114 NITIDULID^. 



Four examples have been taken in Cumberland by Mr. F. H. Day 

 {v. Ent. Mo. Mag. xliv. (2 Ser. xix.) 1908, 89). 



In M. 2yediGularius, Gyll., the cross-striation of the elytra is wanting, 

 and the upper surface is usually more strongly and deeply punctured ; 

 the two species, however, can only be satisfactorily distinguished by the 

 male characters ; in M. pedicularius the male has a large smooth 

 tubercle at the extremity of the last abdominal segment, and behind 

 this an inclined smooth and shiny space, while in M. viduatus this 

 segment is simple. 



M. lugubris, Sturm, var. gagatinus, Er. (Naturg. Ins. 

 Deutsch. iii., 201). This variety is larger and more convex than the 

 type, with darker pubescence, and has the anterior tibiae more finely 

 denticulate ; it has^ however, been genei-ally regarded as a variety ; 

 Reitter, apparently, desires to separate it as a species on the structure 

 of the last ventral segment in the male, which in 21. hcgubris has two 

 small prominences separated by a shallow impression, whereas in 

 M. gagatinus there is only a small raised titans verse band ; as however 

 (according to Ganglbauer, who does not recognise the insects as separate) 

 a complete set of transitional forms occur, there seems no reason to alter 

 what I have said before, viz., that J/, gagatinus is not specifically distinct. 



M. bidentatus, Bris. (Mat. Cat. Gren., 1863, Gl). I have come to 

 the conclusion that this insect must be struck out of our lists ; it is very 

 close to M. eri/thropus, but is larger and has very peculiar male 

 characters ; the tibife are wider, the forehead is roundly and deeply 

 emarginate and there is an almost total absence of alutaceous markings 

 on the elytra. 



The insect which I i^ecorded (Ent. Mo. Mag. xlvi. (2 Ser. xxi.), 

 1910, p. 15) was wrongly determined ; I have since, through the kindness 

 of Mr. Newbery, been enabled to see an authentic specimen of M. biden- 

 tatus, and have not come across anything like it in the collections I have 

 had experience of. 



CYCHRAMUS, Kugelann. 

 C. fungicola, Heer., is regarded in the 1906 European Catalogue 

 as a variety of C. luteals, F. Dr. Sharp {v. Ent. Mo. Mag. xxv., 1889, 

 404) believes them to be the sexes of one species, 0. luteus being the 

 male, and C.ftmgicola the female. Mr. Newbery tells me that he has 

 on more than one occasion taken them in cop. in Highgate Wood on 

 Umbelliferre, which strongly corroboi'ates Dr. Sharp's opinion. Mr. 

 E. W. Janson (Ent. Ann., 1861, p. 66) states that out of a dozen 

 specimens taken indiscriminately on the honeysuckle seven were 

 C. fungicola and five C. luteus, but he gives reasons for considering 

 them to be distinct species. 



RHIZOPHAGUS, Herbst. 

 In R. dispar, Payk., the pygidium is indistinctly punctured, whereas 

 in R. hipustulatus, F., it is strongly punctured. 



