250 [April, 



^Elytra oblong, with tlie sides parallel, as wide as the thorax, and 

 rather longer than the head and thorax united ; strongly asperate, 

 or almost tuberculate, in transverse rows, with the interstices 

 alutaceous ; the posterior half of the suture elevated, and the apex 

 much rounded, and very narrowly pale. 



Abdomen but little exposed. 



Legs yellow, robust. 



TTnder-parts black, with the mouth and coxa3 pitchy. 



T canariensis differs from T. sericeus in its smaller size, longer 



and sub-parallel shape, very short obscure pubescence, deep black 



colour, and deep and peculiar sculpture; by which last character 



it is especially distinguished from all the other species of this genus. 

 It is not uncommon in Tenerifte and Gomera, but does not seem 



to have occurred in any of the other Islands. 

 Gnmley, \Oth March, 1865. 



ON THE LUMINOSITY OF FULGORA LATERNARIA. 

 BY 3)E. HAGEN. 



I perceive in the proceedings of the Entomological Society of London 

 (Trans. 3rd Series, Vol. 1, p. 207—209), there is a communication on 

 the luminosity of Fiilgora laternaria and candelaria, from which Mr. 

 Smith infers that the controversy as to their luminosity or non-lumino- 

 sity may now be considered as concluded. In this, I believe he is 

 wrong. The statement that F. laternaria is not luminous was first 

 made by Olivier, and since then by a number of credible observers and 

 acknowledged Entomologists, such as Becker Hancock, Hoffmansegg, 

 Burmeister. The assertions for and against are about of equal value, 

 and are diametrically opposed to one another. As we cannot possibly 

 suppose that either side states that which is false, I would seek 

 another explanation. May it not possibly be the case that Fulgora is 

 only luminous at certain seasons, or which is very credible, the lumino- 

 sity may be confined to one sex. 



The latter notion according to all analogy seems extremely 

 probable, and as I do not recollect that any observer of the luminous 

 or non-luminous insects has stated their sex, the explanation would 

 admit of our agreeing both with the affirmative and negative statements. 

 I cannot, therefore, consider the subject disposed of 



In the Stett. Ent. Zeit., 1853, p. 55, I have remarked that 

 Professor VVestwoodand Dr. Burmeister have incorrectly stated that the 



