ooc [Deceniher, 



Ptinus testaceus Boicldieu : an old error corrected. — Tlie insects stauding 

 under the above name in British collections must all be referred to P. pusillus, 

 of the same author, which was described from a single specimen from Brazil. 

 The possibility of the existence of a S testaceus or a ? pusillns has, so far, been 

 overlooked ; and the object of this note is to prove that pusilh(.s and testaceus 

 are merely males and females of one and the same species, for which the name 

 pusillus should stand. P. jmsillus was added to the British list on the strength 

 of examples taken in a coi'n shop at Edmonton, where testaceus was fairly 

 numerous at the same time. I distributed a number of " testaceus " as 

 P. hrunneus, with which it is now confounded by Continental authorities^ 

 That it is quite distinct from that sp<.'cies may be seen by reference to the 

 specimens in the Power Collection at South Kensington. P. pusilhis belongs 

 to the group of species in which the sexes may be easily distinguished by the 

 elongate form and very long antennae of the males, compared with the globular 

 form and short antennae of the females. These cosmopolitan insects, which 

 are treated by our standard British authority as little short of nuisances, 

 appear to have received little or no study, and although I have distributed 

 some dozens of testaceus as brunneus, I have not yet been corrected by a single 

 one of their recipients. If any student of the groiip is inclined to doubt the 

 correctness of the connection of testaceus with pusillus, it would be of interest 

 if he would kindly publish information regarding the existence of any speci- 

 mens representing either pusillus ? ? or testaceus S $ which do not form the 

 same connection. There is one character in this group, viz., the general 

 structure of the thoiax, which, whilst separating the different species, will 

 always easily connect the sexes of any one of them. Take for instance P. fur 

 and P. svibpilosus. I have presented both sexes of pusillus to the National 

 Collection at South Kensington, where also may be seen a $ , formerly mixed 

 Avith the series of P. fur, and three females from Birdbrook from the Power 

 Collection, which are erroneously placed under P. brunneus along with two 

 specimens of the latter from Mickleham. During the present summer I have 

 taken a ntimber of females of P. pusillus in a room at the Zoological Gardens 

 along with other members of the group, viz., P. fur, numerous females, but 

 no males yet ; P. tectus, a paii-, and a few of each of Nip)tus hololeucus and 

 N. crenatus. — Chas. J. C. Pool, Insect House, Zoological Society's Gardens, 

 Regent's Park, N.W. : September I'jth, 1915. 



[Mr. Pool's note, as it stands, may lead to continued error. The Ptinus 

 testaceus to which he refers is not the Ptinus testaceus of Olivier or Boieldieii, 

 which is a species quite distinct from P. pusillus Sturm. := P. pusillus Boield., 

 but is merely the species known to British collectors and writers as P. testaceus. 

 Pic, in his recent Catalogue of the Ptinidae, rightly, I believe, places P. testaceus 

 Oliv. (and Boieldieu) as a distinct species, of which he regards P. brunneus 

 Duft., as a variety. What Mr. Pool has shown in his note is that the female of 

 P, pusillus has been wrongly identified in British collections as P. testaceus or 

 as P. brunneus. — C. J. Gahan.] 



