2 \Q [September, 



Roland Trimen. We tender our very sincere sympathy to liis widow, who is 

 well known in connection with the "Leagnieof the En:pire" and other patriotic 

 associations. 



The South London Entomological and Natural History Society : 

 Thursday, July I3th, 1916.— Mr. Hy. J. Turner, F.E.S., President, in the Chair. 



Mr. H. Leeds exhibited a large number of aberrations of PolyommaUis 

 icarus taken in May and June, including obsolete, asymmetrical, gynandro- 

 morphous, abnormally spotted, light, dark, and suffused specimens. Mr. H. 

 Main, pupa of Geotrupes spiniger, living examples of Copris lunaris, larva of 

 Panorpa germanica (scorpion-fly), an ichneumon of the alder sawfly, Phyllotoma 

 vagans, and the larva of the sawfly of the Solomon's seal, Phymatocera aterrima. 

 The Eev. P. D. Morice, a British specimen of Polistes gallica, a common con- 

 tinental wasp. It was taken in IXirham. Dr. Chapman, a larva of Trichopteryx 

 viretata on the flowers of Corntis sanguinea from Keigate. Mr. Hy. J. Turner, 

 cocoons of Bucculatrix aurimaculella, leaves of birch mined by the Coleopteron 

 Orchestes rusci, the beautiful open net-work cocoon of the anomalous Lepido- 

 pteron ChrysocoHs festaliella, and some tubular larval cases of a Tineid formed 

 on dog's excrement at Aden. Mr. Bvinnett, the imagines and larval cases of 

 the hawthorn Coleophorid, Coleoplwra nigricella. Mr. P. B. Carr, a pvipa of 

 Gonepteryx rhamni. Messrs. E. Adkin and P. M. B. Carr communicated notes 

 on the Lepidoptera of the present season, and interesting remarks were made on 

 the same subject by Messrs. Curwen, Hare, Newman, Rev. P. D. Morice, and 

 others. — H, J. Turner, Hon. Report Secretary. 



NOMADA RUFICORNIS (sensu lato) AND ITS CLOSE ALLIES. 

 BY R. C. L. PERKINS, D.Sc, M.A., F.Z.S. 



The very variable Noviada, which we know as ruficornis L., 

 though a most interesting species, has never received in this country 

 the attention that it deserves. Both the distinctive characters of its 

 named varieties, and the habits of these, require a most careful study, 

 and this will only have been satisfactorily carried out on the acquisi- 

 tion of extensive series of examples, specially collected with regard to 

 the different species of Andrena on which they are parasitic. 



In considering the status of the so-called varieties of ruficornis, it 

 is advisable to include with them the two forms, N. horealis Zett., and 

 N. xantliosticta K. {lateralis E. Saund. nee Smith), which, as Saunders 

 remarks, are without any very strong structural characters to dis- 

 tinguish them from ruficornis itself. 



