1883.] 197 



NOTES ON NEW BRITISH COLEOPTERA SINCE 1871; 



WITH NOTICES OF DOUBTFUL SPECIES, AND OF OTHEES THAT 

 EEQUIRE TO BE OMITTED FROM THE BRITISH LIST. 



BY THE EEV. W. W. FOWLER, M.A., P.L.S. 



{continued from p. 172.) 



PSELAPHID^ and SCTDM^NID^. 



Betaxis cotus, Sharp. 



The insects taken near Thornhill by Dr. Sharp, and distributed by him under 

 the name of B. Lefebvrel, belong to a new species, and must stand in our list under 

 the name of B. cotus (Ent. Mo. Mag., xii, 225). 



EupLECTUs DupoNTi, Aube. 



This French species was iirst taken in England by Mr. Lawson, near Scar- 

 borough : it is rather a flat insect, with the head broad at the sides ; the male is 

 more shining than the female, and has its head punctured only on the sides, and 

 the thorax and elytra almost impunctate, whereas the female is not very shiny, 

 and has the head rather thickly and plainly, and the thorax and elytra moderately 

 thickly, punctured ; the characters of the abdomen in the male also serve to dis- 

 tinguish it ; Aube (Monogi'aphia Pselaphiorum, p. 57) says that it is very like allied 

 species, but is distinguished by the front fovea of the head being wider, and by its 

 longer and more slender anteunse. 



Euplectus piceus, Mots. 



This species, recorded as new in Ent. Mo. Mag., xii, 225, is apparently synony- 

 mous with Euplectus nigricans, Chaud. E. sulcatulns, De Saulcy, is also synonymous 

 with the same insect, as also is E. Dennyi, Wat. Reitter (Bestimmungs Tabellen 

 der Europiiischen Coleopteren, Part v, 1881, p. 525), gives the right synonymy. 



Euplectus Aheillei. 



Dr. Sharp records this insect (Ent. Mo. Mag., xii, 225) on the authority of M. 

 De Saulcy : it is not, however, in Stein and Weise's catalogue, nor is it mentioned 

 by Reitter {I. c.) among the numerous species of which he gives descriptions. 



Euplectus Kirhyi, Denny. 



This species has been considered as synonymous with E. nanus, Reich. ; it was, 

 however, again separated by Mr. Waterhouse as distinct (Ent. Mo. Mag., xvi, 123), 

 on the ground that the furrows in the forehead are parallel in E. nanus, and con- 

 verge strongly in E. Kirlyi. Reitter {I. c, p. 525) refuses to admit E. Kirhyi as a 

 separate species, unless Mr. Waterhouse can point out the specific differences of the 

 male. I have type specimens of both insects, and they show a very marked dif- 

 ference in the sculpture of the head, which is generally considered to be a most 

 important point in the Euplecti. Dr. Sharp, in his catalogue, considers E. nanus, 

 Reich, (see Ent. Mo. Mag., viii, 84), and E. Kirhyi to be synonymous. Both Aube 

 and Denny make E. nanus, Reich., and E. Reichenhachii, Leach., synonymous, but 



