194 BULLETIN 31, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



cross-band ; the inner ends of the yellow spots are a little whitish 

 dusted; third segment with two large yellowish-red, subtriangular 

 spots, the posterior margin straight, more or less indistinct, their inner 

 end whitish pollinose, 8e])a rated by about the same width as the pre- 

 ceding, the inner anterior sides a little convex, the front ends slightly 

 encroaching on the second segment, the narrow hind margin yellow, 

 dusted with whitish pollen, which expands somewhat in the middle; 

 elsewhere the black is opaque ; fourth segment on the front half shin- 

 ing, on each side with a moderately broad, arcuated, pollinose spot, 

 the outer end attaining the anterior angle, posterior border yellow, and 

 before it with a cross-band of about the same width, subopaque black ; 

 the yellow is pollinose, encroaching somewhat on the black in the mid- 

 dle. In the female the color of the abdomen is less opaque, with polli 

 nose markings as follows: First segment, except an oval spot on the 

 sides ; second segment with a slender convex spot on each side near the 

 middle, the inner end widened, expanded on the sides in a slender tri- 

 angle, the ground color of which is reddish yellow, posterior border in 

 the middle also pollinose ; third and fourth segments similar, the spots 

 not so slender, the lateral reddish yellow spots smaller, and the poste- 

 rior pollinose margin broadly dilated in the middle, so that in the 

 fourth segment it is more than a third of the width of the segment; 

 fifth segment wholly pollinose, except narrowly at the base. Legs red- 

 dish-yellow ; a spot above on the front and middle femora, the tip of 

 front tibioe, and the distal joints of their tarsi, a large oval spot on the 

 upper part of the hind femora, and the extreme tip black; a sub-basal 

 and a preapical ring on the hind tibiae, and the hind tarsi brown. 

 Wings nearly hyaline. 



Although I have but two specimens {$ ,9), from Connecticut, yet from 

 comparison with European specimens and also with the full description 

 of H. liyieatus given by Loew (Stett. Ent. Zeit., vii), I am satisfied that 

 this is not the same. The male diflers in the much larger extent of yel- 

 low on the abdomen, and the thoracic stripes being more distinct ; in 

 the female by the greater extent of pollen on the abdomen, and espe- 

 cially by the thoracic stripes, which are broad and distinct, a third of the 

 width of the intervening black stripe ; they are not diffuse on the pos- 

 terior part, but are well defined quite to the scutellum ; the intervening 

 black stripe is narrowed in a lanceolate form at the tip, merely touch- 

 ing the scutellum in an acute point. In H. Uneatns, on the posterior 

 third, the stripes are widened in a more grayish color so as to leave 

 only a slender line between them, apparent in well-preserved examples. 

 The lower part of the face is less brownish in R. conostomus, and the 

 legs have a less extent of black. I am not sure that all these differences, 

 especially the latter ones, are constant. 



ShouM the genus Eurhimyia Bigot be deemed admissible (I do not 

 think that it is) this species would belong in it. 



A single specimen without a head, of this species is in the Loew type 

 collection, bearing the label " Spec, indescr." 



