﻿360 
  PROCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  NATIONAL 
  MUSEUM 
  VOL. 
  96 
  

  

  of 
  Aphidae 
  and 
  of 
  Odynerus 
  sp. 
  is 
  quite 
  certainly 
  erroneous. 
  The 
  

   species 
  apparently 
  normally 
  attacks 
  scolytids 
  of 
  the 
  genera 
  

   Leper 
  isinus, 
  Scolyttis, 
  Chaetoptelius, 
  and 
  Phloeotrihus 
  . 
  The 
  most 
  

   complete 
  description 
  of 
  the 
  species 
  is 
  that 
  by 
  Russo 
  (Boll. 
  Lab. 
  

   Ent. 
  Agr. 
  Portici, 
  vol. 
  2, 
  pp. 
  206-215, 
  figs. 
  105-110, 
  1938). 
  

  

  So 
  far 
  as 
  known, 
  C. 
  cor7iigera 
  is 
  confined 
  in 
  its 
  distribution 
  to 
  

   the 
  European 
  continent 
  and 
  the 
  British 
  Isles. 
  

  

  CEROCEPHALA 
  ECCOPTO«ASTRI 
  Masi 
  

  

  Ceroeephala 
  eccoptogastri 
  Masi, 
  Ann. 
  Mus. 
  Civ. 
  Stor. 
  Nat. 
  Genova, 
  ser. 
  3, 
  

   vol. 
  9, 
  pp. 
  189-193, 
  fig. 
  7, 
  1921. 
  

  

  Judged 
  by 
  Masi's 
  description 
  and 
  figure 
  as 
  well 
  as 
  by 
  the 
  

   indicated 
  host 
  this 
  species 
  is 
  very 
  likely 
  a 
  synonym 
  of 
  C. 
  cornigera 
  

   Westwood. 
  The 
  types 
  are 
  said 
  to 
  have 
  been 
  reared 
  from 
  

   Eccoptogaster 
  (probably 
  rugulosus 
  Ratzeburg) 
  taken 
  at 
  Bengasi, 
  

   Cyrenaica. 
  

  

  The 
  figure 
  published 
  by 
  Gonzales 
  Ceballos 
  (Las 
  tribus 
  de 
  los 
  

   Himenopteros 
  de 
  Espano, 
  p. 
  204, 
  1943) 
  under 
  the 
  name 
  Cero- 
  

   cephala 
  eccoptogastri 
  Ratzeburg 
  does 
  not 
  agree 
  completely 
  with 
  

   Masi's 
  description 
  and 
  figure. 
  The 
  head 
  appears 
  longer 
  and 
  

   apparently 
  has 
  only 
  one 
  tooth, 
  instead 
  of 
  two, 
  on 
  each 
  lateral 
  

   margin 
  of 
  the 
  facial 
  depression. 
  If 
  the 
  drawing 
  is 
  accurate 
  it 
  

   probably 
  represents 
  a 
  species 
  different 
  from 
  eccoptogastri. 
  

   Ceballos 
  has 
  evidently 
  confused 
  the 
  specific 
  name 
  with 
  that 
  of 
  

   Pachyceras 
  eccoptogastri 
  Ratzeburg, 
  an 
  insect 
  quite 
  different 
  

   from 
  the 
  one 
  he 
  figures. 
  

  

  CEROCEPHALA 
  DINODERI 
  Gahan 
  

  

  Plate 
  47, 
  Figure 
  5 
  

   Ceroeephala 
  (Parasciatheras) 
  dinoderi 
  Gahan, 
  Philippine 
  Journ. 
  Sci., 
  vol. 
  

   27, 
  p. 
  100, 
  1925. 
  

  

  As 
  was 
  pointed 
  out 
  in 
  the 
  original 
  description, 
  dinoderi 
  is 
  ap- 
  

   parently 
  very 
  similar 
  to 
  caelehs 
  Masi. 
  The 
  former 
  was 
  described 
  

   from 
  a 
  unique 
  female 
  and 
  the 
  latter 
  from 
  a 
  unique 
  male. 
  Subse- 
  

   quent 
  to 
  the 
  description 
  of 
  dinoderi, 
  the 
  C. 
  F. 
  Baker 
  collection 
  of 
  

   Hymenoptera 
  was 
  acquired 
  by 
  the 
  U. 
  S. 
  National 
  Museum, 
  and 
  

   in 
  it 
  were 
  seven 
  specimens 
  of 
  this 
  species, 
  one 
  of 
  them 
  a 
  male. 
  

  

  This 
  male 
  apparently 
  differs 
  from 
  the 
  description 
  of 
  caelehs 
  

   by 
  having 
  the 
  antennal 
  flagellum 
  much 
  less 
  conspicuously 
  hairy, 
  

   the 
  hairs 
  being 
  very 
  sparse 
  and 
  short, 
  none 
  of 
  them 
  as 
  long 
  as 
  

   the 
  segment 
  from 
  which 
  it 
  arises. 
  The 
  antennal 
  club 
  is 
  much 
  

   less 
  distinctly 
  segmented 
  than 
  in 
  Masi's 
  illustration 
  of 
  the 
  antenna 
  

   of 
  caelehs, 
  the 
  dividing 
  furrow 
  being 
  very 
  shallow 
  and 
  indistinct. 
  

   The 
  striations 
  on 
  the 
  face 
  are 
  present 
  but 
  appear 
  to 
  be 
  somewhat 
  

   weakei- 
  than 
  illustrated 
  for 
  caelehs. 
  The 
  head 
  dorsally, 
  pronotum 
  

  

  