144 



Jiiideiisis by the evidently shorter antenna? — at any rate, of ther 

 female— from pariiilus, Gr., by its shorter prothorax which i& 

 not wider than the elytra, from ferruginetis by its much smaller 

 size, much nairower build, prothorax less narrowed behind, (tc.,. 

 from jyiisiUns by its very much narrower form prothorax narrowed 

 behind, &c. 



Victoria, (Dividing Eange). 



L. pusillns, Schonh. I have four Australian specimens that 

 have been examined by M. Grouvelle — the well-known specialist 

 on this group— and ticketed "i. pusillus." They — and other 

 Australian examples before me of the same species — all have a 

 small fchining tubercle about the centre of the disc of the pro- 

 notum. This character is not mentioned in Erichson's somewhat 

 lengthy description of the insect (Ins. Deutschl., III., p. 321). I 

 have not Scbonherr's original description available. Examples 

 from other parts of the world hearing the same name all present 

 this character. 



i. arliceps, Ollifi'. This species is very close to — if not identi- 

 cal with — L. iaamanicus, Gr. Olliff's remark on it is "appears 

 to be more nearly allied to L. iasmanicus than to any other 

 species," but he adds no mention of the distinctive characters. 

 Both descriptions are fairly full and they agree so exactly in 

 respect of the leading characters — e.g. the remarkable coloring 

 and pattern of the elytra, and the notably strong impression of 

 the fourth elytral stria — that in spite of some little discrepancies 

 in the language employed to characterise the puncturation I can 

 hardly think them founded on two species. I have before me 

 examples from the Victorian mountains (whose Coleopterous 

 fauna is closely allied to that of Tasmania — Grouvelle's locality) 

 and N.S. Wales (which Olliff quotes for arliceps) which agree in 

 all their strongly marked characters with those set forth in both 

 descriptions. The specimen from N.S. Wales is undoubtedly a 

 trifle less strongly punctulate than the Victorian ones of the 

 same sex — from the descriptions articeps- appears to be less 

 strongly punctured than iasmanicus — but certainly not so mar- 

 kedly as to in itself justify specific distinction. I cannot think 

 it in the least likely that I have before me a species with the same 

 unusual elytral pattern and other strongly marked characters as 

 the specimens that Olliff and Grouvelle described, and yet dis- 

 tinct from them, but undoubtedly my examples present som& 

 characters which I cannot understand both those authors passing 

 over without note — foF the lateral outline of the prothorax is 

 quite evidently trisinuate and the space on the pronotum inter- 

 mediate between the lateral stria and the lateral margin bears a 

 deep transverse furrow slightly behind its middle. I may add 

 that one of my specimens was sent to me by Mr. Lea ticketed as 

 "L. articeps. Oil." 



