INTRODUCTORY PAPERS ON ICHNEUMONIDZ. 105 
species. Marshall’s Catalogue includes forty-four species, to 
which H. biannulatus, Gr., has since been added (Ent. Ann., 
1874, p. 142). Mr. Parfitt has described three new species from 
Britain (Ent. Mo. Mag. xviii. pp. 79, 88, 184, 272); and the 
descriptions of nine other species will be in found in ‘Trans. 
Ent. Soc. Lond., 1888, pp. 142-152. Of these H. inustus, Gr., 
is omitted, as it is almost impossible to identify the species with 
any certainty from Gravenhorst’s short description,—it was not 
in the Gravenhorstian collection, or Taschenberg would have 
mentioned it,—which probably refers to the male of some 
Pezomachus. H. formosus, Desy., is omitted, as a probable 
synonym of H. fragilis, Gr., the only distinctive character 
appearing to be the shorter aculeus in the former species. From 
a long series of captured and bred specimens (from nests of 
Agelena brunnea) this species is seen to be very variable in this 
and many other respects, and it does not appear improbable that 
H. imbecillus is the male; the females of H. decipiens, gyrini and 
persector have a marked general resemblance to these two varieties 
or species. Gravenhorst’s H. melanarws appears to include the 
males of both H. vicinus and H. castaneus. Myr. Parfitt’s 
H. litoreus appears to include two distinct species, both males, of 
which the description is not satisfactory. 
Independently of the imperfect areolet the species of Hemiteles 
may generally be distinguished by having the complete meta- 
thoracic are of Phygadeuon, with the slender legs and antenne 
of Cryptus. There are, however, exceptions to this in H. crassi- 
cornis and H. mixtus having the thickened antenne of a 
Phygadeuon. Ratzeburg’s genus Hemimachus was split off from 
Hemiteles, to include those males which have the metathoracic 
ares very imperfect or entirely absent; and as they are now well 
known to be merely the winged males of Pezomachus, really the 
genus has no right to a separate existence. For convenience sake, 
however, we retain the name in these papers for the known males 
of Pezomachus ; so if a male should not be found in the Hemiteles 
tables, it will be advisable to seek it in Hemimachus. Much 
requires clearing up in the economy of this group before the 
species can be conveniently arranged. 
Hemiteles fulvipes is well figured by Ratzeburg (Die. Ichn.,i., 
pl. vii., fig. 6), which is copied with the bad figure of another type 
into Vollenhoven’s ‘Schetsen’ (pt.i., pl,i., fig. 20). H. melanarius 
M 
