﻿Types 
  of 
  Oriental 
  Carabidae. 
  177 
  

  

  Murree 
  in 
  N. 
  India, 
  but 
  I 
  accept 
  this 
  for 
  the 
  present 
  with 
  

   reserve. 
  

  

  2. 
  Iridessus 
  (Amara) 
  orientalis 
  = 
  Iridessus 
  (Harpalus) 
  re- 
  

   lucens 
  Bates 
  (Trans. 
  Ent. 
  Soc. 
  1873, 
  264; 
  ibid. 
  1883, 
  240). 
  

   Tchitcherin 
  deals 
  with 
  this 
  genus 
  several 
  times 
  (Abeille, 
  

   xxix, 
  1897, 
  60; 
  Hor. 
  Soc. 
  Ent. 
  Ross, 
  xxxiv, 
  1900, 
  363; 
  

   ibid. 
  XXXV, 
  1901, 
  245; 
  ibid, 
  xxxvii, 
  1906, 
  284). 
  In 
  his 
  

   diagnosis 
  Bates 
  said 
  that 
  the 
  penultimate 
  joint 
  of 
  the 
  labial 
  

   palpi 
  was 
  bisetose, 
  but 
  Tchitcherin 
  (Hor. 
  Soc. 
  Ent. 
  Ross, 
  

   xxxvii, 
  1906, 
  285, 
  note 
  (9) 
  ) 
  says 
  that, 
  although 
  at 
  first 
  he 
  

   could 
  distinguish 
  only 
  three 
  setae, 
  on 
  dissection 
  he 
  dis- 
  

   covered 
  that 
  there 
  were 
  actually 
  four, 
  two 
  very 
  short 
  and 
  

   fine, 
  the 
  other 
  two 
  longer 
  and 
  much 
  more 
  conspicuous. 
  

   In 
  Hope's 
  specimen, 
  which 
  is 
  very 
  poor 
  and 
  defective, 
  the 
  

   labial 
  palpi 
  are 
  present, 
  but 
  their 
  condition 
  does 
  not 
  allow 
  

   of 
  more 
  than 
  a 
  superficial 
  examination. 
  Tchitcherin 
  in 
  a 
  

   further 
  note 
  (I.e. 
  N.B.) 
  points 
  out 
  that 
  Bates, 
  in 
  his 
  descrip- 
  

   tion 
  of 
  the 
  genus, 
  contradicts 
  himself 
  regarding 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  

   the 
  thorax 
  ; 
  the 
  Latin 
  and 
  not 
  the 
  English 
  diagnosis 
  should 
  

   be 
  treated 
  as 
  correct. 
  In 
  Hope's 
  type 
  the 
  neck 
  is 
  covered 
  

   with 
  short 
  irregular 
  longitudinal 
  wrinkles, 
  but 
  I 
  look 
  upon 
  

   this 
  as 
  an 
  individual 
  variation. 
  

  

  The 
  species 
  is 
  only 
  known 
  from 
  China 
  and 
  Japan. 
  

  

  3. 
  Anoplogenius 
  (Harpalus) 
  cyanescens 
  = 
  A. 
  (Megrammus) 
  

   circumcinctus 
  Motch. 
  (Et. 
  Ent. 
  1857, 
  27). 
  The 
  genus 
  

   Anoplogenius 
  was 
  published 
  by 
  Chaudoir 
  (Bull. 
  Mosc. 
  

   1852, 
  i, 
  88) 
  five 
  years 
  before 
  Motchulsky 
  (I.e. 
  26) 
  pubhshed 
  

   his 
  genus 
  Megrammus; 
  Nietner's 
  genus 
  Lepithrix 
  (Journ. 
  

   As. 
  Soc. 
  Beng. 
  1857, 
  ii, 
  151) 
  seems 
  to 
  be 
  identical. 
  Schmidt- 
  

   Goebel 
  (Faun. 
  Col. 
  Birm. 
  1846, 
  t. 
  iii, 
  f. 
  9) 
  figures 
  a 
  species 
  

   which 
  he 
  names 
  Loxoncus 
  elevatus, 
  but 
  there 
  is 
  no 
  corre- 
  

   sponding 
  text 
  ; 
  there 
  is 
  little 
  doubt, 
  however, 
  that 
  Loxoncus 
  

   is 
  identical 
  with 
  the 
  other 
  genera 
  named, 
  and, 
  had 
  Schmidt- 
  

   Goebel 
  published 
  a 
  description, 
  his 
  genus 
  would 
  have 
  

   ranked 
  in 
  priority 
  to 
  Chaudoir's. 
  For 
  the 
  species 
  Hope's 
  

   name 
  must 
  stand. 
  

  

  It 
  is 
  common 
  in 
  China, 
  Japan, 
  and 
  Korea. 
  

  

  4. 
  Stenolophus 
  (Harpalus) 
  dlfflcilis 
  = 
  S. 
  chalceus 
  Bates 
  

   (Trans. 
  Ent. 
  Soc. 
  1873, 
  270). 
  The 
  sohtary 
  example 
  was 
  

   unnamed, 
  and 
  I 
  attached 
  little 
  importance 
  to 
  it. 
  Fortun- 
  

   ately 
  Mr. 
  Arrow 
  recognised 
  the 
  locahty-label, 
  and, 
  with 
  this 
  

   as 
  a 
  guide, 
  I 
  was 
  able 
  to 
  identify 
  the 
  specimen 
  as 
  being 
  

   almost 
  certainly 
  Hope's 
  type 
  of 
  Harpalus 
  dijfficilis, 
  for 
  which 
  

   I 
  had 
  long 
  sought 
  in 
  vain. 
  Tchitcherin 
  (Hor. 
  Soc. 
  Ent. 
  

  

  TRANS. 
  ENT. 
  SOC. 
  LOND. 
  1919. 
  — 
  PARTS 
  I, 
  II. 
  (JULY) 
  N 
  

  

  