

December, 18S0. J 309 



NOTES OX THE BRITISH SPECIES OF THE 



GENUS ANTHONOMUS, GEEMAR, WITH A DESCRIPTION OF A 



SPECIES NEW TO BRITAIN. 



BY THE EEV. CANON FOWLER, M.A., F.L.S. 



In the Anuals and Magazine of Natural History for the year 

 1844 (pp. 104 — 107), Mr. Walton gives some notes on this genus, and 

 he says at the beginning of his paper : " There is the greatest ima- 

 ginable confusion amongst the species of this pretty and interesting 

 genus of insects ; ten have been described as specifically distinct, but 

 I must confess my inability to distinguish out of that number more 

 than four ;" in his notes, however, he adds another, making five in all, 

 viz., A. pomorum, A. ulmi, A. pedicularius, A. piibescens ?, and A. ruhi. 

 Mr. Waterhouse, in his catalogue, which was published in 1858, merely 

 copies Mr, Walton's synonymy, but in ISGS, M. Desbrochers des Loges, 

 in his monograph of Anthoiwmus and Balaninus (Ann. de la Soc. Ent. 

 de France, 1868, 425), made considerable additions to our list of 

 species, apparently on specimens communicated to him by Mr. Crotch : 

 he described Walton's A. pubescens ?, Gryll., as A. britannus, and quoted 

 two other of his newly described species, A. Chevrolati and A. con- 

 spersus, from Britain, among other localities ; he also mentioned A. 

 rufus, Schonh., and A. incurvus, Panz.,as from Britain, but apparently 

 in error ; at about the same time Mr. Crotch identified an insect taken 

 by Charles Turner at Eannoch (and first determined to be A. pubescens) , 

 as A. varians, Payk., and separated an insect referred to by Mr. Rye 

 (Ent. Mo. Mag., vi, 88), as a "var. ? comari of ruhi.'''' A. druparum, 

 L., had long before been recorded as British, but, as Mr. Walton 

 pointed out, in error, although he was of opinion that it would very 

 likely be found in Britain if the bird-cherry were searched for it ; this 

 latter insect is placed alone by Des Gozis (Eevue d'Ent., i, 208) in the 

 genus Anthonomus, being distinguished from all the other species by 

 its large convex and granulate scutellum, and the fact that the femora 

 are armed with two teeth : all the other species are assigned to a new 

 genus, ToplitJius ; the arrangement, however, is not followed by later 

 European writers. 



Up to the present time the genus has stood in the British cata- 

 logues as it did in 1868 ; at the same time there has been considerable 

 confusion with regai'd to it, and it has always been a well-known crux 

 to collectors ; the fact is, that several of the species, especially if we 

 include the European ones, are so closely allied and lead so much by 

 variations one into another, that it is very hard to distinguish with 

 certainly between them ; one cannot help thinking that M. Bedel's 



