250 



[March, 



Wat. Cat. syn.), thongh with a query. C^wleva grandicolliSy &o., of Murray, 

 erroneously attributed as varieties to chrysomeloides ; most likely through a 

 misunderstanding of the remarks of that author, who says there are forms 

 of chrysomeloides corresponding with the type as he (erroneously) considers 

 grandicollis, &c., to correspond with tristis. C. Kirbyi (roUmdicollis) is again sunk 

 as a var. of tristis. C.frater, Newman, Ent. Mag., 1, 1853, 507 (not in Wat. Cat.), 

 is given as a good species. This, and C. soror and nuhifer of Newman, 1. c, are 

 only incidentally mentioned in Murray's introductory remarks, wherein he states 

 that he has not seen types of them, but that Mr. Little had specimens of soror and 

 nuhifer, named by Stephens, which were respectively to be referred to C. nigricans 

 and C. velox. Apparently in accordance with this inconclusive identification, 

 C. soror and nuhifer are here placed as synonyms of the latter two species. . C. frater^ 

 from the hopeless description, would seem possibly to be either small nigricans or 

 coraciniLS. It is likened by its describer to C. fornicatus, — a name which I cannot 

 find in Murray or Wat. Cat,, but which, I presume, signifies C. nigricans, Spence. 

 All three of Mr. Newman's species are stated to have been taken at HaHfax, and 

 to be in the Cabinet of Mr. Davis. 



Anisotoma vittata, Curtis, Ann. Nat. Hist., v, 1840, 276, not being in syn. of 

 Wat. Cat., is given as a good British species. I presume it is A. litura, Steph. 

 Colenis latifrons, Curtis, 1. c, also given as a good species, is C. dentipes, teste Wat, 

 Cat. Liodes axillaris, Steph., is stated to be a variety of L. castaneus (an insect 

 not known to occur in Britain until late years), but is <J humeralis. Agathidium 

 convexum. Sharp, is placed as a synonym of glohosum, Muls. et Key. Clamhus 

 coccinelloides and nitidus, Steph., 111. Brit. Ent., ii and v, not in syn. of Wat. Cat., " 

 are given as good species ; and Ptilium minutum, Steph., 1. c. iii, 61, is in the 

 same rank. 



Finding so many note-worthy subjects in this volume, I propose to look 

 through the first vol. in like manner, and will publish the results of my exami- 

 nation.— E. C. RYt, 7, Park Field, Putney, S.W. 



Note on Saprinus fGnatlioncus) punctulatus, Thorns. — Among some insects 

 Bent to me for examination by Mr. Jos. Chappell of Manchester, I find a specimen 

 of a Saprimis (taken at Lytham) which has raised in my mind a certain amount of 

 doubt as to there being sufficient specific distinction between S. punctulatus 

 (already recorded as British, from the London district, Ent. Ann., 1867), and 

 rotundattis, Thomson's chief characters for his punctulatus, as compared with the 

 latter, appear to be its smaller size (L lin. as against IJ lin.) and lighter antenuce, 

 legs, and hinder parts of the elytra, which are more sparingly punctured, and have 

 no sutural stria. Now Mr. Chappell's insect is quite 1^ lin. long (my London* 

 district specimens averaging 1 line only), has the antennce, legs, and hinder part 

 of elytra darker, and the punctuation of the elytra closer (being quite confluent 

 behind) than in my above-mentioned smaller examples, — so far agreeing with the 

 differential characters for rotundatus. But its sutural stria is so very short that it 

 may bo considered as absent, for it requires a " Coddiugton " to show that it is 

 represented by the confluence of three basal punctures only. Now, in the much 

 smaller London examples above alluded to (all of whicli have lighter legs and apox 

 to elytra, and less closely punctured elytra), the sutural stria varies considerably, 



