185 



The genus Nerthus Dist. has nothing to do wilh the Golobathris- 

 tidte, where it is placed by its author (Rhynch. Brit. Ind. Y, p. 33). 

 It is closely allied to if not actually identical wiih Ilyginus StAl 

 (Heterogastrinœ). Horvath has recently placed Arteiiiidoriis Dist. 

 as a synonym of Hyginus, but as Artemidorus has clavate hind 

 femora, a more constricted body and a somewhat différent faciès, 

 Distant may be right in regarding it as distinct. 



The gênera Esmunus Dist. and Eiihcmeriis Dist. (1. c, p 41-43), 

 placed in the Heterogastrinse, are so iike Blissina3, that I suppose 

 they will prove to belong to this subfamily even if the membranal 

 nervures are correctly figured. 



In 1901 Distant descrîbed a new genus and species under the 

 name Heinsius explicatus. I bave seen spécimens from the same 

 locality from where the typical spécimens came, and I can see no 

 reasons why it should be generically separated from IscJmodemus 

 FiEB. Far from being « clavate », as Distant says, the antennae 

 are on the contrary tapering from the base to the apex. 



It must be admitte I that the descriptions of the Myodochidaî in 

 Distant's last Volume of bis Indian Rhynchota, though far from 

 complète, are belter than the utterly futile « descriptions » in the 

 a Biologia », and I think most of them can be recognized. The 

 genus Nysius is an exception. Of this genus Distant has described 

 from différent j) irts of the world about 15 new species, not one of 

 which can be recognized from the description even as to the group 

 of the genus where it belongs, and some of them may possibly be 

 Coreid?e. Yet Stâl and Horvath hâve clearly indicated what cha- 

 racters should be used in distinguishing species of this genus. 



Pyrrhocoridae. — The genus Rhododia Dist., originally 

 placed in the Mirida^. is now transferred by Distant (1. c, p. 92) to 

 the Pyrrhocoridft3. It may really belong there, but as it is founded 

 on larvaî (a fact not mentioned by Distant), it is impossible to 

 détermine its place without a careful examination of the type. 

 Reuter (Acta Soc. Se Fenn. XXXVII, 3, p. 165 1 suggested that it 

 may belong to the Alydinée (Goreida^) and this is perhaps its true 

 place. 



Tingidse. — Distant describes (1. c, p. 103) a new genus 

 Ahdastarlus and says that it is « difficult to locate the genus preci- 

 sely » because the two last antennal joints are wanting, and that 

 « it is probable that in placing it after Phatnoma no considérable 

 error will bave been committed ». The two last antennal joints are 

 of no importance in locating the genus and as it has the pronotum 

 posteriorly prolonged in a long acute process reaching for beyond 



