BY E. W. FERGUSON. 775 



tubercles; interstices with strong, conical tubercles, suture with a 

 few obsolete granules at base; second interstices with two or three 

 isolated tubercles; third with a more continuous row of ten, more 

 closely set, extending almost to apex; fourth with one or none; 

 fifth with a continuous row of ten closely placed tubercles; sixth 

 with nine, not reaching to base ; the tubercles of the fifth and sixth 

 interstices conical, slightly smaller than those of third, and not 

 transverse. Sides with punctures more regular, the interstices 

 with subobsolete tubercles. Beneath, with scattered, setigerous 

 punctures; apical segment concave, not excavate, the posterior and 

 lateral borders raised. Anterior femora with a well developed 

 ridge beneath ; tibiae simple. Dimensions : (J, 17x5 mm. 



Hab. — New South Wales, Mt. Kosciusko (Dr. A. Jefferis 

 Turner). Type in Coll. Ferguson. 



Close to the species identified by Macleay as S. elongatus Germ., 

 but narrower, with much more evident elytral punctures. Possibly 

 an extended series, from intermediate localities, would link the two 

 species up, but, at present, I do not think it can be regarded as 

 conspecific with the Blue Mountain species. 



SCLERORINUS ELONGATUS Bohem. 



Bohemann, Schonh., Gen. Cure, vii.(l), 1843,. p. 58. 



This species has been referred, and I believe correctly so, to 

 Sclerorinus, by Macleay, who, moreover, identified it with an insect 

 which occurs on the Blue Mountains, N.S.W. 



An examination of the description enables me to assign the 

 species with tolerable certainty to Group iii. The description of 

 the abdomen, "... medio longitudinaliter dense atro-pubescens " 

 would apply only to S. inconstans, S. alpicola, one or two members 

 of Group i., and Group iii. The species not belonging to Group 

 iii., can all, I think, be excluded. Of the species contained in 

 Group iii., S. huhalus, S. dilaticollis , and S. Stutchhuryi can con- 

 fidently be excluded; and I do not think that it is likely to prove to 

 be S. apicalis or S. verrucosus. 



Until the type can be examined, I think it wisest to accept 

 Macleay's identification as being correct, particularly as this insect 



