1^6 PSYCHE [August 



SYNOPSIS OF THE NORTH AMERICAN SPECIES OF AMMOPHILA. 



BY A. L. MELANDER, CHICAGO, ILL. 



Recently through the kindness of the authorities of the Academy of natural 

 sciences of Philadelphia I had the opportunity of studying the types of Ammophila 

 contained in their collection. A synopsis of the species was arranged in tabular 

 form with the intention of further work on the group. As this plan cannot now 

 be carried out it seems advisable to publish the notes made while in Philadelphia 

 for the assistance of any who wish to study this interesting genus. In the original 

 table have been interpolated the additional North American species not contained 

 at the Philadelphia academy, their places having been determined from the descrip- 

 tions alone. Owing to the incomplete diagnoses of some authors a number of these 

 species have been placed out of their natural order, and hence the table is in part 

 more artificial than is to be desired; but in the main a natural relationship is 

 expressed. 



It is strange that the study of such large, common, and intelligent insects 

 should have been so long neglected. Possibly this is due to the uncertainty in the 

 determination of the species of the older authors and to the confusion existing 

 between the homonymous but difTerent species of Dahlbom and Lepeletier. But 

 as in the northeastern part of the United States the species are not numerous the 

 student of at least that section should experience but little trouble in naming his 

 captures. For example, some two hundred specimens collected by myself in central 

 and southern Texas, Illinois, and New England yield only three Psammophilas, 

 nine Ammophilas and the one Coloptera, thirteen species, of which ten are found 

 in the Northeastern States. In order of abundance of individuals these species 

 are : procera, nigricans^ uffiar'ia, violaceipe)uiis^ extremitafa, inepta (Tex.), abbreviata^ 

 vulgaris, grossa (Tex.), luchios a, gracilis, wrightii (T&yi.), and an undescribed species 

 from Illinois. It will be noticed that most of these are the species of the older 

 authors. On account of the brevity of their descriptions the determination of these 

 can best be accomplished by eliminating the other species found in the type locality. 

 By this method, and as they seem to be the most abundant forms, the older species 

 can be readily fixed. A careful redescription of them is desired from the next 

 monographer. 



A number of changes in nomenclature are instituted, whereby several well- 

 known names are dropped as synonyms. The dubious violaccipennis is a common 

 form of the United States, concerning whose identity it is indeed strange that a 

 doubt should ever have existed. The Brazilian iirnaria of Lepeletier is not the 



