June, 1902.] 121 



P. 195 — /. melanopyrrhus. The type is not indicated, but no doubt can exist 

 that this is Ccelichneumon castaneiventris, Grav., var. subniger, Berth., Ann. 

 Soc. Fr., 1894, p. 558, $ . 



P. 197 — /. caslanopyga. This is recognised as Amblyteles castanopygcs, 

 Steph., = A. rubriventris, Wesni. (1854). The lower mandibular tooth is verj 

 small, subobsolete, as in A. equitatorius, Panz. ; (he checks are aciculately punctate ; 

 the labrum of the <? is laterally white ; the mctathoracic apophyses are much 

 stronger in the J ; the postpctiole of the ? is finely aciculate, of $ subrugose, 

 throughout, with its apex centrally elevated and glabrous ; the gastrocaoli are some- 

 what deep and striate, though small. 



P. 198 — /. pyrrhopus. The type is not indicated, but authors are undoubtedly 

 correct in ascribing this species to Cratichneumon fugitivus, Grav., $ . 



P. 199 — /. gasterator. This is not a good species as was for some time held ; 

 it has the facies of Microcryptus abdominator, Grav., but is a true Ichneumonid. 

 Holmgren's reference to the Cryptid facies of Cratichneumon fugitivus, Grav., ? , 

 led me to compare it therewith, but the coxae are distinctly scopuliferous, and no 

 doubt remains that it is C. cokuscator, Linn., $ . 



P. 200— I. femorator — Colpognathus celerator, Grav., ? . 



P. 201 — /. rufalor. Placed among 1. latrator, Fab., in Stephens' collection ; 

 it is a $ Phueogenes. 



P. 202 — /. abdominator. Type not indicated. 



P. 204 — /. picipes. Type not indicated. 



P. 206 — /. rujicollis. The type is not indicated, but it has been referred by 

 Bridginan (Entom., 1882, p. 139), followed by Berthoumieu, to I. SANGULNAtor, 

 Rossi. 



P. 207 — /. rufescens. This is rightly ascribed by authors to STENICHNEUMON 

 pictus, Grav., ? . 



P. 271— Trogus atrocaudatus. I consider tins species, of which no type is 

 indicated, as more probably referable to T. exaltatorics, Panz., than to T. 

 lutorius, Fab. 



P. 272 — Trogus dissimulator. The type is not indicated, but the description 

 appears to differ from that of Ichneumon bisignatus, Grav., only in the immaculate 

 coxae and flavous vertical orbits. 



P. 274 — Alomyia semiflava = A. debellator, Fab., ? . 



Haliday described Ichneumon phaleratus in Ann. Nat. Hist., 1839, p. 112, but 

 I know nothing, beyond its original description, of this striking species, which 

 rather recalls a $ Cryptid than an Ichneumonid. Berthoumieu places it, as in- 

 sufficiently described, in the genus Platylabus. I learn from the Director of the 

 Dublin Science and Art Museum that the type is probably still extant in Haliday's 

 collection through, since no labels are affixed, he is unable to indicate it.* 



* Since the above was printed, the Rev. T. A. Marshall has kindly drawn my attention to 

 the identically of Haliday's description with that of Platylabus leucugvamraus, Wesm. Bui. Ac. 

 3rux„ 1853, p. 316 ; Holnigr., Thorns., Aic. ; and, although the former is short, I think it suffi- 

 cient, remembering its author's accuracy, to justify the conclusion :— Platylabus phaleratus, 

 Hal. (1839) = P. Uucogrammus, auctt.— C. M. 



a. 



