714 REVISION OF THE AUSTRALIAN CURCULIONIDJE, IX., 



parallel-sided to near apex, wider than and more than twice the 

 length of prothorax, disc somewhat flattened, base trisinuate, 

 apex entire but appearing feebly emarginate, alternate interstices 

 raised. Pectoral canal wide, deep, terminated just before middle 

 coxae. Mesosternal receptacle raised, apices produced, emargina- 

 tion semicircular, transverse; sloping from apex to base; basal 

 portion rather large ; cavernous. Metastemum large, episterna 

 wide. Abdomen with sutures partially concealed by scales; but 

 when these are removed, very distinct; two basal segments large, 

 2nd as large, larger or slightly smaller than 1st; 3rd and 4th thin, 

 their combined length less than that of 2nd and subequal to 5th, 

 depressed below 2nd and level with 5th. Legs moderately long; 

 femora linear, edentate, not grooved, posterior extending to 

 apical segment of abdomen; tibiss straight or slightly curved; 3rd 

 tarsal joint wide, deeply bilobed, claw-joint long, squamose. 

 Elongate, subparallel, densely squamose, fasciculate, winged. 



The clothing of the species belonging to this genus is so dense 

 that the punctures (which are unusually numerous) are nearly 

 always hidden; their presence on the elytra may be easily traced, 

 but they can only be seen elsewhere where scales have been rubbed 

 off; the finer details are also concealed. The antennae are more 

 or less red, but the colour of other parts cannot be seen unless 

 the scales are removed, consequently I have not mentioned it, 

 I have found it necessary to strictly define the genus and to 

 extend Pascoe's limitations (given below), as Chcetectetorus has, 

 perhaps, more genera (both Australian and Malayan) distinctly 

 allied to it than any other genus of Australian Cryptorhynchides. 

 G.setosus Boh., and C. bifasciatus Boh., are here regarded the types 

 of the genus; these two species, though originally referred to 

 G aster ocercus, were undoubtedly those that Schonherr had under 

 observation when drawing up the diagnosis of the genus. It is 

 necessary either to strictly limit the genus or to include in it 

 Chimades, Deretiosus, Achopera, Ephrycus, Axides, Metacymia, 

 Menios, Phloeoglymma, and a host of other forms. In the genus 

 as restricted by me, it is doubtful if 0. gronopoides Pasc, would 

 find a place. I do not know the species, but Pascoe's remark : 



