50 
than those of the interstices, antenn® of pale-ferruginous colour, 
are, I think, L. duplex, Blackb., and Victorie, Cand., from both 
which it differs inter EM by its colour and the strong rugulosity 
of its elytral interstice 
S.A.; Lake Eyre xeu ; taken by Herr Koch at Lyndhurst, 
-near Farina. 
RHIPIDOCERIDE. 
ENNOMETES. 
Er ice fi ) ruficornis, Gray. Some years ago I took, in 
the Blue’ Mountain district of N.S.W., a species which seems to 
be the very briefly described Callirrhipis ruficornis, Gray. It is 
however quite clearly a me of Pascoe’s genus Hnnometes 
(which seems to me w atio ep ting considered really distinct 
from Callirrhipis). I can find no character to distinguish as 
species E. Lacordairei, Pasc., and C. ruficornis, Gray, nor does 
the insect before me diffe r from either description except in being 
somewhat larger than the specimen described 7 ea (Gray 
oes not mention the size of his species). As Pascoe makes no 
reference to C. ruficornis it seems not unlikely that » Minh ie 
it, and I suspect that Callirrhipis ruficornis and Ennometes 
acordairei are identical, in which case the insect must stand as 
Ennometes ruficornis, Gra 
RHIPIDOCERA, 
R. mystacina, Fab. Mr. Waterhouse (Tr. E.S., Lond., 1875, 
p. 202) describes the typical specimen of this insect and mentions 
that examples from Northern Queensland are quite identical with 
it. Hethen mentions what he calls the ** common form" which 
he says has the prothorax spotted not a. clothed) with 
white pubescence as being in his opinion a variety of mystacına. 
I have before me specimens of typical ee from N. Queens- 
land and also examples with spotted prothorax from Tasmania, 
Victoria, and S. Australia. These do not appear to differ inter se 
ti 
of the prothorax) by inter alia the darker colour of their derm 
and the notable sinuation of the sides of their prothorax (the 
same in mystacina being nearly straight). 
