44 Rev. T. A. Marsliall's Monograph of 



beneath at the extreme base. Wings hyaline ; sijuaniula; and 

 radicles pale yellow ; stigma yellow or pale green during life, after- 

 wards brownish, like the nervures, which are tolerably :?tout aiid 

 distinct ; cubital nervure complete as far as the end of the 1st cubital 

 areolet ; 2nd discoidal areolet open internally. Fore legs yellow ; 

 the middle pair slightly infuscated ; the hind pair still darker, with 

 the tips of the trochanters and base of tibia; pale ; the tarsi infuscated. 

 Abdomen much longer than the head and thorax, compressed pos- 

 teriorly ; 1st segment slightly widened from the base, its tubercles 

 situated before the middle (which is not the case in urt'icx, sp. 8) ; 

 sometimes yellowish, sometimes brown with the extremity yellowish ; 

 the dark spots on the intermediate segments are variable in number 

 and intensity. Valves of the terebra black. ^ Dissimilar ; black ; 

 oral parts testaceous ; palpi pale brownish ; antennae 20-jointed ; 

 squamulfe and radicles impure testaceous ; fore legs yellow, streaked 

 with fuscous ; the 4 posterior fuscous with the trochanters and base 

 of the tibia) yellowish ; all the coxai black ; abdomen fuscous with 

 the sutures pale, a larger pale patch on the 2nd suture. Length, I5 ; 

 exp, almost 3 lines. 



This is the constant parasite of Siphonopho^^a rosee, 

 Reaumur, the well known puceron of several species of 

 rose-tree (Rosa canina, gallica, centifolia, etc.) to the 

 exclusion oi R. ruhiginom, the sweet-briar, which nourishes, 

 according to Haliday, a peculiar Aphis, with its parasite A. 

 eglanteriie (sp. 35). Wild roses of whatever variety are 

 less frequently attacked by aphides than the cultivated 

 forms, upon which it is easy to find, in every garden, 

 specimens of Siphonophora, accompanied by the present 

 parasite, and another equally abundant, A. avcniv, Hal. or 

 picipes, Nees (sp. 12), which association of species has 

 originated some confusion in the older descriptions. A. 

 rosie, Hal. is not to be confounded with A. rosarum, Nees, 

 which belongs, at least for the most part, to our sp. 12. 

 A. Protxus, Wesm. (meant for Proteus), is another notable 

 example of the confusion of species. A. rosaj was probably 

 the principal subject of the experiments and observations 

 of the older writers, Frisch, Geoflfroy, Schrank, etc. but 

 their works are valuable rather for generalities than 

 specific distinctions : the reference to De Geer above given, 

 however, is not doubtful. Haliday, in a long note (Ent. 

 Mag. ii. 98) has given an able summary of the results 

 obtainable from these sources. 



In breeding the present species of Aphidius I en- 



