Staiolujliaiddi of the Amazon Valley. 31 



the ordinarily accepted sub-families of StaphylinidcB in 

 the following manner : — 



Aleocharini . . . . . . . . . . 44 species. 



Tachyporini .. .. .. ,. ..18 „ 



Qucdiini . . . . . . . . . . 9 „ 



Staphylinini . . . . . . . . . . 03 „ 



Xantholinini . . . . . . . . . . H3 „ 



Pfedcrini .. .. .. ., ..126 „ 



Pinopbilini C6 „ 



Stenini .. .. .. .. ..28 „ 



OxyteliDi .. .. .. .. ..27 „ 



Omalini .. .. .. .. .. 1 „ 



Piestini .. .. .. .. ..31 „ 



Platyprosopus .. .. ., ..10 „ 



Turellus 1 „ 



Total 487 species. 



It would be premature for me to attempt to draw any 

 important generalizations as to the geographical distribu- 

 tion of the different groups, for our knowledge of tropical 

 StaphylinidcB is yet far too meagre to justify this ; but on 

 comparing the number of species contained in each sub- 

 family with the number of species representing the same 

 sub-family in the European fauna, one or two contrasts 

 are so striking that they may be mentioned ; they are 

 the great comparative predominance of Finopliilini and 

 Piestini in the Amazons, and, on the other hand, the 

 diminished number of species oi Aleocharini and Omalini. 

 This latter fact cannot, however, be accepted as more than 

 a negative temporary conclusion ; and all I think we can 

 at present say as the result of a comparison of this sort is 

 that the groups Piestini and Pinophilini, which are barely 

 represented by two or three species in Europe, are richly 

 represented in the Amazons. In this respect the fauna 

 of the Amazons will, I believe, be found to be similar to 

 that of the other warmer parts of the Avorld. 



As regards genera, I have referred the Amazonian 

 insects here dealt with to eighty different genera, of which 

 I have established twelve as new, but of this part of my 

 work I am unable to speak with any feeling of satisfaction. 

 My main object in commencing this work w^as to describe 

 the species of Amazonian Staphylinida, and I have only 

 concerned myself with genera, because questions of 

 nomenclature compelled me so to do. When a man 

 describes a new species, the best thing he can do for the 

 assistance of others is to mention what previously descnbed 

 species it is most nearly allied to. The system at present 

 in vogue permits him, however, to avoid doing this by 



