554 Mr. R. E. Turner on Fossorial Hymenoptera, 



This is given by Saussure as Tasmanian (Reise Nov., 

 Zool. ii. p. 74). It is a very common species in North 

 Queensland, and is also found at Sydney. Though I have 

 not seen Tasmanian specimens, I have no reason to doubt the 

 correctness of the record. 



Larra australis, Sauss. 



Tachytes australis, Saiiss. Mem. soc. pbys. & hist. nat. Geneve, xiv. 



p. 19 (1854) (uec Sauss. 1867). 

 Larrada australis, Sauss. M^lang. Ilyrn. ii. p. 69 (1854). 



Ilab. Eaglehawk Neck ; March. 



I am not sure that my identification of this species is 

 correct. Saussure states that the median segment is as long 

 as the mesonotum, but in my specimens it is distinctly 

 longer. Saussure's figure, however, shows it longer than 

 the mesonotum. 



In my specimens the pronotum is sunk much below the 

 mesonotum, the middle portion higher than the sides, in this 

 respect approaching Kotogonia, but the tarsal ungues are 

 shorter than is usual in that genus. 



Larra (?) nigripes, Sauss. 



Larrada nif/ripes, Sauss. Reise Nov., Zool. ii. p. 74 (1867) ; Schulz, 

 Zool. Ann. iv. p. 191 (1911). 



Schulz gives a description of the specimen marked as the 

 type of this species in the Geneva Museum. But Saussure's 

 description is of a ? , apparently without a head, whereas 

 the specimen described by Schulz is a c?, with a head. 

 This causes doubt as to whether the specimen is really the 

 type or whether the label may not have been accidentally 

 shifted. Schulz is inclined to place the species in TacJiyfes^ 

 though carefully pointing out how it differs from that genus 

 in the oval posterior ocelli, in the long median segment, 

 and in the form of the pronotum. I formerly considered the 

 species identical with L. psilocera, Kohl, but after Schulz's 

 remarks on Saussure's collection, I do not feel that this can 

 be maintained. I have no evidence that L. psilocera occurs 

 in Tasmania. I have not seen any species answering to the 

 description given by Schulz. 



The localities given in the Reise d. Novara are not always 

 reliable, and it cannot be considered at all certain that the 

 present species is Tasmanian. 



