- 
178 Mr. H. E. Andrewes’ Notes on Synonymy 
the other hand, the fourth tarsal is only slightly emarginate, 
and the apex of the prosternal process (in the specimen 
dismounted for examination) is glabrous, so that it will 
not go into the genus Stenolophus. It does not seem wise, 
without more substantial characters to work on, to propose 
a new genus, so I leave the species provisionally where 
Bates has put it. 
59. Perigona ruficollis Motch. v. nana (p. 273). In the 
Revue d’Entomologie 1907 Fauvel discusses this genus, 
and a specimen of nana sent to him for examination bears 
the label “‘ plagiata Putz. ex. typ.” (presumably compared 
with Putzey’s type). As, however, Bates’ v. nana is left 
by Fauvel (p. 100) as a var. of ruficollis Motch., it seems 
uncertain whether or not it is actually identical with Putzey’s 
species, 
60. Perigona ? (p. 274). This example was also 
sent to Fauvel and determined by him as “ P. litura Perroud 
ex. typ.” 
62. Tachys ? (p. 274). Bates thought this was 
T. pictipennis Putz., or an allied species. I think probably 
the latter. I have an example which I identify with 
Putzey’s species and which, like the type, comes from 
Celebes: in this the spots on the elytra are distinct, but 
in Bates’ example the front and hind spots are joined, the 
sutural striae are less impressed and the surface more 
shiny. Without seeing the type, I cannot decide the point. 
69. Triplogenius buqueti Cast. (p. 276) = 70, Lesticus 
(Triplogenius) chalcothorax Chaud. It is difficult to surmise 
why Bates should have picked out this example and 
labelled it 7. buqueti. The species are closely allied, 
but can be readily distinguished by the form of the pro- 
thorax. Tchitcherin has already drawn attention to the 
misidentification (Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross. xxxiv, 1900, 177, 
Observ.), but without indicating the correct name. 
71. Abacetus marginicollis Chaud. (p. 276). This is not 
the Burmese species. I have compared the specimen 
with an example of A. aenigma Chaud., from Hong-Kong, 
previously compared with the type: I find them to be 
exactly similar. Mr. R. Vitalis de Salvaza has lately taken 
it in some numbers in Laos and Cambodia. 
74. Abacetus lophoides Bates (p. 277). In a subsequent 
paper (Ann. Mus. Civ. Gen. 1892, 362) Bates says of this 
species, “ scarcely more than a local variety of A. quadri- 
guttatus, having 2 instead of 3 apical antennal joints 
eyes 
