138 Mr. G. J. Arrow on 
superfluous, and a critical examination shows that a con- 
siderable number of the specific names are synonyms. At 
the end of this paper I have given a revised list of the African 
species, distributed, so far as available materials permit (and 
I have fortunately been able to determine the large majority 
of described species), under their correct generic names. A 
number of hitherto unknown species are added. The genera 
will no doubt be increased as our knowledge of the species 
grows ; but the Jatter are not numerous, so far as at present 
recorded, and the creation of new genera, in the present un- 
satisfactory state of classification of the family, appears very 
undesirable. 
Either by oversight or intention the genus Lucestus 
has been omitted by Kuhnt both from the ‘ Genera’ and 
his since-published Catalogue, although allied genera like 
Hypodacne and Eidoreus are included. The African species 
of Euxestus here described forms an interesting link with 
Hypodacne and helps to render the position of the former 
genus less enigmatical. This is the second species known 
to me, all the non-African specimens TI have seen, although 
bearing many names, being conspecific. Huxestus parki, 
Woll., was first discovered in Madeira; but I have seen 
specimens from China, Burma, the Malay Peninsula, 
Philippine Is., Java, Hawaian Is., Haiti, Central America, 
etc. E. minor, Sharp, and E. piciceps, Gorh., are certainly 
identical with it (see Champion, Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. 1913, 
p- 79); and Neoplotera peregrina, Belon, and Tritomidea 
translucida, Motsch., I believe to be also synonymous both 
as genera and species. It is not possible to decide whether 
Motschulsky’s names basalis and oblonga also belong to the 
same insect ; but the 7ritomidea rubripes of Reitter, although 
related, is not congeneric, and the two Malayan species 
referred to Tritomidea by Gorham have evidently neither 
affinity nor resemblance to it. 
M. Bedel has recently formed a new genus, Mimodacne, 
for certain species previously included in Megalodacne but 
in which the club of the antenna is very large and markedly 
asymmetrical. The genus is a little difficult to define, as 
the shape of the club is gradually developed through a series 
of transitions : but it may be convenient to retain it for those 
species which exhibit the most pronounced asymmetry. One 
of these, M/. magnifica, Har., has been transferred to Lino- 
desmus by Kuhnt, in spite of the fact that Harold stated its 
resemblance to ZL. cawcus to be purely superficial. It has also 
been redescribed by Kuhnt as Megalodacne kolbei. 
I have found myself, like Harold (Coleopt, Hefte, xvi. 
