( 636 ) 



Pygidiuin pariim longius quani latum, ajiieem rotundatum vereus angustius, 

 rufescens. 



Prosternum medio parum planatum, punctis grossis baud densis instructum ; 

 episterna metastemalia dcnsius pubesoentia ; segmentum anale abdomiiiale subiafuiii. 

 Tarsi apice rufi. 



Long. 51 mm., rostr. 1, elytr. 4, lat. Sf. 



Bab. Kuilu, Fr. Congo (A. Mocquerys, 1892). 



Prothorax with two feeble spots of a fulvescent ashy colour near apical margin ; 

 these spots are invisible in some specimens. Interspaces of the elytra sometimes 

 rufous here aud there. 



75. Nessiabrissus interruptostriatus sp. nov. 



(? ? . Forma praecedentis, scd minor, linea rostri mediana laevi longiore 

 antennarum articulo secundo crassiore, vertice pone oculos prothoraceque maculis 

 fulvescenti-cinereis inconspicuis notatis, elytrorum striis illius jnibis pone basim ac 

 pone medium inteiTuptis ; tibiis tarsisque rufescentibus. 



Long. 3i mm. 



Eab. Kuilu, Fr. Congo (A. Mocquerys, 1892). 



Those parts of the derm in this and the preceding species which are more densely 

 clothed with a fulvescent ashy pile, are more or lofs rufous. 



Xenocerus Schouh. (Gew. Cure, i., p. 117, 1833). 



1. A', anguiifer Walker, Ann. Mag. N. H. (3), iii., p. 202 (1859), is, according to 

 the type-specimen in the Brit. Mus., a Sympactor Kirsch, Mittfi. Mus. Dresden, i., 

 p. 28(1877). 



2. X. arcifer Blanch., Voy. Pole Sud, iv., p. 196, t. 13, f. 4 (1853), is highly 

 probably an Ecelonerus Schonh., Gen. Cure, v., p. 163 (1839) ; at least not a Xenoceru.'i, 

 according to figure. 



3. Anthrlhus incei-tus White, Toy. Ereh. Ten'., ix., p. 13, t. 3, f. 6 (1846), 

 standing in the Munich Gat. under Xenocerus, is closely allied to Anthribus vates 

 Sharp, as far as I can make out from the figure. This latter sjiecies is, however, no 

 Anlhribus Geofifr., but belongs to Lacordaire's " Anthribides Tropiderides." It does 

 not fit into any of the genera I am actpiainted with, and possibly will have to stand, 

 under a new generic name, between the " Corrhecerides " and the " Ecelon^rides." 



[_Anthribtis sharpi Broun and A. brouni Sharj) have likewise nothing to do with 

 Anthribus Geoffr., but come near Plintheria Pasc, in which genus they ought to be 

 placed for the jiresent.] 



4. A^ iiisignis Pasc, Ann. Mag. N. H. (3), iv., p. 328 (1659), is, according to 

 the description, identical with X. seniiluctuosus Blanch., Voy. Pole Sud, iv., p. 139, 

 t. 13, f. 142 (1853), as Pascoe himself suggested (I.e.). In Pascoe's collection there is 

 no species labelled A', i'lisignis ; the two sjiccimens of X. semiluctuosus Bliuich. in the 

 collection stand under this latter name. 



5. X. revocans y\^s\ker,Ann.Mag.N. H. (3), iii., p. 262 (1859), is no Xenocefrus, 

 according to the tyi)e-.specimen in the Brit. AIus. I refer it with much doubt to 

 Straboscopus Lac, Gen. Vol., vii., p. 533 (1806). 



6. X. albolriangidaris Motsch., Bull. Mosc, p. 237 (1874), is identical with 

 A', semiluctuosus Blanch., cj (^.c), according to the description ; and 



7. A', semi/iiiveua JNIotsch. (I.e.) is ihe female of A', seviihixtuoaus Blanch. 



