110 ICnNEUMONID.B. 



described varieties in place o£ species. Brulle, he contends, had 

 (Kist. Nat. Ins. Hym. iv, p. 94) in 1846 reversed Fimj)I(C pcdatur 

 and P. punctata in respect to the conformation oF their metanotal 

 areolae : i. e., that of P. pmictator (Erulle's P. p>edata) is hexagonal 

 with two quadrate arese on either side, while that of P. punctata 

 is distinctly transverse. Thereupon Vollenhoven gives the de- 

 sci"iption of an insect under the former name, which agrees very 

 well with those we now know as Xanthopimpla lepcha and X. reijina, 

 but he unfortunately omits to mention tlie terebral length. 



Dr. K. Krieger does not pretend, in his very excellent account 

 •of the present genus (Ber. Nat. (les. Leipzig, 1890, p. 101), to 

 determine tlie species of Fabricius, but describes a $ , agreeing 

 with BruUe's description in every way, excepting its coloration. 

 That it cannot, however, be referred to P. p>unctator is siiown by 

 its possession of but four abdominal spots on either side, and I 

 am quite satisfied that it is synonymous with P. jyunctata, F., 

 since the alternate segments are alone maculate, the areola is 

 transverse and basally much constricted, the second segment 

 centrally smooth and nitidulous, the third coarsely and dilfusel}' 

 punctate, and the terebra is detiexed and as long as the hind 

 tibiae with their tarsi, excepting tlie claws (cf. also ^mith, Proe. 

 Linn. Soc. li. 1857, p. 119). 



A¥ithoufc an examination of the type specimens, which I Iiave 

 been enabled to effect only in the case of the Eauksian Cabinet, 

 it is, I fear, useless to retain these ancient and insufficiently 

 defined names. 



If these insects be not killed with cyanide of potassium their 

 ■coloration is often a good guide to specific distinction ; but I liave 

 rarely been enabled to rely upon this feature to any extent, owing 

 ■to the large percentage of ancient and more usually discoloured 

 specimens, which have been the best at my disposal. 



Xanthopimpla is known to prey upon iS'octuid and Pyralid 

 moths in India; it has also been recorded from species of PapiJio 

 and Oricula, and Mr. Ilowland Turner tells me that it is parasitic 

 upon the grand and exclusively Oriental OmithojHera, Boisd., which 

 genus, however, does not occur in Madagascar, whence XantJio- 

 j)imp>la was first mentioned by Saussure. Vollenhoven tells us it 

 is probably destructive to several species of Lepidoptei-a, atiding 

 that Ur. Piepers bred a cJ of his X. punctator from the pupa of 

 Papilio pammon., L., in Celebes. Mr. E. C. Cotes is also said to 

 have bred specimens from larvae of the Bombvcid moth, Cricula 

 drifeni'strata, in Hazenburgh (Manch. Mem. 1891, p. 5), where 

 Pimpla zebra, Voll., is stated to have been likewise raisfd from 

 the same species. Mr. E. P. Stebbing tells us (Journ. Bombay 

 Nat. Hist. Soc. xvi, p. G84) that Pimpla punctator is parasitic upon 

 various species of defoliating Satujiniidje, but I do not know 

 to which of the modern species to assign his observations, which 

 .are somewhat general in character, since he also remarks that 

 •various species of Glypta, Pimpla, &c.., are beneficial in reducing 

 'the numbers of Ilijhlera pucre, the connnon teak defoliator. 



