102 [May, 



Tlie (letevmination of the identity of C. affapliiltis as an addition to the 

 Bi'itish Faima is entirely due to Mr. G. C. Champion, who, after naming 

 the insect ironx Brisout's description was aljle to verify it l:)y comparison 

 with an authentic French example, and I desire to express m}' sincere 

 thatdcs to him for the immense amount of trouble involved. 



An apology must be made for the indifferent quality of the illus- 

 trations, the result of the half-tone eng'raver touching up the antennae. 

 etc., after getting into some trouble with the photographs. But poor as 

 they are, doubtless they may be of some general help in the identification 

 of the species, all three of Avhich, with an enlarged figure of the head 

 and antennae of each, are shown on the Plate. 



7 Whimple Street, Plymouth. 

 March 192L 



ON A SECOND BRITISH SPECIES OF PRIOBIUM -. P. KIESENWETTERI, 

 NOM. NOV. = TRICOLOR Kiesw. (nec Ol., nec Muls.). 



BY .TAMES EDWAKDS, F.E.S. 



There exists in East Gloucestershire a species of Priohivni 

 distinguished fi-om the one we are accustomed to call castaneum F. by 

 its larger size, more pronounced alteration of direction in the outline of 

 the sides of the pronotum beyond the middle in the strictly dorsal 

 aspect, and the elevation beyond the remainder of the 3rd, 5th, and 7th 

 interstices. By " dorsal aspect " is meant the view obtained when the 

 pronotum is seen along an optical axis at I'ight angles to the central 

 point of its disc ; for purposes of com])arisou it is very miportant that 

 the circumstances of observation shoidd l)e ])recisely similar. There can 

 be no reasona1)le doubt that this is the P. iricolor 01. of Kiesenwetter 

 (Ins. Deutschl. v, p. 96, 1898) ; but Olivier's original description, for 

 which I am indel)ted to Mr. Champion, contains no reference to the 

 characters by which Kiesenwetter distinguishes his tricolor., and 1 

 therefore propose the name Mesenu'ctferi in place of tricolor 01., Kies. 



A good deal has been written about the European species of this 

 genus, but the result is far from satisfactorj^ This arises in great 

 measure from the fact that the Avriters in selecting characters which they 

 regard as distinctive, have not paid due attention to normal variabilit}^ 

 and the differences between the sexes. The difference in the apex of the 

 elytra in the two sexes, obliqueh^ truncate in the males and separately 

 rounded in the females, and the relatively greater length of the last 

 three antennal segments in the male, were known to Mulsant (Terediles, 



