BY THE REV. T. BLACKBURN. 247 



puncturis nonnullis subobsoletis irapiesso ; elytris obscure 

 costatis, inter costas intequaliter sat crasse punctulatis, latera 

 versus fortiter transversim rugatis ; pygidio foititer gibboso 

 longitadiiialiter sulcato (siilco in medio interrupto), concen- 

 trice stiigato ; corpore subtus fulvo-hirto. 



[Long. 13, lat. 74 lines. 

 The elytral scnlptui-e is about as coarse as in Diaphonia Parryi, 

 Jans., but considerably less close. The elytral costse are much 

 like those of Metallesthes metallescens, White, but evidently a 

 little stronger ; the intervals between the costse are not in the 

 least sulciform. The hinder part of the suture is strongly and 

 narrowly carinate, but is not spiniform at the apex. 



I cannot refer this species to any of Dr. Kraatz' genera. It 

 comes nearest, I think, to Chlorobapta, of which, however, the green 

 colour of the elytra is made a character (the name being derived 

 from it). But apart from colour, this insect dififers from Chloro- 

 bapta (e.g., C. f7'ontalis, Don.) in the form of its mososternal 

 process, which is different from, that of any other Cetonid known 

 to me. This process is of triangular form, the apex of the triangle 

 being directed hindward and fitted into an emarcjination of the 

 metasternum, and its base (the longest side of the triangle) 

 forming the front of the process, which is consequently truncate 

 in front, this truncate front margin of the mesosternal process 

 being as wide as the distance from eye to eye across the front of 

 the head, but projecting forward very little more than does the 

 mesosternal process of C. frontalis. The typical example is 

 evidently a male ; its antenna! club is about as long as the 

 clypeus; its front tibi?e are unarmed externally; its four posterior 

 tibiie have a median blunt projection (scarcely a spine), the 

 ventral segments are widely concave longitudinally (more widely 

 and less deeply than in C. frontalis), its clypeus scarcely differs 

 from that oi Jro7italis except in being more strongly (but not very 

 deeply) and triangularly emarginate in front and with somewhat 

 more upturned margins, its prothorax is very like that oi fro7italis 

 in all respects except in its sides being considerably more divergent 

 hindward near the base (concealing the summit of the mesothoracic 



