TENEBRIONID^; 79 



however antedated by Pactostoma Lee., can be legitimately sus- 

 tained, since anastomosis Say, which was included, although not 

 fitting the generic diagnosis of Lacordaire so well as graciliformis, 

 is evidently generically different from the type named Stenosides 

 graciliformis by Solier. 



The genus Philolithus, of Lacordaire, is said to differ from Pele- 

 cyphorus solely in the absence of a definite everted acute angle at 

 the apex of the anterior tibiae. This is only measurably true of 

 carinatus, the type of Philolithus, and in others that must necessarily 

 be included, such as the cegrotus and actuosus groups, there is 

 evidently an everted and acute angle; so I can perceive no other 

 just course to pursue than to consider carinatus congeneric with 

 mexicamis, the obviously intended type of the mixture named 

 Pelecyphorus by Solier, through such forms as cegrotus and mor- 

 billosus. 



Mr. Geo. C. Champion founded a number of new genera among the 

 Mexican species under the names Sicharbas, Zaleucus ( = Zamolxis 

 preocc.), Poliorcetes, Ucalegon and Tisamenes, the first of which 

 is related to Astrotus and doubtless a very good genus. The others 

 were suppressed by their author in an appendix to the volume of 

 the "Biologia" in which they appeared, but I have scarcely any 

 doubt that some of them are valid and will ultimately have to be 

 resuscitated; they are probably more or less close allies of Pele- 

 cyphorus. In addition to these genera it is almost certain that at 

 least fifteen others will prove necessary for known aberrant Mexican 

 types and in making allowance for some American species, such as 

 Microschatia sulcipennis and morata and Asida siibmttata, luctata, 

 semilcBvis and flaccida, which will almost undoubtedly necessitate 

 separate genera, as well as for others not yet discovered. As 

 none of the Mexican species belong truly to Asida, it would be well, 

 in cataloguing them, to assign provisionally such as are not disposed 

 of generically in the present paper to some of the genera here de- 

 fined, with which they may apparently be most closely affiliated. 



The three European genera at the end of the table are introduced 

 in order to indicate the connection of the old world fauna with the 

 new. There is actually no resemblance whatever between the two 

 faunas in this tribe, and of the eighty or more European and North 

 African species in my cabinet, I cannot recognize one that bears 



