124 GEO. H. HORN, M. D. 



the male has the tendency to become black. One male before me 

 is entirely black, except that the thorax is orange-yellow, but I think 

 I have seen in Mr. Ulke's cabinet an entirely black specimen. 



Occurs in Utah and Arizona, and in the State of Coahuila, Mex. 



FHYL,L,ECTHRUS Lee. 



Form elongate, surface glabrou.s and nearly smooth. Head free, 

 eyes oval, entire, distant from the margin of the thorax, fi'out more 

 or less grooved transversely above the insertion of the antennai, 

 labrum short, emarginate ; maxillary palpi stout, the terminal joint 

 acute, narrower and shorter than the preceding. Antennse moder- 

 ately long, slender in the 9 , thickened toward the tip Z in all the 

 species except r/enfi/is ; 11-jointed in both sexes, but 10-jointed in the 

 male of gentilis. Thorax broader than long, slightly narrowed at 

 base, sides distinctly margined, base arcuate ; scutellum oval at tip. 

 Elytra with very distinct lateral margin, epipleurse narrow, but ex- 

 tending more than half to apex ; prosteruum obliterated between 

 coxse ; metapleurre moderately wide and slightly concave longitu- 

 dinally. Legs moderately long, tibise slender and without spurs ; 

 first joint of hind tarsi longer than the next two ; claws broadly 

 appendiculate at base.- 



The position of this genus as indicated by Chapuis is by no means 

 satisfactory. With Phyllobrotica, especially, it seems to have but 

 little afHiiity. In the latter genus there is absolutely no lateral mar- 

 gin to the elytra, and consequently no epipleuron properly defined. 

 In Phylledhrus, on the contrary, the margin is even more sharply 

 defined than in many Luperus, and the epipleuron as fully developed 

 as in that genus. The length of the first joint of the hind tarsus 

 and the entire absence of tibial spurs on all the feet place its rela- 

 tionship with but few of the groups suggested by Chapuis, and ap- 

 parently the most closely with the Mimastrites. I am, however, 

 inclined to believe that Chthoneis may be related to Phylledhrus, 

 although that genus is known to me by descripticm alone. Assuming 

 a relationship with the Mimastrite (as can easily be done by regard- 

 ing females alone of Fhyllecthrus) we are then forced to admit a 

 very close relationship with Ciieorane. One fact is, however, very 

 evident — too many of the genera of Galerucini have been described 

 from uniques without any published reference.^ to sexual peculiarities, 

 which are often a guide to relationship when other characters cause 

 doubt bv their double indication. 



