The Zoologist — February, 1870. 1993 



Life-Hislories of Saivflies. Translated from theDutch of M. S. C. 

 Snellen van Vollenhoven, by J. W. May, Esq. 



(Continued from Zool. S. S. 1959.) 



Emphytus cinctus, L, 

 Linnceiis, Syst. Nat. i. 2, p. 925, No. 52. Panzer, Fauna Germ. 

 cxliv, 18 and 19. King, Die Blattw. in Gesellsch. naturf. 

 Frennde zii Berlin Magazin, Ser Jahrg. S. 279, No. 194. 

 Hartig, Blatl und Holzwespen, p. 248, No. 3. Dahlhom, 

 Clavis n. Hym. Syst. p. 35, No. 54. Bouche, Naturgesch. des 

 Ins. p. 139. Brischke, Ahhild. utid Beschr. p. 10, taf. iii. 

 fig. 6. 



I vvas long in doubt whether I should publish the description of 

 this species, for not only did ray observations respecting the colour 

 and ornamentation (if it can be so termed) of the larvae not agree with 

 the descriptions of Bouche and Dahlbom, with which I have for some 

 time been acquainted, but also even my own descriptions of larvae, 

 from which I had at various times reared this species, did not entirely 

 coincide. I was at last driven to the conclusion that this species 

 proceeds from a larva, the individuals of which differ materially from 

 each other, and I adopt this hypothesis until it shall be shown that 

 certain very nearly allied species, of which the iraagos have hitherto 

 not been able to be distinguished, live on the same food-plant, and 

 have all the same habit of life. 



My first acquaintance with this insect is of old date. I remember 

 when a boy having reared this species, as also Cladius viminalis and 

 Nematus Salicis, whilst staying at the country seat of my grand- 

 parents. My first drawing of the larva, however, dates from the 18di of 

 July, 1842 : this is the one from which figs. I and 2 on plate 3 were 

 made, and agrees pretty well with the description given by Brischke 

 of Emphytus viennensis. I subsequently reared precisely the same 

 sawfly from other larvae, having the coloration and general appearance 

 as shown at fig. 3 ; at all events, I was unable to discover any 

 difference between the imagos. 



My general description of the larva will be as follows : — Body 

 cylindrical, but smaller in diameter at the posterior than at the 

 anterior extremity, deeply wrinkled, always curved, never extended 

 at full length ; when at rest rolled up in a spiral form, with the caudal 



SECOND SERIES — VOL. V, G 



