282 



.4. f Lipcretrus ) liunnei.^fin-i, Macl. I have identified this 

 species by comparison with the presumable type in the Mac- 

 leay Museum. 



A. ( LiyaretrusJ al-picola, Blackb. I have already (Tr. 

 Roy. Soc, 1905, p. 332) discussed the possibility of this 

 being identical with .1. angustuius, Burm. (the type of the 

 genus). 



A. (Liparetrus) ordinatiis, Macl. This species is near to 

 ^4. f Liparetrus) depressus, Blanch. Macleay distinguishes it 

 by its pilosity being "decumbent." I believe this to be a sat- 

 isfactory distinction when applied to specimens in their natu- 

 ral condition, but I find that the pilosity on depressus is 

 easily made decumbent by artificial means {e.g., passing a wet 

 brush over it). The dense adpressed pilosity of the propy- 

 gidium and pygidium of ordinatus, however, is essentially dif- 

 ferent from the finer, erect, and much less close pilosity of 

 the corresponding segments in depressiis. 



A. ( LipdrefriM ) depressus. Blanch. I have before me a 

 long series of Automoli from almost all parts of New South 

 Wales, Queensland, and Victoria, among which depressus is 

 undoubtedly included. They vary considerably in size and 

 somewhat in colour, but I cannot find characters in them to 

 indicate more than one species. Some of them from North 

 Queensland are of small size and evidently identical with the 

 presumable type of .4. (Liparefrus) Coohi, Macl., in the Mac- 

 leay Museum, which Macleay distinguishes from depressus 

 only by assigning a smaller size to it. 



.4, f Liparefrus} pygmcp}is^ Macl. {% Burm.). The speci- 

 men before me of this insect is certainlv identical with that 

 which stands in the Australian Museum as L. pygmcetis, 

 Burm., and is, therefore, presumably that which Macleay 

 described under that name in his Monograph of Liparefrus. 

 In that case Macleav was mistaken in placing the species 

 among those with only 8 antenna! joints, as the stipes un- 

 doubtedly has a minute 4th joint, closely connected with the 

 basal joint of the lamella. Whether Macleay's identification 

 was correct, appears, however, doubtful in the extreme, not 

 only because Burmeister, as the author of Aufomolus, would 

 have been unlikely to place one of its species in Ijipnretr'us, 

 but also because Burmeister's description does not agree with 

 Macleay's pgguurus, representing it as infer alia smaller, with 

 less coarse punctures {n-adelsfirhpinirferi}, forming on the 

 elytra regular (Macleav calls them "irregular") rows. Never- 

 theless, as among extensive collections from Western Aus- 

 tralia that T have examined T have not seen any other species 

 that could possibly be pygma'us, Burm., I think this one may 

 reasonablv be called provisionally " pj/'inurus, Macl. ( ? Burm.)." 



