.T., Campbell, B.C., Gill, R.J. and Steffen-Campbell, J.D. (1995) Non-monophyly of Auchenorrhyncha ("Homoptera"), based upon 18S rDNA phylogeny: eco-evolutionary and cladistic implications within pre-Heteropterodea Hemiptera (s.l.) and a proposal for new monophyletic suborders. Pan-Pacific Entomologist 71: 31-60.

von Dohlen, C.D., and Moran, N.A. (1995) Molecular phylogeny of the Homoptera: a paraphyletic taxon. Journal of Molecular Evolution 41: 211-223.

von Dohlen, C.D., and Moran, N.A. (2000) Molecular data support a rapid radiation of aphids in the Cretaceous and multiple origins of host alternation. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 71: 689-717.

Zrzavy, J. (1992) Evolution of antennae and historical ecology of the hemipteran insects (Paraneoptera). Acta Entomologica Bohemoslovica 89: 77-86.

NECROLOGY

Wally Dekle

On Sunday, October 29, 2000 George (Wally) Dekle died at Eden Gardens in Gainesville, Florida at the age of 84. Wally was an entomologist at the Division of Plant Industry of the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services in Gainesville. According to ScaleNet he published 21 papers on scale insects including a book on the Florida armored scales and was honored by colleagues with the patronyms Cerococcus deklei a pest of hibiscus in Florida and the Caribbean area and Melanaspis deklei an armored scale from Florida, Georgia, Mexico, and the West Indies.

Jack Beardsley

On Monday, February 5, 2001 Jack (John) W. Beardsley died of a heart attack while working on the Bishop Museum collection. This is the obituary that was published in a Hawaii newspaper:

"Emeritus Professor of Entomology John W. Beardsley passed away last Monday while working at the B.P. Bishop Museum. He was 74 years old. Dr. Beardsley was an internationally recognized authority in the areas of biological control and insect systematics, particularly with respect to the mealybugs and scale insects of major significance to agriculture in the State of Hawaii. During his career, he conducted extensive research on these insects as well as their natural enemies. He was recognized as an authority on Hawaiian insects as well as the mealybugs and scale insects of the world. During his extensive career, he authored over 150 scientific articles in refereed journals, book chapters, and reviews. He contributed over 500 published scientific notes on new immigrant insects, new host records and new island records. Dr. Beardsley served as Chair of the Department of Entomology from 1981-1991."

A quick search of ScaleNet (which does not currently cover armored scales, pit scales, or margarodids) reveals that Jack published 73 papers on scale insects, described 11 genera (2 eriococcids and 9 mealybugs), 47 species (1 soft scale, 4 eriococcids, 1 halimococcid, 1 phenacoleachid, and 40 mealybugs), and was honored by his coccidology colleagues with 5 patronyms. He was well known for his diverse interests in scale-insect systematics. He was the first to examine an array of male mealybugs intensively, was interested in fossil scales, was an avid collector and recorded many invasive species of scales and other insects in Hawaii before invasiveness became a buzz word, had a comprehensive knowledge of the scale insects of the Hawiian Islands, published an important book on the scale insects of Micronesia, wrote a fascinating chapter on gall-forming scales, and had nearly completed a comprehensive study of the Australian genus Lachnodius. Jack's accomplishments are truly outstanding. They have added to our understanding of scale insects in a very significant way. He will be missed.

Jack sent a contribution for "The Scale" on January 18, 2001. It is included below in the "News from around the world" section. He also contributed the mealybug poem on the first page.

SCALE INSECT FORUM

This web site has added some new categories that many of you may find interesting including a prepublication area, requests for information section, image gallery, a download area for obtaining difficult to locate publications (they currently have Borchsenius 1966 available), and much more. A preview of the ISSIS-IX meeting in Padua, Italy is available under "This issue topics." You can view the site at http://193.204.185.103/scaleinfo/scale.htm and see what it has to offer.

ISSIS-IX ON THE HORIZON

The organisation of ISSIS-IX, to be held in Padua, Italy, September 2-7, 2001 is proceeding on schedule. Presently, 96 delegates from different countries are registered. The most numerous are from USA (12 delegates), Israel and Turkey (6 delegates), France (5 delegates), Georgia (former USSR), Egypt and New Zealand (4 delegates). The Italians number 19. The Symposium will be held at the Faculty of Agriculture, which is located in Agripolis, Legnaro, a village 15 km from Padua. Agripolis is the "town of Agriculture". The Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, the Faculty of Veterinary, the Regional Agriculture Organisation are located at this location. The Opening Session will take place in Padua at the University Palace. For a virtual tour of the Palace of Padua (Palazzo BO) link to: http://www.unipd.it/main/ storia.html. Please, help the Local Organising Committee and send your accommodation forms, title and abstracts of poster/ paper by the date reported in the second circular and in the Accommodation form. With regard to accommodations, please remember that booking depends on the availability of rooms; late reservations may not get their preferred accommodation. In case of full booking, another accommodation will be chosen for you. If anyone needs an official invitation to attend the ISSIS IX, remember please to ask for it. If specific wording is required in the invitation, please let me know when you ask for your invitation. If you have any difficulties or special requests, please don't hesitate to contact us. Looking forward to meeting you in Padua

The Local Organising Committee, Giuseppina Pellizzari, Patrizia Dall'Ara, Paolo Fontana, Valeria Malagnini. e-mail: ISSIS@agripolis.unipd.it

COLLECTION INFORMATION

About Brazilian Scale Collections: A note from Penny Gullan: When I was in Brasil in September I visited Dr. Saulo Soria at the Instituti Oswaldo Cruz. I was able to examine a small part of the Costa Lima collection and I also asked Dr. Soria about the depositories of scale insect collections in Brasil. He very kindly sent me the following information, which may be useful to publish in the next ScaleNet. [Editor's Note: A list of types present in some of these museums was given in "The Scale" in 1993 by Claps 18: 2-12].

Hempel collection is at: Centro Nacional de Identificacao de Insetos, Departamento de Zoologia, Universidade Federal de Paraná, Caixa Postal 19020, 81531.990 Curitiba, Paraná, Pr., BRASIL (Referencia: Prof. Albino M. Sakakibara)

Part of the Costa Lima collection is at: Colecao Entomologica, Departamento de Entomologia, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, IOC/FIOCRUZ, Avenida Brasil 4365, Manguinhos, Pavilhao Mourisco, sala 201, 23045.900 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BRASIL, (Referencia: Dr. Saulo de Jesus Soria Telephone 21.598.4342)

Most of the Costa Lima collection is at: Colecao Entomologica, Escola de Postgraduacao em Parasitologia Animal, Universidade Federal Rural de Rio de Janeiro (UFRRJ) Km 47, Antiga Rodovia Rio - Sao Paulo, 23851.970 Seropedica, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BRASIL, (Referencia: Prof. Dr. Euripedes Menezes)

"Homoptera" and Hemiptera (in general): Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de Saõ Paulo

Avenida Nazareth, s/n, Bairro Ipiranga, Caixa Postal 42694, 04299.970 Sao Paulo, SP., BRASIL, (Referencia: Dr. Ubirajara R. Martins)

For Diaspididae: Departamento de Biologia, Pontificia Universidade Catolica de Rio Grande do Sul (PUC), Cidade Universitaria da PUC, 90000.000 Porto Alegre, RS, BRASIL, (Referencia: Prof. Dr. Helio Corseuil Telephone 51.339.1511)

New York State Museum, Albany, List of Types

The following list comes from Timothy L. McCabe and J. K. Barnes (http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/bio_insect_mite_types.html)

COCCOIDEACeroplastidia bruneri Cockerell, 1910, Can. Ent. 42:76. Syntypes: San Bernardino, Paraguay, S.A.(Bruner)(part of type)/ Ceroplastidia bruneri Ckll. Type material/ N.Y.S. Coll.

Diaspis cacti Comstock, 1883, 2nd Rpt. Cornell Univ. Exp. Sta. Dept. Ent.:91.

Syntypes: Comstock No. 181 [sp?]/ J. A. Lintner Collection/ Diaspis cacti Comstock Type 9012.

Poliaspis carissae Cockerell, 1902, Entomologist 35:112. Syntypes: On Carissa, Durban, Natal, Africa, T.D.A. Cockerell Types Poliaspis carissae Ckll./ "Type" Ac. 9652.

Fiorinia carnelliae Comstock, 1880, Rpt. U.S.D.A.:329. Syntype: J. A. Lintner Coll./ det. as Parlatoria pergandii var. carnelliae Comst. 8558/ Uhleria carnelliae Comst. Type.

Lecanium caryae Fitch, 1856, Rpt. Ins. N.Y. 3:443. Syntypes: Hickory scale-insect and its chalk mark on the bark Lecanium caryae/ Coll. N.Y. State Agric. Soc./ Lecanium caryae Fitch labeled by Dr. Fitch.

Aspidiotus cerasi Fitch, 1856, Rpt. N.Y. State Agric. Soc.:368. Syntypes: Cherry Scale Insect. Aspidiotus cerasi/ Coll. N.Y. State Agric. Soc.

Eriopeltis coloradensis Cockerell, 1905, Can. Ent. 37:136. Syntypes: Boulder, Colo. Dec-1904 N.Y.S. Coll./ Type/ Eriopeltis coloradensis Ckll. 9862 Type Mat'l.

Pseudococcus cuspidatae Rau, 1937, Bull. Brooklyn Ent. Soc. 32:195, Paratypes, 4: N.J. [slide mount].

Coccus diversipes Cockerell, 1907, Davenport Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. 10:130. Syntypes: Coccus diversipes Ckll on fern, Lucena, Philippines Is. (Townsend)/ Coccus diversipes Ckll Type Material/ Sept 27 '06/ 9894.

Aspidiotus furfurus Fitch, 1856, Rpt. N.Y.S. Agric. Soc.:352. Syntypes: Scurfy Bark Louse Aspidiotus furfurus/ Coll. N.Y. State Agric. Soc.

Chionaspis gleditsiae Sanders, 1903, Ohio Nat. 3:413. Syntype, 1: Chionaspis gladitsiae Sand. Cotype Columbus, Ohio 11 Mar. 1903 on Gleditsia triacenthos cotype [slide mount].

Tachardiella glomerella Cockerell, 1905, Ent. News 16:52. Syntypes: Mesilla Val., N.M. Dec-1904 N.Y.S. Coll./ Tachardiella glomerella Ckll. Type Matl. ac. 9863.

Halimococcus lampas Cockerell, 1902, Entomologist 35:15. Syntypes: Durban, Natal, Africa 22-Dec-1902 N.Y.S. Coll./ Halimococcus lampas Ckll. Cotype 9653 [3 palm leaf samples].

Pseudococcus ledi Cockerell, 1911, Ent. News 22:217. Syntypes, 4: 1,2,3) Sand Lake, N.Y. 14 July 1910 N.Y.S. Coll. Cotypes 9811 [3 branch samples]. 4) Sand Lake, N.Y. July 14, 1910 C. H. Peck on ledum cotype 9811 [slide mount].

Drosicha lichenoides Cockerell, 1913, Jour. Econ. Ent. 6:142. Syntypes: Cotypes Drosicha lichenoides Ckll. On Ficus nota, Los Banos, Phillippine Is., 1912. Coll. C. F. Baker Sent by T.D.A. Cockerell 9820.

Chionaspis lintneri Comstock, 1883, 2nd Rpt. Cornell Univ. Exp. Sta. Dept. Ent., Cornell Univ.:103. Syntypes: Aspidotus on Viburnum lantanoides/ Comstock No. 251/ J. A. Lintner Coll./Chionaspis lintneri Comst. Type 8557.

Chionaspis micropori Marlatt, 1908, Wash. Tech. Ser. U.S.D.A. Ent. 16:25. Paratypes: China, Chionaspis micropori Marlatt. Part of type see orig. descr. for details./ Type material to N.Y. Coll.?/ Chionaspis micropori Marl. Type Material.

Phenacaspis natalensis Cockerell, 1902, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 9(7):25. Syntypes: Phenacaspis natalensis Ckll. Type Material/ 9651 [leaf sample].

Aspidiotus pinifoliae Fitch, 1855, Rpt. N.Y.S. Agric. Soc.:488. Syntypes: Pine-leaf Scale-insect Aspidiotus pinifoliae/ Coll. N.Y. State Agric. Soc.

Lecanium pyri Fitch, 1854, Trans. N.Y.S. Agric. Soc.:809. Syntypes: Pear Scale Insect Lecanium pyri/ Coll. N.Y. State Agric. Soc.

Lecanium quercifex Fitch, 1858, Trans. N.Y.S. Agric. Soc-:805. Syntypes: White Oak Scale-Insect Lecanium querci/ Coll. N.Y. State Agric. Soc. [Although labeled L. querci, Comstock believed this to be the specimen before Fitch when he described L. quercifex (see 2nd Rpt. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Sta.:134)].

Lecanium quercitronis Fitch, 1858, Trans. N.Y.S. Agric. Soc.:805. Syntypes: Quercitron Scale-Insect Lecanium quercitronis/ Coll. N.Y. State Agric. Soc.

Coccus salicis Fitch, 1851, 4th Rpt. N.Y.S. Cab. Nat. Hist.:69. Syntype: No. 873. Willow Coccus C. salicis Fh./ Coll. N.Y. State Agric. Soc./ Coccus salicis Fitch 1491/ Det. J. G. Sanders Jan 1915 Washington, D.C./ Lecanium corni Bouch det. Sanders.

Ceroplastes sanguineus Cockerell, 1905, Ent. News 16:162. Syntype: Paraguay, S.A. Nov-1908, N.Y.S. Coll./ Ceroplastes sanguineus Ckll. Part of Type. Villa Encarnacion Paraguay (Schrotky) 9798/ Ceroplastes sanguineus Ckll. Type Material.

Chionaspis spartinae Comstock, 1883, 2nd Rpt. Cornell Univ. Exp. Sta. Dept. Ent.:106. Syntypes: J. A. Lintner Coll./ Chionaspis spartinae Comst. Type 8559.

Pulvinaria occidentalis subalpina Cockerell, 1910, Jour. Econ. Ent. 3(5):428. Syntypes: Pulvnaria occidentalis subalpina Ckll. Part of type Ac. 9877 (immature).

Trionymus violascens Cockerell, 1913, Jour. Econ. Ent. 6:143. Syntype: Trionymus violascens Ckll. Part of type 9_19.

Icerya zeteki Cockerell, 1914, Jour. Econ. Ent. 7:148. Syntypes: Panama Canal Zone/ 9866/ Icerya zeteki Ckll. Cotypes [many on paper strip].

NEWS FROM AROUND THE WORLD

Editors Note: If you have news that you would like to have appear in the next edition I would be most happy to receive it. E-mails are especially appreciated.

Jack Beardsley, Alhambra, California. I am trying to earn enough these days, doing consulting jobs, to afford to pay page charges. Not much in press related to scales I'm afraid. One small paper designating a lectotype for Dactylopius nipae Maskell in the New Zealand Entomologist should appear soon. I'm doing some consulting work for the Hawaii Dept. of Agriculture in Honolulu related to plant and animal quarantine at the Maui Airport. Also, I'm identifying parasitoid Hymenoptera from there, and from Midway Atoll and other Leeward Hawaiian Islands, from the Bishop Museum. Went to Midway myself last year and collected Coccoidea, etc. Nothing but tramp species there, but quite a few new records since the last survey was made in the 1960's. I am enclosing a bit of doggerel [the poem on page 1] that you might find interesting. Regards to all. Jack B.

Vera Regina dos Santos Wolff, Brasil. I submitted my doctoral thesis on Pseudoparlatoria on October 18, 2000 and received a favorable evaluation. I intend to publish this work soon. The results encompassed nine new species, 25 redescribed species, and two new combinations. I have discovered material of another armored scale genus that I intend to describe separately. Last year Dr. Lucia Claps and I described Dynaspidiotus riograndensis. I will be happy to send copies of this paper to people who are interested. Dr. Claps from Argentina, Dr. Roberto González from Chile and I are planning to publish an atlas of the species of Diaspididae from Argentina, Brasil, and Chile with keys and illustrations.

Ferenc Kozár, Plant Protection Institute, Budapest, Hungary: I continue to work mostly on ortheziids. There are many new species in several genera from different parts of the World. I have decided to discontinue my previous strategy of publishing a separate paper for each major genus in a zoogeographic region (although some earlier manuscripts are now in press) and to complete a monograph of the Ortheziidae of the world. If I can finish in time, I would like to dedicate the book to Morrison in honor of his monograph 50 years ago. Thanks to Imre Foldi, I was able to spend two very successful and pleasant months in Paris where several new ortheziids were discovered in the collections. One of these has already been described as Matileortheziola angolaensis. I also have completed a revision of the Carayonemidae, including several new species and genera. I currently am thinking about starting work on the Rhizoecinae group of mealybugs, since I have lots of material from different parts of the World taken from Berlese samples. I am afraid that this will be a much more difficult project than the one on ortheziids.

Benjamin Normark, Department of Entomology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA: In my graduate work and in a series of postdocs, I have studied the phylogeny and evolution of alternative genetic systems (especially apomixis and haplodiploidy) in various insects: broad-nosed weevils, bark and ambrosia beetles, and aphids. I have long been fascinated by the tremendous diversity of genetic systems found in scale insects. This May I had a crash course in coccidology when I had the privilege of assisting Doug Williams, Dug Miller, Penny Gullan, and Ray Gill in sorting the dried scale material in the Bohart Museum at Davis. This fall I began a tenure-track faculty position at the University of Massachusetts and I am currently setting up a molecular systematics lab. I plan to study the evolution of scale insect genetic systems. My first major project is a molecular-phylogenetic study of the Diaspididae, focusing on resolving origins of the diaspidid chromosome elimination system, of apomixis, and of automixis. My student Lisa Provencher will be studying the molecular systematics and phylogeography of the Aspidiotus nerii complex. I have obtained funding for a 5-year Hatch project on "Molecular systematics and molecular identification of armored scale insects" and, in collaboration with Roy Van Driesche, for a molecular-systematics component of a study of beech scale (Cryptococcus). I am also participating, with Penny Gullan and Dug Miller, in drafting a PEET proposal on scale insect systematics. I would be very grateful for (a) any alcohol-preserved (or otherwise quick-dried or frozen) armored scale insects from anywhere, and (b) inquiries from prospective graduate students interested in the systematics, evolution, or genetics of scale insects.

Jan Giliomee, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa: Waktola Wakgari, a student from Ethiopia, received his Ph D at the University of Stellenbosch, South Africa at the end of 2000. His research under my supervision covered the biology and ecology of Ceroplastes destructor, an endemic wax scale (also occurring in Australia) causing damage to citrus. He also described the immature stages and studied the effects of insecticides on its dominant parasitoid. Penny Gullan and Carina Cilliers were the external examiners. Several papers on this work have been published or are in the process of being published. As a result of his good work, Waktola has received a post-doc stipendium and will remain at the University of Stellenbosch for the next two years to study the mealybug complex of citrus.

Yair Ben-Dov, Department of Entomology, Agricultural Research Organization, Bet Dagan, Israel: My official retirement occurred in 1999. Nevertheless, the Department of Entomology and the ARO have allowed me to maintain my laboratory in part of the facilities that I occupied previously. The official retirement did not interrupt my work, and I am proceeding with three major topics in scale-insect research. 1.) ScaleNet. This is a joint project with our colleague Dug Miller, Systematic Entomology Laboratory, USDA, Beltsville; we have been cooperating since 1995. So far the Israeli team has prepared and placed 9 family databases on the Internet, namely Aclerdidae, Beesoniidae, Carayonemidae, Coccidae, Conchaspididae, Dactylopiidae, Kerriidae, Lecanodiaspididae and Pseudococcidae. We, at Bet Dagan, are continuing to build databases of the Asterolecaniidae, Diaspididae (subfamilies Aspidiotinae and Odonaspidinae) and Margarodidae. 2.) Mediterranean Mealybugs. This is a joint project with Daniele Matile-Ferrero, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, to revise all mealybug taxa from this region. So far we have completed about 10 papers that have improved our knowledge of the genera and species in this region. 3.) Scale insects (Coccoidea) of the Middle East. This research involve studies on the taxonomy, faunistics, life history and economic importance of scale insects in Israel and neighbouring countries in the Middle East.

Chris Hodgson, The National Museum of Wales, Cardiff, UK: Subject -- Proceedings of the VIIIth International Symposium on Scale Insect Studies - AND Request for Male Coccoidea. Firstly, I am sure that everyone will be delighted to know that I have completed my examination of the page proofs of the Proceedings of the last Scale Insect Symposium in Wye. It should, therefore be out later in the Spring. Also, I am currently describing as many male Coccoidea as possible with the intention of doing a phylogenetic study (with the help of Dug Miller) on their relationships. I am therefore keen to hear from anyone who has slides (or dry material) of males of almost any taxon. I am trying to describe at least 3-4 species in each taxon and so, to some extent, the more the better. I am particularly keen to get material of some of the taxa whose relationships seem open to question - of which there seem to be quite a few!! I am only interested in the macropterous males at this time. I would be very pleased if anyone willing to help should email me at (hodgsoncj@cardiff.ac.uk).

Doug Williams, Department of Entomology, The Natural History Museum, London, UK: There has been steady progress with my work on the mealybugs of southern Asia and most of the illustrations have been completed. I am about to start on Pseudococcus, the final genus. Writing up will take some time. Although Australia has shown some interest in publishing the work, nothing is finalised yet. In the past year I received a few interesting species of mealybugs inside thecae of the fungus Boletus dimorcarpicola on the roots of longan fruit trees in Thailand. The mealybugs are associated with Pseudolasius ants. I keep receiving remarkable mealybugs from the ant department of Ulrich Maschwitz, Frankfurt, and I am awaiting a collection associated with ants from Java, possibly the last I shall have time to include. During the past year I described 3 mealybugs associated with Acropyga ants, some held in the mandibles, in Dominican amber, at least 20 million years old. Hopefully this paper will be published in 2001.

Imre Foldi, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Entomology, Paris: I am working on several different projects and one or two of them should be finished this year including the Mediterranean margarodids and western Mediterranean kermesids. I continue to make progress on the phylogeny and morphology of the Coccoidea; I have added to the tentative phylogeny published in 1997, but the new results will not be publish for another 2-3 years. I have had difficulty finding as much time for research on the Coccoidea as in years past because of my responsibilities as President of the Entomological Society of France. Anyway, it will be very nice to meet with coccidology colleagues in Italy this year.

Penny Gullan, Department of Entomology, Davis, California: Penny Gullan moved into her new lab at the University of California, Davis, in June 2000 (see her new contact details below). Most of her time since then has been spent setting up the lab and also rehousing and updating nomenclature of the coccoid slide collection of the Bohart Museum of Entomology (BME), UCD. Slides of all families, except the enormous collection of Diaspididae, some common species of other groups and some accession material, have been moved to new flat-tray storage cabinets in Penny's lab. In May 2000, Dug Miller and Doug Williams visited Davis for two weeks to assist with the sorting and identifying of the BME's dry collection of Coccoidea. For some of the time, they were assisted by Ray Gill, who escaped his administrative work at the CDFA whenever he could, and by Ben Normark, who has started a project on the molecular systematics of Diaspididae and visited UCD to interact with other coccidologists and learn more about Diaspididae. By the end of 2000, the student assistants in the BME, supervised by Dr. Steve Heydon, had completed the task of rehousing and labeling the whole scale insect dry collection consisting of about 20,000 boxes. During the re-curation work, an important manuscript by Gladys Hoke Lobdell came to light. Many of you may remember that the last issue of The Scale (Volume XXIV, 2000) had an important article by Terence Lee Schiefer on scale insects from the Lobdell collection that had been found in her son's attic and donated to the Mississippi Entomological Museum. The manuscript in the BME had apparently been sent (or given) to L.E. Myers because this name is handwritten on the inside cover and there are copies of a couple of letters between Myers and Lobdell inserted near the back pages. The work is a compilation of drawings, mostly of Pseudococcidae and Diaspididae but also a few species of Aclerdidae, Asterolecaniidae, Coccidae and Lecanodiaspidiae, plus lists of species and slides in the Mississippi Collection in 1931. There are no descriptions. The cover page of the manuscript has just the words: SCALE INSECTS OF MISSISSIPPI. PREPARED FOR PUBLICATION 1929GLADYS HOKE LOBDELL. DRAWINGS BY S. HOKE DeBORD. NEVER PUBLISHED BY THE MISSISSIPPI STATE PLANT BOARD DUE TO LACK OF FUNDS. In August 2000, Penny attended the International Congress of Entomology (ICE) at Iguassu, Brazil, and had the pleasure of meeting both Takumasa (Demian) Kondo and Cristina Granara de Willink for the first time. Other coccidologists at the meeting included Jan Giliomee, Bill Gimpel and Mike Williams, and so Demian organized a mini-ISSIS dinner. After ICE, Penny spent a further 2 weeks in Brazil visiting universities and also the Instituto Oswaldo Cruz in Rio de Janeiro where she meet Dr. Saulo Soria and examined part of the institute's collection of scale insects. Dr. Soria was extremely generous with his time and very helpful in providing information on the location and contact details of other collections of Brazilian scale insects. These details are reproduced elsewhere in this issue of The Scale. In late December 2000, Penny spent a week in New Zealand followed by five weeks in Australia, mostly working on scale insects and related research in her old department in Canberra. A memorable event occurred on January 24th 2001 with the submission of Lyn Cook's Ph.D. thesis on the evolution and systematics of the gall-inducing scale insect Apiomorpha (Eriococcidae). With Lyn free of the thesis writing, Lyn and Penny plan to get back to their molecular phylogenetic research on Coccoidea, although Lyn currently is employed researching legume systematics. Dr P.J. Gullan, Department of Entomology, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616-8584, USA, Tel: +1-530-754 5805, Fax: +1-530-754 5804

Gillian Watson, UK: I was made redundant by CAB International at the end of 2000, and am currently unemployed. I was part-way through compiling an ETI CD-ROM identification aid to Diaspididae of world importance. The University of Amsterdam and The Natural History Museum, London are negotiating to enable me to complete the CD-ROM on 100 species (80% of my time over the next 14 months at the NHM). I will also be identifying scale insects for the NHM Insect Information Service. This means that I am available for contract work in the remaining 15% of my time, and from April 2002 I will be looking for full-time employment. Does anyone out there need an experienced scale insect identifier/ taxonomist/ trainer/ field surveyor/ or a collaborator on a funded project? I also cover better-known species of aphids and whiteflies. I can be reached on G.Watson@nhm.ac.uk

Jan Koteja, Institute of Applied Zoology, Krakow, Poland: I am moved with the death of Dr. John Beardsley, an extremely friendly man. He has greatly contributed to our knowledge of the fossil scale insects; in the 70's and 80's he provided unpublished information and opinions on coccid fossils housed at the American and Canadian museums. His suggestions concerning various paleontological and general questions were very useful in my studies. The paper on the New Jersey amber scale insects was intended to be a kind of acknowledgement and appreciation of his generous help; unfortunately, it appeared a bit too late. Please recall: Twenty years ago, Dr. Kajetan Boratynski (+Dec 4, 1980) and prof. Zbiegniew Kawecki (+Jan 26, 1981) died. Dr. Boratynski initiated modern studies of male morphology and introduced numerical methods in scale insect systematics. You will remember the now classical papers of his students (J.G. Theron, M.S.K. Ghauri, J.H. Giliomee and S. Afifi). Prof. Kawecki stimulated development of scale insect studies for many years in both Cracow and Warsaw. I am one of many of his students; he devoted all his scientific life to the study of scale insects. Fossils: The number of registered scale insect fossils has increased to 1,570, items since my last report. All the specimens have been entrapped in resin or buried in rocky sediments while moving, thus their hosts remain a puzzle. There are only two exceptions to this rule, a Miocene impression fossil of a lauracean leaf with several diaspidid- (or coccid) like larvae or females, and a "leafy conifer shoot" with two, apparently "margarodid" larvae in Cretaceous New Jersey amber; none thoroughly examined. Conference: The IInd International Congress of Paleoentomology, will be held in Cracow, Poland, on September 5-6, 2001. [Organizer: The Natural History Museum of the Institute of Systematics and Evolution of Animals].

Jack Munting, South Africa: I wonder whether you remember me. I was the taxonomist working on scale insects in South Africa from 1962 - 1970. I was working with the National Collection of Insects in Pretoria. Much water has of course gone under the bridge: since I entomologised I went into high school biology teaching; then taught in Jerusalem for 4.5 years; back to South Africa where I then worked as head of the science dept. of a college for training teachers. In dec 1992 this folded and I was forced into early retirement. Took on a clerical job as administrator of the distance education courses for the Law Society of S A which is not of my choice but was forced upon me since at age 52. I was too young to live on my pension and too old to get back into teaching which I would have loved. So the Law Society of S A is where I am at present, and although I am not at all interested in matters legal, I can get some satisfaction from doing a good job. Since being retrenched the closest I get to matters biological is wood turning which I thoroughly enjoy. The closest to taxonomy is trying to identify different indigenous trees by examining their timber. That's my life in a nutshell. Will be delighted to hear from you again. My email address is jack.cle@lssa.org.za.

Roberto González, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Forestales, Universidad de Chile, Santiago: Roberto wrote an extensive letter about his current projects that somehow was lost in the mess on my desk [sorry Roberto]. I recall that he is especially interested in a project on the mealybugs of fruit trees. He also mentioned that he is considering retiring although he apparently hasn't made a final commitment.

Maren Gimpel, Gary Miller, and Dug Miller, Systematic Entomology Laboratory, USDA, Beltsville, Maryland: There is a new web page available that lists all of the scale species present in the U. S. National Collection of Coccoidea with associated type data (sel.barc.usda.gov/scaleframe.html). Gary has done a lot of work designing and preparing the page to go online and Debra Creel has been responsible for getting the database into shape so that Gary could put it on the web. Current and back issues (1996-2000) of The Scale are available at this web site. You can access them from the side menu on the main page or at http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/Coccoidea/the_scale.htm. Hard copy of The Scale is not searchable, but use of the "Find" feature in the "Edit" menu of your browser allows a search mechanism. The big news this year is that the first (we hope not the last) of the hard-copy catalogs resulting from the ScaleNet project has been published, i.e., Miller, D.R. & Gimpel, M.E. (Collaborators Ben-Dov & Gibson). 2000. A Systematic Catalogue of the Eriococcidae (Felt Scales) (Hemiptera: Coccoidea) of the World. Intercept Ltd., Andover, U.K. 589 pp. ScaleNet continues to progress and Maren is more than half through our assigned area of the Diaspidinae and related groups. She informed me yesterday that she was working on the "N' s having finished such difficult genera as Lepidosaphes and Leucaspis. Two major additions to ScaleNet this year are a new query that allows a search for all or any part of a species name and a comparison table that will help with alternate spellings of authors names. We are working on including images and a way of identifying invasive speceies. We are planning to do a new volume on other smaller families in our assignment including the Cerococcidae, Halimococcidae, Kermesidae, Micrococcidae, Ortheziidae, Phenacoleachiidae, Phoenicococcidae, and Stictococcidae. Yair Ben-Dov indicated that the Israel team also is working on a book on some smaller families. Dug will be going to Davis again this year to work on the collection. Doug Williams will participate as will Penny Gullan, Ray Gill, and Benjamin Normark. This past year Gary traveled to St. Kitts to discuss the papaya mealybug, Paracoccus marginatus, and Dug went to Belize and Mexico to help with the pink hibiscus and papaya mealybug projects. Our current collaborative research continues on: Newsteadia (Kozár); some eriococcids in South America (Hodgson); descriptions of papaya mealybug instars (Miller and Miller); economic armored scales of the U.S. (Davidson); Furcaspis (Williams); Antonina (Williams); an unusual species of Dysmicoccus (Miller and Miller); new species of Chilean mealybugs of importance in quarantine (González); scale insects of importance in ornamental plants in Brasil (Peronti); selected scales of the Galapogos Island (Causton); etc.

RECENT LITERATURE

Compiled by Karen Veilleux

This is the first edition of "Recent Literature" that has been partially generated from "ScaleNet" . Karen has used the output from "ScaleNet" and modified it to complement last years contribution by eliminating anything that was included in the latter. She has maintained the unique citation codes for each entry. A detailed explanation of these codes can be found in Miller and Gimpel 2000. Essentially they are codes used in the ScaleNet database that are compiled by listing the first six letters of the first author's family name and the first two letters of the next two author's family names accompanied by the date. If there are more than two publications in the same year with the same authors then they are given a letter designation after the date. A paper by Williams and Watson in 1993 would be WilliaWa1993. A second paper by the same authors in 1993 would be WilliaWa1993a. A paper in 2000 by Cook, Gullan, and Stewart would be given the citation code of CookGuSt2000.

Abate, T., van Huis, A. & Ampofo, J.K.O. 2000. Pest management strategies in traditional agriculture: An African perspective. Annual Review of Entomology 45: 631-659. [AbateVaAm2000]

Notes: African agriculture is largely traditional, characterized by a large number of smallholdings of no more than one ha per household. Crop production takes place under extremely variable agro-ecological conditions, with annual rainfall ranging from 250 to 750 mm in the Sahel in the northwest and in the semi-arid east and south, to 1500 to 4000 mm in the forest zones in the central west. Farmers often select well-adapted, stable crop varieties, and cropping systems are such that two or more crops are grown in the same field at the same time. These diverse traditional systems enhance natural enemy abundance and generally keep pest numbers at low levels. Pest management practice in traditional agriculture is a built-in process in the overall crop production system rather than a separate well-defined activity. Increased population pressure and the resulting demand for increased crop production in Africa have necessitated agricultural expansion with the concomitant decline in the overall biodiversity. Increases in plant material movement in turn facilitated the accidental introduction of foreign pests. At present about two dozen arthropod pests, both introduced and native, are recognized as one of the major constraints to agricultural production and productivity in Africa. Although yield losses of 0% to 100% have been observed on-station, the economic significance of the majority of pests under farmers' production conditions is not adequately understood. Economic and social constraints have kept pesticide use in Africa the lowest among all the world regions. The bulk of pesticides are applied mostly against pests of commercial crops such as cotton, vegetables, coffee, and cocoa, and to some extent for combating outbreaks of migratory pests such as the locusts. The majority of African farmers still rely on indigenous pest management approaches to manage pest problems, although many government extension programs encourage the use of pesticides. The current pest management research activities carried out by national or international agricultural research programs in Africa focus on classical biological control and host plant resistance breeding. With the exception of classical biological control of the cassava mealybug, research results have not been widely adopted. This could be due to African farmers facing heterogeneous conditions, not needing fixed prescriptions or one ideal variety but a number of options and genotypes to choose from. Indigenous pest management knowledge is site-specific and should be the basis for developing integrated pest management (IPM) techniques. Farmers often lack the biological and ecological information necessary to develop better pest management through experimentation. Formal research should be instrumental in providing the input necessary to facilitate participatory technology development such as that done by Farmer Field Schools, an approach now emerging in different parts of Africa. Phenacoccus manihoti is used as an example of a target of classical biological control efforts.

Abd Rabou, S. 1999. Parasitoids attacking the Egyptian species of armored scale insects (Homoptera: Diaspididae). (In English with summary in Arabic). Egyptian Journal of
Agricultural Research 77(3): 1113-1129. [AbdRab1999]

Notes: A total of 18 parasitoids associated with the Egyptian armoured scale insects (Homoptera: Diaspididae) were recorded. The parasitoids belonged to the genera: Aphytis, Encarsia, Marietta, Habrolepis, Coccophagoides. Keys to the parasitoids attacking each species of armoured scale insects in Egypt were constructed, based on the morphology of the adult female. The general characteristics of the adult parasitoids are illustrated, together with more detailed figures of some key characteristics. The keys were designed for use with slide mounted specimens, and the techniques for their preparation are described.

Acheche, H., Fattouch, S., M'Hirsi, S., Marzouki, N. & Marrakchi, M. 1999. Use of optimised PCR methods for the detection of GLRaV3: A closterovirus associated with grapevine leafroll in Tunisian grapevine plants. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter 17(1): 31-42. [AchechFaMH1999]

Notes: A report of a modification and optimisation of a previously published procedure for the detection of GLRaV3 in infected grapevine plants. GLRaV3 RNA was successfully detected not only in total crude nucleic acid extracts of infected grapevine tissues but also in viruliferous mealybug extracts by IC-RT-PCR. This detection was rapid, sensitive and specific without occurrence of any background. A comparative ELISA, RT-PCR and IC-RT-PCR assays were carried out and revealed the greater sensitivity and specificity of PCR techniques. GLRaV3 is normally transmitted by Planococcus ficus, P. citri, Pseudococcus longispinus, P. calceolariae, Ceroplastes rusci and Pulvinaria vitis.

Ackonor, J.B. & Mordjifa, D.K. 1999. Parasitism and predation in Planococcoides njalensis (Laing) (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) on cacao in Ghana. Tropical Agriculture 76(4): 269-274. [AckonoMo1999]

Notes: From 1988 to 1992, 1870 colonies of Planococcoides njalensis (Laing) were sampled from 188 randomly distributed cacao farms in Ghana. Natural enemies obtained from these colonies included two predatory beetles, Hyperaspis egregia and Scymnus (Pullus) sp., and a predatory Diptera, Coccodiplosis coffeae (Cecidomyiidae). Six hymenopterous parasitoids, Aenasius abengouroui, Anagyrus beneficians, A. amoenus, Leptomastix dactylopii, Tropidophryne melvillei, and Chryptochetum (Lestophonus) sp. were observed. A hymenopterous hyperparasitoid, Cheiloneurus carinatus and a parasitoid of C. coffeae, i.e., Xyphigaster pseudococci, were also observed, as were unidentified Lepidoptera whose exact role was uncertain. Coccodiplosis coffeae was the most common natural enemy, followed by A. abengouroui, Hyperaspis, Scymnus, A. beneficians, L. dactylopii, and C. carinatus. The rates of parasitism were low for the individual species with the highest (0.8 to 6%) by A. abengouroui. Simultaneous parasitism by more than one species was common in infested colonies. This gave rise to monthly parasitism levels ranging from 0.9 to 11.6%. The observations of A. abengouroui, A. amoenus, and H. egregia appear to be the first indication of their presence on Ghanaian cacao. The recovery of L. dactylopii suggests its establishment in Ghana after it was introduced here in 1949. The frequencies of occurrence of the beneficial insects and their proportional representations in the mealybug's colonies are discussed.

Adu Ampomah, Y., Adomako, B., Owusu, G.K., Ollennu, L.A.A. & Bekele, F. 1999. Breeding for resistance to the cocoa swollen shoot virus in Ghana. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Contribution of Disease Resistance to Cocoa Variety Improvement. 173-179. [AduAmpAdOw1999]

Notes: [Conference held in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, 24-26 November, 1996.] Cacao swollen shoot virus (CSSV) is caused by a badnavirus transmitted by mealybug (Planococcoides njalensis) and occurs in all the main cocoa [Theobroma cacao]-growing areas of West Africa. Progress on breeding for CSSV resistance in Ghana is discussed by referring to: variation in mealybug (Planococcoides njalensis) vectors; variation in CSSV isolates; resistance breeding, including varieties in use in 1969, development of Inter-Amazon hybrids (1969-81), methods of screening for resistance (manual inoculation of seeds and mealybug inoculation), searching for pollen parents to replace Amelonado, searching for female parents, and mutation breeding; mild strain cross protection; and identification of markers linked to loci controlling resistance to CSSV.

Afroze, S. 2000. Bioecology of the coccinellid, Anegleis cardoni (Weise) (Coleoptera : Coccinellidae), an important predator of aphids, coccids and pseudococcids. Journal of Entomological Research. New Delhi 24(1): 55-62. [Afroze2000]

Notes: The bioecology of Anegleis cardoni (Weise) was studied under controlled laboratory conditions, where the temperature and relative humidity were maintained at 25 degrees +- 5 degrees C and 80 +-5 per cent, respectively. The rearing was done on the pseudococcid, Centrococcus insolitus Green; and the cabbage aphid, Brevicoryne brassicae L. to evaluate its effectiveness against both the host pests. The life cycle was completed in 25 and 22 days in B. brassicae and C. insolitus, respectively. The average fecundity of a female was 821.2 and 1099.9 eggs, and the egg hatching was 86 and 95 per cent on B. brassicae and C. insolitus, respectively. Also, higher adult longevity and voracity was recorded on C. insolitus than B. brassicae.

Aftab Ahamed, C.A., Chandrakala, M.V. & Maribashetty, V.G. 1999. Effect of feeding mealy bug affected mulberry leaves (tukra) on nutritional efficiency and cocoon yield in the new bivoltine silkworm, Bombyx mori L. Entomon 24(3): 265-273. [AftabAChMa1999]

Notes: Mealy bug infestation of mulberry by Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) causes malformation of terminal buds and the appearance of small curly leaves on the shoots. The food and dietary water intake and utilization were studied by feeding diseased mulberry leaves to the new bivoltine silkworms, Bombyx mori (Race: KSO1) during fourth and fifth instars, caused shortening of the larval duration and significant increment in conversion rate, conversion efficiencies (K1 & K2), water absorption efficiency, water retained in the body and water retention efficiency. In continuation of this, a significant increase in larval biomass, cocoon, pupal and shell weights followed by their efficiencies were noticed in spite of lesser wet food consumed. The factors responsible for these beneficial changes in food and water intake and utilization are discussed.

Ahamed, C.A.A., Chandrakala, M.V. & Maribashetty, V.G. 1999. Effect of feeding mealy bug affected mulberry leaves (tukra) on nutritional efficiency and cocoon yield in the new bivoltine silkworm, Bombyx mori L. Entomon 24(3): 265-273. [AhamedChMa1999]

Notes: Mealybug infestation of mulberry (Morus alba) by Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) causes malformation of terminal buds and appearance of small curly leaves on the shoots. The food and dietary water intake and utilization were studied by feeding diseased mulberry leaves to the new bivoltine silkworms, Bombyx mori (Race: KSO1) during the fourth and fifth instars, causing shortening of the larval duration and significant increment in conversion rate, conversion efficiencies (K1 & K2), water absorption efficiency, water retained in the body and water retention efficiency. In continuation of this, a significant increase in larval biomass, cocoon, pupal and shell weights followed by their efficiencies were noticed in spite of the decrease in quantity of wet food consumed. The factors responsible for these beneficial changes in food and water intake and utilization are discussed.

Alichi, M. & Ahmadi, A.A. 1999. [Effects of two IGRs, buprofezin and pyriproxifen, on Icerya purchasi Maskell (Homoptera: Margarodidae).] (In Persian). Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources 1999(3): 1, 75-82. [AlichiAh1999]

Notes: The effectiveness of buprofezin (40% SC) and pyriproxifen [pyriproxyfen] (10% EC) on the mortality of nymphal stages and fecundity of Icerya purchasi was investigated under glasshouse conditions. The LC50 of the insect growth regulators (IGRs) was also determined for the first nymphal stage. Two applications were conducted at intervals of one day prior to introduction of crawlers and 42 days after infestation. The results indicated that buprofezin was superior to pyriproxifen in suppressing the growth and development of crawlers. The mortality of first instars was determined 28 days after the first application. Although the total mortality of second instars due to pyriproxifen was higher than that caused by buprofezin, the cummulative mortality of 1000 ppm treatment was estimated to be 100% in both experiments after 42 days. The effect of buprofezin on incomplete moulting of nymphs and its ovicidal activity showed a decreasing rate in third-instar nymph survival and fecundity of the pest in relation to different concentrations of the IGRs, but it never reached 100%. Meanwhile the 1000 ppm concentration of pyriproxifen in the same treatments brought about complete mortality in third instar nymphs and inhibited adult and egg formation due to imbalanced juvenile hormone activity. However in 1 ppm concentration of pyriproxifen, a noticeable increase in fecundity of the adults was observed.

Allsopp, P.G., McGill, N.G. & Stringer, J.K. 2000. Host-plant resistance in sugarcane to pink ground pearls, Eumargarodes laingi Jakubski (Hemiptera: Margarodidae): Confirmation and further screening of clones. Australian Journal of Entomology 39(4): 316-321.[AllsopMcSt2000]

Notes: The response of 11 commercial cultivars and nine experimental clones of sugarcane to the margarodid Eumargarodes laingi Jakubski were evaluated over the plant (first harvest) and two successive annual ratoon harvests in a field trial in southern Queensland. Clones varied in the number of cysts developing on the roots with the lowest numbers on Q147, Q135 and Q182 and the highest on Q124, Q141, Q184 and 85S1247. The effect was similar over the three crops and indicates the presence of antibiosis and/or antixenosis. Clones also varied in cane and sugar yields and sugar content, with Q136, Q135, Q155, Q147 and Q124 giving the highest cane and sugar yields and 87S7364, 87S7367, 85S1247, Q141 and Q184 giving the lowest. Deviations from a general relationship between number of cysts and yield suggest that clones such as Q136, Q124 and Q155 have tolerance to E. laingi. Good concurrence in the ranking of clones between harvests and between this trial and previous work indicates that the resistance is stable and could be selected for on the basis of data from 1 or 2 years.

Anga, J.M. & Noyes, J.S. 1999. A revision of the African and Malagasy species of the genus Leptomastix (Hymenoptera, Encyrtidae), parasitoids of mealybugs (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae). Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Entomology 68: 2, 93-128[AngaNo1999]

Notes: The 11 species of Leptomastix known from Africa and Madagascar are revised and illustrated. Three species are described as new, Leptomastix herreni sp. nov., Leptomastix africana sp. nov. and Leptomastix jonesi sp. nov. Three new synonymies are proposed. A dichotomous key to all species is provided and each species is further characterized by a taxonomic diagnosis or description. Notes are provided on distribution, hosts and use in biological control.

Arai, T. 2000. The existence of sex pheromone of Pseudococcus cryptus Hempel (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) and a simple bioassay. Applied Entomology and Zoology. Tokyo 35(4): 525-528. [Arai2000]

Notes: The attractiveness of the volatiles from females to adult males of Pseudococcus cryptus was tested in a glasshouse to verify the presence of a sex pheromone. Males were attracted to the volatiles from females, and therefore, the existence of the sex pheromone of this mealybug was confirmed. The attractiveness of the pheromone to adult males aged from 0 to 5 days at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 h after lights-on was investigated in plastic petri dishes. Adult males were attracted to the pheromone under all these conditions, and it was considered that a bioassay in plastic petri dishes could be conducted using 0- to 5-day-old males within 10h after lights-on.

Arantes, A.M.V.T. & Correia, A. do C.B. 1999. [Diversity of fungi associated with Parlatoria ziziphus (Lucas) (Hemiptera: Diaspididae) in citrus.] Diversidade de fungos associados a Parlatoria ziziphus (Lucas) (Hemiptera: Diaspididae) em citros. (In Portuguese with summary in English). Anais da Sociedade Entomologica do Brasil 28(3): 477-483.[AranteCo1999]

Notes: There are many reports on species of entomopathogenic fungi that impact on host (pest) populations, but information on their biology, identification and relationship with the host are scarce. This study was conducted to identify fungi associated with Parlatoria ziziphus [P. ziziphi] in two Citrus groves in the region of Taiuva, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Samples were collected monthly in 15 trees by removing 16 leaves from each plant. In the laboratory, fungi associated with P. ziziphi were determined using a microscope, taking into account aspects of reproductive structures and spores. Four species were identified: Fusarium coccophilum [Nectria flammea], Tetracrium coccicolum, Podonectria coccicola and Myriangium duriaei. N. flammea was the most abundant species in both groves.

Asef, F.M. 1999. [Chemical control trials against the euonymus and juniper scales (Unaspis euonymi and Carulaspis juniperi, Homoptera: Coccoidea).] Kémiai védekezési kisérletek a kecskerágó-és boroka-pajzstetvek (Unaspis euonymi, Carulaspis juniperi. (In Hungarian). Növényvédelem 35(11): 567-569. [Asef1999]

Notes: Six insecticides (including formulations of buprofezin, dioxalane [of unstated composition], fenoxycarb and phosalone) were tested in Hungary in 1996 against Unaspis euonymi (a pest of Euonymus) and Carulaspis juniperi (a pest of Juniperus and Thuja). The results against these two diaspidids are presented in the form of histograms showing the levels of control in June, July and November.

Babcock, C.S., Heraty, J.M., De Barro, P.J., Driver, F. & Schmidt, S. 2001. Preliminary phylogeny of Encarsia Forster (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) based on morphology and 28S rDNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 18(2): 306-323. [BabcocHeDe2001]

Notes: Species of Encarsia Forster (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae, Coccophaginae) are economically important for the biological control of whitefly and armored scale pests (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae, Diaspididae). Whereas some regional keys for identification of Encarsia species are now available, few studies have addressed relationships within this diverse and cosmopolitan genus because of unreliable morphological data. Nuclear sequences of the D2 expansion region of 28S rDNA were determined from 67 strains of 24 species representing 10 species groups of Encarsia, 2 strains of Encarsiella noyesi Hayat, and 1 strain of Coccophagoides fuscipennis Girault. Analysis of molecular data alone and combined with morphological data resolves many nodes not resolved by morphology alone and offer insights into which morphological characters are useful for supporting group relationships. All analyses that include molecular data reveal Encarsia to be paraphyletic with respect to Encarsiella. If monophyly of Encarsia is constrained, the relationships are the same but with a different root within Encarsia, and these trees are presented as an alternate hypothesis. The luteola and strenua species groups are shown by both morphological and molecular data to be monophyletic, whereas the inaron group, the E. nigricephala + luteola group, and the E. quericola + strenua group are supported only by molecular data. The aurantii and parvella species groups are not supported in any of the analyses. The utility of morphological characters for defining species group relationships is discussed.

Babu, B.G. & David, P.M.M. 1999. A simple technique for mealybug multiplication on grooveless pumpkins. Journal of Biological Control 13(1-2): 59-63. [BabuDa1999]

Notes: A simple roping technique that facilitates rapid multiplication of mealybugs even on smooth pumpkins (Cucurbita moschata Poir) devoid of ridges and furrows is described. After 20-40 days of ovisac inoculation, populations of Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) were 8-12 times higher on grooveless pumpkins secured vertically across with 4 mm thick ropes at 2-4cm interspacing at the widest girth than that on bare grooveless pumpkins. However, populations increased by only 2-3 times on deep-grooved pumpkins and by 4-5 times on shallow-grooved fruits. Significantly higher populations of mealybugs were found along 4mm thicker top rope than along 2mm thinner twine running vertically across the fruit surface.

Babu, T.R. & Ramanamurthy, G. 1999. Residual toxicity of pesticides to the adults of Cryptolaemus montrouzieri Mulsant (Coccinellidae: Coleoptera). International Pest Control 41(4): 137-138. [BabuRa1999]

Notes: Studies on the toxicity of insecticides and fungicides to adult C. montrouzieri (a predator of mealybugs, Saccharicoccus sacchari), are presented together with details of the persistence of the pesticides. The insecticides monocrotophos (Nuvacron), cypermethrin (Lacer), acephate (Asataf), chlorpyrifos (Radar) [propiconazole] and fenvalerate (Fenval) and the fungicide mancozeb (Indofil M-45) [mancozeb + thiophanate-methyl] recorded 100% mortality of adults in bioassays. Chlorothalonil (Kavach) had the lowest LT50 value of 1.5 days and was least persistent. The pyrethroids, viz. cypermethrin (15.9 days) and invalerate (14.1 days) were highly persistent. The lethal time values (LT) were calculated following probit analysis.

Balikai, R.A. 1999. New record of plants of grapevine mealybug. Insect Environment 5(2): 81. [Balika1999]

Notes: Two weeds, Portulaca oleracea and P. quadrifida, were recorded as host plants of the polyphagous Maconellicoccus hirsutus in and around vineyards in the Bijapur area of Karnataka, India, in September 1996.

Balikai, R.A. 1999a. Seasonal incidence of grapevine mealybug in northern Karnataka. Insect Environment 4(4): 148-149. [Balika1999a]

Notes: Seasonal incidence of Maconellicoccus hirsutus on Thompson Seedless grapes was studied in farmers' fields at Tikota village, during 1990-92. Mealybug was recorded throughout the year. Following pruning in Oct., the mealybug population started to increase from Jan. and peaked during Feb.-Mar. before harvesting. After harvesting, the mealybug population remained low from May to Dec.

Balikai, R.A. 1999b. Management of grapevine mealybug, Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green). Insect Environment 4(4): 149. [Balika1999b]

Notes: Management of mealybug on grapes was studied in farmers' fields at Tikota, Karnataka, following application of treatments during the first 2 weeks of Nov., when average mealybug population was 3.81 colonies/vine. Treatments were: Padan [cartap hydrochloride] at 50 g/vine; phorate at 50 g/vine; Lannate [methomyl] at 3 ml/L; dichlorvos at 2 ml; neem [Azadirachta indica] seed extract at 5%; disturbing with toothbrush followed by spraying with dichlorvos at 2 ml; and an untreated control. At 30 and 60 days after treatment (DAT), all treatments were superior to the untreated control. Mealybug populations were lowest (1.17 and 5.9/vine at 30 and 60 DAT, resp.) on grapes disturbed with a toothbrush and then sprayed with dichlorvos.

Balikai, R.A. 1999c. Pest scenario of ber (Zizyphus mauritiana Lamarck) in Karnataka. Pest Management in Horticultural Ecosystems 5(1): 67-69. [Balika1999c]

Notes: A field survey was carried out in Ziziphus mauritiana crops between 1996 and 1998 in Karnataka, India. A total of 22 pests was identified. Of these, Dacus correctus [Bactrocera correcta], Carpomyia vesuviana