458 BULLETIN 182, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM 



five or to separate my own specimens from any of them. A similar 

 experience was had with the three Casey species. Examination of 

 the characters used to separate these has shown that they are variable 

 characters and apparently not of specific value. I can only con- 

 clude that the names are synonymous. In addition to these species 

 of which I have seen examples, a careful examination of the other 

 described American species (except formicetor-um Bernhauer) shows 

 that the same characters have been used in every case, and no varia- 

 tions are recorded which are not included in the series at hand. 

 I am forced to conclude that tlicy too are synonyms, and I feel that 

 the evidence is strong enough to justify placing the names in the 

 formal synonymy. 



M}^ specimens were collected from among decomposing trash in 

 canefields, from under dung, rotting fruit, moss, and stones along 

 edge of streams, and flying at dusk. 



LXXII. Genus CEPHALOXYNUM Bernhauer 



Cephaloxynum Bernhauer, 1907, p. 282. 

 Subgenus Ponticulus Bieeig, 1931, p. 424. 



Genotype. — C. gestroi Bernhauer (monobasic). Of Ponticulus^ 

 ^ ephaloxynum {Ponticulus) ramhouseki Bierig (original designa- 

 tion and monobasic). 



Diagnosis. — Form slender, depressed; head and pronotum without 

 dense umbilicate punctures; head not margined beneath or behind 

 the eyes; antennae widely separated at anterior margin of head, 

 outer segments pubescent from the fourth joint; labrum bilobed 

 (though separated from the clypeus by a smooth area that might be 

 mistaken for the labrum itself) ; fourth segment of maxillary palpus 

 sliorter and much more slender than the third; labial palpus similar 

 to maxillary; gular sutures united, at least basally; lateral margin 

 •of pronotum doubled, the lines not clearly united nnteriorl}^; ante- 

 rior coxal cavities open behind; front coxae very large, exserted; 

 posterior coxae contiguous, "triangular"; first and second abdominal 

 sternites absent; femora unarmed beneath; tarsi 5-segmented. 



Remarks. — This genus was described in the Piestinae, but I can 

 see no reason for regarding it as anything but a true staphylinine, 

 ■especially since the redefinition of the Piestinae. I have assumed that 

 Sr. Bierig's species from Cuba is actually a Cephaloxynum^ since the 

 genus is not otherwise available to me in identified material. I con- 

 sider that Ponfic}ih(S cannot be maintained even as a subgenus on the 

 basis of the characters given by Bierig, and his figures and descrip- 

 tion leave little doubt that ramhouseki is congeneric with tricolor. 

 If tricolor is properly assigned to Cephaloxynvm^ then this transfer 

 to the Staphylininae is valid. If not, then the genus here treated 

 would take the name Ponticulus. 



