102 Mr. Arthur M, Lea's Revision of the 



All the Tasmanian specimens (with one exception) which 

 I have seen, have the dark markings about the scutellum 

 continued very narrowly along the suture to about the 

 middle. In an occasional specimen (especially when of 

 large size) the black marking is continued along the suture 

 almost to the apex. The exception (in Mr. H. H. D. 

 Griffith's collection) is from Sheffield and has the elytra 

 entirely red except for a small almost circular dark apical 

 patch common to both elytra. It is true that Waterhouse 

 says of sciitellaris, "Elytra rusty red, sometimes with the 

 apex black," but his specimens (from the "Swan River 

 and N.W. Coast ") in all probability belonged to the species 

 he subsequently described as hasalis. 



In size the species varies from 9 to 17 mm. In the 

 female the projecting spine is represented by a small 

 tubercle at most, and the base of its head is very lightly 

 (instead of deeply) longitudinally impressed. 



I have not seen the references in Cist. Ent. and Rev. 

 Zool. 



ITah. Tasmania (widely distributed) ; Victoria : Gis- 

 borne, Studley Park. 



Calochromus basalis, Wat., Cist. Ent., 1877, p. 106; 

 111. Typ. Col., p. 2, PI. I, fig. 2. 



Of this species I have a pair taken in cop. ; the female 

 has palpi as in Waterhouse's first section of the genus, 

 the male as in his second section.* The male differs 

 also from the female in being longer and thinner with 

 considerably longer and thinner antennae. In all the 

 specimens I have seen the apex of the elytra has a 



to be entirely uncovered ; the existence of a frontal spine in the 

 male also constitutes an interesting cjiaracter hitherto unrecorded 

 in the genus Calochromus." The beautiful figures he gives leave no 

 doubt as to the species described by Mons. Bourgeois, and despite 

 the above statements I am still inclined to believe it to be scutellaris. 

 At any rate it is the only species known to me from Tasmania, is 

 common, and agrees exactly with Erichson's description. Some 

 specimens before me certainly differ from the normal form in colour 

 and size but not in sculpture. If the supposed differences really do 

 exist there must be two distinct species, but it is to be noted that 

 the shape of the epistome is by no means readily seen, except from 

 certain directions, even in fresh specimens, and could easily become 

 obscured by dust or grease. 



* The sexual variation of the palpi has already been commented 

 upon by Mr. Blackburn. 



