132 



Notes on Australian Cetonides; with a List of 

 Species and Descriptions of Some New ones. 



By Arthur M. Lea, F.E.S., Museum Entomologist. 



[Contribution from the South Australian Jliiseum.] 



[Read May 14, 1914.] 



Plates VI. to XIII. 



The acquisition by the South Australian Museum of two 

 fine new species of Dilochrosis rather forcibly directed my 

 attention to the Cetonides, a subfamily of beetles considered 

 by many entomologists to be the finest of all. I was pre- 

 viously well aware of the chaotic condition of the Australian 

 genera, which have never been considered as a whole, except 

 by Kraatz; and his revision but added to the confusion. 



In 1880 (!) Dr. Kraatz gave what purported to be a 

 generic revision of the Australasian Cetonides. No doubt our 

 species needed a certain amount of revision, but Kraatz used 

 colour and markings to an unjustifiable extent, with the 

 result that, if his characters were strictly adhered to, new 

 genera would be required for varieties of well-known species. 

 As an example, the diagnosis of his supposedly new genus 

 PhceopharisW contains the following particulars: — "Antennae 

 castanese. Thorax supra castaneus, disco macula magna 

 lobata;( 3 ) basi apiceque nigris. Scutellum nigrum. Elytra 

 castanea, basi humeris suturaque nigris. Pedes nigri, tibiis 

 castaneis, apice nigris." Speaking of the genera proposed by 

 Kraatz, Blackburn said : ( 4 ) "Some of these latter are, I think, 

 very unsatisfactorily characterized, and founded on slight 

 characters, even colour being treated as generic." Janson 

 also < 5) speaks of "the other numerous so-called genera as 

 characterized" by Kraatz. 



In preparing my notes on the subfamily I have probably 

 had under examination much greater numbers of species and 

 of specimens from Australia than have ever previously been 

 gathered together. For this several Museums and private 



(i) Deutsche Ent. Zeit, pp. 177-214. 



(2) Founded on Dilochrosis brouni. 



(3) This spot is sometimes absent. 

 (4)Proc. Linn. Soc, N.S.W., 1893, p. 246. 

 (5)i. c, 1889, p. 130. 



