1877.] 33 



varieties of Ph. popiili, the vertex broader between the eyes, wbicli in 

 tlie $ are less prominent, and the pronotum more shining. But this 

 species was previously described by Kirschbaum (Ehynch. Wiesb., 122, 

 2) under the name of Ph. dlmidiatus, which is therefore to be retained. 



Phttocokis marmoeatus (Catal., 28, 6) is cited by Mr. Saunders 

 (Synops., 265, 4) as a dark variety of Ph. tiJicB, L., and I think he is 

 right. In describing the species belonging to this genus, and also to 

 many other genera, Messrs. Douglas and Scott have had regard mostly 

 to the colour and the markings, which, however, in this genus are 

 extraordinarily variable. On the contrary, they mention scarcely a 

 single character, taken from the structure of the body ; and con. 

 cerning this last I have not found any difference between Ph. tilice 

 and Ph. marmoratus. On the other hand, I have seen the first species 

 show'ing a series of transitions from pale, very little marked varieties, 

 to dark with black spots more or less enlarged. Ph. marmoratus is the 

 extreme form in this particular. 



Phytocoeis dimidiatus (Catal., 28, 7) is not the species described 

 by Kirschbaum under this name, but Ph. longipennis, Flor, under which 

 name it also is described by Saunders (Synops., 264, 2). It differs 

 from the true dimidiatus, Kirschb.,in having the joints of the antennae 

 a little longer, the vertex more narrow (the vertex of the ^ is almost 

 twice as narrow as the large prominent eye), the pronotum not shining, 

 and the colour generally much paler. The extreme apex of the cuneus 

 is pale red. 



Phytocoeis crassipes (Catal., 28, 8) is not the species of Tlor 

 (Eh. LivL, ii, 606, 8), which latter is Ph. pini, Kirschb. (Eh. Wiesb., 

 123, 3). The species of Douglas and Scott has the first joint of the 

 antennae distinctly longer, and Mr. Saunders has had the kindness to 

 name it Ph. lleuteri (Synops., 265, 5). Concerning Ph. crassipes, Flor 

 expresslv says : — " Glied 1 kaum etivas Mrzer als das Pronotum, ver- 

 haltnissmjissig dicker als bei den nahe verwandtcn Arten." In Ph. 

 crassipes, Flor (reef ius pini, Kirschb.), the apex of the clypeus reaches 

 to the middle of the first joint of the antennae, but in Ph. crassipes, 

 D. and S. {Reuteri, Saund.), it reaches only to about the first third 

 of this joint. 



Phytocoeis floealis (Catal., 28, 9) and Pn. ulmi (Catal., 28, 

 10). — According to my idea, Ph.Jloralis must be named Ph. ulmi, L. 

 This species is much more common in the country of Linne ; it is also 



