252 [March, 1873. 



but is blacker and rather narrower, the legs being much blacker, 

 and the antennae quite black instead o£ yellowish-black, the pu- 

 bescence on the scutelluin is all black, instead of all yellow, and 

 the yellow spots on the abdomen never extend to the edge. 



4. Strphus aiwulatus, Zett. — I am now able to describe both sexes 

 of this species for the first time, as it was originally described 

 from the female, and only that sex has hitherto been recognised 

 in connection with the name. I can, however, find no satisfactory 

 distinction in the description of the male of ;S'. vittiger, but the 

 female is readily distinguished by the pale base of the hind 

 femora. The species belongs to the " ribesii'' group, from which 

 I omitted it before, as Zetterstedt places it next to S. cinctus and 

 cinctelJus, which have the abdomen very nai'row. It need only be 

 compared with S. lineola and vittiger, as it has a black line down 

 the middle of the epistoma ; but, while the male annulatiis has the 

 legs luteous, with the basal half of the anterior femora black, and 

 the hind legs all black excejDt the knees, and the female has the 

 legs nearly all luteous, except a broad black ring on the hind 

 femora, which leaves the basal two-fifths of the femora luteous, 

 the male lineola has the legs black, with the anterior knees and 

 base of tibise luteous, and the female has them luteous, with the 

 basal third of the femora black, and the hind legs all black except 

 the reddish knees. Vittiger is especially stated by Zetterstedt to 

 have the hind femora black, with only the tip yellow, and he 

 knew the female of vittiger from several specimens, though he 

 did once (Dipt. Skan. ii, 715) refer to it a specimen having the 

 hind femora pale at the base, which he subsequently (Z. c. viii, 

 3138) considered ati7iulatus. Vittiger has been described by 

 Schiuer in his Pauna Austriaca, and he speaks of the hind femora 

 being black, except at the tip, without any refei'ence to sex. I 

 can, however, find no character by which I am able to separate 

 the males, nor have I seen any males which I believe to be distinct, 

 though I have seen some females answering to the description of 

 vittiger. In case the two names should be synonymous, annulatus 

 has the priority by some years. I found it in some abundance on 

 Shirley Common, on May 5th, 1872, about some furze bushes ; I 

 fancy, from the fragility of the specimens, that they had only re- 

 cently come to maturity. I caught one female at Eannoch in 

 June, 1870, and I have seen eight specimens (2 (J, 6 ? ) caught 

 by Dr. Buchanan White at Braemar, in 1871. 



