156 \V. M. WHEELER AND J. E. McCLENDON. 



points of difference, so that we are compelled to regard the two 

 species as very closely related to each other. The worker latipes 

 has a thicker petiole, which is distinctly blunt and rounded above, 

 and the hairs are somewhat more abundant and evenly distributed 

 on the dorsal surface of the gaster. In the worker clavigcr, on 

 the other hand, the petiole is thinner anteroposteriorly and sharply 

 cuneate above when seen in profile, and the gaster is less uni- 

 formly hairy and somewhat more shining. The males of the two 

 species differ much as clo the workers in the shape of the petiole. 

 Moreover the male c/ai'igcr is decidedly larger, more robust and 

 blacker than the male of latipes. These differences, especially in 

 the males, are easily appreciated in the living specimens when 

 they are seen in numbers, but are necessarily more obscure in 

 dried cabinet specimens. 



From these comparatively slight differences between the males 

 and workers of the two species we should naturally expect to 

 find a corresponding similarity in the females. It is quite obvious 

 that the -female is the very form which satisfies this require- 

 ment, whereas the /?-female presents extreme characters which 

 make it appear like a decided sport or aberration from the nor- 

 mal type of Lasins female. It would seem, therefore, that the 

 ^-female is the one for which we are most in need of an explana- 

 tion, although it is connected with the females of normal form by 

 a rather complete series of gradations, /. ?., through the females 

 of the following species, beginning with the most extreme form : 

 /.. Murpliyi, -female of latipes, claviger, intcrjcctns. The re- 

 markable configuration of the legs and antenna:', the color and 

 pilosity of the /9-female all suggest some peculiarity of habit or 

 habitat the nature of which remains to be determined by further 

 observation and experiment. 



We come now to the important question : What is the mean- 

 ing of this dimorphism in the females of L. latipes? From the 

 fragmentary data at our command it would seem that four dif- 

 ferent hypotheses might be advanced to explain this peculiar 

 phenomenon : 



i. It may be suggested that the - and ^-females really belong 

 to two distinct species. According to this view the a-female 

 might be regarded as the true queen of latipes, whereas the 



