281 



BBB. Hoad and pronotuni with little 

 pilosity, at most fine adpressed 

 sparse hairs. 

 C. Punctui'es of pronotuni very coarse 



and by no means close ... ... pygmspns, Mad. 



CC. Pnncturesof pronotum not as C. (?Burm.J 



D. Propygidinm of comparatively 

 small size. 

 E. Clypens of male much narrow- 

 ed forward and rounded at 

 apex ... ... ... ... evaneficens, Blackh. 



EE. Clypens of male wider, 

 shorter, and tridentate at 

 apex ... ... ... ... opaoulns, Blackh. 



DD. Propygidinm enormous. 



E. Antennpe entirely testaceous... major, Blackh. 

 EE. Clnb of antennse black. 



F. The depressed part of pygi- 

 dium bears a longitudinal 

 sulcus ... ... ••• granulatus, Blackh. 



FF. The depressed part of 

 pygidium not longitudin- 

 ally sulcate ... ... ... humilis, Blanch. 



I shall now furnish notes on species already described, 

 and add descriptions of new species. 



A. ( LiparetrusJ hispid us, Mad. I have examined the 

 presumable type of this species in the Macleay Museum. It 

 is, I think, a male. Two specimens in my own collection are 

 certainly male and female. The elytra of the female bear 

 a strongly convex, highly nitid, glabrous elongate sublateral 

 area, commencing at about the middle of the length and bent 

 inward near the apex to join the subapical callus. It does 

 not differ much from the male in other respects. In both sexes 

 the antennal flabellum has four joints, which are a little 

 shorter in the female than in the male. 



A. (Liparetrus) aureus, Blackb. This species remains 

 unique in the South Australian Museum. It is near to A. 

 hi.^pidus, Macl., but the pilosity of its elytra is so much shorter 

 than in that insect that I have little doubt of its specific 

 validity. The specimen is a male, and it is therefore, though 

 probable, not certain that its female has antennae with a four- 

 jointed flabellum. 



A. fLip^u'ctrus) hicolor, Blackb. Identical with speci- 

 mens named L. hasalis, Blanch., in the Australian Museum. 

 I have already (Tr. Roy. Soc. S.A., 1905, p. 312) stated my 

 reasons for thinking that Macleay was mistaken in this deter- 

 mination. This insect is somewhat close to A. f LijKiretriis) 

 depressus, Blanch., but is readily distinguishable by the very 

 much darker pilosity of its pronotum and the notably co irser 

 sculiDture of its elytra. 



