60 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society. 
XI.—On Thanasimus rufipes, Brahm., a Beetle new to the British 
Fauna, and its Life-History. By Professor T. Hudson Beare, 
B.A., B.Sc., M.Inst.C.E. 
(Read 27th January 1913. Received 21st June 1913.) 
In the early part of last July, during a visit. to Nethy Bridge, Inverness- 
shire, I was trying to capture Magdalis duplicata, Germ., by beating the cut- 
off tops of felled Scots firs, and on 15th July, when examining the contents 
of the net after a pretty vigorous thrashing of a lot of tops, I saw amongst 
the debris of pine needles and swarms of common insects two specimens 
of Thanasimus. I was just about to turn them out, thinking they were both 
our well-known species formicarius, L., when, fortunately, certain differences 
in their general appearance caught my eye, and both specimens were bottled. 
Upon killing and mounting them, I found that one was formicarius, L., and 
the other an insect which differed in certain important characters from that 
species. On my return to Edinburgh in September, this species was soon 
identified as rufipes Brahm., the only other European species of the genus. 
This species is apparently rare on the Continent in central and northern 
regions, though it is also recorded from Spain. 
The discovery of such an interesting addition to our fauna induced me 
to have a look through my boxes of duplicates of captures at Nethy Bridge 
in 1910 and 1911, and to examine my diaries for these two years. In 
1911, I was apparently too late for the insect, and none was seen, but 
in the 1910 diary I found a record of a capture of one specimen of 
Thanasimus, on 9th July, and, on overhauling the duplicate box for that 
year, the species proved to be vufipes. At the time it was taken, I naturally 
assumed it was formicarius, set it, put it away, and never looked at it again. 
I captured altogether, in 1912, five specimens; the last one was taken on 
6th August. There can, therefore, be no doubt that the species is truly 
indigenous, and its probable rarity is the reason why it has escaped notice. 
T. vufipes differs from formicarius in its smaller size—6-8 mm. as 
against 7-10 mm., and in the much finer and less dense puncturation of 
the head and thorax; moreover the whole of the breast of formicarius is 
black, while in vujfipes only the metasternum is black. 
In typical rujfipes the antenne and legs are red, and in formicarius 
they are black, but in rufipes var. austriacus they are partly black, and in 
formicarius var. letipes they are mainly red. 
In formicarius, the elytra, with the exception of a narrow red band at 
their base, are black, and the black portion is traversed by two transverse 
