466 WILLIAM G. DIETZ, M.D, 



the above-named locality. It agrees well with the description as 

 given by Dr. LeConte, differing only in that the anthor describes 

 the s})ecies as densely scaly above, which is not the case in my speci- 

 men. In appearance it closely resembles the next ; it is, however, 

 easily distinguished by the longer beak, the longer fourth tarsal 

 joint and the sexual characters of the male. 



P. ptisillns n. sp. PI. xiv, fig. 376. — Of the same size as squnmosus, with 

 wl>i('h it agrees, except in the following points: Beak very stout, shorter than 

 the head. Eyes less convex, the scales on the upper surface are brownish with a 

 distinct brassy lustre and more conspicuously mottled with larger white scales; 

 scales of underside of prothorax and mesosternal side pieces ochreous. Legs 

 rufous, fourth tarsal joint distinctly longer, nearly equal to the two preceding 

 joints. 



% . Last ventral with a small longitudinal fovea. 



Hab. — Tampa, Fla. 



The single specimen before me is a male in Dr. Horn's coll. and 

 bears the label, " squamosus Lee." ; however, the description tallies 

 less with this than the preceding species. The more northern habitat 

 of the former would also in a measure lend support to this view ; 

 still, should a comparison with the type prove my conclusions to be 

 erroneous, the specific name adopted for the present species may be 

 applied to the one which I consider as squamosiis Lee, 



MECOPELTIJS gen. nov. 



This genus differs from Pelenomus only in the presence of distinct 

 ante-coxal ridges, forming a prosternal canal, more or less distinct 

 for the reception of the rostrum in repose, the latter is a little less 

 robust ; antennal funicle (vjointed, club large, the first joint forming 

 fully one-half its mas8 ; orbital margin acutely elevated ; second 

 abdominal segment longer than the two following united, the third 

 not narrowed on the sides ; prosternum longer in front of the coxje ; 

 the scutellum is minute, but visible in all. In general appearance 

 the species do not differ from those of the preceding genus and may 

 be distinguished as follows : 



Antennre more slender, second joint of funicle distinctly elongate, elytra rounded 

 on the sides. 



Front concave, scales without lustre, dull liili(;iiiO!<iii<<i. 



Front not concave, scales witli a l)rassy lustre scaildeiis. 



AntenniE stouter, second joint of funicle not distinctly elongate, scarcely longer 

 tlian wide. 



