NEW BRITISH SPECIES, ETC., IN 1868. 17 



supplemented by MS. notes by his contemporaries, Mr. 

 Wilkin and Dr. Leach, there is a statement to the effect that 

 chalconotus and 7iigro-ceneus are not distinct species. 



8. Agabus unguicularis, Thomson, Skand. Col.,ix,p. 101 



{Eriylenus) ) G. R. Crotch, 1. c, p. 67. 



Mr. Crotch, noting Thomson's recently described species 

 in this genus, states that one of them, A. unguicularis^ 

 resembles A. affinis very closely, from which it differs 

 principally in the shape of the laciniae (not to be confounded 

 with the laminaB of the posterior coxse) of the metasternum, 

 and that all his examples (I presume, of A. affinis) belong- 

 to this species. 



Thomson distinguishes his unguicularis from affinis, 

 Payk., by its body not being laterally parallel, its thorax 

 having pitchy sides and being more narrowed in front, aiid 

 its head being smaller. The characters by which he sepa- 

 rates his genus Eriglenus (which includes unguicularis) 

 from his Gaurodytes (in which he places affinis) are the 

 narrovv', linear, lateral lacinice of the metasternum, the in- 

 variably carinated process of the prosternum, the strongly 

 margined thorax, and slightly enlarged anterior tarsi. 



9. Agabus affinis, Payk.; Thorns. {Gaurodytes); nee 



Schaum ; D. Sharp, Ent. M. Mag., vol. v, p. 17. 

 Dr. Sharp records the capture near Dumfries of four 

 specimens of what he considers to be the true Gaurodytes 

 affinis of Thomson ; and acquiesces in Mr. Crotch's opinion 

 that the affinis of our lists and collections must be referred 

 to E. unguicularis, Thorns, 



In addition to Thomson's characters for the two species 

 1869. c 



