137 



sublaevia ; pedes sat elongati, femoribus posticis elytrorum 



apicem plane vel fere attingentibus tarsis 5-articulatis, 



articulo basali (tarsorum omnium) superne haud manifesto, 



articulo ultimo robusto prsBcedenti parum exserto, ungui- 



culis parvis simplicibus divaricatis; corpus modice elongatum, 



capillis erectis vestitum. 



Type Opilo patricius, Klug (sexnotatus, Westw.). 



O. patricius, Klug, cannot be rightly placed in any hitherto 



characterised genus. Its finely granulated eyes separate it 



strongly from Opilo; its tarsi (all apparently four-jointed, — 



owing to the basal joint being concealed, — when viewed from 



above), the securiform apical joint of its maxillary palpi, and its 



pronotum transversely sulcate near the front, in combination 



associate it with the Scrobiger group of genera. Among those 



genera its mesosternum not vertical in front, its elytra neither 



fasciculate nor tuberculate and having a large apical space nitid 



and almost unpunctured, and its form (the elytra considerably 



more than twice as long as at the base wide) are sufficient to 



distinguish it. 



Characters such as these appear to me certainly entitled to be 

 treated as generic in the Cleridce, a family in which many 

 structural characters seem to be of less value than they are in 

 most families, Metabasis and Thanasimomorpha, e.g. (also 

 Tarsostenus and Paratillus) being so much like each other 

 respectively that it seems strange to separate them widely, and 

 yet having a totally different tarsal structure one from another. 

 No doubt structural differences must have their full weight, and 

 it is out of the question to # associate under one generic name 

 species having such, but much study of the Australian Cleridce 

 satisfies me that it is also out of the question to associate under 

 one generic name (at least as far as the Australian Cleridce are 

 concerned) species differing widely in faciesand sculpture because 

 one cannot find important differences in the structure of the eyes, 

 palpi, tarsi, &c. Aulicus, Trogodendron, Scrobiger, and the 

 present genus, undoubtedly resemble each other closely in 

 structural characters, but each has so distinctive and constant a 

 facies and type of sculpture that it seems unreasonable to merge 

 any two of them under one generic name. Probably when their 

 life histories and habits are fully known it will be found that 

 each of these genera mimics the facies of the group of insects on 

 which it is parasitic. 



N. rauciceps, sp. nov. Sat elongatus, postice sat dilatatus ; sat 

 nitidus ; seneo-niger, labro antennis palpis tibiis tarsisque 

 rufis, elytris ante medium macula discoidali et ad medium 

 fascia sat lata albidis ornatis (parte apicali rufescenti dense 

 albido pubescenti) ; capite confertim subgrosse ruguloso, 



