84 
TECHMESSA. 
I have in my collection a Tasmanian specimen which seems to 
be decidedly congeneric with Mr. Champion’s 7. ruficollis: 
Indeed, as I can find no discrepancy even as a species between it- 
and Mr. Champion’s description, except in respect of colour, Iam 
obliged to regard it provisionally as a variety of that insect. It 
is entirely black, except the mouth organs and labrum the 
summit of the front coxe and the trochanters which are pitchy- 
testaceous. It even presents the same prothoracis peculiarity as 
Mr. Champion’s specimen (and which he mentions as abnormal) 
in that the prothorax is rounded on one side and subangularly 
dilated on the other. I consider it unquestionably allied rather 
closely as a genus to my Z'richananca from which, however, it is 
readily separated by good generic characters, especially the fine- 
ness of the granulation of its eyes, the considerably less dilatation 
of the apical three joints of it maxillary palpi, and the greater 
slenderness of its front tarsi—and, indeed, of its legs altogether. 
PSEUDOLYCUS. 
The species of this genus are extremely variable in respect of 
colour and markings and unfortunately colour distinctions are 
almost the only ones that have been referred to in the descrip- 
tions. The number of names that have been applied to real or 
suppused members of Psewdolycus are, so far as I know, seven, 
and one of them (P. apicalis), as I have already stated, does not 
represent a true Pseudolycus. P.cinctus, Mr.Champion has shown 
(Joc. cit.) to be a variety of hemorrhoidalis, Fab., and it seems to 
be hardly doubtful that atratus, Guer., is another variety of the 
same. PP. (Cidemera) luctwosa, Boisd., is described in seven 
words, which exactly agree with the brief description of P. 
atratus, Guer.; nevertheless, inasmuch as there is another species 
of which they might very well be a Boisduvallian description, 
and there is good reason to think that /uctwosa was not founded 
on a Tasmanian specimen, it seems desirable to claim Boisdu- 
val’s name for this latter species which, although very close to P. 
hemorrhoidalis, Fab. (=cinctus, Guer.=atratus, Guer.) is, I 
believe, really distinct from it. P. marginata, Guer., is the one 
species of the genus that may be identified with some confidence 
by the description of its author, and this identification is con- 
firmed by the specimens which agree with the description having 
been taken in the locality cited by Guerin. There remains P. 
hemoptera, Guér., and this its author only conjectures to be Aus- 
tralian. I have before me a Psewdolycus (in Victoria the most 
plentiful species of the genus) which agrees fairly well with 
Guérin’s description (differing most in being smaller than the size 
Guerin states) and which, I think, may fairly be treated as. 
