Analysis of larval and adult characters, as well as biological data from various geographic populations, indicates that Chrysopa mohave Banks and Chrysopa carnea Stephens represent two strains of a single species and C. mohave is therefore designated a new synonym of C. carnea. The carnea strain occurs allopatrically throughout eastern and midwestern North America and the mohave strain is probably indigenous to California.

The pattern of variation found in larvae and adults from different populations suggests that the carnea strain was secondarily introduced into California where it interbred with the mohave strain. This hybridization resulted in genetically varied populations with predominantly carnea characteristics in California’s Central Valley. Populations of the mohave strain occur in the California foothill and coastal areas because adults of the mohave strain, unlike the carnea strain, can aestivate during the hot, dry summers when food is sparse. Summer irrigation increases the abundance of larval and adult food which the non-aestivating carnea strain needs. It appears that the native mohave strain will compete successfully only in those areas of California which are unmodified by agricultural practices.

A new, endemic monotypic genus of Pyrgomorphidae, Xenephias, is described from Socotra. The single known species, X. socotranus n. sp., proves to be a member of the widely distributed tribe Sphenariini. It shows some similarities to eastern Asiatic genera, but is apparently closest to the isolated east African genus Sphenexia Karsch.

Entomophagous carnivoroids, especially those in which the development of the individual (ontogeny) is effected by its subsistence on the body fluids and the flesh of one host individual, show an extreme diversity in form and habit whereby their embryonic and larval stages are adapted for a highly specialized mode of life.

One of the more interesting of these adaptations is exhibited by biparental species of Hymenoptera in the placement of their haploid and diploid eggs in a particular organ or tissue of the host species. This adaptation may or may not be correlated with sex differentiation in host relations, a reproductive habit characterized either by differing oviposition responses that segregate haploid (male) and diploid (female) eggs to different kinds of hosts or, lacking such responses, by differing developmental mechanisms that segregate first instar males from first instar females.

The available information regarding the occurrence of the obligatory associations between the hymenopterous egg and a specific organ or tissue of the host, their characteristics, and pertinent physiological prerequisites are summarized.

Basically, these associations appear to be dependent on (1) the gravid carnivoroid usually being free of any physiological pressure (or urge) to oviposit despite the presence of eggs ready for deposition in the ovary and/or stored in the oviduct and (2) the limitation of egg deposition to the moment when the tip of the female’s ovipositor makes contact with a host or the spoor of the host. Freedom from oviposition pressure derives from the female’s ability to dispose of her "ripe" ovarian eggs by methods other than deposition, that is, either by storage in enlarged oviducts or by resorption into the bloodstream.

One hundred years ago the theory of evolution was new in men's minds and battles still raged between the protagonists and the antagonists. But this was not the first time that biologists had been divided. Much earlier they argued about the moral and ethical use of microscopes to aid their work. Many felt that microscopes were totally unnecessary and that there was more than enough to see with a good pair of eyes and the occasional use of the hand lens without resorting to such contraptions. Some went a stage further and insisted that God would have given us better eyes if he intended us to study the minute.

It was very difficult to decide whether to introduce this paper by discussing taxonomic problems in the genus Euxoa and how certain different approaches might help to solve them, or whether first to describe a number of different approaches and then to reveal that the genus Euxoa provides an excellent opportunity to try them out. Chronologically speaking the second alternative is the more correct, the approaches existed and their acknowledgment was followed by the recognition and definition of a suitable problem.

The nature of systematics and its fundamental importance to other branches of biology have already been ably discussed by such authors as Simpson (1961) and Mayr (1963, 1969). Thus, in defining systematic entomology, we may paraphrase Simpson (1961): Systematic entomology is the scientific study of the kinds and diversity of insects and associated arthropods and any and all [biological] relationships among them. “Modern” merely implies current and recent, not avant-garde, although this is not excluded.

The premises for biochemical systematics are outlined, including the demonstration of colinearity between polypeptides and the nucleotide sequence of the gene, and subsequent comparative studies based on amino acid sequencing of proteins. Distinct differences in the stability in the amino acid sequences among various proteins demands that the systematist select those most appropriate to the taxonomic problem to be resolved. As sequencing is a difficult and time consuming task, an alternative analytical means of obtaining objective data by which taxa may be phenetically compared is proposed. Electrophoretic studies on the enzyme GDH from cockroaches and bumble bees are outlined and the use of the data in superspecific classifications is documented.

A numerical taxonomic analysis was performed using eight exemplars of the orthopteroids. Two suites of attributes were used in a non-weighted dissimilarities analysis. The same suites of attributes were analyzed for a similarity index with dendrograms based on the shortest connection network of Prim. The Tettigoniidae and Gryllidae are in agreement with current systematic placement within the Ensifera. The Caelifera diverge early from ancestral stem lines and suggest a greater separation from the Ensifera within the Orthoptera than generally accepted for their systematic position. The dendrograms suggest that the Blattaria and Mantodea show a relationship closer than the present subordinal rank permits. In the dendrograms the Grylloblattodea and Dermaptera form a remote complex from the other orthopteroids and each qualifies as a separate order. Modern classification of the orthopteroids considers the Dictyoptera, Dermaptera, Orthoptera, and Phasmida as orders. My analysis elevates the Grylloblattidae to the ordinal level as Grylloblattodea.

This paper reviews recent work on the higher systematics of insects and summarizes the various phylogenetic concepts advocated. It is evident that there is considerable difference of opinion. This is likely to prevail since the fossil record is inadequate. It is suggested that a numerical analysis of the insects at the Order level might be profitable.