BY EUSTACE W. FERGUSON. 67 



moderately distinct granules; suture with a pair of small, closely placed spicules 

 below summit of posterior declivity; three rows of acute spiniform tubercles, first 

 row about 8, the basal ones small and nodulif orm, the last two acute and spini- 

 form; second row — 7, strong spiniform tubercles, extending almost to base and 

 reaching a lower level on declivity than first row; humeral tubercle small, but 

 distinct; third row represented by a single large tubercle followed by a row of 

 3 — i granules. Venter moderately closely set with rather long, decumbent, yel- 

 low setae. Legs simple. 



?. Similar, but larger and broader, more produced at apex and strongly 

 mucronate. Head with i-ugae more marked, separated by deep impressions. 

 Prothorax similar. Elytra with gTanules more distinct; tubercles smaller, first 

 row with gi-auules on basal portion, not distinct from gi-anules of disc, the last 

 3 — 4 distinct tubercles, becoming progressively larger; second with 7 distinct 

 spines; humeral angle with a row of 3 tubercles; the posterior the largest and in 

 line with second row. Venter convex. Dimensions : c?. 14 x 5 mm. ; 9. 17 x 

 7 mm. 



Hah. — Western Australia: King George Sound. 



I do not think that there can be any doubt that the present species is 

 A. aureolus Bohem., under which name it has long Ijeen known in Australian col- 

 lections. But it is by no means certain that it should not bear the name .1. echin- 

 atus. A specimen in the Museum d' Histoire Naturelle, Paris, is labelled as being 

 the type of A. echinatus. The question as to the author of this species and as to 

 the validity of the name as applied to the present species is discussed elsewhere. 

 Until further information is available T prefer to retain the well known name of 

 A. aureolus. 



The specimens of A. rugiceps Mad., which are in the Australian Museum cer- 

 tainlv belong to the same species. 



With the exception, of A. nasiconns Pasc, which I regard as a variety, the 

 present species can hardly be confused with any known form. In his grouping of 

 the genus Macleay placed aureolus and rugiceps in his first section and second 

 "roup along with 4 other species all differing widely inter se, and with none of 

 ■which A. aureolus has much in common. It appears to be most nearly related to 

 A. crevaticollis Macl., but besides the marked differences in the supraorbital crests, 

 that species lacks the strong, spiniform, elytral tubercles. 



A male from Esperance in my collection differs somewhat from the descrip- 

 tion given above, which is founded on specimens from King George Sound. 



The median dorsal line of the rostiiun is impressed, not carinate; the pro- 

 thorax is more distinctly concave; the elyti-a lack the small conjoined spicules 

 on the suture, and the venter is somewhat sparsely clothed with white subsquamose 

 setae. The differences hardly seem sufficient to warrant giving even a varietal 

 name to the specimen. 



Var. NASicORXis Pasc. Joum. Linn. Soc, Zool., sii., 1873, p. 6. 



2. Closely related to A. aureolus Bohem., but larger. 



Head similar; supraorbital crests double, the anterior portion closely applied 

 to posterior, varying in length, sometimes appearing as a short spicule at base, 

 sometimes as long as posterior portion, the two only being separate at apex; 

 transverse sulcus between head and rostrum continued up on inner side of crest 

 between the two portions. Prothorax similar. EMra without the conjoined 

 sutural spicules on declirity: tubercles more numerous, about 10 in number on 

 second row. Venter with white subsquamose clothing, sparse in middle, denser 

 at sides and apex. Dimensions: ?. 18 X 7 mm. 



