374 Mr. G. Lewis on LTI. — On the Lamellicorn Coleoptera of Japan ^ and Notices of others. By G. Lewis, F.L.S. Although twenty years have elapsed since the publication of Waterhoiise's paper on the Lamellicornia of Japan in the * Transactions of the Entomological Society of London,' liis memoir remains the only important one on this section of the Japanese Coleoptera. Approximately Waterhouse enume-rated 100 species, and my list to-day gives but 123. There is an unexpected limit to the number of the species. The fauna fails in Aphodii^ of which I have no new species to record, and in this respect corresponds with the tropical region of Eastern Asia ; and it lacks Onthophagi, which in Southern and Central China are particularly numerous. It is possible that the finest species are local and remain to be discovered. No species of Euchirus is at present known to occur in the Archipelago, but it is very probable one exists, and it should be sought for in autumn in the large elevated forests of the central and southern provinces. The Cetoniidae are not generally dealt with here, because they were the subject of an article in this Magazine in 1887 (xix. pp. 196-202), and beyond two species of Cetonia described by Janson in 1888 and one new species of Paratrichius described in the note at the end of this paper, there is nothing further to record. I consider that the following species have been erroneously included in the catalogues and papers on the Japanese Coleo-ptera, and I have not given their names a place in my list : — Onthophagus damn, F. ; Geolrupes splendidus^ F. ; Serica briinnea, L. ; PhyUopertha horticola^ L. ; Phyllopertha arenaria^ Brulle ; Anomala ohloiiga, Scop.; and Mimela testaceoviridisj Blanch. Regarding the synonymy set forth in the List of Species, I believe it is correct ; and when it differs from lists previously published I have given in the body of this paper the reasons for my conclusions. Three species of Aphodii have been very indifferently described by Motschulsky, and Waterhouse, failing to refer them to any species in the collection formerly in his hands, transcribed Motschulsky's descriptions verbatim, to enable students not having the ' Etudes ' to judge of their value. After studying Motschulsky's papers and becoming familiar with the author's work generally, I think I have assigned his names to the right species ; but in consideration of the incompleteness (and, in one case, false measurement) of his descriptions, I think his names are not entitled to the right
BioStor
