380 Prof. Vfestwoo&'s further notice concerning 



Loncl., 1882, Plates II. and III., the structure of the 

 front of the head, both on the upper and lower surface 

 (Plate XVI., figs. 2 a, 2 b), as well as of the basal portion 

 of the head (figs. 2c, 2d), the mandibles destitute of 

 teeth, the antennas destitute of the dilated basal joint, 

 the possession of two small black spots near the base of 

 the mandibles in the place of eyes, the ovate form of 

 the abdomen destitute of the elongated lateral cerci, 

 which seem replaced by the two horny plates described 

 by Coquerel (of which I have not been able to define the 

 structure), but which appear to me to be unprovided with 

 the two singularly large lateral tracheae of the male 

 Sycophaga (of which I could observe no trace, although 

 represented in Dr. Coquerel's figure), — are all sufficient 

 to warrant the separation of Apocrypta perplexa from 

 A. paradoxa, and, as the latter is now proved to be a 

 Sycophaga, the retention of the name Apocrypta for A. 

 perplexa will not perhaps be objected to. It was only 

 after numerous dissections that I was able clearly to 

 trace the two retinacula of the male, proving the exserted 

 terminal appendage to be the male organ, and not, 

 as supposed by Dr. Coquerel, the ovipositor of a female 

 insect. 



In the absence of specimens of A. perplexa from Ficus 

 terragena for comparison with the Ceylonese ones from 

 F. glomerata, it is not possible to determine the minute 

 differences (if any) between Dr. Coquerel's and my 

 insects. Mine vary in size from 1 to 2 mm. in length, 

 and have the abdomen of a different form from Dr. 

 Coquerel's figure. I have further to remark that the 

 external envelope of the thoracic and abdominal seg- 

 ments is so extremely thin and transparent, that 1 

 cannot determine the absolute form of the posterior 

 portion of each segment, which overlaps the base of the 

 following segment to a considerable extent. 



