158 DESCRIPTIONS OF AND OBSERVATIONS ON 



4. B. divaricata, Nob. That this insect is closely allied to acumi- 

 nata, F.j there can be no doubt, and Dejean (in a letter) considers it 

 the same ; but, on reference to the description of that species by Gyl- 

 lenhal (Insecta Svecica*), I find the following characters, " thorax ante 

 scutellum puncta duo impressa: anus emarginatus." In the present 

 species is only a single indentation at the base of the thoracic groove, 

 and immediately anterior to the scutel, and the anus is tridentated, the 

 middle tooth being more slender and acute. A vairiety in my collec- 

 tion is destitute of the punctured striae of the elytra. 



4. B. obscura, F. (and Melsh. Catal.) 



Herbst says the side of the thorax is rectilinear, not arcuated. This 

 would agree better with lurida, F. ; my specimens of ohscura are rec- 

 tilinear only from before the middle to the base. 



5. B. dentipes, Germar. This is the characteristica of Melshei- 

 mer's Catalogue ; but, as no mere catalogue can establish a name, Ger- 

 mar's must be of course retained, because it is the first name recogniz- 

 able by a description. 



6. B. hybernata, F. From the specimen in my collection, I am led 

 to believe that the hybernata, F. is but a variety of the frontalis, Oli- 

 vier, and that both have serrate elytra ; but I have not at present the 

 means of referring to Olivier's work. My specimen is reddish purple ; 

 thorax immaculate ,• elytra serrate, with but five green spots ; and the 

 anterior thighs are armed with a prominent tooth, 



7. B. sexguttata, Nob. (Journ. Acad. Nat. Sc). This name being 

 preoccupied by Herbst for an American species, we change it to sex- 

 signata. 



8. B. gibhicolis, Nob. (Journ. A. N. S.). This name is pre-occu- 

 pied by Illiger for an European species, it must therefore be changed. 



9. B. jnilchella, Herbst. The volvulus, F. is probably the same 

 species ; but which of the two names has the priority I cainnot now 

 ascertain, not having the date of Herbst's volume. There is some con- 

 fusion amongst the species of the small group to which this belongs, in 

 consequence of the short descriptions of Fabricius. Herbst's descrip- 

 tion of this species cannot well be mistaken. I have found it in Penn- 



* For this very accurately descriptive work, I am indebted to the politeness of the author. 



