236 



some species, unknown to us, intermediate perhaps between his 

 variegata and tortuosa ? 



What you state, quoting from Dejean, of the terminal lunule 

 being nearly lost in the lateral margin, does not seem to me of 

 so much importance as the structural character of the elytra of 

 the females. 



Mr. Alex. Agassiz told me that on examining his Missouri 

 specimens, you gave to them the name of Cicindela cuprascens, 

 and I find that they agree in the main, though not in every par- 

 ticular, with your description, as stated in my last letter. I re- 

 member now that all the trochanters (not the hinder ones 

 only) are red or testaceous in the Missouri specimens, as they 

 are in my white Cicindela, which your father gave me. The 

 latter, since reading your description, I have referred to your 

 tar salts, though my specimen has the tarsi mutilated, so that I 

 cannot judge of their comparative length. Having only a male 

 of this supposed tarsalis, I do not know except from your de- 

 scription, how the elytra of the female are constructed, and even 

 this seems a matter of doubt, for although in your descriptive 

 catalogue, under 0. lilanda, you say '-'elytra in foBminis prof uncle 

 sinuata '' in your description of tarsalis (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sc. 

 Phil., VI, p. 66) you refer only to " one male," and make no 

 mention of any female, or of the structure of the female elytra 

 of tarsalis. 



I venture to suggest the following conclusions in regard to 

 these species, etc., thouglrit may be rash to do so without see- 

 ing your specimen. 



1. C. blanda Dejean. Elytra in both sexes entire. (Georgia?) 



var. albino, vel decolorata (C. tarsalis Lee.) Georgia. 



2. C. cuprascens Lee. Elytra in the female emarginated. 



C. Wanda a Lee., from Conn. River and St. Croix, Wisconsin. 

 I? Lee., from Arkansas River and Missouri? 



The Roanoke specimen or specimens, referred to in your Cat- 

 alogue, but omitted in your last letter, remain to be disposed of. 



