REVISION OF GENUS EUCERCERIS CRESSON 55 



Type. — The holotype 9 of E. punctifrons cavagnaroi Sciillen was 

 taken on Volcan de San Salvador, El Salvador, June 24, 1963, 

 (D. Cavagnaro and M. E. Irwin). The mandibles of the type are 

 badly worn and the apices of the wings are frayed. Deposited at the 

 CaHfornia Academy of Sciences. 



Distribution. — Known only from the type locaHty. 



Prey record. — None. 



Plant record. — None. 



27b. Eucerceris punctifrons punctifrons (Cameron) 



Figures 33, 85 a, b, c 



Aphilanthops punctifrons Cameron, 1890, p. 106, fig. 2 ? (cf by error) 

 Cerceris punctifrons Kohl, 1890, p. 369.— Dalla Torre, C. G., 1897, p. 470. 

 Eucerceris punctifrons Scullen, 1939, pp. 18, 22-23, figs. 54, 55, 56, 135; 1948, p. 157. 



Type. — The holotype female of E. punctifrons (Cameron) is at the 

 British Museum of Natural History, no. 21.1,195. It was taken at 

 Temax, North Yucatan, Mexico, by Gaumer. 



Distribution. — Known only from the holotype. 



Prey record. — None. 



Plant record. — None. 



28. Eucerceris rubripes Cresson 



Figures 34, 86 a, b, c, d, e, f, g 



Eucerceris rubripes Cresson, 1879, p. xxiii; 1882, pp. v, vi, vii; 1887, p. 281. — 

 Ashmead, 1890, p. 32.— Bridwell, 1899, p. 209.— Ashmead, 1899, p. 295.— 

 Viereck and Cockerell, 1904, pp. 84, 85, 88.— Viereck, 1906, p. 233.— Smith, 

 H. S., 1908, p. 372.— Mickel, 1917, p. 455.— Cresson, 1916, p. 101.— Scullen, 

 1939, pp. 18, 25-28, figs. 15, 16, 38, 60, 78, 93, 111, 125, 140; 1948, pp. 156, 

 158; 1951, p. 1012. 



Eucerceris unicornis Patton, 1879, pp. 359-360. — Cresson, 1887, p. 281. — 

 Bridwell, 1899, p. 209.— Ashmead, 1899, p. 295.— Viereck and Cockerell, 

 1904, pp. 84, 85, 87.— Viereck, 1906, p. 233. 



Cerceris unicornis Schletterer, 1887, p. 505. — Dalla Torre, C. G., 1897, p. 480. 



Cerceris rubripes Dalla Torre, K. W. von, 1890, p. 201. — Dalla Torre, C. G., 

 1897, p. 473. 



Aphilanthops marginipennis Cameron, 1890, p. 105, t. 7, fig. 1. 



Eucerceris marginipennis Kohl, 1890, p. 368.* 



Cerceris marginipennis Dalla Torre, C. G., 1897, p. 467. 



The female of E. rubripes Cresson is very close to the female of 

 E. apicata Banks from which it may be separated by the foUovnng 

 characteristics: (1) The mesal clypeal area of rubripes shows a dis- 



1 This reference is from Dalla Torre, 1897, p. 467. However, the original Kohl 

 reference was examined and no reference was found to the species Eucerceris 

 marginipennis. If Kohl used the above species name it must be in another pub- 

 lication so far undiscovered. 



