THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 195 



13. Embia (Olyntha) Brasilicnsis. 



Olyntha Brasiliensis Gray, in Griffith Anim. Kingd., vol. xv., p. 374, 

 pi. 72, f. 2. 



O. Brasiliensis Westw., Trans. Linn. Soc, vol. xvi., p, 373, pi. 2, f. 3. 



O. Brasiliensis Walk., Neur. Br. Mus., p. 532, n. i. 



Winged form (male?) Length of body 16 mill.; e.xp. of wings 25 

 mill, (from Westwood's plate). 



"AntemicC corporis fere longitudine, articulis 32 ; alae nervo 4 interne 

 trifido. Piceo niger, prothorace supra femoribusque 4 antiois ochreis, 

 antennarum articulis 10 ultimis albis, alis piceis, vittis albis inter nervos 

 longitudinales, nervisque transversis tenuiter albo-marginatis." (West- 

 wood.) 



Hab. — Brazil, coll. British Museum, formerly in Mr. Children's coll. 

 I have seen only the type, first described by G. Gray in Griffith and 

 figured ibid, by Westwood ; on the plate it is named Embiiis ? Brasilien- 

 sis. I have omitted " palpi maxillares 4 articulati " in Westwood's 

 description, as it has been corrected by Burmeister in 5 articulati for 

 Olyntha, and this statement is verified by examination of the type by 

 McLachlan, 1. c, p. 378. The few words in Griffith contain nothing 

 more, except that prothorax and femora are called fulvous instead of 

 ochreous. Though there is no asymmetry stated for this species the 

 figure by Westwood has the tubercle between the appendages drawn more 

 to the right, and the figure in Griffith has a spine on the left side and the 

 right appendage (by error) three jointed. In 1857, on my way to Lon- 

 don, I had compared O. Brasiliensis in the museum at Berlin, and the 

 type in the Museum at Halle, both from the same lot, and when I saw 

 the type in London, I had the impression that the type of 0. Brasiliensis 

 was different from Burmeister's species, with yellow appendages. In the 

 figure by Griffith they are black. On my return I compared again the 

 specimen in Berlin, and found my first impression confirmed. As 

 I had seen only single specimens, and was then very little acquainted 

 with this family, I thought it more prudent in my Synopsis Embid, p. 

 222, to draw attention to the supposed difference. I should remark 

 that Mr. Walker has copied Burmeister's description instead of Westwood's, 

 though he had the type at his disposal. 



14. Embia (Oly?itha) Batesi. 



Embia Batesi McLachl., Jour, Linn. Soc, vol. xiii., p. t^Zq, 



