138 ^Ir. G. J. Arro-^ on 



superfluous, and a critical examination shows that a con- 

 siderable number of the specific names are synonyms. ^ At 

 the end of tliis paper I have given a revised list of the African 

 species, distributed, so far as available materials permit (and 

 I have fortunately been able to determine the large majority 

 of described species), under their correct generic names. A 

 number of hitherto unknown species are addecl. The genera 

 will no floubt be increased as our knowledge of the species 

 gro"S : but the latter are not numerous, so far as at present 

 recorded, and the creation of new genera, in the present un- 

 satisfactory state of classification of the family, appears very 

 undesirable. 



Either by oversight or intention the genus Eujrestus 

 has been omitted by Kuhnt both from the 'Genera' and 

 his since-published Catalogue, although allied genera like 

 Hvpodaaie and Eidorens are included. The African species 

 of Evxestus here described forms an interesting link with 

 Hypodac7ie and helps to render the position of the former 

 genus less enigmatical. This is the second species known 

 to me, all the non-African specimens! have seen, although 

 bearing many naines, being con specific. Eiixestns parki, 

 ^^'oll., was first discovered in Madeira ; but I have seen 

 specimens from China, Burma, the Malay Peninsula, 

 Philippine Is., Java, Hawaian Is,, Haiti, Central America, 

 etc. E. minor. Sharp, and E. piciceps, Gorh., are certainly 

 identical with it (see Champion, Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. 1913, 

 p. 79) : and Neoplotera peregrbia, Belon, and Tritomiden 

 translucida, Motsch., I believe to be also synonymous both 

 as genera and species. It is not possible to decide whether 

 Motsclmlsky's names basalis and, ohlonga also belong to the 

 same insect ; but the Tntomklea rubripes of Reitter, although 

 related, is not congeneric, and the two ^Malayan species 

 referred to Tritomulea by Gorham have evidently neither 

 affinity nor resemblance to it. 



M. Bedel has recently formed a new genus, Mimodacne, 

 for certain species previously included in Megahdacne but 

 in which the club of the antenna is very large and markedly 

 asvmmetrical. The genus is a little difficult to define, as 

 the shape of the club is gradually developed through a series 

 of transitions : but it may be convenient to retain it for those 

 species which exhibit the most pronounced asymmetry. One 

 of these, M. magnifica, Har., has been transferred to Lino- 

 desmus by Kuhnt, in spite of the fact that Harold stated its 

 resemblance to L. cacitsto be purely superficial. It has also 

 been redescribed by Kuhnt as Megalodacne kolhei. 



I have found myself, like Harold (Coleopt. Hefte, xvi. 



