^fr. A. Murray on Coleoptera f?'om Old Calabar, 169 



base, and with the margins very slightly reflexed, the expansion 

 and reflected margin not extending further than two-thirds from 

 the base; sutural apical angle slightly rounded; the spot on the 

 elytra placed near the suture and soutellum, and extending some- 

 what obliquely outwards. Pygidium slightly visible. Under- 

 side moderately shining; metasternum finely irregularly punc- 

 tate. Segments of abdomen longitudinally finely rugose, and 

 with a luteous narrow margin. Legs lighter brown than the 

 body; the middle and posterior thighs obliquely finely acicularly 

 scratched. 



Scarce, only two or three specimens having been received, 

 which I owe to the Rev. W. C. Thomson. 



This genus, so far as I know, has never been figured : I have 

 therefore given a rough woodcut outline to give a general idea 

 of the facies of the above species. 



AxYRA, Er. 



1. Axyra perfoi'ata [Galaor perforatus) ^ Thomson, Archiv. 

 Entom. ii. p. 43. 



M. Thomson, apparently not having known Erichson's genus 

 Axyra nor his species Axyra brunnea, from Guinea, which is 

 almost identical with this, has described it as the type of a new 

 genus, under the name of Galaor. He says that it difi'ers 

 from the genus Lordites by its tarsi not being dilated, and by 

 the second article of its antennae being small. The latter of these 

 characters is not sound, there being scarcely any difi*erence in the 

 size of the second article of the antennae in Lordites and Axyra, 

 and there being (so far as I can remember) not a single insect in 

 the whole family which has not the second article of the antennai 

 small. The former character is one of those on the strength 

 of which Erichson placed Lordites among the Strongylini, and 

 Axyra among the Nitidulinse. Lacordaire has thought that it 

 is not a sufficient character for this purpose; for he has dis- 

 regarded it, and combined Lordites and other similar genera 

 along with Axyra as part of one general section of what he 

 considers typical Nitidulinse. But the main character by which 

 he does distinguish the true Strongylini (or Cychramidae, as he 

 calls them) seems to me no better, indeed scarcely so good, 

 viz. that in the Nitidulinse the thorax is only applied to the base 

 of the elytra, while in the Cychramidae it laps over them. In 

 some, such as Lobiopa and ^thina, it is scarcely possible to say 

 whether the thorax laps over or is only applied to the elytra. 

 On the whole, weighing these characters singly, I should prefer 

 to rest the separation of the sections on the dilatation of the 

 tarsi ; but probably the better plan would be to have three sec- 



Ann. &; May. N. Hist. Ser. 3. Vol. xix. 12 



