terjninal segments of Halticella, dc. 297 



dorsal segment, abutting on a narrow impunctate belt 

 appertaining to the hypopygiiim, where their union is 

 effected as aforesaid. 



Each of these terminal segments, thus conjoined 

 together in the females, is furnished with a pair of 

 spiracles, seen in succession from above, and first 

 recorded by Prof. Westwood in his figure and description 

 of Chalcis pyramidea, Fab. (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. vol. ii. 

 p. 224; pi. XX., fig. 6 a); those of the epipygium (6th 

 segment, Sichel) being rotundate, and located close to 

 the base on each side ; those of the hypopygium, elongate- 

 oval, situated towards the projecting apex above, in 

 proximity to the aforesaid impunctate belt, while sepa- 

 rated inter se by a slightly carinated ridge. In the males, 

 however, where the terminal segments retain their 

 normal condition, the 7th dorsal segment {epipyriium) is 

 alone furnished with its usual spiracles, the hypopygium 

 below having none. 



M. Andre, however, does not seem to be fully persuaded 

 of the peculiar conformation of these terminal segments 

 in the female, or of the conjunction of this caudal ap- 

 pendage with the epipygium in succession thereto, when 

 he denounces, as "une erreur commise involontairement 

 par le docteur Sichel," that, by some strange miscon- 

 ception of the text and figure of Prof. Westwood {loc. cit.), 

 the former "semble reconnaitre en effet la presence de 

 stigmates a la base (?) de ce qu'il appelle Y hypopygium, 

 qui est en realite le 7e arceau ventral de I'abdomen" 

 (p. 334). M. Andre contends that "Celui-ci considerant 

 en effet, avec raison, que les parties que le docteur Sichel 

 appelle epipyyium et hypopygium constituent par leur en- 

 semble un seul segment abdominal — le dernier visible, 

 dit : ^Abdominis segmentis duohas apicalibus utrinque puncto 

 spiraculiformi, lit in generihus Ibalia et Leucospide^ ;'^ 

 while — as our esteemed colleague conceives — "la figure 

 explique surabondamment que ^segmentis duobus' s'ap- 

 plique a V epipygium de Sichel et mi segment dorsal qui le 

 precede, mais nullement a son hypopygium. Celui-ci 

 n'en presente, par le fait, aucune trace, ou du moins je 

 n'ai pu en decouvrir" ! 



pi. 180) les deux premiers segments sont representes comrae n'en 

 formaut qu'uu seul ; ce qui y parait le cinquieme segment est en 

 realite I'epipygium. Ce que j'ai regarde dans ces deux especes 

 corame I'epipygium est I'liypopygium." 



TRANS. ENT. SOC. 1882. PART II. (jULY.) 2 Q 



