May, 1875 ] 2G5 



the uaine as o£ Fulleu, aud puts it as a Bynoiiym of P. piclus, Scliill. 

 Thomson also passes over the Fabriciaii dosci'iption altogether, and, 

 citing Ealh'U as the author of tlie name podap-icus, applies it to the 

 form of Scolopostcthiis which has the first two joints of the antennae 

 entirely yellow, the mesosternum bi-tuberculated, and the membrane 

 of the elytra wanting ; while he refers to decoratus, Hahn, the macrop- 

 terous examples of the same form, having the same kind of antennge, 

 but in which the tubercles of the mesosternum have disappeared by 

 reason of the correlative development of the elytra. If these were 

 really two species, the names would be untenable, but both forms were 

 first (and rightly) comprehended as one species under the name S. ad- 

 junctus, D. and S. Stal, in his " Hemiptera Fabriciana," ii, 122, 142 

 (1869), refers Lygceus fodagricus, Fab., to the genus Uremocoris, Fieb. 

 Finally, to clear up this imhroglio, seeing that Fabricius wrote 

 " Habitat in Auglia. Mus. Dom. Banks," I determined to refer to the 

 Banksian collection still presei'ved in the British Museum, and the ex- 

 amination of the unique typical example has proved not only that 8tal 

 was correct in his reference to the genus Eremocoris, but that the long 

 lost podagricus is identical with Lggceus erraticus, Fab. ! The former 

 name is the older, and the description oi podagricus in some respects 

 suits erraticus better (<?. g., " Femora antica crassissima, bidentata," for 

 the description of erraiicus has " f emoribus anticis uuidentatis," which 

 is incorrect) ; but the identity of Eremocoris erraticus with the Fabri- 

 cian species not having been questioned, the synonymy, as far as 

 Fabricius is concerned, will be as follows : — 



Eeemocoris podagkicus. 

 Cimex podagricus, Fab., Mantissa, ii, 302, 238 (1787); Lggcexis poda- 

 gricus, Fab., E. S., iv, 1(J7, 111 (1791); S. 11., 232, ll"2 (1S03). 

 Lygaus erraticus. Fab., E. S., iv, 1G7, 109 (1791); S. R., 232, 139 

 (1803). 



NOTOCIIILUS, Fieb. 

 Wieu. Ent. Monats., viii, G8 (180 1). 



NOTOCIIILUS LIMBATUS. 



Kolochihis liinbatus, Fieb., Vcrh. zool.-botaii. Gesells. AVien, xx, 257, 



1 (1870). 

 Scolupostcthus crassicornis, D. and S., E. M. M., viii, 21' (1871). 



As indicated, I. c, the British example from Avliiih llie description 

 was made, then and still unique, has some points of divergence from 

 the genus Scolopostethus, although it was not then referred to Noto- 

 chilus, Fieb., to which it really belongs ; but five species being now 



