BELENTJS. 115 



one instead of two lateral series of areolets ; its smaller size also 

 distinguishes it, as well as the structure of the pronotum. 



Genus PHYLLONTOCHILA. (Vol. II, p. 135.) 

 PHYLLONTOCHILA BAVANA. (Vol. II, p. 136.) 



This species was described and received from Ceylon. It has 

 since been sent from Calcutta. 



Genus AMMIANUS. (Vol. II, p. 136.) 



Horvath (Ann. Mus. Hung, vii, p. 632, 1909) states that 

 Ammianus = Phyllontochila, Fieb. The type of Phyllontochila is 

 P. ampliata, Fieb., which the describer figured (Ent. Monogr. 

 t. v, f. 10). The type of Ammianus is A. erosus, Fieb., also figured 

 (t. vi, f. 5). If generic differences are sometimes strained, I think 

 that most entomologists would agree that these two typical figures 

 cannot represent the same genus. Horvath subsequently (Sjostedt's 

 Kilimandjaro-Meru Expedit. 12, p. 63, 1910) treats Ammianus as 

 a distinct subgenus of Fieber's genus under the division of 

 " Subg. Phyllontochila, s. str." ; this latter course apparently 

 disposes of his first contention, but I regret being unable to 

 unravel this proposed arrangement. 



Genus BELENUS.* 

 (To follow Phyllontochila, Vol. II, p. 135.) 



Belenus, Diet. Ann. Soc. Ent. Belg. liii, p. 116 (1909). 

 Phyllontochila, St8l, En. Hem. iii, p. 128, Sect, aa (1873). 

 Sakuntala, Horv. (nee Kirk.) Sjdstedfs Kilimandjaro-Meru Expedit. 

 12, p. 62 (1910). 



Type, B. dentatus, Fieb. 



Distribution. British India ; Borneo. 



Differs from Phyllontochila by the strongly and widely dilated 

 pronotum, the elytra behind the middle gradually not abruptly 

 narrowed, the costal margin more obtusely rounded, the costal 

 area occupying nearly half of the width of the elytra. 



I only knew the P. dentata, Fieb., when previously enumerating 

 the Tingididse, by Fieber's figure. Since then I have procured 



* Horvath (Ann. Mus. Hung, vii, p. 632, 1909), states that Belenus= Sakun- 

 tala, Kirk., the type of which is given as 8. ravana, Kirk. This species under 

 the genus Phyllontochila I have previously figured (vol. ii, p. 136, f. 99). I 

 can only again refer to these figures and descriptions in reply to this proposed 

 correction. 



i2 



