42 



asymmetrical claws it will probably be desirable to regard 

 them as forming a genus distinct from Liparochrus. It may 

 be added that Mr. Arrow, in the valuable memoir noted 

 above, does not refer to the genus Antiochrus, Sharp, to the 

 type of which he presumably has access, and on which I wrote 

 some notes in Trans. Roy. Soc, S.A., 1905, pp. 273-5, those 

 notes being conjectural to the extent involved in my not 

 having seen the typical species. 



PROCHELYNA. 



P. lieterodoxa, Burm. I have a specimen before me 

 taken flying in the sunshine on Eyre Peninsula by Mr. J. 

 S. Blackburn which there can be little doubt is this species. 

 It agrees with Burmeister's description in every respect except 

 in the scarcely perceptible tendency to reddish colouring at 

 the base of its elytra, its being a trifle smaller than the type, 

 and (as far as I can see) its mentum not particularly narrow. 

 It unfortunately died with its head much depressed towards 

 the prosternum, so that the form of its mentum — which is 

 densely pilose — cannot be examined satisfactorily without 

 breaking the specimen — indeed, in any case, dissection would 

 be necessary. But even if the form of the mentum does not 

 quite square with Burmeister's description, the close agree- 

 ment with the decidedly unusual characters of sculpture, etc. 

 (especially the elytra completely and quite strongly striate in 

 their hinder half, but in front non-striate except close to the 

 suture, the strongly pointed pygidium, the red bristles fring- 

 ing the elytra), would certainly, I think, point to the pro- 

 bability that Burmeister's description of the mentum is 

 defective rather than to the likelihood of two species occurring 

 in South Australia so closely resembling each other and yet 

 differing in the form of the mentum. I note some hairs 

 about the margin of the pronotum suggestive of the pro- 

 bability that my specimen is abraded (as was, in that case, 

 probably Burmeister's type),. and that in a fresh specimen 

 the pronotum is more or less pilose. 



P. rubella, Schauf . There is no mention in the brief de- 

 scription of this species of any character indicative of its being 

 rightly referred to Prochelyna, or even to the Systellopid 

 Group — nor, on the other hand, of any character inconsistent 

 therewith. I have hitherto considered that the phrase 

 u ( pronoto) utrinque medio tubere prcedito" rendered it un- 

 likely to be a Systellopid, but the examination of a specimen 

 referred to below under " Atholerns" has shaken that opinion, 

 and there seems to be no definite ground left, apart from 

 Schaufuss having called it a Prochelyna, for referring it to 

 any particular genus. It is much to be desired that the type 

 be examined and reported on. 



