- 5 — 



g Abdomen ilot carinate ventrally, 6 th segment (ventral) about 2 C * as 

 long as 5 th , apical margin subsinuate. Posterior femora not incrassate, 

 not dentate; tibiae not dentate. 



Lenght 2.6 roill. 



Ecuador — Foreste Rio Peripa. 



Dark slate-grey, slightly covered with yellowish pubescence. Antennaè 

 (except the yellowish- whi te base of first segment) and legs (except brow- 

 nish coxae & yellowish-brown pilosity) shining bluish-black. Antenni- 

 ferous tubercules shining brownish. 



I have great pleasure in naming this interesting bug in honour of 

 Dr. Festa, the intrepid traveller. 



It belongs apparently to Trochopus, estabi ished by G. H. Carpenter, 

 1898, Entom. Monthly Mag., pp. 78-81, Piate ni & pp. 109-11 & con- 

 fìrmed by Champion, 1898, Biol. Centr, Amer., Hem. Heten, n, pp. 140-1; 

 PI. 9, figs 4 & 5. 



I regret however that after a careful examination of examples of 

 Rhagovelia plumbea Uhi. in the British Museum and, through the kind- 

 ness of Mr. Carpenter, in my own collection, and of Trochopus sa- 

 linus Champion, kindly given tome by Mr. Champion, I cannot see my 

 way to regard Trochopus as a genus distinct from Rhagovelia Mayr. 



The chief differences betwen Rhagovelia & Trochopus appear to be 

 (teste Carpenter and Champion) that : 



1) In Trochopus the tarsi are (according to these authors) 3, 2, 2- 

 segmentate; in Rhagovelia, 3, 3,3. 



2) The pronotum in Trochopus is sutured off from the mesonotum; 

 in Rhagovelia (except R. tenuipes Champion, 1. e, p. 137) these nota 

 are fused together. 



1) Now, I have elsewhere expressed my opinion of the unsatisfactory 

 character of these minute tarsal « segments». 



I think I may say that in average « good » museum specimens, pre- 

 served in the ordinary way, they are very difflcult to observe with any 

 degree of certainty, without a certain amount of preparation — which 

 is very undesirable, if not improper, in dealing with borrowed material, 

 especially types — , and examination under a compound microscope. 

 The fact that such a careful worker and able entomologist, as Mr. Car- 

 penter, failéd — in working with material preserved in alchool — in 

 his originai description (1. e. p. 78) to detect more than two segments 

 in each anterior tarsus, shows the undesirability of employing such a 

 character. Moreover, these minute segments (or « nodes » as they may 

 preferably be termed) are apparently not always Constant in the Ger- 

 ridae, for Professor Uhler in describing Trepobates piclus (Proc. Zool. 

 Soc. Lond., 1894, p. 214) writes « In two specimens the basai joiut of 

 tarsi was present on oue side, and not on the other », 



