ADDENDA et CORRIGENDA. 



PART I. 



Page 97. — By a letter received from General Dejean, I learn that 

 Pholidotus lepidosus had previously to the publication of this part, 

 been described by Schonnher in the third volume of his Synonymia 

 Inscctorum, under the name of Lamprima Humboldtii. Not having 

 yet seen this volume, I can only give the name as a sjTionym, and 

 make use of it as a satisfactory proof that 'he insect in question 

 may safely be attributed to the family of Lamprimidcc. 



P. 98. — Mr. Swainson, who was urged by his zeal for Natural 

 History to make a voyage to Brazil, has assured me that my suspi- 

 cions were correct with respect to the insect I have named Cad- 

 gnetus being die female of Pholidotus. 



P. 111. — General Dejean is convinced, from actual observation, 

 that Dorcus pai-allelipipcdus and D. tuberculatus are sexes of the 

 same species. 



P. 143. — It is the female of Ambli/tcrus wliich is here described; 

 but it has been remarked by Mr. Brightwell of Norwich, that the 

 other se.\has the last joint of the maxillary palpi much larger, and 

 also furnished with the same longitudinal incision which is so con- 

 spicuous in Pelidnota. An additional proof is thus o|t"ered to our 

 view of the affinity betv/een these two genera. 



P. 154. — The organs of manducation in R.pulchella are described 

 from Mr. Kirby's dissections, published in the 12th vol. of the Liu- 

 naean Transactions. On this subject I have since received the fol- 

 lowing letter from him : — " Dear Sir, — I beg that in your next part 

 you will correct an error into which I have been the occasion of 

 leading you. The Instrumenta cibaria, figured in the 12th vol. of the 

 Linna;an Transactions (tab. xxi. fig. 10. a, b, c, d), are not those of 

 Rutela pulchella, of which I had only a single specimen, but they 

 are those of Macraspis tetradactyla, which I then regarded as a Ru-. 

 tela. This oversight arose from the MSS. and drawings being sent 

 separately to town, so that the circumstance escaped my treacherous 

 memory before the explanation of the plates was made out. I am, 

 &c. W. K." — The Entomologist will therefore perceive, that the 

 character is erroneous which I have given to Rutela pulchella in the 

 first part of this work. 



