68 Mr. Walter F. H. Blandford on the 
One or two examples taken at Kiga, Subashin, 
Nagasaki, Omori, and Oyama. 
Oblong, cylindrical, black, tesselated with close-lying grey and 
brownish scales. Head granulate with front flattened, hairy, im- 
pressed and more densely hairy in the male. Antenne black, club 
rather short, acuminate oval, its basal joint large. Prothorax 
rather broader than long, its base bisinuate, not produced, sides 
uniformly rounded, tuberculate in front, surface regularly convex, 
front and sides with short erect bristles. Elytra cylindrical, wider 
at base than thorax, and a little more than twice as long, base 
crenate, sides subparallel to behind middle, apex strongly declivous 
and convex; with rather fine punctured strie, interstices flat 
with a single row of sete throughout, and with one or two 
tubercles at base. Underside strongly punctured with short scale- 
like hairs, metathoracic episterna narrow, abdomen not convex 
longitudinally. Legs black, with tarsi lighter. 
Two specimens are larger and broader than the rest, 
the scales are pale ashy-grey and yellowish, whereas in 
the others they are light and dark brown. I believe the 
two former to be females and not specifically distinct. 
This species may be referred to Bedel’s sub-genus 
Pteleobius, and is nearest to H. vittatus, Fabr., of the 
European fauna, but is larger, more elongate, with the 
strize deeper and less clearly punctured, and the inter- 
stices more convex and distinctly setose. 
Puia@osinus, Chap. 
In the generic diagnosis given by Chapuis (Syn. Scol., 
p. 93), the third tarsal joint is stated to be simple. This 
is correct for the European P. aubei, Perr., and P. 
thuye, Perr., but in the Japanese species it is bilobed, 
though M. Chapuis has made no mention of this point 
in the descriptions of P. lewisi and perlatus. It is also 
bilobed in the American species, according to Leconte, 
except in his Chetophleus hystrix, which can hardly be 
separated from the genus upon the characters given, and 
in which the 3rd tarsal jot “is emarginate rather than 
bilobed.’? This difference in structure is not here of 
generic value, and the genus is sufficiently recognisable 
by the structure of the antenne. 
