62 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. xos 



tibiae or enlarged femora. Although I have not seen any male speci- 

 men of this species, I think it is not unlikely another of this group, 

 closely related, as Suffrian stated, to D. cyanospila, and possibly also 

 with enlarged hind femora. 



On searching through the list of species under section "P" in 

 Gahan's (1891a, p. 418) table of Diabrotica, which is composed of 

 species that may be distinguished by the peculiar structure of the 

 antennae of the male, I have found two that have excised middle 

 tibiae in the male. One of these, D. amplicornis Baly, seems to be 

 another of the Luperosoma group in which Horn and Jacoby described 

 species. In the other species, D. dilaticornis Baly, both the anterior 

 and middle tibiae are widely emarginate, the emargination being 

 unlike that of the group under consideration, but it has bifid claws, as 

 in a true Diabrotica, and therefore cannot be considered one of the 

 group of genera under discussion. 



Among species of that heterogeneous genus Neohrotica occur 

 several that differ from the type of the genus, Neobrotica variabilis 

 Jacoby, in being smaller, oblong in shape, and more slender and with 

 excised middle tibiae in the male. They do not have any pecidiarity 

 of the male antennal joints, in this respect being unlike most of the 

 rest of this group. These species are Neobrotica ruatanae Jacoby and 

 a closely related and undescribed beetle, and Neobrotica sexplagiata 

 (Jacoby) , the latter related to Diabrotica nymphaea Jacoby. The name 

 N. sexplagiata covers a number of closely related species. Besides 

 these are others from South America, so far undescribed. that fall into 

 this group. 



Jacoby has described still another geinis with at least one species, 

 Platymorpha smaragdipennis , having excised middle tibiae. In his 

 other species, P. variegata, I am unable to detect any such character. 

 In both, however, the male antennae are peculiar in that the third 

 joint is very short and truncate. 



Chapuis (1875, p. 163) included Phyllecthrus with Phyllobrotica in 

 his treatment of Phyllobroticidcs, and separated them in his key by 

 the epipleural characters. He stated that in PhyUecthrus the epipleura 

 are very narrow. LeConte rightly described the elytra as distinctly 

 margined with the epipleura narrow and not extending to the tip. In 

 Phyllobrotica the epipleura are either very narrow or wholly lacking. 

 The genus Phyllobrotica, in spite of its worldwide range in the temperate 

 Northern Hemisphere, is exceedingly' homogeneous, the species all 

 being closely related and rather uniform in markings. The chief 

 points of likeness between the two genera lie in the semicircular depres- 

 sion across the prothorax and the appendiculate claws. In at least 

 one species, Phyllobrotica limbata (Fabricius), the male antennal 

 joints are thickened, but the middle tibiae show no emargination, and 

 there is no thickcninar of the anterior tibiae in the male or short first 



