1022.] 253 



is not likely to occur with us, being parnsitic on Andrcva prmde/Ici E, Saund. 

 That the German species assigned to hillana K. is distinct from ochrostoma 

 there appears to be no doubt, as the sculpture of the mesonotum and scutellum 

 is diflerent, apart from other characters. It is said to be synonymous with 

 N. vi/losa Thorns. Kirby's description of hillana, so far as it goes, appears to 

 me to refer clearly to ochrostoma and not to rillosa Thorns. Kirby's type, a J , 

 was smaller than his S ochrostoma, while Stockhert's hillana is said to be larger 

 than the latter. Owing to great individual variability in size, and seeing that 

 Jvirby saw only one c? of each species, possessing neither himself,* not much 

 importance is to be attached to his measurements. In his description Kirby 

 savs that the ventral abdominal segments of hillana are variegated with yellow 

 bauds and spots, and that the legs are red, except certain specified parts — not 

 inc-luiling llie tibiae — which are black or marked with black. The jellow 

 markings of the abdomen are described as four lateral spots, two on each side, 

 followed by three bands, of which the first two are interrupted. In species 

 where the spots are larger he does not call these '' lateral." In these points 

 Kirby's description of hillana appears to me to accord with British ochrostoma^ 

 and of course the brevity of this does not allow much comparison with the 

 detailed descriptions of Stiickhert, which in each case occupy several large 

 pages of print. The host oi hillana Stockhert is n'^Y^xHwiXy Andrena lathyri 

 Alil'., a species unknown in Britain, but one which I have specially sought in 

 many localities and in many collections from the time when it was first de- 

 scribed and Herr Alflcen furnished me with specimens, liill, in whose collection 

 Kirby found the c? hillana — " a D. Hill Londinensi capta " — does not appear 

 to have been a special collector of bees, as very few species are credited to him 

 in the Monographia, and it would be remarkable it he collected a Nomada, 

 never since found in England and known to be parasitic on an Andrena, like- 

 wise unknown here. Though it would be a pleasure to add another Nomada 

 to our limited list, I think that Kirby's hillana should not be accepted as such, 

 and that the name villosa Thoms. should be applied to the species so carefully 

 described by StiJckhert under the name hillana K. Incidentally I have re- 

 examined a long series of a Nomada from Baden, Germany, collected by Mr. 

 A. Koebele, in company with great numbers of Ayidrena lathyvi, no other 

 Andrena on Avhicli this could be parasitic being found at the same time and 

 place. I had referred these to N. ochrostoma, as a larger and darker form than 

 ours, and I find that they are this species, and not Stockhert's hillana, as 

 one u;iglit have expected. Herr Stockhert gives a list of various hosts for 

 ochrostoma and the authority for these, but very positive evidence is needed 

 before some of them can be accepted as correct. In this Magazine (Iyi8 

 p. 3G) I have shown that in England ochrostoma apparently restricts its 

 parasitism to A. wilkella {xantliura) and leaves the closely allied afzeliella K. 

 and similis Sm. immune. It would be strange if, under these circumstances, 

 the hosts A, humilis and A.fucata, and still more so \i Halictus scabiosae, 

 were correct. Various authors give A. lahialis as a host, but Smith's record I 

 know to be wrong, as his (supposed) Ilampstead specimens of ochrostoma were 

 (juttidata, the well-known parasite of A. cincjidata ! In Germany N. villosa Th. 

 appears about a mouth ea,rlier in the season than N. ochrostoma. Any British 



* Kii'b3''s collection coutaiued females of oc/uros/of/ai, but these were considered by bim to be 

 varieties of riijlcornis. 



