Manchester Memoirs, Vol. xlii. (1898), A^^. 11. 7 



than one undoubted instance known ; and, when such is 

 the case, the form of the thorax in the $ approximates to 

 that of the females. Such is certainly the case with M. 

 ocdipiis, in which I am not only unable to find any trace of 

 there having been wings, but so far as the hind wings are 

 concerned, I cannot see where they could have been 

 attached. The contracted thorax is well shown in my 

 figure {Majich. Memoirs, vol. xli., No. 4, pi. 4, f 13). A 

 comparison of my figure with that of M. perfecta Rad., 

 shows great similarity between these apterous males in 

 structure of the thorax.* 



Miitilla acidalia Cam., described {MancJi. Memoirs, 

 I.e., p. 56) in both sexes by me, is omitted entirely by 

 Bingham. 



Col. Bingham also has overlooked my description of 

 both sexes of Miitilla opulenta {JMancJi. Memoirs, I.e., 

 P- 57). 



MUTILLA APICIPENNIS Cam. 



This species is not mentioned by Bingham under 

 this name, unless he regards it as identical with M. 

 pedunculata Klug {I.e., p. 51). If so, his description 

 of the latter is defective in a very important point, 

 namely, he says nothing about the petiole being serrate, 

 or irregularly armed with teeth beneath, this being one of 

 the most specific features whereby M . peduneulata is dis- 

 tinguished from the very closely-allied M. ehlorotiea Grib. 

 1 have not at hand King's original description, but M, 

 apicipennis does not agree with Gribodo's description of 

 M. peduneulata, e.g., the second abdominal segment is not 

 coarsely and strongly rugosely punctured, M. apieipennis 

 having it only irregularly roughened at the base ; in M. 



* For details regarding the apterous males, as well as the generic position 

 of MiUilla apicipennis and its allies, see the work of Radoszkowski, Horce 

 Soc. Ent. Ross., XIX. 1885, and the more recent paper by M. Ernest Andre, 

 Mem. Soc. Zool. France, 1 896, pp. 261-277. 



