27 



genus. The male characters of the front tarsi are quite as in 

 C. puhescens except in the basal lamina of the large claw being 

 scarcely developed. 



N. Queensland ; sent by Mr. French. 



NEOPHYLLOTOCUS (gen. nov. Sericidarum). 



Type iV. [Macrothops) rostrata, Macl. 



I propose this name as a substitute for Macrotliops, Macl. nee 

 Boisd., which is a nom. prseocc, having been used by Boisduval 

 for a genus already named Phyllotocus by Fischer de Waldh. Sir 

 W. Macleay's diagnosis is not very complete as it does not in- 

 clude any reference to the claws, where the most obvious distinc- 

 tive characters of the Fhyllotocides are to be found. In the 

 present genus the claws are extremely short (about half the 

 length of the 5th tarsal joint), and are all simple in the female. 

 In the male one of the claws on each of the 4 anterior tarsi is 

 bifid. 



Sir W. Macleay described a second species of his genus 

 Macrotliops under the name j^f^^^'i'dipennis which he stated was 

 founded on specimens that had lost their " palpi, tarsi &c." It is 

 therefore, impossible to say whether that species is rightly as- 

 sociated with the present insect. 



CHEIRAGRA. 



Sir W. Macleay formed this genus for a number of species 

 which he described so briefly that it is impossible to identify any 

 of them (as species) with certainty except by comparison, which 

 has not been practicable for me. 



I have before me a considerable number of specimens evidently 

 attributable to the genus. Sir W. Macleay in his diagnosis of 

 the genus omitted to mention that the claws are appendiculate 

 and furnished at their base with large membranous processes, 

 which I take to be the most reliable generic character. In the 

 male the front tarsi have one claw similar to those of the female 

 while the other claw is enormously developed and turned back 

 against the surface of the tarsus. 



With the exception of two examples (from a far Northern 

 locality, unfortunately both females and therefore undesirable for 

 description) I cannot satisfy myself that the specimens of this 

 genus before me represent more than one species. They are from 

 various localities in Victoria and N.S. Wales and difier to a 

 remarkable extent in coloring, so that it is hard to find two quite 

 alike. This species does not appear to be Phyllotoc^is pusiUus, 

 Blanchv (which Sir William seems to regard as the type of 

 Cheiragra) as its prothorax is not black in any variety that I have 

 seen and certainly could not be described as *' haud punctatus.'^ 



