150 [J"iy- 



ON A SECOND BEITISH SPECIES OF CRYPTOBIUM. 



BY B. SHARP, M.A., F.E.S. 



I find we have two species of Cryptohmm in England, viz : — 



(1) An insect with sliort elytra — shorter than the thorax — with 

 vestigial wings which are smaller than the elytra. The male has a 

 deep excision of the last ventral plate, and a slight emargination of the 

 preceding segment; round this notch there is a slight, fine, black 

 pubescence. 



This species occurs generally throughout the country ; it is the 

 C. fracticorne of my collection, and presumably of other British 

 collections. It occurs from Scotland to Brockenhurst, where it- is 

 not uncommon. It is in several respects a variable species. 



(2) A rather larger insect, with elytra slightly longer and broader 

 than the thorax, with fully developed, though short wings, which are 

 twice as long as the elytra. The male has a very deep excision of the 

 last ventral plate, and a well marked emargination of the preceding 

 segment, and in front thereof a great deal of coarse, black pubescence. 



This species has only been found in this country near Bourne- 

 mouth by Mr. Ford and myself, Mr. Ford being its discoverer ; and 

 to him I am indebted for the opportunity of examining a small, but 

 sufiicient series. The elytra vary a little in length, but the two are 

 distinct in this respect. 



The Bournemouth insect is the Cryptohium fracticorne of Con- 

 tinental authors ; the species we call in this country C. fracticorne being 

 apparently the C. fracticorne var. hrevipenne of Mulsant, Reitter, 

 Ganglbauer, and others. 



In addition to the confusion as to these two distinct species, 

 their nomenclature presents serious ditiiculties. Paykull was the first 

 who gave the trivial name oi fracticornis (Piederus fracticornis, Payk., 

 Fauji. Suec. iii, p, 430, 1800), and his description is certainly that of 

 the longer-winged and lai-ger form. But he previously described the 

 same species in almost the same words as Staphylimis glaberrimus 

 (Mon. Carab. Appendix, p. 136, 1790). In the " Fauna Suecica " he 

 refers to his previous description, but gives no reason for the change 

 of name he makes. At the same time he gives a reference to Herbst in 

 Fuessly's " Arcliiv." This reference was, however, probably erroneous, 

 as Erichson and the older authorities do not cit(! Herbst, but only 

 Paykull. I conclude that the confusion will be most simply cleared up 

 by calling the larger species C. (jJaberrimiim, Payk., 1790, and the 

 smaller one C. hrevipenne, Muls., as mentioned below. 



