52 



them are in respect of obviously sexual characters, with the 

 exception of the slight difference in the lateral curve of the 

 prothorax, which is perhaps a little puzzling ; but the general 

 agreement in non-sexual characters is too close to allow of 

 their being considered two species. The male was given to 

 me by Mr. Lea, labelled "Cairns" ; the female by Mr.. Per- 

 kins, labelled "N. Queensland." 



North Queensland. 



LEPIDODERMA. 



I have recently procured a type-written copy of Brenske's 

 treatise on this genus referred to in my previous paper (Trans. 

 Roy. Soc, S.A., 1911, p. 197), and find that its author had 

 not extended the limits of the genus to include species that, 

 in my opinion, should not be placed there. It was his in- 

 clusion of Antitrogus in Lepidiota which led to the thought 

 that a similar extension of Lepidoderma might possibly 

 bring into the number of the new species he described under 

 that name the insect for which I founded the genus Para- 

 lepidiota. I have now given to it a specific name and descrip- 

 tion (vide supra). As Brenske's treatise occurs in a publica- 

 tion of the Societas Entomologica, which, I am informed, is 

 out of print, a brief resume of its contents will probably be 

 useful to Australian workers on the Goleoptera. The treatise 

 is, on the whole, rather disappointing for the reason that, 

 although it contains a lengthy note on the relation of 

 Lepidoderma to the Leucopholides, there is no reference in it 

 to the spurs of the hind tibiae, which in his former paper on 

 the Leucopholides discussed by me (loc. cit.) Brenske regarded 

 as of value higher than even generic ; and that omission 

 leaves one in doubt whether he had perhaps come to the con- 

 clusion expressed by me that the importance he gave in his 

 earlier paper to the character in question ought not to be 

 accepted without hesitation. 



In his general remarks on Lepidoderma Brenske expresses 

 the opinion which I also expressed (loc. cit.), that the ordin 

 arily accepted subdivision of the "True Melolonthides" cannot 

 be satisfactorily applied to the Australian genera, and he 

 states that although Lepidoderma under the ordinary classifi- 

 cation would fall among the Polyphyllides, he thinks its true 

 place is among the Leucopholides (where I placed it). He 

 does not refer to the clypeal character which determined me 

 in the matter, but bases his opinion on the fades and on the 

 build of some of the mouth characters. He also mentions a 

 character in Lepidoderma as distinguishing it from other 

 M elolonthid genera known to him in the hind femora being 



