290 M. W. R. de V. GRAHAM 



<J. Differs considerably from those of the other species of this group in the form of the anten- 

 nal fiagellum (Text-fig. 209), particularly in its numerous sensilla and relatively less strongly 

 outstanding hairs. From o* fuscicornis it also differs in the more thickly hairy disc of the fore 

 wing, with the speculum not extended below the marginal vein, and in having the space between 

 the postmarginal and stigmal veins hairy. From $ alectus it also differs in its much stouter 

 fiagellum and relatively shorter funicular segments. 



The sculpture of the axillae is similar in both sexes. 



Holotype (J. England : Lancashire South, Freshfield, 26. vi. 1962, from foliage 

 of an isolated oak (Quercus robur L.), growing in an area of birch-scrub behind the 

 dune-slacks (Graham), in Hope Department, University Museum, Oxford. 



Paratypes. Same locality as holotype, 2 $, 1 $, 28. vi. 1962, 2 $, 2 $, 29.vi.1962, 

 8 (J, 2 $, 26.vii.1962 (Graham), in BM(NH) and Graham collections. 



Biology. Unknown. 



Gastrancistrus consors sp. n. 



o* ?. Differ from those of fuscicornis as follows : 



Fore wing with speculum, on upper surface of wing, not extending beyond the proximal end 

 of the marginal vein ; the space between the postmarginal and stigmal veins mainly hairy ; 

 the wing beyond the speculum more thickly haired. Axillae with a conspicuous smooth shiny 

 area at their inner angles, this area larger and more distinct than in fuscicornis. 



The characters by which consors differs from the other species of this group are summarized 

 in the key. 



Holotype $. England : Lancashire South, Freshfield, 29. vi. 1962. (Graham), 

 in the Hope Department, University Museum, Oxford. 



Paratypes. Same locality as holotype, 1 $, 3^.1959, 2 <$, 2 $, 26. vi. 1962, 1 $, 

 28. vi. 1962, 4 <$, 29. vi. 1962 (Graham), in BM(NH) and Graham collections. With 

 the exception of the male captured in 1959, all the above were taken from foliage of 

 the same oak upon which G. dispar was found, and at the same time as the latter. 



Biology. Unknown. 



Species sola 

 Gastrancistrus pusztensis (Erdos) comb. n. 



Meromalus pusztensis Erdos, 1946 : 153-154, fig. io, q* $. 

 Gastrancistrus tripedias Boucek, 1964a : 259-261, 9, syn. n. 



Type material. I have not seen the types of Meromalus pusztensis Erdos, but 

 from the description am confident that it must be the same as Gastrancistrus tripedias 

 Boucek, the holotype of which I have examined. Three paratypes of the latter 

 evidently represent the material upon which Forster based his genus Tripedias, 

 described without included species (Boucek, 1964 : 259). A detailed redescription of 

 the female was given by this author ; the only male specimen available was too 

 damaged to be described. 



Britain [new] : Scotland, East Inverness, Aviemore, 1 $, 17. vi. 1965, swept from 

 foliage of Populus tremula L. (Graham). Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary. 



