RETROSPECT OF A COLEOPTERIST FOR 1907, O 



all settling some difficult question of synonymy. Canon Fowler's remarks 

 {loc. cit., p. 30) on this point are well worthy of quotation, " The 

 determination of continental authorities should not be accepted as 

 absolutely final, without being verified, as is too often the case." In 

 this case Mr. Newbery did submit some of Mr. Rye's specimens to 

 M. Bedel, but as that gentleman speaks of castanipes as a " form," the 

 whole matter turns once more upon the question of what is a species, 

 and as I have taken specimens in the Highlands, and seen others taken 

 there, which to my mind are far more distinct when compared with 

 the ordinary forms of rtijipes than is the case with many allied, but on 

 all hands admitted, species, I shall myself for the present continue to 

 consider castanipes, Pk., as a genuine species. 



In a very interesting note^{loc. cit., p. 102) Mr. J. H. Keys showed 

 that the insect known as Aleochara »(o>7'oh, Grav.,has its tarsal formula 

 4, 5, 5 : it is not, therefore, a true Aleocharina, but as it has the mintite 

 accessory joint of the palpi, it cannot be 'a Myrniidoniina, it is inter- 

 mediate, and he proposed for its generic name Exaleochara. 



I have already alluded to the fact that Mr. Gorham has described 

 Laccobius oblom/us as a species new to science on what I consider to be 

 insufficient grounds ; that gentleman also introduced as new to our 

 list {loc. cit., p. 53) Oxijpoda vietatarsalis, Thoms., on| specimens taken 

 in moles' nests ; there can be no doubt, however (Mr. Gorham himself 

 suggests the possibility) that these insects were lowjipes, Muls., 

 which has long stood in our lists on the authority of a specimen taken 

 by Dr. Sharp at Aberlady. In the latest European Catalogue metatar- 

 salis is treated as a synonym of lon(/ipes, and the difference of habitat 

 and locality on which Mr. Gorham relied is of no value, as I have this 

 year taken in moles' nests at Lowestoft, and again by sweeping at the 

 edge of a forest road in the Newtonmore district in Invernessshire, 

 specimens between which a most careful examination fails to show the 

 slightest diflerence, and both sets of specimens agree perfectly with 

 the descriptions given for lomjipes, and those now given for metatarsalis 

 by Mr. Gorham. When introducing lomjipes Mr. Rye stated that 

 metatarsalis was a synonym. 



In another note {loc. cit., p. 205) Mr. Gorham expressed the opinion 

 that we have a second species of Siinplocaria, distinct from soiiistriata, 

 F. ; the two specimens on which he based his opinion are narrower 

 than seiiiistriata, darker in colour, and have deeper strire, which are con- 

 tinued almost to the apex of the elytra. Mr. Gorham thinks they are 

 probably the insect alluded to by Stephens, as picipes of Olivier ; this 

 latter name is considered by Ganglbauer {Die Kiifer von Mittel-Europa, 

 vol. iv., p. 59) to be merely a synonym of semistriata, while, since 

 Mr. Gorham says the two specimens are smaller than average se///e- 

 stiiata, they can hardly be picipes, Gyll., which is considered by 

 Ganglbauer to be a synonym of nietallica, Stm. I am afraid that, 

 until Mr. Gorham can give more definite information, this proposed 

 addition must be placed in the doubtful list. 



The valuable paper by Mr. G. A. Crawshay on " The life-history of 

 Tetropinni (jabrielli, Ws.," to which I shall allude later on, makes another 

 deletion from our list necessary, namely, Tetroiiiinn crawshayi, Shp., 

 as it is shown to be only a synonym for (fabrielli. 



One neAV variety has been added to our lists, Cteniouus sulphinrus, 

 L., var. bicolor, F., taken by Mr. Donisthorpe at Deal. 



Summing up, we have fifteen undoubted additions to our list, and 



