206 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [September, 



from the inner apical angle of the tibia, obscuring the tip of the 

 spur and giving the appearance figured under low power in the 

 case of scapalis by Dr. Dietz. If the author will examine a series 

 of specimens under a power sufficient to reveal the true structure 

 say a two-thirds inch objective, he cannot fail to perceive this. 

 The diversity in size of the tibial spurs is comparatively slight, 

 and is purely specific; the posterior spurs are often noticeably 

 smaller than the others. 



The eyes are more or less narrowly separated beneath, but 

 variable in size, and, when larger, of course approximate still 

 more closely; the mere fact of mutually touching occasionally is 

 consequently of no value from a generic point of view, unless 

 accompanied by strongly marked differences in facies. This we 

 do not find in the case of Synertha, nor any other structural pe- 

 culiarity, and I think it will be evident that Synertha cannot stand 

 for even a well-marked group, since the eyes approach each other 

 :so gradually that it will be impossible to place intermediate species. 



There is only one other character given, and this relates to the 

 antennal club; unfortunately this is also without value, as there 

 .are all intergrades between the slightly larger and stouter club 

 of some more robust species, and the smaller and slighter club 

 of the majority; there is no radical difference of structure in any 

 direction however. 



In all of these cases it will be observed that where difference 

 of facies is principally relied upon for generic separation, Dr. 

 Dietz has assumed a single organic structural character of very 

 slight weight and connected by numerous intergradational forms 

 non-existent in the case of Desmoris for defining the genus, 

 and where the single structural character is more evident, as in 

 Synertha, there is a complete absence of habital peculiarity. In 

 fact, Smicronyx is one of those genera like Mycetochara, of the 

 Cistelidae, in which it is impossible to define generic subdivisions, 

 although some structural differences exist; at the same time there 

 is apparently more warrant for generic disintegration in Myceto- 

 chara than in Smicronyx. 



Dr. Dietz seems to differ from me to some extent in the iden- 

 tification of LeContean species, and it will be well to take these 

 up in order. In the first place I am altogether certain that my 

 identification of corpiilentus, ovipennis, griseus, obtectus, pusio, 

 tychioides, fulvus, sordidus, cinereus and squamnlatus is correct, 



