Oi 



2 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



method of computation. Counting the club as one joint and omitting 

 the "annular" joint between 2 and 3, the antenna of Eupelnms would 

 count as lo-jointed (see figure of antenna of E. Geeri 

 Dalm., Walker's Notes, p. 76, and also antenna of E. 

 cereanus Rondani, Bull. Soc. Ital. Ent., 1877, ii., pi. iv., 

 fig. 122). Applying the ordinary method of computation 

 to the antenna of Antigaster, it will be seen to be 13- 

 jointed. The identity of the two is readily seen from 

 the accompanying figure, b representing a camera lucida 

 sketch of the $ antenna of Antigaster, and a a repro- 

 duction of Walker's figure of Eiipdmus Geeri. 

 Fig- 3- With regard to the second objection, an oblique 



truncation of the club is seen in Rondani's figures of E. cecido?nyinus and 

 E. circinantis (ibid, figs. 147 and 150% and also slightly in Walker's figure 

 reproduced above ; so Westwood's definition, " club ovate," does not 

 hold with acknowledged European species. 



3rd. The character quoted from Walker (^translated by him from 

 Foerster) is incomplete as applying to Eiipelmus, as Thomson (Hym. 

 Scand. iv., 103) says, " tarsis % semper dilatatis." That the "bristles" 

 of Walker (Foerster) are identical with the " dentations " seen with 

 Antigaster, seems most probable from the fact that Foerster, in his figure 

 of E. Geeri (Beitr. z. Monog. d. Pteromal., pi., fig. 3) shows projections 

 on the middle tarsi altogether too stout for " bristles" ; and also from the 

 fact that the term " rigid pectinations " of Rondani would apply very 

 well to the dentations of Antigaster. These are really but a higher devel- 

 opment of the strangely modified bristles seen upon the middle tarsi of 

 some Encyrtinae, notably of Comys. 



4th. A glance through a number of descriptions of European species 

 of Etipelmus shows that the shape of the abdomen varies from the 

 " abdomen lanceolate " of E. subvittatus (Walker's Notes, p. 83) to the 

 " abdomen iiicreasing in breadth from base to tip of E. pezomachoides (ibid, 

 p. 82). So the fourth objection will not hold. 



Walker's recognition of Antigaster in 1869 certainly amounted to but 

 little, since he entirely omitted it from his generic synopsis in 1872. 



I would state in conclusion, as a confirmatory evidence of my view, 

 that, since the American Entomologist article appeared, in looking over a 

 list of Chalcids identified for me by Dr. Mayr, of Vienna, I find that 



