Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Calendar

Miridae

http://bugguide.net/node/view/94

There's a flaw in logic here:
________________

Identification

The unique characteristic that defines mirids is . . . . Other characteristics are the lack of ocelli and the possession of cuneus. However, these two characteristics are not unique to mirids since the mirids in subfamily Isometopinae have ocelli, and some other heteropterans such as bed bugs also have cuneus.
________________

That some mirids have ocelli doesn't show that lacking ocelli is not unique to mirids. To show this, one would have to find a nonmirid without ocelli. Perhaps the writer meant that the absence of ocelli isn't universal among mirids or doesn't define the group.

Typos in revision
However, these two characteristics are not enough to define mirids since some other heteopterans heteropterans such as Cnemodus species in Rhyparochromidae have no ocelli, and bed bugs bedbugs also have cuneus. In addition, the Isometopine mirids have oscelli ocelli.

 
Fixed
I have corrected the two typos that you pointed out, but I agree with John that the more standard usage (at least on this site) is "bed bugs". Although the single-word version seems to be in fairly common use, if you try doing a search on "Cimicidae", I think you will find more references to the two-word version on scientific and academic sites...

 
Thanks, guys!
^^

 
actually ...
...BG has it as "bed bugs" throughout, so it might be correct.

Thank you for your pointing out!
I intended to mean what you said, but it was incorrect. So I corrected the sentence.

 
And thank you for reviewing the sentence
In the good old days of academic publishing, harrumph harrumph, the standard procedure when an editor noticed something like this was to write a query to the author, asking whether what was on the page truly expressed the intended meaning. Scientific writing is complex and is full of pitfalls. I'm glad a second pair of eyes helped this time.

True
But the statement is attributed to someone, so changing the statement would be putting words in the mouth of that person. That of course assumes that the statement is an accurate description of what was said- I'm not sure which image the original comment was on, so I haven't checked.

 
From what I can tell...
...the Miridae guide page is the only place that this statement currently exists on the site. So, one of two possibilities seems likely -- either the image where the initial comment was made has since been removed from the system, or the comment was made directly to the guide page itself. The latter option is certainly feasible considering that WonGun has contributed greatly to the content of the page in question.

"G Whiz", please note that WonGun does not speak English as his native language and as such, there may at times be grammatical issues in his writing with which one could take exception. In this particular case, it is my opinion that it would be best to leave the statement as is.

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.