52 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL. MUSEUM VOL. 75- 



Mexico: Envii' de Guadalajara, Jalisco (M. Di^et). 



'Seyada: Reno (August 19, 1890, F. H. Hellman). 



New Mexico: Alamogordo (April 29, 1902j ; High Rolls (May 30, 1902) ; Las 



Cruces (May 17, S. Steel) ; Mesilla Park (C. N. Ainslie). 

 Texas: Marfa (June 5, 1908, Mitchell and Cushman). 

 Utah: Lehi (Septemher 9, 1905, W. A. Hooker). 

 Washington: North Yakima (July 7, 1903, Eldred Jenue). 

 Wyoming: Ritzville (July 29, 1922, M. C. Lane); Stratford (September 3^ 



1920). 



STENIOLIA DISSIMILIS C. L. Fox 



ateniolia dissimilis C. L. Fox, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., vol. 12, 1923, p. 429. 



This species is very closely related to Steniolia dupUcata. The 

 males may be distinguished from the males of duplicata by the ab- 

 sence of pits on the segments of the flagellimi. With regard to the 

 females of this species, I have been unable to discover characters on 

 which I could rely to separate them from the females of duplicata. 

 Consequently the females of these two species are not separated from 

 one another in the accompanying key to the species of this genus. 



STENIOLIA ALBICANTIA Parker 



Steniolia alhicantia Parkek, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 52, 1917, p. 12. 



This species was described from only male specimens and up to 

 the time o^ the present writing no females have been discovered that 

 can be associated with these males as sexes of one species. C. L. Fox,, 

 of San Francisco, has devoted considerable time to the study of the 

 Bembicids and has collected extensively in the West. He writes me : 



At Lake City, Modoc County, Calif., on the eastern side of the Warner 

 Mountains, close to the Nevada border line, July, 1922, I collected a large 

 series of what I determined as albicantia, and along with them I also took 

 several males and females of typical duplicata. At Lewiston, Idaho (on the 

 eastern border line of Washington), alongside of the Snake River, this summer 

 (1925), I collected a series of albicantia, only males (similar to those from 

 Lake City, Modoc County, Calif., in 1922) and with them in the same locality 

 only females of duplicata. I did not come across a male duplicata during this 

 trip. 



I have never come across any white females to associate with albicantia, and 

 in your description only males are described. The specimens of albicantia in 

 my collection run to all sizes, robust and small. 



I liave seen some of the specimens collected by ISIr. Fox at Lake 

 City, Calif., and at Lewiston, Idaho, and they belong to albicantia. 

 The data, however, that Mr. Fox has obtainecl from his work in the 

 field and which he sets forth in his letter throw doubt on the validity 

 of this species. I strongly suspect that the male of duplicata appears 

 under two forms and that albicantia is simply a white form of the 

 male of duplicata. More field work must be done and a fuller 



