218 ZOOLOG-ICAL EESULTS OF THE EUWENZORI EXPEDITION. 



Plagiodera impolita Vogel, Nunquam Otiosus, i. p. 134 (1871). 



Ruwenzori, 6000-9000 ft. {G. F. Scott Elliot)- Mubuku Valley, E. Euwenzori. 

 6000-7000 ft. 



Subfam. Halticin^. 



Haltica PTRiTOSA Erichs. Wiegm. Archiv fiir Nat. 1843, i. p. 266. 



Ruwenzori, 7000-8000 ft. {G. F. Scott Elliot). 



Haltica oleracea Linn. Syst. Nat. edit. x. p. 372. 

 Mubuku Valley, E. Ruwenzori, 6000-13,000 ft. 



Subfam. GaleruciNjE. 

 OiDES PALLiDiPENNis, sp. n. (Plate VII. fig. 2.) 



Head, pro thorax, body beneath, legs, and antennae black ; elytra entirely of a luteous- 

 white colour. Prothorax about twice as broad as it is long, sparsely and very feebly 

 punctate, nitid ; the basal angles more or less distinct, but very obtuse, the anterior 

 angles acute. Scutellum triangular, acute at apex, the base and sides nearly equal in 

 length. Elytra ovate, nitid, very finely and rather sparsely punctulate, furnished with 

 a tuberculiform elevation at each shoulder; epipleures short. 



Length 8-10 ; breadth 3f-4| mm. 



Ilab. Mubuku Valley, E. Ruwenzori, 6000-7000 ft. 



This species is very distinct from all other described African species of the genus. 

 The only species resembling it in colour is 0. fiavijiennis Weise ; but in that the 

 suture and margins of the elytra are narrowly black, the elytra are carinate at the 

 shoulders and dentate at the apex. 



DiACANTHA* PASSETi Allard (Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr. 1888, p. 318), var. 



= Aulacophora pygidialis Fairm. Ann. Soc. Eiit. Belg. 1891, C. R. p. 304. 

 Ruwenzori, 5300 ft. {G. F. Scott Elliot); Mubuku Valley, E. Ruwenzori, 6000- 

 13,000 ft. 



* The genus Diacanilta, as it is here understood, is equivalent to the genus Prosmidia Weise. It corresponds 

 to the genus Diacantha Chevr. aa defined by Chapuis in 1875 (Gen. des Coleopt. si. p. 161), and of which 

 D. dregei Dej. may be taken as the type, a figure of this species having been published by Chapuis. Von 

 Harold in 1879 gave a different interpretation of the genus by taking as the type a species {hidentata Fab.) 

 which was not included in the genus either by Chevrolat or by Dejean. lleiche also (1847) assigned 

 characters to the genus, but they were of scarcely more value for its identification than those originally given 

 by Chevrolat in 1844 (D'Orbigny, Diet. Univ. Hist. Nat. iv. p. 718). I find it necessary to give this 

 explanation, because, although the facts have already been pointed out by Jacoby, Herr Weise still persists in 

 giving the name Diacantha to the genus erroneously so named by Harold and which was described by 

 Chapuis in 1879 under the name of Hyperacantha. 



