136 ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY 



terminations were caused by confusion with closely allied Euro 

 pean species, e.g., Anobium pertinax ( = Hadrobregmuscari- 

 natus Say), Altica urticce ( = Epitrix cucumerts13.a.ri'.), Al- 

 tica oleracea ( = Haltica chalybea 111.), etc., but I have not the 

 slightest doubt that all other species identified (no doubt, by Krioch) 

 with European species were collected by Melsheimer in Penn 

 sylvania. A few of these deserve special mention : No. 533 is 

 Crioceris asparagi, whose striking coloration precludes an 

 erroneous determination. This record of the occurrence of the 

 Asparagus beetle in North America at the beginning of this cen 

 tury has been entirely overlooked, but it seems probable that the 

 disastrous invasion of this species which took place about 60 

 years later on Long Island, N. Y., and which has been treated 

 of by Dr. Fitch in his 8th Report, was due to a second importa 

 tion from Europe. 



No. 50, Onthophagus nuchicornis, is, no doubt, the type of 

 the species subsequently described by Dr. F. E. Melsheimer as 

 O. rhinocerus, the occurrence of which was denied by Halde- 

 man and LeConte, until, many years afterwards, it was found 

 again at various places in the northeastern States (see Mr. S. 

 Henshaw's note in Can. Ent., 19, 1887, p. 160), and also in 

 Pennsylvania. 



No. 178 is Lictus (Lyctus) striatus, to which, as a synonym, 

 is added L. canaliculatus. Whether or not the L. striatus 

 described by the younger Melsheimer is identical with the L. 

 striatus of the Catalogue I cannot decide, but so much appears 

 to be certain that our commonest species of Lyctus, so often 

 referred to in our economic literature as the "powder-post 

 beetle " and usually named in collections L. striatus, is an intro 

 duced species, and I fail to distinguish it from European speci 

 mens of L. canaliculatus in the collection of the U. S. National 

 Museum. 



Not the least interesting feature of the Catalogue are Melsheimer's 

 references to economic entomology. As a matter of course the 

 list of injurious Coleoptera was not as formidable at the beginning 

 of this century as it is now. Some of the most destructive species 

 had not yet been brought over from Europe at that time, and 

 many of our native species were not so injurious then as they are 

 now. They are simply enumerated in the Catalogue, and some 

 of them (e. g., Chrysobothris femorata} are not mentioned at 

 all ; or at least they cannot be recognized among the manuscript 

 names. The scientific names of those species which Melsheimer 

 considered as especially injurious are accompanied by the popular 

 names, while foot-notes refer to the nature of the damage or 

 even in two instances recommend remedial measures. It may 



