134 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM 



It is noted that E. Olivier's (1907) generic description does not 

 entirely agree with Solier's. Nor do the latter's descriptions of the 

 species exactly meet his generic characters, a condition which my 

 examination of the specimens at hand confirms. 



Barber (1951, p. 16) designated P. depressicornis Gemminger 

 (compressicornis Solier) as the type species. From the standpoint 

 of being typical of the genus, this species, with wide pale elytral 

 borders, is perhaps less satisfactory than say, P. obscura, although 

 it is the first in Solier's descriptions. 



POSITION OF PYRACTONEMA AMONG THE LAMPYRIDAE 



E. Olivier (1907, 1910) placed Pyractonema in his subfamily 

 Lucidotinae. As was noted above, Fairmaire and Germain called 

 their species Lucidota, and there is, indeed, very little in the published 

 descriptions to differentiate Pyractonema from many of the species 

 commonly called Lucidota, the principal difference being the very de- 

 pressed body of most species of Pyractonema. However, the large 

 genus Lucidota, with over 100 species, is obviously composite and 

 probably includes a considerable number that are properly Ellychnia 

 and Pyropyga. 



As was also mentioned, E. Olivier (1902) originally described three 

 Japanese species as Pyractonema but subsequently removed them to 

 Lucidina (Gorham, 1883). The chief distinguishing character of 

 the latter genus is the deeply cleft tarsal claw resulting in a 3-clawed 

 appearance, but in the writer's experience this condition is not con- 

 stant in all claws of species of Lucidina. Occasional specimens of 

 Chilean Pyractonema have some claws so divided. Thus, aside from 

 the widely different geographic distribution, only the described long, 

 apically attenuate pronotum of Lucidina distinguishes it from 

 Pyractonema. 



SOURCES OF MATERIAL STUDIED 



I received from Luis E. Peiia, of Santiago, Chile, a large series of 

 Chilean lampyrids, the majority being of the P. nigripennis group, 

 which must be very abundant, together with several larvae of at 

 least two types. A rather striking feature of this collection is the 

 great general similarity of the species, although they range from 5 to 

 24 mm. long. A few specimens of Chilean cantharids also resemble 

 the lampyrids in their black elytra and reddish or black-striped red 

 pronota. Apparently the adults are not appreciably luminous, if at 

 all so, and the majority seem to be diurnal. If present, the luminous 

 organs are rudimentary, frequently merely minute pale scales, or 

 sometimes distinct red spots, occasionally centrally yellow, on the 8th 

 ventral segment, where the residual larval luminous organs are situ- 

 ated in other lampyrids. Although Pena states that he has never 



