228 {March, 
L. scutellata, F., &c. Spondylis buprestoides, L., forests. Ergates — 
Jaber, L., rotten pine trees. Oriocephalus rusticus, L. Deilus fugaw, — 
F. Stenopterus rufus, L. Parmena sp.? burrowing in the sand, under 
sea-spurge, at Propriano; common. Morimus luqubris, F., on fig trees 
and poplars, Ajaccio and Campoloro. 
Crioceris asparagi, L. (var. campestris, Panz.). Clythra taxicornis, 
F., 0. centromaculata, Géné, C. longipes, ¥., C. leviuscula, Ratz., C. 
floralis, Ol. Cryptocephalus signaticollis, Suffr., C. populi, Suffr., &c. 
Stylosomus tamaricis, Suffr. Colaphus ater, Ol. Chrysomela americana, 
L., Bonifacio, C. stachydis, Géné, C. quadrigemina, Suffr. Lyperus 
flavus, Rosenh. lispa atra, L. 
Joccinella 12-guttata, Poda, 0. 14-punctata, Ll. Eaxochomus auritus, 
Seriba, H. 4-pustulatus, L. Brumus desertorwm, Gebler. Hyperaspis 
reppensis, Hbst. Lpilachna chrysomelina, ¥., on sea-spurge; Bastia ; 
Bonifacio. Platynaspis villosa, Fourer. Scymnus, several spp. 
The above are all the hitherto named Coleoptera taken by me. The 
period of my visits was the worst in the whole year for a coleopterist. 
From February to April is probably the best, before the long rainless 
summer has set in. Even in January the butterflies are out near 
Ajaccio. The Corsican individuals of well-known insects differ from 
those of South France in their smaller size and duller colours. The 
number of species met with is much less, but on the other hand many 
of them are peculiar to the island. I propose to take the Orthoptera 
next, with which I have a somewhat better acquaintance than with 
the Coleoptera. 
[To be continued.) 
eee eee ee 
Observations on Feronia (Pterostichus) puncticeps and pauciseta, Thoms.—Dr. 
Kraatz (Berl. Ent. Zeits., 1870, p. 221 et seq.) introduces Thomson’s descriptions of 
these two species (published in 1867) to Teutonic coleopterists; and, whilst ad- 
mitting that the acute Swedish author is certainly right, pace Dejean and Schaum, 
in establishing them, admits a preference (solely founded on long usage) for the 
Linnwan name cuprea for the larger of the two (puncticeps),—which name, 
after some apparent indecision, ‘he finally adopts at p. 229. It seems to me, 
however, alike unreasonable and unjust to reject Thomson’s name. The description 
of cuprea by Linnzus applies equally well (or, rather, badly) to two species, 
admitted by Kraatz to be certainly distinct, but the correct diagnosis of which has 
apparently escaped every one up to the present time but Thomson; and this, 
although such authorities as Dejean and Schaum had specially studied the 
Carabide. Both species are so common, that there could be no special merit in 
discovering them,—still less in failing to discriminate between them; and one of 
them (pauciseta, Th.) is, according to Kraatz, l. ¢., without doubt, identical with the 
