119 



My two specimens of this insect differ considerably from each 

 other in color, — one being considerably darker than the other on 

 both the upper and under surface. The species is rather close 

 to T. o'lifiila, Grouv., its most conspicuous difference being in the 

 form of the prothorax. — the sides of which are almost straight, 

 with the lateral edging ver}^ distinctly wider and evidently 

 explanate. 



Victoria (in XaniJiorrhcea , near the mouth of the Glenelg Kiver). 



PSEUDEBA (gen. nov. Colydiidarum.) 



Caput transversum antice profunde emarginatum ad clypeum 

 recipiendum; antennae breves, crass*, basi tectse, 11 artic- 

 ulatae (articulo basali minuto ceteris gradatim magis trans- 

 versis, apicali brevi minus lato) ; palporum maxillarium 

 articulo ultimo elongato-conico, oculi grosse granulati, 

 superne vix manifesti ; prothorax transversus, basi angus- 

 tatus \ elytra elongata, quam prothorax circiter duplo 

 longiora ; tibife modice lataB, ad apicem calcarata3 ; prosternum 

 antice profunde emarginatum, ante coxas breve ; coxae 

 anticse inter se sat anguste divisa^, intermedi^e fere contiguse, 

 posticse vix late divi;£e; segmentum ventrale basale quam 

 2'^™ haud (quam 3''°' manifeste) longius, antice inter coxas 

 sat angustum ; tarsi 4-articulati, breves, sat crassi, articulis 

 1 — 3 inter se sat sequalibus (4° quam ceteri conjuncti vix 

 breviori) ; corpus glabrum, sat opacum, alatum, sat con- 

 vexum. 

 The obscure little insect for which I propose this name 

 is evidently allied to the species mentioned in Trans. U.S., 

 S.A., 1902, p. 318 as being probably Eha cerylonoides^ Pasc. 

 The curious antennae of the two are extremely sinriilar, but 

 whereas in the present species there is cert? inly a minute 

 basal joint (making the number of joints 11) I cannot 

 detect any such joint in the other. The character that 

 seems to me most distinctive of this genus is the very 

 strong emargination of the front of the prosternum which 

 causes the front margin of the prosternum to be considerably 

 nearer to the coxae than is usual in the Colydiida. I am afraid- 

 I must say of it, — as Pascoe said of Eha, — " for the present its 

 affinities must be left in doubt," but there seems no other family 

 than the Colydiidce in which it could possibly be placed. It 

 should be added that the position of the clypeus in a deep emar- 

 gination of the front is a distinctive character and the same may 

 be said of the eyes scarcely visible except when viewed from 

 below, — which is however the case with some other Colydiidce 

 (e.g., Leretaphrus, — especially D. Erichsoni, Newm.). In general 

 appearance this insect is not v^ery like any other known to me, — - 



