BY REV. T. BLACKBURN. 513 



the same species, the metallic pattern of which I have developed 



very clearly. The metallic pattern is extremely like that of 



nohUitata, but differs in that portion which Erichson describes as 



the hinder two of the 3 spots placed longitudinally near the 



suture. In the present species they are represented by a single 



elongate patch of continuously equal width and very sinuous form 



(somewhat resembling the shape of a sickle) running parallel with 



the suture, its hind extremity in contact (close to the apex of the 



elytra) with the extremity of the lateral vitta. Dried specimens 



scarcely differ from dried specimens of nohilitata except in being 



evidently more convex and without the stria-like structure 



(mentioned above) of the 10th elytral series; they also resemble 



dried specimens of decolorata, but are easily distinguished from 



the latter by the non-rugulose puncturation of their pro thorax. 



It is possible that this species is identical with purpureoaurea, 



Clk., but I cannot quite reconcile the pattern of its elytra with 



that attributed by its author to the latter species which is said to 



have two rings of metallic colour on each elytron besides the 



lateral vitta. As far as I can gather this description was 



furnished to Mr. Clark by the collector from whom he received 



the species, and may have been somewhat of an " off-hand " 



nature. I have seen examples of dehilis, Chp., from diverse 



localities in W. Australia, and their markings do not seem to be 



variable. 



Subgroup vi. 



This subgroup is very easily distinguished by the head in front 

 of the eyes being strongly produced and much narrowed forward. 

 The species known to me are all of small size and of firm texture, 

 non-metallic in colouring (so far as my observations go) and not 

 or but little liable to fade after death. The shape of the head is the 

 only character I can find to separate them from subgroup iv., 

 some of the species of which resemble them closely in size and in 

 colour and markings {e.g. ,f estiva, Chp., and delicatula, Clip.); indeed 

 I look upon it as a merely artificial arrangement to separate sub- 

 groups iv. and vi., but nevertheless one that is of great convenience 

 in monographing so diflicult a genus as Paropsis. Moreover there 



