er 
108 Rev. F. D. Morice on 
Klug’s description of /aetus , except that the antennae 
cannot, I should say, be called “fusco-annulatae.” 
1 2. Biskra, on Ammi visnaga. “Eyes bluish-ash,” 
8. wil; OF. Ae: 
PALARUS DISPUTABILIS, n. sp. 
3d. P. laeto, K1., fere omnibus notis similis: sed forma segmenti 
ventralis 2", pyg ae et seutelli, certe (ut opinor) distinctus. 
Antennae pedum que bases vix conspicue infuscatae. Scutellum 
totum flavum, magis transversum quam in laeto, forma trapezoidali, 
antice quam postice multo latius. Segmenti ventralis 2" pars 
apicalis callose quidem assurgens, sed leniter ac sensim, haud (ut in 
laeto) a latere visa in formam tuberculi magni subquadrati elevata. 
Abdomen apice haud “ tridentato,” sed potius uni-mucronato (angulis 
lateralibus pygidii non dentiformibus, sed omnino obtusis vel rotun- 
datis ; apice medio solum in mucronem satis longum producto). 
Segmenta abd. dorsalia 1-5, quodque ante flavedinis suae apicem 
utrinque maculam minimam curvatam, vel potius impressionem, 
tenuem sed distinctam, plus minusve decoloratam, spiraculo haud 
dissimilem, exhibet: cuius rei in P. laeto ne vestigium quidem 
invenire potui. 
Oculi (nune quoque, hoe est post duodecim annos !) colore omnino 
alio atque in laeto; scilicet rufo-brunneo suffusi (in laeto potius 
virescentes). 
Scapi antennarum antice flavi (in /aeto obscuri). 
Long. cire. 8 mm. 
The above characters appear to me amply sufficient to 
distinguish disputabilis ¢ from laetus ¢. Unfortunately 
the most important of them relate to points of structure 
in which the sexes differ, and cannot therefore be used to 
ascertain their respective ? 9. 
Two of them at least, however, viz. (1) the feeble dis- 
coloured impressions at the side of each abdominal yellow 
fascia (looking like a row of spiracles down each side of 
the dorsum) and (2) the transverse trapezoidal form of 
the scutellum and its entirely yellow colour, appear in the 
Q just mentioned, and called by Mr. Saunders laetus 9. 
On this ground, and also on account of its complete 
general resemblance to disputabilis 2, and its occurrence 
in the same locality at a slightly later date in the season, 
I believe it to be the @ of the latter. 
(I ought to say that in /epidus also, though not in laetus, 
I can see indications of spiracle-like impressions in the 
