A. B. WOLCOTT iO 



but never in a satisfactory way. The coarse sculpture of the 

 basal portion of elytra will immediately separate it from the 

 allied hietus and its variety n1)rupt>(s. It is, however, more 

 closely related to atriceps Gorliam, of Chiatemala. In atnce])>< 

 the head may be either l)lack or red, it is also a larger species 

 (7.3 mm.) than chapini, the color pattern is, however, quite 

 similar, the principal difference being that in chapini the median 

 fascia forms a distinct curve upon each elytron, the convexity 

 toward the base, in atn'cepft the fascia is straight, the pale yellow- 

 ish basal maculation wanting, and the apical margin of the 

 prothorax narrowly Ijlack, the head is somewhat more coarsely 

 and deeply punctate than in chapini Init the elytral sculpt are is 

 ({uite simihu" in the two species. 

 Enoclerus laetus Klug and Enoclerus coccineus .Sfhenkling 



Clerus ladu.-< Klus, Abh. Berl., Akad., p. 301, 18-12. 



Clerus abruptu.s Leconte, Proe. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., p. 72, 1S58. 

 Clerus coccineus Schenkling., Deutsch. Ent. Zeit., p. 272, 190G. 



Clerus corallinus Fall, Trans. Anier. Ent. Soc, xxxm, p. 240, 1<)07. 



Under the name Clerus corallinus Fall, Mr. Chas. Schaeffer'' 

 has published a note in which he places coraUimis as a variety 

 of ahrupius Leconte, failing to appreciate the fact that abniptus 

 is but a variety of laetus, the latter name having priority; also 

 that Prof. Fall's species is a synonym of coccineus Schenkling. 

 Schaeffer also alludes to the prol)ability of flavosignatus Spinola, 

 recnrvatus Gorham, and laetus Klug being merely variations of 

 abrnptus. 



The writer feels compelled to tlissent fro^n the expressed oi)in- 

 ion of Mr. Schaeffer so far at least as it relates to the identity 

 of laetus and coccineus. It is the author's firm conviction that 

 we have here two distinct species, and while it may l)e true that 

 we have little more than type of color pattern to enable sei)ara- 

 tion of these species, this appears to me to ])C, in this gemis, of 

 e([ual value to other specific characters. There is, in my opinion, 

 always a distinct line of demarcation existent in the tyiie of 

 pattern in tliese two species. In all the specimens having a 



^Journ. N. Y. ImiI. Sue x\i, j). Ill, I'.IO^. 



TRANS. AM. ENT. SOC, XL\H1. 



