300 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST 



began his work in Quebec and spent most of his Ufe there, it is not 

 surprising to know that a large part of his collection came from 

 that region. But later in his life he received much material from 

 other people so that his completed collection included species 

 from many parts of Canada, the United States, Europe and some 

 of the West Indian Islands. 



Provancher described about 923 species and a few genera of 

 Hymenoptera and most of this great number are valid. His 

 largest and most comprehensive work on Hymenoptera is Petite 

 Faune Entomologique du Canada and its Additions, but besides 

 this he published several shorter papers on Hymenoptera in which 

 new species are described. Considering the time, lack of facilities 

 and literature, and his comparative isolation, Provancher had a 

 very good idea of the limits of a species. The weakest point of 

 his hymenopterological work was his conception of genera and 

 generic limits. Even when we consider the genera he recognized, 

 we often find that he placed the same or closely allied species in 

 widely dififerent genera. Hence, we find, especially in the parasites, 

 that Provancher was often wrong in his generic placement of the 

 species. His descriptions are accurate, and if we remember that 

 the diagnostic characters of that period were limited mostly to 

 colour, they are as satisfactory as those of his contemporaries. 



Location of Collections. 



Most of Provancher's types are in the Public Museum of 

 Quebec, some are in the collection of Mr. W. Hague Harrington 

 at Ottawa, a few are in the collection of the Canadian Department 

 of Agriculture at Ottawa, while a few others were returned to 

 Ashmead and Coquillett and are now in the United States National 

 Museum. Some few types we were unable to locate. These m.ay 

 have been returned to the collectors. 



In 1889 the College de Levis, Levis, Quebec, received a collec- 

 tion of insects from Provancher, and for some time it was thought 

 to contain some of his types. Further investigation tends to prove 

 that this collection was composed entirely of duplicates, and in 

 certain cases these were not correctly determined. 



A — Collection in the Public Museum at Quebec. 



The collection in the Museum of Natural History, under the 



