86 



have always considered as distinct. It is true, as you have 

 observed, that in the insect sent you for "(7. sericea Say, Long's 

 Exped.," there are two depressions on the thorax, more obvious 

 in some specimens than in others, transverse, arcuated, and 

 almost dividing the thorax in an undulating line into two parts. 

 Besides this character, the insect is larger and darker than the 

 other sericea or suIpJmrea. As it was first described, it must 

 retain the name given it by Say, even if the other should prove 

 to be distinct from the sulphurea of Fabricius. 



Your remarks on my 777 led me to make a critical examina- 

 tion of it. Much to my surprise I found that the maxillary 

 palpi were pointed, the labials fuscated, and the tarsi pentam- 

 erous ; add to these characters the incrassated posterior femora 

 and spincd til)ia3, and we must conclude the insect to be a 

 Scirtes. It is probably allied to depressus Fabr. 



Compare the insect you have figured with my sketch of 

 Mojyaloceros fasciatus, in a letter written Dec, 1828. You will 

 then be convinced that yours is at least congeneric. My insect 

 differs from your figure in being about one-fourth smaller, in 

 having the anterior angles of the thorax and of the elytra more 

 rounded, in having the first two joints of the tarsi subequal, 

 the third smallest, and the claw joint longest of all. I place 

 my insect among the Xi/IojjJiages of Latreille, and near to 

 JPaussus. 



If no mistake has been made in the European insects sent 

 nie, our Tenehrio molitor most closely resembles T. obscurus 

 Fabr., and my T. punctulatus, T. molitor Fabr. But the habits 

 of these allied insects are completely reversed, our molitor 

 never living in wood, and my ^mnctulatus never being found in 

 meal. I think you must have my p)unctulatus, as it is the 

 most common species. 



The insects injurious to the vine in this State have received 

 some attention from me ; they are 3Iacrodactylus suhspinosus 

 Fabr., its most destructive enemy, next to which in noxious- 

 ness is an homopterous insect, which I call Tettigonia vitis, pale 



i 



