OSTOMID/E IO5 



OSTOMID^: 



The few genera at the head of this family in our fauna have been 

 greatly neglected and misunderstood until recently, when Dr. E. C. 

 Van Dyke published a table of the Nemozomini (Bull. Bk. Ent. 

 Soc., 1915, p. 25), showing, with apparent correctness, that those 

 species hitherto recorded under the name Nemozoma Latr.,* in our 

 lists, are really members of the Central American genus Cortico- 

 tomus Sharp, and that Nemozoma never had been correctly reported 

 in our fauna until Mr. Fall described a species under the synonymic 

 name Psendalindria (Tr. Am. Ent. Soc., 1910, p. 126), which he 

 named fissiceps. Dr. Van Dyke added another, in the article cited, 

 under the name attenuata. I now find that the genus Corticotomus, 

 as defined by Sharp and Van Dyke, is also composite. It is to be 

 regretted, in the interests of more general knowledge of this group, 

 that individuals seem to be extremely rare in collections, and I 

 have never seen an example of the true Nemozoma. 



Corticotomus Sharp 



This genus is represented thus far by basalis and gracilis of Sharp, 

 from Guatemala and Panama respectively, also cylindricus Lee., 

 parallelus Mels. and caviceps Fall. Never having seen a specimen 

 of parallelus, I am unable to state whether or not it may be identical 

 with cylindricus; the published characters do not distinguish the 

 two very clearly. I am under the conviction that Corticotomus 

 californicus of Van Dyke, is a member of the next genus. The 

 following species seems to be new to literature : 



Corticotomus laeviventris n. sp. Moderately slender, convex, inflated 

 posteriorly, piceous-black, rufo-piceous beneath, the legs rufous; elytra 

 rufescent basally toward the humeri; micro-reticulation fine and feeble, 

 becoming very strong and dense on the alutaceous elytra; head peculiarly 

 porrect, the mandibles sloping upward, without the latter slightly trans- 



* This is the original spelling of the word, later emended to Nemosoma. The original 

 spelling was restored by Reitter (Verh. Nat. Ver., Briinn., 1876, p. 13) and I think 

 justly, for permanence in generic names is more important than any other consideration, 

 and if changes of any kind are inaugurated, permanence suffers, as seen in the various 

 ways of writing several names that could be cited. There is no reason, for instance, 

 why some other reformer should not write Nematosoma. So the safest plan is to 

 adhere to the original spelling of generic, though not necessarily of specific, words, 

 even though they may be incorrect from an etymological point of view. I should 

 properly have used Rhyzophagus above, instead of Rhizophagus, but perhaps the prin- 

 ciple can be carried too far. 



