ClCINDELID/E AND CARABID.E 35 



than in stringens; although apparently a trivial character, this is 

 very constant throughout a good series of fulgoris and five examples 

 of prcetextata. 



22 The togata group is closely allied to the preceding and has a 

 generally similar style of ornamentation, but the head is densely 

 pubescent, almost as in the gratiosa group, to which it is also allied. 

 The following is specifically different from togata: 



Cicindela globicollis n. sp. Coloration, sculpture, vestiture and or- 

 namentation almost exactly as in togata, but much smaller in size and 

 of shorter form; labrum moderately and broadly produced medially, 

 with a feeble medial sinuation, from the bottom of which projects an 

 acute tooth, the sinus narrower and stronger and the tooth a little longer 

 in the female; head noticeably smaller; prothorax less cylindric and with 

 still much more arcuate sides, giving a subglobular appearance; elytra 

 (o 71 ) with the sides gradually rounding and oblique to the acute and 

 spinulose tips, or ( 9 ) more broadly, obtusely rounding to the tips, which 

 are rounded to the only very slightly retracted but similarly spinulose 

 angles. Length (cf 9 ) 9.8-10.6 mm.; width 3.6-4.2 mm. Kansas 

 (Clark Co.), F. H. Snow. Three examples. 



Differs specifically from togata in the form of the elytral apices 

 of the female, the tips there being more rounded and the spine 

 representing the sutural angle very greatly retracted and pro- 

 jecting from the edge of the suture; the male apices do not differ 

 appreciably from those of togata. This form seems to resemble 

 apicalis W. Horn, and may possibly prove to be a variety of that 

 species, but it is much smaller in size and apparently has a more 

 globular prothorax; in the absence of examples of apicalis, I am 

 unable at present to supplement these with other indicated differ- 

 ences. The differences between the apicalis globicollis section 

 of this group and togata are exactly parallel to those between 

 hamata and marginata of the marginata group; since the latter 

 two are maintained as distinct species, apparently with justice, 

 although they have identical markings, I think analogy should 

 determine apicalis, with its analogue or possible variety globicollis, 

 to be specifically different from togata. 



23 The following is a very striking and beautiful variation of 

 lepida: 



Cicindela lepida ssp. insomnis nov. Nearly as in lepida but with a 

 larger head, more prominent eyes and somewhat narrower and more 



