tm Osmia-spccies of the adunca-group. 157 
that these were the $ $ of my Saleve $ though we both 
thought it very likely that they might be so. 
Being obliged to return to England I had to bequeath 
my problem to M. Frey-Gessner for further investigation, 
and he continued to make excursions to the Saleve with 
that object in the spring and summer of 1908, which, 
however, met with no success, till at last on June 28th, in 
company with Dr. H. A. Schulz, he found both sexes of an 
Osmia visiting the Lotus —the ^ J agreeing with those 
taken by myself, and the $ $ with those which we had 
expected would prove to be their partners! He has 
recorded these captures, making kind allusion to my paper 
of 1901 and expressing his agreement with its views, in 
the Transactions of the Swiss Entomological Society (July 
1909), and has also most kindly presented me with several 
of the ^ which now' lie before me. 
0. loti ^ much resembles caementaria in sculpture and 
pilosity, and like tliat species has pale calcaria. But it is 
even more like morawitzi, Per., and might easily be mis¬ 
taken for it without most careful examination. It seems, 
how'ever, to be a smaller insect than either morawitzi or 
caementaria —at least I have seen no specimen of either 
sex more than 8 mm. long, a size which is generally a good 
deal exceeded in both the other species. The best char¬ 
acter, however, by which it can be at once separated from 
either morawitzi or caementaria, and which originally led 
M. Frey-Gessner to set it apart in his collection, is to be 
found in the sculpture of the clypeus. This in the other 
species is evenly punctured all over, but in loti is bisected 
longitudinally by a smooth and shining carina which is 
uniformly developed, and quite unmistakable when once 
noticed, in every specimen that I have seen. Nothing of 
the sort seems to exist in any other ^ ^ of the group. 
And this fact, coupled with the characters of the ^ 
antennae and 6th ventral-plate, which my former paper 
describes in detail, to my mind fully justifies the retention 
of this as a distinct species.* Unfortunately Morawitz says 
nothing as to the clypeus of his loti ^ ; but, notwithstand¬ 
ing this omission, I feel practically certain that his species 
* M. Frey-Gessner has lately written to me that he finds the usual 
habitats of morawitzi and loti differ, the former occurring chiefly 
on the higher Alps, the latter on mere hills and in the valleys. Yet I 
have also taken morawitzi in North Italy near the sea and at no great 
height above it, I think on Echiwm. 
