21 <) GEO. H. HORN, M. D. 



The males of this genus are said to have the first joint of all the 

 tarsi broader than in the female and the front tibia also broader. 



This insect is very like Scirtes tibialis in form and color. It varies 

 in color to piceous brown with the underside and legs pale ; this is 

 due probably to immaturity. 



Occurs in Illinois, North Carolina and Texas. 



Group VIII.— HALTIC^. 



Antenna3 11-jointed. Thorax regularly arcuate at base, with dis- 

 tinct ante-basal line variable in distinctness, not limited at its ex- 

 tremities by a longitudinal ])lica. Posterior tibire with, at most, a 

 very slight sulcus on the posterior edge near the apex. Anterior 

 coxal cavities open behind. Claw joint of posterior tarsi slender, 

 claws appendiculate. 



This group is nearly parallel with the Halticites as defined by 

 Chapuis, and in our fauna is represented by Haltica alone. Several 

 species had been referred to Creporis by LeConte, which, however, 

 do not possess the essential character of that genus. 



HAL,TI<;A Geoffr. 



Head short, usually deeply inserted, front regularly declivous, the 

 interocular carina never very prominent, the tubercles usually feebly 

 marked. Antennae half as long as the body, joints 2-3-4 gradually 

 longer, except in rufa. Labrum small. Maxillary palpi short, 

 rather stout, the terminal joint short and conical. Thorax usually 

 one-half wider than long and broadest at base, and with a more or 

 less distinct ante-basal impressed line, base arcuate, lateral margin 

 more or less thickened at the front angles. Elytra usually a little 

 wider at base than the thorax, the [)unctuation of surface confused. 

 Prosternum rather narrow between the coxie, the coxal cavities open 

 behind, angulate externally. Legs moderately long, tibia? of poste- 

 rior legs not or feebly sulcate, terminated by a small spur. Tarsi 

 moderate in length, claws with a broad dilatation at base. 



From the above description it will be observed that the differences 

 between Haltica and Disonycha are very feeble and may be nar- 

 rowed down to the form of the base of the thorax and the presence 

 of a line more or le.ss impressed in Haltica. 



The character of the impressed line affords a means of grouping 

 the species, but must be used with care and nv)t too strictly inter- 

 preted. In other words, very little can be done with the sj)eeies from 



