ON THE STENOCHORID^ OF NEW HOLLAND. 189 



in my collection of this family are very considerably increased in number, I shall confine 

 my remarks chiefly to those which are from New Holland. It is satisfactory to state 

 previously, that of the twelve genera proposed, and a thirteenth suggested by rae as a 

 subgenus, in the memoirs of 1833, the major part of them are now adopted as genera, 

 although they bear different generic names. The following tables will perhaps give the 

 reader a more concise view of the points of agreement and difference than anything I 

 can state. 



Hope's Genera and Types in 1833. | Serville's Genera and Types in 1834. 



Section I. 



1. Stenochorus, St en. semipunctatus, Fab. 



2. Acanthinomonus, Sten. spinicornis, Fab. 



3. Cycliopleurus, Sten. irroratus, Fab. 

 A S ' Genus nondum defectum." 



L Monacantha^ , Kirby; Surinama, Fab. 

 5. Tmesisternus^, Latr. ; biguttatus, Don. 



Mallocera, Sten. glauca, Dejean. 

 Cordylomera, Sten. spinicornis, Fab. 

 Elaphidion, Sten. irroratus, Fab. 



Achryson Serville? Sten. pallens, Fab. 

 Tmesisternus, Cat. variegatus. Fab. 



Section II. 



6. Tetracanthus, Sten.festivus^, Fab. 



7. Dissacanthus, Sten. 4-maculatus, Fab. 



8. Uracanthus'^ triangularis. 



Chlorida, Sten. costata, Dejean. 

 Eburia, Sten. 4-maculatus, Fab. 

 TJracanthus triangularis. 



The remaining four genera of Scolecobrotus, Strongylurus, Coptopterus and Piesar- 

 thrius are all from New Holland, and were unique in my cabinet at the time I pro- 

 posed them, and I beheve are still unknown to foreign entomologists. It must also be 

 added that Stenochorus rufipes of Klug, which was suggested to be formed into a sub- 

 genus, has since received the appellation of Stenosphenus by the Baron Dejean. I am 

 not aware, however, if its generic characters are given. It will appear then, from a 

 view of the above tables, that out of the thirteen genera proposed seven are adopted 

 by M. Serville and two by Dejean, some of them having the self-same types, whilst 

 the remaining four are peculiar to New Holland, and if not unique in my collection at 

 present, are most likely unknown to French writers. But it is time to proceed to the 

 descriptions of the Stenochorida of New Holland, including the four genera mentioned 

 above. 



' I have reasons to think that Monacantha Surinama of Kirby, and Achryson pallens of Fabricius, are the 

 satae insect. 



« The typical species of Tmesisternus seems doubtful ; from examining Sten. biguttatus of Donovan, it ap- 

 pears to belong to the genus Coptocercus mihi. 



' Festivus of Fabricius and costata of Dejean belong evidently to the same genus. 



* Uracanthus triangularis, Hope, is the angustatus of Dejean and the elongatus of Gory. 

 VOL. HI. PART II. 2 C 



