128 Bibliographical Notices. 



7. " F. fusca," Foerster, I. c. 33. 11, is undoubtedly the same as 

 F. nigra, L. This opinion is based not only on the traditional testi- 

 mony of the northern collections, but also on the characters given by 

 Linnaeus himself: "Formica minor e fusco nigricans ;" whilst on the 

 contrary he says of his F. fusca : " Formica media, corpus certo 

 modo ad lucem videtur nigrum, alias cinereum," which agrees per- 

 fectly with my F. fusca or glebaria. [On this subject as well as the 

 synonomy of the other Linnaean species I have treated in the * Saell- 

 skap. pro Fauna et Flora Fennica Notiser,' Heft 1 . 239 seqq.~] Unfor- 

 tunately there are now no specimens of these two species with the 

 Linnaean tickets in the collection preserved by the Linnaean Society. 

 M. Foerster asserts somewhat too positively, that it is solely on the 

 authority of Latreille, that I have founded my interpretation of the 

 Linnaean F. nigra. 



8. (( F. timida" (I.e. 35. 15) and "jP. aliena" (I.e. 36. 16) ap- 

 pear to me only different forms of one species distinguished princi- 

 pally by their size, the latter being the smaller. But whether both 

 these species are not merely forms of JP. nigra, L. (F. fusca, Foerster) 

 is perhaps a question requiring further examination, for a paler colour, 

 and the legs and antennae a trifle more naked are, perhaps, characters 

 too fugitive upon which to establish specific distinctions. I admit 

 that I should have easily referred the individuals of these species, 

 which I have seen, to F. nigra, L. 



9. " Tapinoma collina" (I. c. 43. 21) is my F.glabrella (Addit. 2. 

 38) ; and I cannot understand why M. Foerster has established a di- 

 stinct genus for it, only on the single character, that in this species 

 the little scale of the petiole is inclined forwards and almost incum- 

 bent. My subdivisions of Formica and Myrmica had undoubtedly 

 afforded more substantial generic characters. Formica glabrella ap- 

 pears to be a species widely distributed throughout the central and 

 southern regions of Europe. At Paris it is of frequent occurrence, 

 and inhabits all kinds of soil, sometimes dry sandy places, and some- 

 times humid mossy situations, often in very large and numerously 

 tenanted nests, and is remarkable for its extreme agility and the sweet 

 nectareous odour which it emits. 



10. "Myrmica ruginodis" (I. c. 66. 36), " M. Icevinodis" (I. c. 

 64. 35), " M . scabrinodis " (I. c. 67. 37), are absolutely identical with 

 my species of the same names. 



11. "M. acervorum" (I. c. 61. 32); the specimens sent to Mr. 

 Walker are a pale form of my species bearing the same name. 



12. " M. fuscula" (I. c. 56. 29) is likewise mine (i. e. M. cespi- 

 tum, Latr.). In the male sent I can discover no tooth on the meta- 

 thorax, but merely an obtuse angle. 



13. " M. impura" (I. c. 48. 22) is in my opinion nothing more 

 than a pale form of M. fuscula, which is very variable both in size 

 and colour, and colonies are sometimes found consisting entirely of 

 large individuals, while others are inhabited by small individuals only. 

 I have observed the same circumstance in other species, more parti- 

 cularly in F. nigra and F. herculeana (cf. Addit. 2. p. 28). Perhaps 

 M. modesta, Foerster, I. c. 49. 23, which I have not seen, is also a 



