Dec.,1918 Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society 101 
trochanters, which are darker above and yellow below. ‘The 
other two species have the head quite broad and rounded behind 
the eyes but not strongly expanded; (b) represented by 15 99 
and 3 gd, evidently the common form locally at least, has in the 
2 never even a touch of fuscous on the hind femora, and the tibize 
are usually entirely yellow, but in one or two specimens are barely 
shaded with fuscous on part of the apex. The hind tarsi, how- 
ever, are always more or less infuscated, in some cases really only 
a deeper duskier shade of reddish yellow. In the males of this 
species the entire hind tibiz and tarsi are fuscous, their femora 
red except for more or less dusky along the upper margin. Spe- 
cies (c) of which I have a single 9 from Ithaca, has the middle 
and hind tibiz white, tipped with fuscous and differs from a and 
b in the sculpture of the petiole. 
While Say may have had any of the three species a, D or ¢, it 
seems most likely that he had b, for the following reasons: He 
says “ Head with the distance behind the eyes considerable,” but 
does not mention the noticeable lateral expansion of a, as he 
would probably have done had he had that species; he describes 
the ovipositor as being as long as the body, and that seems the 
average length for b, while in the specimens of a before me it is 
longer ; knowing both sexes, he describes the feet as honey yellow, 
which he would have been less likely to do without modification 
if he had had a male of a. Finally b seems to be much the com- 
mon form and would have been the more likely to have attracted 
his attention. 
Provancher in 1877 described Odontomerus canadensis, g and 
2. It seems highly probable that he had one of these three spe- 
cies, and in all likelihood a. Knowing both male and female he 
describes them as having clear red legs, the posterior femora at 
tip, the tibiz and the tarsi fuscous. Rohwer and Gahan have 
recently selected the 2 as holotype, so that we may omit consid- 
eration of Provancher’s male, which may be 0. I have not seen 
2 specimens with black posterior tibize, but the several specimens 
of a before me have the extreme apex of the femora and apex of 
the tibiz fuscous, and it would seem probable that Provancher’s 
specimen represented an individual of a with more completely 
infuscated tibia. Finally I have a male of a from Quebec so that 
we may be certain it is regional for Provancher’s species. 
