10 Mr. T. Vernon WolLaston on the 
Dryophthoro alitor discedit elytris angustioribus, magis 
parallelis, lateraliter compressis, utrinque ad apicem multo 
magis cariniformibus, uncoquc tibiali minus elongato. 
A TzTqa, quatuor, et te^uvoo, scindo. 
There can be no doubt that the weevil from which the 
above characters have been drawn out, if not already de- 
scribed as a Dryoplithorus, is congeneric with several 
which have been referred to that group. Yet a careful 
comparison of it with the European D. hjmexylon (which 
is stated expressly to be the type, and for examples of 
which, from Finland, I am indebted to Mr. E. W. Jan- 
son) is abundantly sufficient to shew that it cannot in 
reality be admitted into the same actual genus Avith that 
insect, — its shorter rostrum and legs, and (above all) the 
fact of its anterior coxk being comparatively wide apart 
from each other (instead of nearly contiguous), whilst the 
posterior pair, on the other hand, are not so distantly 
se]iarated as is the case in Dryoplithorus proper, being 
differences of the utmost importance in this particular 
department of the Rhyncliophora. As regards its less 
essential details, I may observe that its elytra are nar- 
rower and more parallel (or laterally-compressed) tlian in 
Dryoplitliorus, and have their keeled apical margin very 
much more prominent and developed ; and that its an- 
tenna) are implanted a little further behind the middle of 
the rostrum, Avhilst its tibial hook and feet are consider- 
ably more abbreviated. 
In other respects (and which it retains in common Avith 
Dryoplitliorus), I wiU merely mention that its 4-jointed 
funiculus and transverse eyes, and the fact of its abbre- 
viated feet being distinctly pentamerous (the fourth articu- 
lation, although smaller than the preceding ones, being 
quite conspicuous and exposed — an almost unique feature, 
if not indeed entirely so, in the Rliynchophora), -will com- 
bine to separate it from every other Cossonideous form 
with which we are here concerned.* 
* In its shorter rostrum, antenna;, legs, and feet, as well as in the pro- 
portions of its funiculus-joints, Tetratemmis would appear (judging at 
least from the published diagnosis) to agree better with the genus Chcc- 
rorkinns, Fainn., from the south of P^.urope, than with Bri/ojjitt /torus ; 
but from that group its eyes and tarsi will (apart from all other differences) 
at once separate it, — the former being transverse and depressed, instead of 
rounded and prominent, whilst the latter are filiform and conspicuously 
5-articulatc; whereas the feet in CJuerorhinus are said to be {rule Fair- 
maire, in the French Annales for 1857, p. 742, and also Lacordaire, Gen. 
vii. 323) on the ordinary pseudotetramerons type, with their third joint 
