148 ON THE AUSTRALIAN CLIVINJDES, 



base of the intercoxal part may be either transversely sulcate 

 or not; this seems a useful feature for separating species. 



The differences in the legs are of great classificatory importance, 

 but need no special note beyond attention being drawn to the 

 differences between the terms used by M. Putzeys in describing 

 the digitation of the anterior tibiae and those adopted by me. M. 

 Putzeys disregarded the external apical projection and only made 

 reference to the teeth on the outer side above the apex, while, 

 in conformity with the usage of writers on the Carenides, I 

 include the apical projection in counting the external teeth of 

 the tibia. 



I have made no use of the maxilla); in all the species which I 

 have examined the inner lobe has been found to be hooked and 

 acute at the apex; this form I believe to be invariable among the 

 Australian species of Clivina, but Dr. Hoi-n's drawings* of the 

 maxillse of North American species show that sometimes the 

 inner lobe is obtuse at the apex. 



M. Putzeys reduced the genus Ceratoghssa, Macleay, to a 

 synonym of his genus Scolijptus, and, as far as the Australian 

 fauna is concerned, I would merge Scolyptns in Clivina. There 

 is no doubt in my mind that the species placed by me in 

 the "proce7-a group," several of which M. Putzeys put in 

 Scolyptus, are congeneric with C. basalts, Chaud., &c ; C. 

 planiceps (with allied species) might be thought to require a 

 different genus from C. basalts, but, if so, other species (e.g., C. 

 frenchi, SI.) are equally deserving of separation from both C. 

 basalts and C. planiceps. On the whole I think the only course 

 is to place in the central genus Clivina all those Australian 

 species which have been put in Scolyptus, at least till someone is 

 prepared to give sound reasons for the generic separation of any 

 of them from the other species of Clivina; this I am not, at 

 present, prepared to do. 



The first Australian Clivina to be described was C. basalis by 

 M. de Chaudoir in 1843, and this remained the onl}'- species 



* Trans. Am. Ent. Soc. ix. 1881, pi. v. 



