a 
106 Rev. F. D. Morice on 
PROSOPIGASTRA MORICEI, Mercet 
Described in Boletin de la Real Soc. espanola de His.. 
nat., July 1907, from one of the specimens here recosded.. 
The species is so like P. laevior, described by myself in 
1897 from Egypt, that neither Mr. Saunders nor I had 
considered it distinct, and, in fact, I sent it to Sefior Mercet 
as a “duplicate” of laevior. In Mr. Saunders’s MS. list. 
it still bears the latter name, but I think he had not 
seen the specimens since the description of moricei was 
published. The ? 2, both of /wevior and moricei, are still 
unknown; the chief difference between the ? 9 lies in the 
form and sculpture of the “area pygidialis” (vide figs. 2 
and 3 in Mercet’s Paper). 
4 2 2. Constantine, 16.-18. vi, 98. F. D. M. 
PROSOPIGASTRA INSIGNIS, Saunders 
Described in Trans. Ent. Soc. 1910, Part IV. 
The species, or at least the type-specimen here recorded, 
is quite startlingly larger than any of our other Proso- 
pigastra spp. ! 
Le. Biskra, Vivi, 98: “B.D: M. 
GASTROSERICUS MORICEL, Saunders 
Described in Trans. Ent. Soc., /. e. 
1/o) Biskray 7 ive 98ou H, 1). IM. 
DINETUS SIMPLICIPES, Saund. 
Described in Trans. Ent. Soc., /. ¢. 
4 fg f. Bone, 4. vi, 96. A. E. E. 
Mr. Eaton notes as to these specimens, “Eyes tinged 
towards the orbits in front and behind with brownish, 
this colour leaving the middle lateral space (from the jaw 
upwards) olive-greenish, and intersected subvertically by 
a movable dark streak that slants downwards towards the 
lower end of the posterior orbit.” 
ligfste Vari hi, iy96:. (A. 1. Wis) 
DINETUS DENTIPES, Saund. 
Described in Trans. Ent. Soe., /. ¢. 
320.4, 1 9... Biskra, BOsiv,.94 Ac HE: 
“ Aoile and difficult to net. . . . They rest on the sand, 
with antennae porrect and close together, Often near 
