46 Mr. M. Burr — yofes on the Forficularia. 



4. Nesogaster puhhripes (Bormans). 



Labia pulchripes, Bormans, apud Burr, 1903, Ann. & Map:. Nat. Hist. 

 (7) xi. p. 23G; Burr, Ees. exp. Sci. n^erl. N. Guinea, Derm. p. 10 

 (1906). 



Northern Australia (coll. Dohrn, teste Borm.). 



I have not examined this species, but de Bormans's 

 description and a coloured drawing in my possession, together 

 with its resemblance to iV. amosnus, render it probable that 

 its true position is in this genus. 



5. J^esogaster aculeatus (Bormans). 



Labia aculeata, Borm. 1900, Ann. Mus. Civ. (2) xx. p. 456 (1900) ; 

 Kirb. Cat. Orth. i. p. 27 (1900). 



British New Guinea (Mus. Gen.). 



6. Nesogaster amosnus (Stal). 



Forjicula amcena, Stal, l8o5, (EtV. Vet. Ak. Forh. xil. p. 350. 



Labia amcena, Dobrn, Stett. ent. Zeit. xxv. p. 425 (1864) ; Dubr. Ann. 



Mus. Civ. Gen. xiv. p. 363 (1879) ; {amcenn incorr.) Borm. C. R. 



See. ent. Belg. p. Ixxi (1880) ; id. Tierreicb, Forf. p. 67, figs. 29 a, h 



(1900) ; Burr, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. (7) iv. p. 258 (1899) ; id. 



Termesz. Fiiz. xxv. p. 481 (1902) ; Kirby, Cat. Orth. i. p. 26 (1904). 



Malay Archipelago : New Guinea ; Java ; Celebes ; 

 Philippines. 



7. Nesogaster ruficeps (Erichs.). 



Forficula oceanica, Blancbard (nee Goiiillon), Voy. Pole Sad, iv. p. 352, 



Orth. t. i. fig. 4 ( $ ) (1853). 

 Forjicula ruficeps, Ericbson (nee Burmeister, 1838), in Arch. f. Naturg. 



viii. (1) p. 246 (1842). 

 A})teryyida ruficeps, Borm. Tierreicb, Forf. p. 118 (1900). 

 Forjicula erichsoni, Borm. C. II. Soc. ent. Belg, p. Ixxiii (1880). 

 Apterygida erichso7ii, Dobrn, Stett. ent. Zeit. xxiii. p. 231 (1862). 

 Sphingolahis erichsoni, Kirb. Journ. Linn. Soc., Zool. xxv. p. 529, 



pi. XX. figs. 11, 11 a (1896) ; id. Cat. Orth. i. p. 45 (1904J. 



Tasmania (Mus. Brus.) ; Australia ; Vavau. 



This well-known species is easy to recognize by the long 

 simple forceps, coloration, and long tongue-shaped pygidium. 

 It has been previously placed in Forjicula and Apterygida, 

 but its affinities are undoubtedly with Nesogaster, though, on 

 account of its more conical antennje, it may later require a 

 new genus. 



Addendum. 



Since writing the above I have had the opportunity of 

 examining Verhoeff's type of Nesogastrella rujiceps in the 



