308 
L. assimilis, Macl. The presumable type is in the Mac- 
leay Museum. I think it a male. Its apical ventral segment 
does not differ materially from that of male diseipennis,' 
Guer. 
L. discipennis, Guer. Specimens from almost all parts 
of southern Australia and from Tasmania stand in collec- 
tions under this name. Macleay gives New South Wales and 
South Australia as its habitat. Whether the specimens from 
Tasmania and South Australia are specifically identical with 
those from Sydney I feel rather doubtful. It is too variable 
a species in colouring for great importance to be attached to 
such distinctions as greater or less width of dark margins of 
elytra in local races ; but the opportunities I have had of ex- 
amining sexual characters point to difference in the ventral 
characters of the male in at any rate Tasmanian examples. 
Unfortunately, there is only a single male among those I have 
from Tasmania, and I do not think it safe to found a new 
species on the decided (though not very great) difference be- 
tween the sculpture of its apical ventral segment and the cor- 
responding segment in the few male Sydney specimens before 
me. The study of a longer series might not improbably es- 
tablish specific difference as constant. The species that Ger- 
mar describes as discipennis seems, from the colour of its 
vestiture, to be that which Macleay named cane seen s. 
L. montanus, Macl. I have examined the presumable 
type of this species, unique in the Australian Museum, and 
can find no difference whatever between it and L. discipennis, 
Guer. It seems to be a male ; at any rate, its apical ventral 
segment is quite like that of male discipennis. 
L. canescens, Macl. I have examined the presumable 
type in the Macleay Museum. It is a common South Aus- 
tralian insect, and very distinct from discipennis, Guer. Be- 
sides other differences the apical ventral segment of its male 
is nitid and almost punctureless, with a strong, obtuse carina 
placed transversely across its middle, the corresponding seg- 
ment in male discipennis , from Sydney, having an even sur- 
face, on which there is fine puncturation, mixed with some 
coarse piliferous granules. 
L. alhohirtus, Macl. Two specimens are pinned into 
the label bearing this name in the Macleay Museum. One of 
them is obviously some very different insect — the other pre- 
sumably the type. Macleay says that the front tibiae are 
"scarcely bidentate," the upper tooth being ''nearly obsolete." 
I find, however, that although the upper tooth is small (as in 
discipennis, Guer., and canescens, Macl.), it is perfectly well 
defined in the type. 
