150 NOTES ON AUSTRALIAN COLEOPTERA, 



not Ije the case in a fresh example), the puncturation of the elytra 

 is not so distinctly seriate, and the puncturation of the basal portion 

 of the pygidium is very much closer and more rugulose, though 

 scarcely so strong. 



The comparative shortness of the flagelluin of the antennfe 

 might appear suggestive of merely sexual difference between this 

 and the older species, but I think there is no doubt that all I have 

 seen of either species are males, since not only are the pi'othoracic 

 excavation and armature similar (though varying a little in indi- 

 vidual development) but they all have the anterior ventral seg- 

 ments very short and the hind tarsi moderately long, whereas 

 in Corynofhyllus^ Cavonns and other allied genera the former are 

 much longer, and the latter much shorter in the female than in the 

 male. It is hardly likely either that all the examples before me 

 from one locality should be males and all from another locality 

 females. The external teeth of the front tibire are strons: and 

 sharp as in xl. calvus ; in one example however they are moi'e 

 feebly developed, and this I take to be merely an individual pecu- 

 liarity, though it may possibly be indicative of a third closely- 

 allied species. 



Taken in the Lake Eyre Basin by Mrs. Eichards of Bel tana, a 

 lady who has long been a successful and interested collector of 

 the Australian fauna in various parts of S. Australia, and whose 

 work I am glad of the opportunity of commemorating by the 

 association of her name with one of the 8. Austi'alian species 

 she has collected. 



N.B. — In characterising the genus Aneurysfyjnis I stated that 

 it differed from Corynoj)hyllas in the mouth organs as well as in 

 the shape of the flabellum. The mouth organs of A. Bichardsce 

 however are not quite like those oi A. calvus; the mentum being 

 slightly wider (but quite distinct from that of the CorynojjhyUi I 

 have dissected) while the maxillary palpi come nearer to Coryno- 

 phyllus. I suspectthat the mouth organs are given to vary specifically 

 in insects that cannot be generically separated, and are not very 

 reliable characters for generic distinction (at any rate in the 

 Dynastidcf). The narrow flabellum of the antennae however 



I 



