512 FAUNA HAWAIIENSIS 



scutellum, forming the genus Aeletes for the latter. Aeletes was again merged in 

 Acritits by Lewis (I.e.), on the ground that the distinction between them is insufficient. 

 This arrangement is retained here. 



The known Hawaiian members of the genus are obviously divisible into two very 

 unequal groups ; one consisting of but a single species, A. iiisn/an's, with a distinct 

 scutellum, the other consisting of 2,0 species in which absolutely no scutellum is visible, 

 in any light or position, even under high powers of the compound microscope. A. hisit- 

 laris is moreover sharply marked off from its congeners by several other characters ; 

 chiefly by the very definite basal chain of punctures on the thorax, arcuate in the 

 middle, and by the definite row of coarse punctures along the meso-metasternal suture ; 

 these two characters are not found in any other known Hawaiian Acviti, though they 

 are present in various Acriii from other lands. Indeed the meso-metasternal row of 

 punctures is, according to the descriptions of de Marseul and others, present in several 

 Acriti (some of which are N. American) which in other respects seem to be very 

 closely allied to the Hawaiian Acriti without visible scutellum. Altogether A. iiisu- 

 lar-is is so very unrelated to its Hawaiian congeners, that one almost suspects it of 

 being a recently introduced form : this however is only a matter of conjecture. 



Leaving A. insiilaris out of account, and considering only the forms without 

 visible scutellum, there is every reason to believe that they are part of the truly indige- 

 nous fauna of the islands. They are almost all from mountain localities at elevations of 

 from 2000 to 6000 feet ; many are recorded from elevations of 3000, 4000 and 5000 

 feet. They are from the indigenous forests, where they are found, as I am informed 

 by Mr Perkins, always in dead wood of .some kind, either just under the bark, or deeper 

 in the rotten wood. 



These Hawaiian Acriti (and indeed the Acriti of all the world) are at present too 

 imperfectly known for any statement to be made with certainty, as to whether or not 

 they are precinctive, that is, confined to the Hawaiian Islands. Examination of a 

 number of Acriti in the British Museum, from Europe, various parts of Asia, Australia 

 and New Zealand, has not revealed any closely related to those in question. The 

 descriptions of many other .species show plainly that they too are quite different from 

 the Hawaiian forms. Descriptions of yet other species do not allow of a decision being 

 formed as to whether those species are like the Hawaiian Acriti or not. It is to be 

 regretted that in many cases no statement is made as to whether a scutellum is visible 

 or not. If any known species do come very close to their Hawaiian congeners, it 

 appears that such are North American forms. Certain specimens found by Blackburn 

 near Honolulu were considered to belong to the Californian A. basalis Leconte. Some 

 ot these have had to be removed to other species ; as to the remainder, I have not seen 

 A. basalts Leconte, and cannot be certain whether they are of that species. 



The material is not large enough to allow of much being said about the distribution 

 within the .-Archipelago. The majority of species are so far known each only from one 



