FORMICA. 313 



Mich., L. oophilus Wasm., L. cuneifer Mich., L. montanus Berl., and 

 Tryoglyphus wasmanni Mon. 



Crustacea : Armadillum pulchellum Brdt., and Platyarthrus hoff- 

 manseggi Brdt. 



Of the forms of the Formica fusca group in which the workers 

 are not black, and the males and females are not shining, but dull 

 or opaque, it is impossible to say what is actually intended by the 

 older British records, the name F. cunicularia Latr. being used 

 loosely for various forms, and not restricted to the species which is 

 now known as ruftbarbis F. (= cunicularia Latr.). 



Most of the British references to cunicularia really mean (wholly, 

 or in part), one, or both, of the vars. of. fusca. 



In 1880 Saunders mentions only cunicularia and fusca [Trans. 

 Ent. Soc. Lond. 1880 206] ; his description of the former agrees 

 with rufibarbis, but he states it is " generally distributed and 

 common in many localities," which is not the case with rufibarbis 

 in Britain. 



In 1896 he gives "race rufibarbis F 'ab. = cunicularia Latr.," and 

 says rufibarbis is more local than fusca, but is widely distributed 

 [Hym-Acul. 22 (1896)]. 



Saunders's records must include rufibarbis, fusca v. glebaria, and 

 fusca v. rubescens, and most of the older records doubtless refer 

 to one of these vars. rather than to rufibarbis. 



It should perhaps be mentioned that specimens of glebaria taken at 

 Weymouth in 1896, and of rubescens taken in the New Forest the 

 same year, were both determined for me by Saunders as cunicularia. 



In 1906 I introduced F. rufibarbis v. fusco-rufibarbis teste 

 Wasmann ( = F. fusca v. fusco-rufibarbis Donis. nee Forel) as 

 British [Ent. Rec. 18 217 (1906)], and in 1911 Crawley brought for- 

 ward F. fusca v. glebaria Nyl. [Ent. Rec. 23 96 (1911)], but I now 

 believe the insects in question are both glebaria; certainly I am 

 unable to distinguish them. In 1909 I introduced F. fusca v. 

 rubescens Forel as British [Ent. Rec. 21 258 (1909)], and in 1911 

 pointed out that the varieties of Formica fusca have been quite 

 inaccurately determined in this country endeavouring to dis- 

 tinguish rubescens, glebaria, and fusco-rufibarbis by differences in 

 the pubescence and their habitats [Entom. 44 391 (1911)]. 



Subsequent researches however have shown that no reliance 

 can be placed on the situations in which these ants occur [Ent. 

 Rec. 25 66 (1913)], and degrees of pubescence are of little value. 



Forel when describing var. rubescens [Ann. Soc. Ent. Belg. 48 

 423-424 (1904)] says it is the var. " a thorax rougeatre " in his 

 Fourmis de la Suisse this is F. fusca v. fusco-rufibarbis and he 

 points out that the var. rubescens has been frequently mistaken for 

 F. rufibarbis F. 



Emery in his paper on the Palaearctic Species of Formica 

 [Deutsch. Ent. Zeitschr. 1909 179-204] makes no mention of the 



