41 



elytral interstices ; and from L. alternans, Macl., by its non- 

 costulate elytra. The type seems to be a female. 



North Queensland (Little Mulgrave River) ; Mr. Hacker ; 

 given to me by Mr. Lea. 



L. geminatus, Westw. This species is very variable in 

 respect of sculpture — especially that of the pronotum. I have 

 examples from various localities in South and Western Aus- 

 tralia which I cannot regard as representing more than one 

 species, but among which there are very definitely two quite 

 distinct types of sculpture on the pronotum — in some speci- 

 mens that segment bearing extremely fine short transverse 

 scratches, while in others the scratches (similar in shape) are 

 very much larger and deeper (quite twice as large). The 

 specimens with finer puncturation have also the external teeth 

 of the front tibiae smaller and blunter than those of the 

 others and are on the average of smaller size. Both these 

 forms occur near Adelaide. I observe similar differences 

 among specimens all of which I have taken to be L. multi- 

 striatus, Har., the only other Liparochrus of which I possess 

 numerous specimens. I have hitheto regarded these differ- 

 ences as sexual. I cannot, however, discover any marked 

 difference between the front claws of the two forms which, as 

 pointed out by Mr. Arrow (Trans. Ent. Soc, London, 1909) 

 distinguishes the sexes of two Liparochri of which I do not 

 possess a male. I notice that in the paper quoted Mr. Arrow 

 describes a Liparochrus (timidus) allied to L. geminatus of 

 which he had before him "a series of specimens" and does 

 not refer to its sexual characters, from which I assume that in 

 it the sexual difference of the claws is wanting. The species 

 which I take to be silphoides, Har., presents the sexual dis- 

 tinction in the claws. Mr. Arrow's two species mentioned 

 above as having the claw distinction and the species which 

 I take to be silphoides (probably — L. raucus, Fairm.) — also 

 the species described above as L. hackeri, of which the type 

 is probably a female — another species which I take to be //. 

 sculptilis, Westw. (probably = H. ciliboides, Har.), and of 

 which I believe my specimen to be a female — L. alternans, 

 Macl. (not alternatus, as quoted by Arrow), and L. papuus, 

 Har., are the only species known to me as having only two 

 external teeth on the front tibiae (I do not possesss the descrip- 

 tion of L. sulcatus, Montrouz.). All of the above-mentioned 

 species of which the male is known (and no others, so far 

 as known) present a sexual distinction in the front claws, and 

 all of them, so far as I know them, are of facies markedly 

 different from the rest of the species attributed to Liparochrus 

 (one of which, L. geminatus, Westw., is apparently the type 

 species). If it should prove that the males of all of them have- 



