66 SCYDMENIDZ. 
4. Kumicrus pectoralis. 
Brunneus, nitidus, longius sat crebro pubescens; capite posterius subtruncato ; elytris sat elongatis. 
Long. 27 millim. 
Mas tarsis anterioribus leviter dilatatis; tibiis intermediis apice intus valde bimucronato; pectore in medio 
tuberculo magno, apice truncato et minute pubescente. 
Fem. tarsis anterioribus fere simplicibus ; tibiis intermediis apice intus minus valide mucronato ; pectore 
mutico. 
Hab. Guatemaa (Sallé), near the city (Champion) ; Nicaracua, Managua (Sal/é). 
This species has the antenne formed similarly to those of E. brunneus ; and, though 
readily distinguished from that species by the sexual characters, the two are in other 
respects extremely similar; E. pectoralis has, however, the hind body a little longer 
and narrower in proportion, approximating thus to ZL. vestalis, from which it is well 
distinguished by the sexual marks. 
5. Eumicrus laminatus. 
Elongatus, angustulus, brunneus, nitidus, pubescens ; capite angustulo, collo minus abrupto. 
Long. 23 millim. 
Mas tarsis anterioribus leviter dilatatis ; tibiis intermediis apice bimucronato; pectore in medio lamina longi- 
tudinali subhamata. 
Hab. Mexico, Cordova (Sal/é). 
I have before me only one example, in extremely bad condition, of this insect. 
Though certainly closely allied to ZH. pectoralis, the pectoral structure of the male 
decidedly indicates a different species, and it is probable that HL. daminatus is a rather 
smaller and narrower insect ; I detect no difference in the antenne of the two. 
6. Eumicrus centralis. 
Brunneus, nitidus, longius sat crebre pubescens ; antennis longioribus, clava elongata gracili. 
Long. 24 millim. 
Mas tarsis anterioribus fortiter dilatatis; pectore in medio leviter prominulo, densius minus subtiliter 
pubescente. 
Hab. Mexico, Jalapa (Hoge); Guatemaua, San Gerdnimo, Capetillo (Champion). 
This species, at least in the male sex, is readily distinguished from LE. brunneus by 
the pectoral structure and by the more elongate antenne; these last-named organs 
having the fifth joint more elongate, and the seventh and eighth joints less reduced in 
size than they are in ZL. drunneus, the club also being longer and more slender. In 
other respects the two species are extremely similar. We have only received one 
example from each locality, and perhaps they may not all represent one and the same 
species, as they differ a little in the pectoral pubescence. The female I do not think 
we have received at all. It is possible that this sex may not have the more elongate 
antenne of the male, and in that case is indistinguishable, in the present state of know- 
ledge, from the corresponding sex of EL. brunneus. 
