34 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 82 



Distribution. — Massachusetts (Chicopee, Cambridge, Framing- 

 ham, Lynn Beach, Springfield) ; New York; Connecticut (Lyme) ; 

 Pennsylvania (Chester) ; Maryland (Bladensburg, Glen Echo) ; 

 Virginia (Canij^ Humphreys, Virginia Beach) ; North Carolina; 

 Georgia ( Thomas ville) ; Florida (Capron, Enterprise, Haulover, 

 Jacksonville, Miami, Sanford) ; Louisiana (Covington) ; Texas (Col- 

 lege Station) ; Oklahoma (Osage County) ; Illinois (Meredosia). 



Food plant. — Unknown. (Fabricius, 1801, gave the food plant as 

 Amaranthus spinosus, but confusion between this species and glahrata 

 may have occurred at that time.) 



Remarks. — The type of Fabricius' species, described from the 

 Drury collection, seems to have been lost. K. G. Blair, of the British 

 Museum, has lent me for examination a specimen determined as 

 caroliniana^ " the determination of which is probably more or less 

 traditional ", that agrees with specimens compared by Dr. W. G. 

 Kuntzen, of the Berlin University Zoological Museum. Doctor 

 Kuntzen writes that in the Berlin Museum are six specimens under 

 the name caroliniana received from Fabricius himself, all of which 

 agree with the meager description of caroUniana. lUiger, as Doctor 

 Kuntzen writes, with little doubt described a different species under 

 the name caroUniana. Probably Olivier also had a different species 

 or confused two species under carollniaina. According to Olivier's 

 description the pronotum is sometimes immaculate and sometimes has 

 two spots, and in his illustration the pronotum is without markings. 

 No specimen of carolinianu that I have examined is without the 

 anterior pronotal spots. It is possible that Olivier had before him 

 the smaller, oval species described by Blatchley as admiral) ilk. The 

 illustration fits that species, and in many collections ad>mirabilis is 

 labeled caroUniana., mainly, I believe, on account of Olivier's 

 illustration. 



D. caroUniana., which is rather poorly represented in most collec- 

 tions, appears to inhabit the coastal region from Massachusetts to 

 Texas. I have seen one specimen from Oklahoma and one from 

 Illinois. It is ver}^ much like the pale form of fiimata, described by 

 Schaeffer as lodingl^ but can be distinguished from that by its shorter 

 and subequal third, fourth, and fifth antennal joints, and its entirely 

 pale head, as well as by its shorter and broader prothorax. It is 

 larger than admirahiUs., and always has two anterior pronotal spots, 

 which are not usually present in admirahiUs. The eastern variety of 

 latifrons^ described by Schaeffer as laticolUs, is usually larger and 

 darker, the labrum and frequently the metasternum being dark. 

 The aedeagus of caroUniana is not like that of any other North 

 American species of Disonycha. 



D. pulchra was described by Casey from two fresh specimens of 

 this species, both females, collected near Chester, Pa. The live 



