50 [M;ircli, 



Melittd varians Rossi (58) has assigned to it, as ^ , that sex of 

 trimmerana Auct. nee K., as stated above, while the ^ desci'ibed under 

 M. helvola L. is, I beheve, a^f^A. nujroaenea, but it is a headless speci- 

 men. M. picicornift K. (No. 62) has lieen cited as a synonym of 

 A. trimmerana (Auct. nee K.) by E. Saunders, but this I have long- 

 known to be an error, as pieicornis was descril)ed as having a yellowish 

 scopa. The type is very much distorted and affected by the stylopid 

 parasite, but I believe it to be a $ of the second brood of J. gwynana. 

 (which I frequently find stylopized), and the second example in the 

 collection a faded example of the same species. The type of M. sub- 

 dentata K. (No. 65) is a (5" heh-nla L. ; the var. /? is fj variant. 

 M. picipes K., which has been referred to the same species as M. piei- 

 cornis, viz., to A. trimmerana Auct., was probably a worn or faded 

 A. afzeliella, or wilkella, stylopized or otherwise. The type was in 

 Drury's collection, and is not represented in Kirby's, but it could 

 hardly have belonged to the trimmerana group. If found, I fear its 

 name will have to be lised for one of Kirby's later species. In the case 

 of No. 67, M. angnlosa K., the antennae are so mutilated that I do not 

 feel sure whether this type is a slightly aberrant ^J of helvola. or varians, 

 but I do not think it can be synadelpha, a name which, being recent,* 

 one would not regret. 



The type of M. lanifrons (78) was in Haworth's collection, and I 

 do not know whether it is likely to exist now. The description of this 

 (^ is not very convincing, but I think it may have been an Andrena 

 nigriceps. Kirby's M. contigua (79) is ^ fuhicrus, as Smith rightly 

 determined. In the first edition of his book the last-named author 

 retains M. leivineUa K. (88) as a species, and says it is very like the 

 male of dentieulata K., but in his second edition he sinks it, as being 

 a (^ (Zorsoia K., which is correct. M. ovattda'K. (89; is the ^ of Andrena 

 afzeliella, and has priority over that and fuscata K. The type of 

 No. 93, M. eollinsona.na, is not as has been held, the ^ of A. proxima, 

 but is a (^ dorsata, while the var. /3 is a true pmxima. No var. p is 

 mentioned in the " Monographia," so perhaps there has been some 

 error in the labels, for the description agrees better with proxima. In 

 no other case but where proxima is concerned have I found reason to 

 suspect that the type of a species in Kirby's collection was not the 

 actual subject of his description. But M. eonibinata ? type (94) is 

 dorsata, and the ^ given to it is -eb p)roxima. There should be a var. (5 

 of eonibinata, which Kirby described as " plantis omnibus nigris," and 

 this was no doubt a i^ proxima. 



