ALBERT

Description: ACANTHOCEPHALINI\nAcanthocephala (A.) declivis Say. 1-4. Mexico, Klug.\nVar. panamensis Dist. 5-6. Chiriqui, Panama.\nAcanthocephala (A.) latipes Drury. 1-3. Brazil, Calkoen. \xe2\x80\x94 4. Brazil, van Eyndhoven. \xe2\x80\x94 5. Central Brazil, van Vollenhoven. \xe2\x80\x94 6. Brazil. \xe2\x80\x94 7. ?. \xe2\x80\x94 8. Post Groningen, Surinam, W. C. van Heurn. \xe2\x80\x94 9. Brazil.\nAcanthocephala (A.) mercur Mayr. 1. Espirito Santo. \xe2\x80\x94 2. Pachitea, Peru. (Both: Staudinger 1933).\nAcanthocephala (A.) scutellata Sign. 1-2. Pachitea, Peru, Staudinger 1932. \xe2\x80\x94 3-4. Puerto Inca, Rio Pachitea, Peru, Staudinger 1933.\nAcanthocephala (A.) sericeicollis Walk. 1-3. Chiriqui, Panama. \xe2\x80\x94 4. ?. (Altogether: Staudinger 1933).\nAcanthocephala (Spilopleura) parensis Dall. 1. Santa Cruz, Bolivia, Staudinger 1933. \xe2\x80\x94 2. Marcapata, Peru, Staudinger 1936. \xe2\x80\x94 3. Espirito Santo, Staudinger 1936.\nVar. tristis nov. var. This variety differs from the typical form by the darker colour of the upper parts, the less distinctly lighter coloured nervatures in the hemielytra, and the absence of any indication of a yellow annulation at the ultimate antennal joint. In the specimens I could examine the sharp-pointed teeth on the upper edge of the femora of the \xe2\x99\x80 are more distinctly developed than in the typical form. \xe2\x80\x94 4\xe2\x80\x947. Callanga, Peru, Staudinger 1935 (Holo- Allo- and Paratypes of the var.), and two \xe2\x99\x82 Paratypes from Peru in the collection of the "Deutschen Entomologischen Institut".\nAcanthocephala (Metapodius) angustipes Westw. 1. Brazil. \xe2\x80\x94 2. Amer-

Description: STENOCEPHALINI\nStenocephalus agilis Scop. 1-2. Staff, Fichtelgebirge, Bavaria. \xe2\x80\x94 3.\nToulon, 1894, Dr. Nodier. \xe2\x80\x94 4-5. Cauterets. \xe2\x80\x94 6. Rivi\xc3\xa8ra, France, 1896, Brants. \xe2\x80\x94 7. Capo di Ponte, Italia, August 1895, Fokker. \xe2\x80\x94 8. Ivize, Spain, Schmiedeknecht. \xe2\x80\x94 9. Finsterm\xc3\xbcnz, Tyrol, Sept. 1895, Fokker. \xe2\x80\x94 10-13. Gospi\xc4\x87, Croatia, Sequens. \xe2\x80\x94 14. Corsica, May 1893, D. v. d.\nHoop. \xe2\x80\x94 15-16. Amasia. \xe2\x80\x94 17. Oran, 1895, Dr. Schmiedeknecht. \xe2\x80\x94 18-23. Tunis, 1898, Dr. Schmiedeknecht. (The specimens 1-23 in Fokker\'s collection). \xe2\x80\x94 24-26. Germany. \xe2\x80\x94 27-28. Dalmatia, Cantraine. \xe2\x80\x94 29. Italia, Cantraine. \xe2\x80\x94 30. Zermatt, Switzerland, June 1906, Dr. H. J.\nVeth. \xe2\x80\x94 31-34. Algeria, Richter. \xe2\x80\x94 35. G\xc3\xb6ttingen, Everts. \xe2\x80\x94 36. Laubach, v. Hasselt. \xe2\x80\x94 37-38. Brig, 13-19 July 1924, R. v. d. Veen. \xe2\x80\x94 39-41. ?. \xe2\x80\x94 42. Algeria, April 1899, A. Legras. \xe2\x80\x94 43. Cape of Good Hope ( ?), Horstock.\nVar. femoralis Noualh. 44. Ain Fezza, Algeria, Staudinger 1934. \xe2\x80\x94 45. Sidi-Bel-Abbes, Staudinger 1934.\nStenocephalus albipes F. 1. Th\xc3\xbcringen, Dr. O. M. Schmiedeknecht. \xe2\x80\x94 2-6. Charente, H. Giraudeau. \xe2\x80\x94 7-8. S. France, L. Duda. \xe2\x80\x94 9. Grasse, S. France, D. v. d. Hoop. \xe2\x80\x94 10. Chiclana, Andalusia. \xe2\x80\x94 11-18. Palma, Baleares, Dr. O. M. Schmiedeknecht. \xe2\x80\x94 19-20. Colle dei Giori, Genoa, Mantero. \xe2\x80\x94 21-26. Monte Brione, Lago di Garda, Dr. O. Schmiedeknecht. \xe2\x80\x94 27-28. Riva, Tyrol, August, Fokker. \xe2\x80\x94 29. Gospi\xc4\x87, Croatia, Sequens. \xe2\x80\x94 30-31. Corfu, 1889, Schmiedeknecht. \xe2\x80\x94 32-40. Corfu, 1901, Schmiedeknecht. \xe2\x80\x94 41-48. Olympia, 1901, Schmiedeknecht. \xe2\x80\x94 49.\nHungaria, Saj\xc3\xb3. \xe2\x80\x94 50. Sarepta, A. Becker. (The specimens 1-50 in

Description: SPARTOCERINI\nMenenotus lunatus de Cast. 1-2. Brazil, Dupont. \xe2\x80\x94 3. Brazil, van Vollenhoven \xe2\x80\x94 4. Brazil, Dohrn. \xe2\x80\x94 5-6. Brazil. \xe2\x80\x94 7. Sao Paulo, Staudinger 1932.\nSpartocera batatas F. 1. St. Vincent, Hope. \xe2\x80\x94 2. ?. \xe2\x80\x94 3-75. Post Groningen, Suriname, W. C. van Heurn. \xe2\x80\x94 76. Suriname, Leesberg. \xe2\x80\x94 77. ?, van Eyndhoven. \xe2\x80\x94 78. Palume, Tapanahoni expedition, van Stockum, 1904. \xe2\x80\x94 79. Paramaribo, 1900, Dr H. van Capellen. \xe2\x80\x94 80. Suriname, van Brussel, from Fokker\'s collection.\nSpartocera brevicornis St\xc3\xa5l. 1-5. Montevideo, Deyrolle. \xe2\x80\x94 6. Uruguay, Meyer-D\xc3\xbcr. \xe2\x80\x94 7. Ensenada, near Buenos Aires, 1893, Dr H. ten Kate.\nSpartocera cinnamomea Hahn. 1. St. Martin, Parzudaki. \xe2\x80\x94 2. Hohenau, Paraguay, Staudinger 1932. \xe2\x80\x94 3-4. ?, Staudinger 1932.\nSpartocera denticulata St\xc3\xa5l. 1-3. Brazil, Calkoen. \xe2\x80\x94 4. Brazil, Deyrolle. \xe2\x80\x94 5. Brazil. \xe2\x80\x94 6. ?, van Vollenhoven. \xe2\x80\x94 7. Suriname, van Eyndhoven.\nSpartocera dentiventris Berg. 1(-2?). Espirito Santo, Staudinger 1932.\nSpartocera fusca Thbg. 1-6. Rio de Janeiro, Museum Berlin. \xe2\x80\x94 7. St.\nVincent, Hope. \xe2\x80\x94 8. Antigua, Hope. \xe2\x80\x94 9. ?, from Hope\'s collection. \xe2\x80\x94 10-11. Antilles, Parzudaki. \xe2\x80\x94 12-13. Brazil, Deyrolle. \xe2\x80\x94 14-16. Uruguay, Meyer-D\xc3\xbcr. \xe2\x80\x94 17. St. Martin, 1869, Rijgersma. \xe2\x80\x94 18. Caracas, van Lansberge. \xe2\x80\x94 19-24. ?. \xe2\x80\x94 25-27. Huanuco, 1934, Ir de Voogd.\nSpartocera granulata St\xc3\xa5l. 1. ?, Staudinger, 1932.\nSpartocera pantomina Dist. 1. Ambata. Equador (Paratype of S. ortonedai Montd.), from Fokker\'s collection.\nSpartocera quadricollis Sign. 1-2. Coroico, Bolivia, Staudinger 1932.

Description: Dysdercus mendesi nov. spec.\nDysdercus spp. 1936, Mendes, L.O.T., Boletim Technico N. 23, Institute Agronomico de Campinas, II, Os "Manchadores" do Algodao, p. 4 pl. I\xe2\x80\x94II.\nThis species is rather similar to D. columbicus m. and to D. brevis m.; the whitish annulation to the ultimate antennal joint is usually indistinct, the pronotum shows no black transverse stripe behind. The third joint of the tarsi, however, is not lighter than the second, the general form is more elongate, the pronotum less broad, the antennae are slightly longer and the membrane is darker, especially at the base.\nThe structure of the male genital segment differs from that of D. columbicus in showing a less pronounced inflexion in the apical edge, the protuberant parts less angular, the transverse furrow on the disk of the segment widened in the middle, ill-defined there. The segment shows a transverse streak of long, soft hairs.\nFrom D. brevis on the other hand the species differs in showing a somewhat deeper impression in the apical edge of the male genital segment, and showing more evidently a transverse impression on its disk. Moreover in D. brevis the disk is more swollen under the apical edge, and the protruding parts of the apical edge are sligthly more distant from each other.\nAlso from this species D. mendesi is distinct by its narrower thorax, and by the whitish annulation of the fourth joint of the antennae.\nLength of the \xe2\x99\x82: 10\xe2\x80\x9412 mm; of the \xe2\x99\x80 : 12 1/2\xe2\x80\x9414 1/4 mm.\nOn cotton; Campinas January 1936, L. O. T. Mendes, one \xe2\x99\x82 and one \xe2\x99\x80 Holo- and Allotype; and 13 \xe2\x99\x82\xe2\x99\x82 and 13 \xe2\x99\x80\xe2\x99\x80 Paratypes, representatives of laboratory breeding experiments of the collector.