136 



abbreviated ; the sides strongly sinuated immediately before the 

 hind angles, which are scarcely less dentiform than those of 

 P. tnucronatus ; the reflexed margin narrow, as in P. hrunneus 

 (narrower than in mucronatns)', the surface transversely depressed 

 in front of the disc, as in hr^mneus, Blackb., and with a curved 

 anterior impression, also as in hrunneus. The sculpture of the 

 elytra is very similar to that of P. hrunneus and felix, Schaum., 

 except that the interstices are more convex. 



The already-described species of Pho7'ticosomus, neither very 

 much larger nor very much smaller than this, and having the 

 posterior angles of the prothorax sharply rectangular or subdenti- 

 form, are simiHs, Blackb. (this is a good deal smaller) and 

 inucronatus. Both these have the elytral striae very much feebler 

 and the interstices flat. P. mucronatus also has the clypeus much 

 less rugose, and the sides of the elytra very much more strongly 

 sinuate near the apex. 



South Australia ; I am uncertain of the exact locality. 



PSELAPHID^ 



CTENISTES. 



C. Adelaide, n"^. nox. Rufescens; antennis elongatis; prothorace 

 antice angustato, postice fovea magna impresso ; elytris 

 prothorace dimidio longioribus ; oculis sat magnis. 

 Maris (?) metasterno prof unde longitudinaliter sulcato ; antennis 

 elytrorum apicem attingentibus, articulis 1-7 conjunctis 

 quam articuli 8-11 conjuncti multo brevioribus, articulis 

 8-10 gradatim brevioribus, articulo 11° quam O"*' et lO'^* 

 conjuncti vix breviori, apice oblique truncato. Long, f 1. 

 This species is, no doubt, rather close to C. jjarvus, Shp., which 

 it resembles in the long antenna? (reaching the apex of the elytra 

 when set back), the well defined simple fovea of the prothorax 

 and the elytra about half again as long as the prothorax. The 

 antennal joints, however, are very different in their proportions 

 inte7^ se ; the 10th joint being much longer than wide, and the 

 11th barely equal (not to the preceding three together but) 

 to the preceding two. These antennal differences might be 

 sexual, but they are accompanied with certain other distinctions, 

 the eyes in the present species being by no means exceptionally 

 small, and the elytra being rather strongly dilated behind — which 

 seem quite inconsistent with specific identity. From C. imjjressus, 

 Slip., the present species may be known iiite^^ alia by the pro- 

 thorax being as long as wide, and scarcely narrower at the base 

 than ill the middle, and having a simple fovea, from C. simplex, 

 Shp., by its long antennae and non-transverse prothorax, from 

 C. vernahs, King, and C. KreusJeri, King, by the very diflerent 

 antennal structure, although it is possibly the previously undes- 



