m«.] 227 



however, m the latTer of these works, that Alfkenhas identified it with 

 a species described in 1839 bv Herrich-Schaeffer under the name 

 ■ i:imjtingens.'' It was also kiiuwn as " co-njungens " to the late 

 Prof. Perez, and that name has been adopted for it by Frey Gressner 

 of Greneva in his recent excellent monograph of the bees of Switzerland. 

 Having carefully studied Herrich-Schaeffer's account of its characters 

 in Grermar's Zeitschr. f. Ent., I, p. 379, 1 cannot doubt that dallatorreana 

 and conj'ungens are identical ; and as the name conjungens has priority, 

 I introduce the species under it. 



The general appearance of conjungens $ — its size, habit, and 

 coloration, etc. — forcibly suggest a rather small and not very highly 

 coloured ruficomis ; or, perhaps still more forcibly, a specimen of 

 killana K. (= ochrostoma K.). Hillana., however, it cannot be. since 

 its mandiblea are acute ! And it differs from, any of the species usually 

 placed near nijicornis in having a black Jabi~um. With, this character 

 it combines that of a yello'ic 1st antennal joint or ' scape.' Now the 

 only Nomada in our present list which presents these two characters 

 together is the $ of jiavogiittata K..* and when cnnjungens 2 and 

 fiavoguttata ? are carefully compared, it will be found that in almost 

 everv detail of coloration the agreement between them is very close 

 indeed. But (1) co-njungens is much the larger of the two insects — 

 8 to 9 mm. long as against 6 to 7 ; (2) jiavoguttata, as Saunders points 

 out, is distinguished by its " slender form," whereas conpingens is a 

 stout, broad-bodied insect ; and (3) the propodeum of Jiavoguttata is 

 densely clothed at the sides with conspicuous silvery hairs, whereas its 

 sides in conjungens are practically naked. Chiefly on the ground of 

 this last difference, which all authorities on the characters of Nomada 

 consider to be one of high systematic unportance, Schmiedeknecht 

 decides that it is im.p<:)ssible to unite the two forms specifically, and on 

 this point his opinion is emphaitically endorsed by Perez. Also it may 

 be mentioned that the ^ assigned by Schmiedeknecht. and also by 

 Frey G-essner, to conjungens (= dallatorreana Schmiedkt.) differs from 

 that of jiavoguttata in having neither the scape nor the labrum hlacle '. 

 So that, in this sex, according to Saunders's Tables, the species would 

 come nearer to n.ijicomis, etc., than to jiavogiittata ! 



A character of less importance than those above mentioned, yet 

 not to be ignored, is that the round, pale, lateral spots on the testaceous 

 ■2nd and 3rd dorsal segments of the abdomen in conjungens are larger 

 (both actually and proportionally) and more brightly yellow than those 



* Saunders s statement that the scsipe oi iacoift'ttuta is black should be takeaas referring only 

 tu the • In the other sex I have Liiways found it pale, at least in frunt ' 



