Bibliographical Notices. 127 



submitted to me for examination typical specimens of the major por- 

 tion of M. Foerster's species, transmitted to him by the author, it is 

 on them chiefly that the following remarks are based. And I trust 

 that the author will excuse me, if in some instances I entertain views 

 differing from his ; and I hope that he will not consider I have been, 

 in penning them, prompted by any other motive than the advantage 

 of our science. M. Foerster generally considers minute, and in my 

 opinion too obscure characters, as sufficient ground upon which to 

 found a species. With all deference to him, I must remark, that 

 the same species of Ant does not always construct its nest of the 

 same materials nor in the same manner, so that specific distinctions, 

 taken from such circumstances, cannot be looked upon as very 

 stable : the hill-making Ants gather the materials they find nearest 

 at hand ; if they inhabit pine-woods, they make use of the needles of 

 those trees ; if they inhabit meadows, of bits of grass, &c. Some spe- 

 cies however (F. pressilabris, exsecta) prefer meadows or thickets ; 

 other, dry sterile heaths or fir-woods (F. rufa, conger ens). The size is 

 also very variable in every species, and the colour is frequently more 

 or less pale or dark. I will now proceed to the remarks on the 

 species : — 



1. Under the name of '■'Formica congerens" (I. c. page 17. 5) is 

 transmitted to Mr. Walker my F. congerens $ and F. rufa ? $ . 



2. Under the name of " F.polyctena " (l. c. 15. 4) I can see only 

 a form of F. rufa. 



3. Under the name of " F. piniphila" I see my F. congerens. To 

 this may belong F. truncicola, Foerster, I.e. 21.7, which is certainly 

 not F. truncicola of my essay. 



4. " F. sanguinea " (I. c. 20. 6) is my F. dominula, and perhaps 

 Latreille's F. sanguinea ; but his description agrees also with F. trun- 

 cicola, whose geographical range is equally wide ; for this reason I 

 was unable to decide on the identity of either ; but as his typical spe- 

 cimens are in all probability lost, the question will most likely remain 

 for ever unsettled*. I believe however that M. Foerster's opinion is 

 correct, and I can have no predilection for my own names. I may 

 observe that my F. dominula occurs in all kinds of nests, and on this 

 account I am induced to consider, that it takes up its residence in the 

 deserted nests of other species. Thus I have found it living in trunks 

 of trees, in nests probably previously inhabited by F. truncicola, fusca 

 or glebaria, or more rarely in old hills of F. exsecta, but most fre- 

 quently in burrows in the earth, belonging I think to F. glebaria, 

 whose workers only it enslaves. The F. truncicola also sometimes 

 makes its nest in the earth. 



5. (( F. exsecta" (I. c. 23. 8), "F.flava" (I. c. 38. 17), F.fuli- 

 ginosa (I. c. 28. 11), F. glebaria (I. c. 31. 13, F. fusca, Latr.), are 

 the insects which are described under the same names in my essay. 



6. " F. stenoptera" (I. c. 26. 10) as far as I can judge does not 

 differ from F. cunicularia, Latr. 



* I may observe that in the magnified figure of the head given by 

 Latreille, the clypeus is figured entire, whereas in my F. dominula it is con- 

 stantly notched. 



