244 [March, 



rostrum a little shorter, thicker, and more dilated towards the tip, with its scutellum 

 appreciably larger, and with its tibite (at any rate, the four hinder ones) less sinuated 

 internally. There are many other characters, which wlU at once be seen on inspection j 

 but these will sufBce for my present purpose. — T. V. Wollaston, Teignmouth : 

 February, 1873. 



Note on the synonymif of Cryptophagus crenaftis, Oyll. — -When at Macugnaga 

 last summer, I captured a very remarkable and interesting Crj/^j^o^/tff^H* in a boletus 

 Ou attempting to name the specimens, I find the species to agree accurately with 

 Erichson's description of C. crenulatus, except that my specimens are considerably 

 smaller than the size he gives (1^ lin.), the largest of my specimens being scarcely 

 a line in length. I consider, however, this discrepancy not to be of importance, and 

 accordingly indentify my species as the very rare C. crenulatus, Er. After his de 

 scription, Erichson adds a note, saying that Gyllenhal's description of C. crenatus 

 applies accurately to crenulatus, except in the size, — G-yllenhal saying that crenatus 

 is more than twice as small as scanicus. Now, as this is really the case with my 

 specimens of crenulatus, it would appear that Erichson's crenulatus is really synony- 

 mical with the crenatus of Gyllenhal. Thomson, however, has identified the de- 

 scription of Gyllenhal with a totally different insect, viz., the C. hicolor of Sturm 

 and of our collections, and he replaces the name bicolor with that of crenatus, 

 Gyll. On consulting Gyllenhal's description, however, I cannot agree with Thomson 

 in assigning it as applicable to hicolor; whde, on the contrary, it seems to me 

 really applicable to my small specimens of crenulatus, as it was thought by Erichson 

 it might be. Tliere is, however, yet another difiiculty. Gyllenhal quotes with ai 

 query his C. crenatus as being the Dermestes crenatus of Fabricius. On turning i 

 Eabricius, I find that his Dermestes crenatus (first described, by the way, inEnt. Sy>i 

 Supp., 72, 41) may or may not be this insect, his description being quite worthlesrr 

 It is prohably neither crenulatus, Er., nor bicolor, Sturm ; but appears particularly J 

 inapplicable to bicolor. I think it may be left out of the question altogether, until ' 

 its type be forthcoming for its identification. It remains then to be decided whetlii 

 Gyllenhal's name shall be adopted for crenulatus, Er., or for bicolor, Sturm, or ]'i 

 neither. I am myself in favour of this latter course ; for I do not think Gyllenhal 

 name should be adopted for bicolor, because his description is not applicable there(i>. 

 and I do not think we should be justified in substitiiting the name croiatus, GyU., for 

 crenulatus, Er., because, though the desci'iption would appear to warrant this, yet wc 

 have no corroborative evidence of the occurrence of crenulatus in Sweden. I ma\ 

 add, that my specimens were found in a boletus adhering to a dead and decaying 

 pine, in company with J?pitr<3a variegate and Gyrophcenaboleti. These circumstances J 

 render its occurrence in Sweden probable ; but, until this be proved, I think crenatus. ' 

 Gyll., must remain a doubtful name, more especially as he says of his insect, "Hal 

 in quisquiliis." I will merely add, that Thomson gives no reason for his adoption 

 of the name crenatus, Gyll., for bicolor, Sturm, beyond quoting Gyllenhal's description. . 

 — D. Sharp, Eccles, Thornhill : January, 1873. 



071 the reported occurrence of Apatura Ilia in England. — Mr. W. Oxenden 

 Hammond kindly sent me for examination the supposed British specimen of Apatursi 

 Ilia, which is mentioned by Mr. Butler in a communication to ' The Entomologist's 

 Monthly Magazine,' published in the last number, p. 219. 



