new Species of Exotic Hi/mawpterons Tnsecis. 229 



gave a figmo in illustration of the genus. As subsequently men- 

 tioned, liovvever, this species difllers in several slight respects from 

 C. compressa, especially in the incomplete veining oT the wings 

 forming the submarginal cells. The specimen of //. fasciata, 

 figured by .T urine, is a female, and the mandible represented by 

 its side is that of a female being destitute of an interna! tooth. 

 Jurine, however, in his generic character, noticed the sexual dis- 

 tinction occurring in the armature of the mandibles. 



In the " Genera Crustaceorum," which appeared soon after 

 .Tiirino's work, Latreille gave Ampniex as a synonyme of his 

 C'hiorton ; l)ut in his later works (" Families Naturelles" and "Regne 

 Animal," second edition) he gives the two genera as distinct, 

 placing them in different sections of the family Sphe^da^, liaving 

 the mandibles internally simple or dentate, thus overlooking 

 Jnrine's correct notice of this difference being only sexual. It is 

 thus evident that Latreille regarded the Ampulex fasciaia as the 

 type of the genus Ampulex, and as generically distinct from his 

 own genus Chlorlon, with which he states that Ampulex agrees in 

 the veins of the wings, thus further proving that Sphex compresan 

 was his real type of the genus Chlonon. 



It remains to be noticed that Panzer, in his " Entomologischer 

 Versuch die Jurineschen Gattungen," has pointed out the differ- 

 ences which exist between Sphex lohata and compressa in their 

 cibarian characters, and that Messrs. Serville and Saint Fargeau, 

 in the " Encyclopedie Methodique," have given a long generic cha- 

 racter of Ampulex with Spliex compressa as its type, (erroneously, 

 however, stating that the mandibles are internally destitute of 

 teeth in both sexes,) and adding that they consider it doubtful 

 whether Jnrine's Ampulex fusciata belongs to this genus. They 

 have also adopted as distinct the genus Chlorlon, dividing it into 

 two sections, the first corresponding with the genus Fronceus of 

 Latreille, and the second given as the " genre Chlorion, Latr." 

 including Chlorion lohalum and two new species. Lastly, M. Guerin 

 has lately figured a new species congenerous with Sphex compressa 

 as an example of the genus Ampniex. 



From what has been stated above I consider, 1st, that the genus 

 Chlorion was always characterized by its founder from Sphex com- 

 pressa, which must be regarded as its real type; 2nd, that Fa- 

 bricius adopted an error of Latreille in giving Sphex lohata as 

 the type, and described a genus under the name of Chlorion 

 distinct from that of Jiatreille, and consequently that a new generic 

 name must be given to Sphex lohata if indeed it be generally dis- 



