258 
INSECTAj COLEOPTERa. 
nothing to do with it, as Parry has supposed, diagnostic characters for 
the $ of both being given. Westwood does not consider Lissapterus, Deyr., 
proposed for hoivittanus, entitled to generic rank ; he refers to it as unpublished, 
but the characters are given in Tr. E. Soc. 1870, p. 98 (cf. Parry, Tr. E. Soc. 
1871, p. xlii). Westwood (/. c. p. 371) gives the characters of typical L. 
ccmcrotdes, F., comparing it with his suhtuherculatiis, and tabulating the males 
of the Tasmanian species. 
RhcetuH westwoodi is from the Himalayas, and Dorcus derelictus^ Parry, is 
probably its $ , sec. Parry : Westwood, 1. c. p. 355. 
Apterocyclus, g. n., 0. 0. Waterhouse, ibid. p. 316. Metasternum extremely 
.short, elytra much rounded, tibiee not spined, except the interm, pair in S ; 
allied to Sclei-ostomus. A. honoluhiensis, sp. n., id. ibid, (and fig. p. 316), 
Honolulu, Sandwich I. 
Hhcetulus, g. n., Westwood, 1. c. p. 353. Allied to HhcetuSj but with smaller 
head, which, with the prothorax, is subopaque, punctured elytra, denticulated 
anterior tibiae, and the post, tibiae with a small tooth in middle of outer 
edge, &c. It. crenatus, sp. n., id. ibid., cJ, pi. viii. f. 4, Formosa (?$, 
p. 355). 
Dorcus ratiocinativus, p. 356, pi. viii. f. 2, Himalaya (^ = rudis, Westw., <5, 
sec. Parry — a view from which Westwood, who redescribes the latter at 
p. 867, and figures it, pi. viii. f. 3, dissents ) ; suturalis, p. 358, pi. viii. f. 6, 
Pungi, Himalaya j glabripennis, p, 359, pi. viii. f. 6, E. India: We.stwood, 
I, c., spp. nn. 
Lissotes furcicornis, p. 862, pi. ix. f. 3, Victoria ; latidens, p. 363, ib. f. 4, 1. 
Maria, Tasmania 5 lamicesioni, p. 365, ih. f. 1, forcipula, p. 366, ib. f. 2 (and 
? p. 367, ib, f. 6u, fe), subct'enalus, p. 368, ib. f. 5«, b, Tasmania (of. Zool. 
Rec. vii. p. 280) : id. 1. c.., spp. nn. 
Figulides. 
Figulus anthracinus, King, = e&ewws, Westw., = si/&/cem, Palis. ; Gerstiicker, 
Arch f. Nat. xxxvii. p. 46. 
Nigidiis parrii, Bates, is recharacterized and figured (pi. viii. f. 1) by 
Westwood, 1. c. p. 360, who considers Bates’s specimen and that figured by 
himself are $ ( c? in reference). 
Passalides. 
Kaup (B.E.Z.xv. Heft iv.pp. 1-125, pis. 3-7) monographs this 
subfamily (considered by himself a family) on the basis of his 
^ Prodromus^ in v. Harold^s Col. H. He gravely enunciates for 
it a quinary system, after the manner of Macleay or Swainson, 
supposed to be founded upon parallels afforded inter se by its 
members with relation to the various sections of the animal 
kingdom, and which he extends even to the limitation of the 
number of species contained in each genus. According to the au- 
thor^s ideas of natural propriety in this family, it ought to con- 
tain 325 species, neither more or less ; and of these 154 yet 
remain to be discovered. At p. 37, the affinities of one of these 
ignota (possibly not as yet in existence, according to the sup^ 
