1894.] 197 



eubiflarginal cell ; as this cell appears to vary in width, I do not think its form 

 is sufficiently strong a character to consider specific. 



Andbena eos^, Fanz., and Teimmeeana, Kirb. 



I have united these as races of one species under the name roscB, as there can I 

 think be little doubt that they are not specifically distinct ; the fact that in the 

 same localities where Trimmerana and its var. spinigera occur in the spring on 

 sallows, roscB occurs in the late summer on brambles, goes a long way to prove their 

 identity. The entire apex of the 8th ventral valve of the <? , and the impunctate 

 6th dorsal valve of the ? , in roscB, which in my Synopsis I gave as its specific 

 characteristics, I find are liable to variation, as I have autumn roscB ( $ ) with the 

 8th ventral valve emarginate, and ? with the 6th dorsal distinctly punctured. 



Andeena apicata. Smith (= lapponica. Smith, Saund., &c., nee Zett.). 



This change of name is necessary, as Zetterstedt's lapponica is a species allied 

 to helcola, Linn., and is quite distinct from the lapponica of our lists. 



Akdeeka heltola, Linn., and fucata. Smith. 



These two closely allied species, which I considered distinct in my Synopsis, but 

 afterwards united as varieties of one, I am again going to separate. Mr. R. C. L. 

 Perkins has always maintained their distinctness, but until I came carefully to ex- 

 amine a series of very fine examples oifucata ( (? ), sent to me by Mr. W. H. Tuck, 

 of Bury St. Edmunds, I could detect no satisfactory structural characters between 

 them. C. G-. Thomson, in his Hymenoptera Scandinavice, gives four allied species, 

 varians, helvola, angulosa, and fucata ; these have always been a puzzle to me, but 

 on reading his descriptions over again I find his helvola is without doubt our 

 prcBcox, which leaves three species agreeing with our three, his angulosa being our 

 helvola. The characters he gives to distinguish angulosa atidfucaia are most exact, 

 and although somewhat " critical," are quite sufiicient to distinguish the species 

 apart. The chief of these lies in the form of the labrum. This in helvola is nar- 

 rower and more pointed than in fucata, so that the apical emargination is smaller 

 and less distinct in both sexes ; in the <? the tooth at the base of the mandibles is 

 rather less developed, and the abdomen is less polished and less finely punctured ; 

 in the $ the clypeus is less regularly and less closely punctured, the abdomen is less 

 shining, more hairy, more rugulose and more punctured, and the hairs of the dorsal 

 surface are largely intermixed with white. 



Meqachile veesicoloe, Smith. 



I am very glad to re-instate this species, as I was the means of excluding it 

 from our list. Years ago I sent a Megachile to tlie late Mr. F. Smith to name, who 

 returned it as M. versicolor, ? . When I came to examine it I found it was only a 

 variety of M. Willughhiella, and as years passed on and I found nothing which I 

 could consider as distinct versicolor, and the ^ was unknown, I presumed that F. 

 Smith's species was only a var. of Willughbiella, ? , and so I left it out. I had no 

 reason to suspect otherwise till about three years ago, when the E-ev. F. D. Morice, 

 whilst staying with me at Woking, brought in a ? Megachile which for some time 

 we could make nothing of, but at last it occurred to him that it might be Smitli's 

 versicolor, and so it clearly proved itself to be ; in the same locality several females 

 were found all alike in character, but still the $ was wanting. I was anxious not 

 to re-introduce the species till it was discovered, but tlii;* bus now turned up. I was 



