1880.] 387 [Patton. 
anterior wing extending as far as the medial cell on the externo- 
medial nervure. Enclosure on the sixth dorsal segment of the 
abdomen in the ¢ broad, pilose. 
The genus Morphota Smith (1856) appears to be synonymous with 
this, Smith’s description applying well in all but the form of the 
prothorax which is said to be ‘“‘transverse’’; and this difference is 
probably one of words rather than of structure. 
Lyroda subita Say, Bost. Journ., 1, 372, 2. Tachytes subitus Sm., 
Cat. H. B. M., tv, 307; Larrada subita Cress., Tr.. Am. Ent. 
Boe 1V, 6218: 
Lyroda triloba Say, Bost. Journ.,1, 372. Tachytes trilobus Sm. 
Cat. H. B. M., tv, 307; Larrada triloba Cress., Tr. Am. Ent. 
Soe., Iv, 213. 
yroda caliptera Say, Bost. Journ., 1, 373. 
LAaRRA Latr. (1802), Fabr. (1804, nec 1793). 
Syn. Larrada Smith (1856). 
Type of Latr., Dahlb., and Smith: anathema. 
The type is said to have no teeth on the inner margin of the 
mandibles, and it was upon this character that Panzer, Illiger, and 
Dahlbom based the distinction between this genus and Tachytes. 
In all the American species examined by me the teeth are more or 
less distinct, sometimes as distinct as in Tachytes, and in all cases, 
even in the males, apparent. This character appears to be liable to 
the objections which may be raised against all characters derived from 
the presence or absence of an organ. I have, therefore, employed the 
characters given by Smith, as they appear also to separate the 
genera more naturally. But this arrangement has its difficulties, and 
it may yet be necessary either to subdivide both genera or to throw 
them into one. 
The genus Scolia was established by Fabricius in 1775, and no 
indication of the type was given by him either at that time or subse- 
quently. In the Entomologia Systematica (1793) he described a 
genus Larra and, contrary to his custom in that work, gave a full 
description drawn from 4-pustulatus. There is nothing in the writ- 
ings of the early authors to show that they placed first in the genus 
the species which they regarded as typical, nor indeed, that they had 
any idea of “types.’? Smith’s statement, in 1856, that vespiformis 
was the type of the Fabrician Larra (because, perhaps, it stood first 
in Fabricius’ list) is, therefore, not to be left unchallenged. A 
| 
