-304 Trans. Acad. Sci. of St. Louis. 



than toward base, the surface with a few sparse punctures; elytra two- 

 fifths wider and longer than the prothorax, with a few sparse punc- 

 tures, especially evident toward base, the humeri distinctly exposed; 

 abdomen slightly narrower than the elytra, parallel and straight at the 

 sides, moderately narrowed posteriorly only near the apex; female 

 with the sixth tergite broadly rounded. Male characters obscured in 

 the type but apparently feeble. Length 1.25-1.35 mm.; width 0.42-0.51 

 mm. Ontario (Toronto) exilis n. sp. 



The above is only the first rude attempt to bring order out 

 <of chaos and may not represent the most natural succession 

 of the species in this hitherto neglected genus. There are, 

 for example, several transitions between the species having 

 the antennae decidedly increasing in thickness from the fifth 

 joint to the tip and those having joints five to eleven parallel, 

 and I do not believe that this is an altogether natural sub- 

 division. These transitional forms are mentioned, however, 

 in the above descriptions and will probably not give rise to 

 much uncertainty in identification. The principal object at 

 the present time is to bring forward such characters as may 

 be easily recognized, in order that the species may be identi- 

 fied and further studv and collecting encouraofed. The next 



V CD Cj 



revision, with fuller material, may enable the reviewer to give 

 a more natural classification, perhaps based primarilv upon 

 the very pronounced secondary sexual modifications of the 

 .male. 



The species identified above as flavicornis Mels., varies in 

 ■color more than any other that I have observed, the usual 

 coloration being dark but varying from this to almost wholly 

 :flavate. Inconspicua has very nearly the same secondary 

 sexual characters as lacustris, except that the tubercle of the 

 £fth tergite is rather smaller and more circular and it is 

 therefore very closely related, although lacking the peculiarl}^ 

 pitted elytra characterizing the three species of that imme- 

 diate group. For the present, therefore, I have regarded it 

 as a subspecies of lacustris. In the Henshaw list a species 

 •*' affinis Fauv.," is inscribed; affinis ^S-ahlh., is undoubtedly 

 intended, but there is no American species before me corre- 

 sponding in sexual characters to the examples of that species 

 forwarded by Mr. Eeitter and taken in the Caucasus. I have 



