﻿4 
  PROCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  NATIONAL 
  MUSEUM 
  vol. 
  67 
  

  

  a 
  similar 
  development 
  of 
  the 
  lower 
  edge 
  or 
  not 
  could 
  not 
  be 
  ascer- 
  

   tained 
  from 
  lack 
  of 
  material, 
  but 
  it 
  seems 
  probable 
  that 
  it 
  is. 
  

  

  The 
  rearrangement 
  of 
  the 
  Adephaga 
  here 
  suggested 
  seems 
  to 
  bring 
  

   into 
  greater 
  prominence 
  characters 
  of 
  importance, 
  while, 
  perhaps, 
  

   taking 
  less 
  account 
  of 
  habits 
  of 
  life. 
  

  

  The 
  author 
  wishes 
  to 
  acknowledge 
  his 
  indebtedness 
  to 
  the 
  follow- 
  

   ing 
  for 
  the 
  loan 
  of 
  specimens, 
  suggestive 
  comment, 
  or 
  for 
  permission 
  

   to 
  examine 
  type 
  material 
  : 
  To 
  the 
  British 
  Museum, 
  through 
  the 
  kind- 
  

   ness 
  of 
  G. 
  J. 
  Arrow 
  ; 
  to 
  the 
  United 
  States 
  National 
  Museum, 
  through 
  

   the 
  kindness 
  of 
  Dr. 
  E. 
  A. 
  Schwarz; 
  to 
  the 
  American 
  Museum 
  of 
  

   Natural 
  History, 
  through 
  the 
  kindness 
  of 
  Dr. 
  F. 
  E. 
  Lutz: 
  to 
  the 
  

   Academy 
  of 
  Natural 
  Sciences 
  of 
  Philadelphia, 
  through 
  the 
  kindness 
  

   of 
  Dr. 
  Henry 
  Skinner; 
  to 
  the 
  Museum 
  of 
  Comparative 
  Zoology, 
  

   through 
  the 
  kindness 
  of 
  Nathan 
  Banks; 
  to 
  Col. 
  Thomas 
  L. 
  Casey, 
  

   Dr. 
  E. 
  C. 
  Van 
  Dyke, 
  the 
  Messrs. 
  H. 
  C. 
  Fall, 
  Charles 
  Schaeffer, 
  

   A. 
  B. 
  Champlain, 
  and 
  Prof. 
  E. 
  B. 
  Poulton. 
  The 
  author 
  is 
  especially 
  

   indebted 
  to 
  Charles 
  Schaeffer 
  for 
  his 
  encouragement 
  and 
  assistance 
  

   in 
  undertaking 
  this 
  study 
  and 
  in 
  continuing 
  it 
  to 
  completion. 
  

  

  KEY 
  TO 
  THE 
  FAMILIES 
  OF 
  THE 
  ADEPHAGA 
  s 
  

  

  1. 
  Mentum 
  and 
  submentum 
  not 
  separated 
  by 
  a 
  suture 
  2 
  

  

  Mentum 
  and 
  submentum 
  separated 
  by 
  a 
  distinct 
  suture 
  3 
  

  

  2. 
  Head 
  with 
  antennal 
  grooves 
  beneath 
  Pseudomorphidae. 
  

  

  Head 
  without 
  antennal 
  grooves 
  beneath 
  Amphizoidae. 
  

  

  3. 
  Metasternum 
  without 
  an 
  antecoxal 
  piece 
  ; 
  prolonged 
  in 
  a 
  triangular 
  process 
  

  

  posteriorly 
  4 
  

  

  Metasternum 
  with 
  an 
  antecoxal 
  piece, 
  separated 
  by 
  a 
  well-marked 
  suture_ 
  5 
  

  

  4. 
  Antennae 
  irregular, 
  very 
  short; 
  abdomen 
  with 
  seven 
  segments; 
  eyes 
  four. 
  

  

  Gyrinidae. 
  

  

  Antennae 
  slender, 
  filiform 
  or 
  setaceous 
  ; 
  abdomen 
  with 
  six 
  segments 
  ; 
  eyes 
  

  

  two 
  Dytiscidae. 
  

  

  5. 
  Antecoxal 
  piece 
  of 
  the 
  metasternum 
  not 
  extending 
  from 
  one 
  side 
  to 
  the 
  

  

  other 
  Hygrobiidae. 
  

  

  Antecoxal 
  piece 
  extending 
  from 
  one 
  side 
  to 
  the 
  other 
  C> 
  

  

  6. 
  Antennae 
  arising 
  on 
  the 
  sides 
  of 
  the 
  head 
  between 
  the 
  eyes 
  and 
  tbe 
  

  

  mandibles 
  7 
  

  

  Antennae 
  arising 
  on 
  the 
  front 
  between 
  the 
  eyes 
  and 
  above 
  tbe 
  mandi- 
  

   bles 
  9 
  

  

  7. 
  Scutellum 
  present 
  S 
  

  

  Scutellum 
  absent 
  Omophronidae. 
  

  

  8. 
  Maxillary 
  fissures 
  not 
  extending 
  to 
  the 
  mental 
  suture, 
  concealed 
  from 
  below 
  

  

  by 
  the 
  mentum 
  Pasimachidae. 
  

  

  Maxillary 
  fissures 
  surpassing 
  the 
  mental 
  suture, 
  open 
  beneath 
  Carabidae. 
  

  

  !). 
  Antennae 
  10-jointed. 
  Hind 
  coxae 
  with 
  large 
  plates 
  almost 
  concealing 
  the 
  

  

  abdomen. 
  Head 
  vertical. 
  Mandibles 
  not 
  prominent 
  Haliplidae. 
  

  

  Antennae 
  11-jointed. 
  Head 
  vertical, 
  with 
  prominent 
  mandibles. 
  Hind 
  

   coxae 
  without 
  large 
  plates 
  Cicindelidae. 
  

  

  3 
  Certain 
  authors 
  have 
  discussed 
  adephagous 
  affinities 
  of 
  the 
  Paussidae, 
  Rhyssodidae, 
  

   and 
  Cupesidae 
  (Burmeister 
  1841, 
  Raffray 
  1885, 
  Escherich 
  1899, 
  Peyerimhoff. 
  1902, 
  

   Desneux 
  1905, 
  Boving 
  1907. 
  and 
  Forbes 
  1923), 
  but 
  these 
  families 
  are 
  here 
  omitted 
  as 
  

   too 
  aberrant 
  for 
  inclusion. 
  

  

  