WICKHAM: new MIOCENE COLEOPTERA from FLORISSANT. 471 



No. 2,614 M. C. Z. (No. 3,375 S. H. Scudder Coll.) as representing the 

 same species, although the punctuation is less pronounced. 



With some hesitation, I have separated this from L. evanescens on 

 account of the much stronger punctuation of the present insect. 

 This is particularly noticeable towards the elytral apices since in 

 L. evanescens the strial rows are scarcely visible beyond the middle 

 while in L. fortior they continue distinct to near the tip. 



Crioceridea dubia Wickham. 



Not uncommon. Represented by good specimens. No. 2,615-2,619 

 M. C. Z. (No. 7,977, 9,577, 11,242, 4,458 and 11,737 S. H. Scudder 

 Coll.). Poorer examples, No. 2,620-2,623 M. C. Z. (No. 438, 8,644. 

 9,110, 11,791 S. H. Scudder Coll.) probably belong here. 



COLASPIS DILUVIALIS, Sp. nOV. 



Plate 11, fig. 1. 



Form rather elongate. Head too much damaged to show the shape. 

 Antennae incomplete but displaying several of the proximal joints 

 which are slender though somewhat thicker than in recent species. 

 Prothorax poorly defined, flanks beneath moderately coarsely and quite 

 closely though not very deeply punctured. Meso- and metathorax 

 more finely punctate and transversely or obliquely subrugose beneath. 

 Elytra showing only a portion of one side upon which the sculpture is 

 displayed in the form of nearly regular striae of circular or slightly 

 transversely elliptical deep punctures, those of the same row separated 

 by spaces usually much less than the diameters of the punctures. The 

 sculpture is much finer towards the apex, and, on account of poor 

 preservation, is nearly effaced near the base. Abdomen nearly smooth 

 but showing traces of shallow punctuation. Legs wanting. Length, 

 from front of head to abdominal apex, 4.50 mm. 



Described from one specimen. 



Type.— No. 2,626 M. C. Z. Florissant, Col. (No. 6,872 S. H. 

 Scudder Coll.). 



Most likely this insect is not a true Colaspis though it may be re- 

 ceived in that genus in its broad interpretation. It is more like Rhab- 



