406 B. p. UVAROV. 



1893. Stauronotus hauensteini, Bolivar, Rev. Biol. Nord. France, v, p. 480. 



1894. Stauronotus hauensteini, Giglio-Tos, Boll. Mus. Torino, ix (191), p. 2. 



1896. Stauronotus hauensteini, Krauss, Zoolog. JaKrb., System., ix, p. 562, no. 9> 



pi. 8, fig. 3. 

 1898. Stauronotus crassiusculus, Bolivar, Ann. Sci. Nat. Porto, v, p. 13, 14. 

 1902. Stauronotus crassiusculus, Navas, Bol. Soc. Esp. Hist. Natur., ii, p. 335, no. 3. 

 1910. Dociostaurus hauensteini, Kirby, Syn. Cat. Orth., iii, p. 153, no. 2. 



1910. Dociostaurus crassiusculus, Kirby, I.e., p. 153, no. 6. 



1911. Dociostaurus kervillei, Bolivar, Bull. Soc. Sci. Nat. Rouen, xlvii, p. 36. 



1913. Stauronotus crassiusculus, Pant., var. cappadocicus, Azam, Bull. Soc. Ent, 

 France, 1913, p. 219. 



D. crassiusculus, Pantel, was described from Spain, and hauensteini, Bol., from 

 Asia Minor, but I have most carefully studied topotypic specimens of both species, 

 and could not find any difference between them. I had very large series of this- 

 species from Asia Minor, Transcaucasia and Persia, which enable me to state that 

 it is very variable in its dimensions and coloration, though not in morphological 

 characters, which are very stable. D. kervillei, described by Bolivar more recently, 

 is but a small and rather light-coloured form of the same species, as I am convinced, 

 from a study of the type specimen. The variety described by Azam is a mere 

 individual aberration which is not worth a distinctive name, j 



Geographical Distribution. This is as yet not fully known. It seems that this 

 species has two separate areas of distribution : one in Spain and another in Western 

 Asia (Asia Minor, Armenia, Eastern Transcaucasia, Persia, Sjrria) ; but it is quite 

 possible that it occurs in North Africa as well. If even these two areas are actually 

 separated, there is nothing unnatural in such distribution of a species, since we know 

 that there existed once a closer connection between the eastern and western parts 

 of the Mediterranean countries than is now the case. 



There are no records concerning the economic importance of this species. 



9. Dociostaurus kurdus, sp. nov. 



There is nothing to be added to the short diagnosis of this species given above^ 

 since it agrees in all essential characters with D. crassiusculus, the differences being 

 given in the key to the species. These differences are, in fact, so few that I should 

 have been inclined to treat kurdus as only a geographical form of crassiusculus were it 

 not that it has also some important morphological features, and I prefer to regard it 

 in the meantime as a distinct species. 



Geographical Distribution. I had a number of specimens of both sexes from Museek 

 and Vezne, in Kurdistan, taken by P. Nesterov in June and July 1914. 



10. Dociostaurus kraussi (Ingen.). 



1897. Stauronotus kraussi, Ingenitsky, Horae Soc. Entom. Ross, xxxi, p. 63, pi. 7. 

 1910. Dociostaurus kraussi, Kirby, Syn. Cat. Orth., iii, p. 153, no. 3. 



