﻿1870.] 209 



Notes on M. Pandelld's Monograph of the European Tachyporid&.—'M. Louis 

 Pandelle' having recently (Ann. de la Soc. Ent. de Pr., 4 me serie, T. 9 me , 1869, p. 261 

 efc seq.) published his "Etude monographique sur les Staphylins Europeens de la 

 tribu des Tachyporini, Erichson," I propose briefly to notice that work, and especially 

 to draw attention to such parts of it as are likely to interest British coleopterists. 



M. Pandelle, thinking Erichson incorrect in his chief character for this family 

 (viz., the insertion of the antenna? at the base of the forehead, beneath a lateral 

 rim, above the mandibles and below the eyes), rejects from it Trichophya (for which 

 he suggests, however, no other location) and (following Kraatz) Tanygnathus. He 

 purposely omits reference to the parts of the mouth, relying upon more accessible 

 external modifications ; prominent among which are the number and position of the 

 setiferous punctures, and the proportionate length of the coxal interval of the 

 metasternum (i.e., the space between the rims of the cavities of the intermediate 

 and posterior coxa?). 



With regard to the Stephen sian species, he remarks as follows — " Thanks to 

 " Mr. Crotch, of Cambridge, who has generously communicated to me the extensive 

 " researches which he has made upon the species of Stephens, I have also been able 

 " to give the synonymy of that author ; but it is easy to perceive with certainty 

 " that Stephens has described varieties rather than species ; and, when even a species 

 ■f is recognisable in his description, I cannot resolve to give his name priority over 

 " those of Erichson and Kraatz, because I find it a great inconvenience to substitute 

 " for a name adopted by everybody, one that has been abandoned (d6laiss4) and of 

 " which the legitimacy is nearly always open to contest." Without seeing the 

 necessity for troubling anew any British coleopterist for information which has been 

 since 1858 before the public in Mr. Waterhouse's catalogue, wherein are (with 

 very many more) the few Stephensian synonyms given by M. Pandelle, I would 

 simply remark, that, where Stephens' species are good, as it ish ere admitted some 

 are, their validity will not be affected by M. Pandelle's convenience or otherwise ; 

 also, that, where good, they have not been abandoned by us ; and that the other 

 names have not been adopted by " everybody," — unless two generations of British 

 naturalists are to be considered as not included in that comprehensive term. 



Abandoning, as above intimated, the Erichsonian characters, M. Pandelle 

 proceeds to enumerate his own : these are very ingenious, but are too long for 

 transcription, and not very capable of condensation ; the result of them being that 

 the family, as restricted by him, may be distinguished from the Oxytelini, Omalini 

 (apart from the absence of ocelli), Piestini, and Proteini by the head being smooth, 

 neck-less, and without impression or elevation at the base of the antenna?, and by 

 the thorax being more extensively contracted in front than at the base ; and from 

 the other Staphylinidce by the deflexed side-pieces of the elytra being wide and 

 defined on their upper sides by a sharp and well marked ridge. 



His genera are as follows : — Hypocyptus, Conurus (M. Pandelle finds no in- 

 convenience in adopting this Stephensian genus in preference to the continentally- 

 used Conosoma of Kraatz, who proposed that modification of it on account of there 

 being a prior genus Conurus in birds), Tachyporus (of which he makes two sub- 

 genera, Lamprinus and Tachyporus proper), Habrocerus, Cilea, Duv. (including the 

 subsequent Leucoparyphus and Coprophorus of Kraatz), Tachinus and Boletobius 

 (afterwards referred to as Bolitobius). The latter genus is made to include the 



