2G6 iMay, 



Nematits aurantiacus, Htg., Blattw., 197, 25.— Mr. C. W. Dale 

 has taken at Glanville's Wootton a Nematus, whicli agrees with the 

 above iu every way except that the stigma is not bluish-black at the 

 base, but this cannot be regarded as of much importance. 



It is allied to pavidus, Lep., but is easily distinguished by its 

 more slender body, by the scutellum having two yellow spots, and by 

 the pleursB being yellow. It is not unlike the form of mi/osofides 

 without the black band on abdomen, but then that species has the 

 antennae quite black, and differs in many other points. 



iV. aurantiacus, Thorns. (Hymen. Scand., i, 156, 89), is a different 

 species : it is pavidus, Lep. 



Athalia rosce. — I feel satisfied that the habits of A. rosce as de- 

 cribed by Taschenberg and Boisduval are erroneous. The larva, I 

 am sure, is not attached to the rose, and the observations of these 

 authors must refer to Eriocampa canines {oetliiops. West.). A. rosce 

 seems to be attached to Ajuga. When at Thornhill last year. Dr. 

 Sharp asked me if I knew the saw-fly on the Ajuga ; not knowing 

 what species he meant, we went to the garden in search of it, and 

 there, on the first plant examined, we found A. rostB. This confirms 

 Mr. James Hardy's observation of its partiality for this plant. Dr. 

 Sharp told me that a saw-fly larva is found on it in the autumn, which 

 is, in all probability, that of the Athalia. 



Blenvocnmpa bipunctata, KL, is stated to live in the rose branches, 

 boring in the pith, by Boisduval and Taschenberg. I think this obser- 

 vation must refer to Poecilosoma repandum, Fall., which has this habit, 

 while the description of its larva agrees tolerably well with that given 

 of the supposed hipunctata. 



Aphilotlirix clementince, Gir. — I found the gall of this species at 

 Cadder, in the middle of October. It was then green, with pink 

 stripes. 



Cynipsfolii, L. — Thomson (Opusc.Ent.,p.790),has called attention' 

 to the fact that the C.folii of Linne is the same as Hartig's, and, con- 

 sequently is different from the/b/a of Schenck and Mayr. That this 

 is the case is proved by the description given by Linne of the galls of 

 hi^folii: " gallis avellana; magnitudine," which scarcely can a])ply to 

 the gall oifolii, Schenck ; and, besides that, there is the fact t\\AifoJii, 

 Sch., is a rai'e South, or, at least. Central, European species, and not 

 found in Sweden at all, while Hartig's /bZ// {scuielhiris^Ol.) is common 

 there. The change of name seems to have been first made by Schenck 



