5^ [March, 



iutrod action of tie species into this countr^y, and Low it is spreading. Walker 

 records [Ent. Mo. Mag. liii, p. 165 (1917)] that on July 30th, 1908, he found 

 a few specimens and larvae of a Trogodenna in a granary at Strood, Kent, 

 which prove to be identical with the species described bj' Arrow in 1917. 



Caenocara hovistae Hoffni. I have recorded [Ent. Rec.xxxii, p. 199 (1920)] 

 that in September 1920 I collected a number of Lycoperdons at Freckenhani 

 and Barton Mills, which I took home and placed on damp sand in large glass 

 bowls, tied over with muslin; and that at the former locality I had captured 

 several female C. bovistae crawling on large puft'-balls. Nothing appeared in 

 the bowl for either locality (except rocadlus femajmetis in large numbers in 

 both, and nothing further from the Barton Mills puff-balls) until April 19tli, 

 1921, when five specimens of C. bovistae were observed running about on the 

 lycoperdons. The beetles continued to appear up to May 30th ; some twenty- 

 nine in all being reared, consisting of six (5 c? and twenty-three $ §. When 

 mature the perfect insects ate their way out of pulF-balls of various species 

 and sizes. Fowler does not refer to the differences between the sexes; the S 

 characters are very distinct — it is smaller, less rounded, and the seventh joint 

 of the antennae (the first of tlie three serrate joints) is considerably longer 

 transversely and more pointed than in the 5 . 



The only other insects which hatched out in the bowl were seven 

 specimens of the Cryptinid rhyijaderton assimilis, all covered with thf hypopi 

 of an Acarus, some so thickly that they were hardly able to walk. As 

 nothing else ever hatched out from the putt-balls, and as I subsequently most 

 carefully examined the contents of the bowl without finding a trace of any 

 other insect, I can only conclude that the Ichneumon is parasitic on the 

 Caenocara, or possibly on Pocadins ; though as it was not present in the Barton 

 Mills bowl (where Pocadius was most abundant), this does not seem so 

 probable. 



Cryj^tucephalus biguttatns Scop. In 1916 the late W. E. Sharj) showed 

 me the spot near Crowthorne where he discovered this fine beetle. We were 

 not fortunate enough to find it on that occasion, and on other visits 1 was 

 equally unsuccessful. In 1920 I found what appeared to me to be a very 

 suitable locality some distance away from the original spot ; but I only 

 succeeded in taking a specimen of C. lineola. In July 1921 1 made several 

 visits to my locality, aud eventually obtained a nice series of both C. biguttatus 

 and C. lineola. Dr. Nicholson pointed out [Ent. Mo. Mag. Ivii, p. 36 (1921)] 

 that the beetle always occurs on Erica tetralix, and this is undoubted!}^ the case. 

 I must confess, however, that I only actually spotted one on the plant, hanging 

 on to a flower-head, when it was very conspicuous (I saw five specimens of 

 C. lineola in the same position) ; but the rest I swept over a large area, only 

 where this Erica was growing. My explanation is as follows : — I have shown 

 [Ent. Mo. Mag. liii, p. 128 (1917)] that all the species of Crgptocephalus (as 

 do Clgthra and GynandropUhabna) lay a covered e^g which they let fall. The 

 ^^g is covered with the excreta of the beetle, which she arranges round it with 

 her posterior tarsi, and whilst doing this she hangs on to a plant or leaf with 

 the other legs. Some C. biguttatus $ $ I took laid naked eggs in the tubes in 

 which they had been placed., and little bits of excreta were also present — the 

 beetles not being able to arrange it round the eggs when they could not hang 

 on to something. The covered eggs would be dropped amongst the moss, etc., 



