142 ELATERID^. 



of a shining oblique fascia ncross the elytra, and the less metallic 

 reflection. It seems very doubtful, however, whether it is really 

 distinct. 



CRYPTOHYPNUS, Eschscholtz. 



In the Ent. Mo. Mag. xxxiv. (2 Ser. ix.) 1898, 207, Mr. P. B. Mason 

 recorded a specimen of C. meridionalis. Lap., as found in the 

 collection of the Rev. A. Matthews. The species is black, with the 

 thorax uniformly rugose, and is easily di.stinguished from C. dermestoides, 

 Herbst., by its dark antennns and legs, the trochanters and apices of 

 the tibife only being reddish. The specimen referred to is labelled 

 " Pegwell Bay." It cannot, ho\vever, be as yet allowed a place in our 

 lists (although it is possible it niay be found, as we have had several 

 surprises of late years), for, as Mr. Champion points out (I.e. p. 207), 

 the insect is apparently not known from Northern France or Germnny, 

 and it is unlikely to occur in Britain. 



C. quadriguttatus, Lap., and C. dermestoides, Herbst. The additional 

 note on these species in Brit, Col. v. Appendix, p. 464, appears to 

 have been overlooked by readers, and it may be as well to call atten- 

 tion to it. 



MELANOTUS, Eschscholtz. 



In spite of the fact that M. casiani2)es, Payk., is used as a 

 synonym (and not even a variety) of 31. rnfifes, Herbst., in the 

 European Catalogue (190G), and although many authorities believe 

 this to be correct, I cannot help thinking, from specimens I have 

 seen, that the real insects are distinct. M, castani2)es is apparently 

 rare, and is represented in many collections by a sex of M. r'}(fi])es. The 

 distinctions are given in Brit. Col. iv. p. 96. Mr. Donisthorpe has 

 taken the former insect in the New Forest and at Rannoch. 



ATHOUS, Eschscholtz. 

 A. niger, L., and A. hirtus, Herbst, Mr. Newbery (Ent. Mo. 

 Mag. xlv. (2 Ser. xx.) 1909, 53) states that the insect standing in our 

 catalogues as Athous niger is not the true A. niger, L. { = alpinus, Redt.j 

 deflexus. Thorns.), but A. hirtus, Herbst. As it is possible that both 

 species may be fov^nd in Britain he adds the following particulars for 

 separating them : 



I. Prosternal projection flat between the anterior 



coxa?, rectilinear and not deflexed beyond 

 the latter : sexes but little difierent in form. 

 L. 12-17 mm. . . . . . .A. hirtus, Ilerhst 



II. Prosternal projection curved downward be- 



tween the anterior coxee, forming with the 

 profile of the presternum a distinctly arched 

 line, in form of a very elongate S: sexes very 

 diflferently formed, the female being broad, 

 obtuse and L'ibbous, L. 10-14 mm. . . A. nigeii, L. 



