140 ANNALS OF THE QUEENSLAND MUSEUM. 
consider Hypocilibe as non-existent in describing" the following" new 
species. The described species are thus eighteen in number. Of 
these I have twelve more or less certainly identified in my collection, 
two more have been identified (with a query) in other collections, 
while the following five species are so far unknown to me: — 0. 
latvis, Pa sc., 0. punctulatus, Bates, 0. inconspicuus, Blackb., 0. 
luguhris, Blackb., 0. veternosus, Blackb. (the last three described 
as Hypocilibe). The inclusion of the sub-parallel species with those 
of oval form, together with my wider study of the group, makes it 
necessary to refer Agasthenes Stepheni, Cart., to Onosterrhus, where 
it occupies a, position somewhere between 0. Deanei n. sp. and 
0. hrtus, Blackb. I would also place Nyctozoilus Sloanei, Blackb., 
in this genus. The author seems to have had considerable doubt 
as to its correct place. The only character in which it varies from 
the normal is its submentum, where the " distinct tooth " becomes 
an enlarged angulate process. This variation also occurs in 0. 
socius n. sp., infra, and throughout the genus I find graduated 
modifications of it varying from this wide angulation to the large 
knobbed tooth in 0. bos n. sp. and 0. major, Blackb. I would also 
suggest the synonymy of 0. inconspicua, Blackb. — 0. luguhris, 
Blackb., since their descriptions do not warrant their separa- 
tion; the only differences named by the author being that the 
former has the " basal joint of the front tarsi channelled beneath 
and scarcely wider than the second joint," and the " impunctate 
ventral segments." These characters seem quite inadequate for 
distinction, depending largely on the condition of the specimens. 
The two species occur within the same geographical area (within 
forty miles). It is possible that 0. heroina, Blackb., maybe found 
conspeoific with 0. major, Blackb. I have been able to identify 
one specimen of the former from Shark Bay, and two of the latter 
from Yalgoo, W.A., from description, and note that, besides the 
differences quoted by Mr. Blackburn (Report of the Horn Expedi- 
tion 1896, p. 279), my specimens of 0. major have the epistoma 
slightly sinuate in front, while the species I assume to be 0. 
heroina, Blackb., has that feature distinctly trilobed, while the 
whole head of 0. ma jor is much more strongly punctured. A longer 
aeries may show these, as well as the differences noted by their 
