iv MONTHLY PROCEEDINGS 



the erroneous localities given. Happily the number is rapidly diminishing 

 by direct comparison of specimens with types. 



The fauna of the United States has been so thoroughly studied at 

 home that the distribution of genera and species is now pretty well 

 understood, and we are warranted in being very skeptical when species 

 are referred to genera unknown to us from a given locality. 



In the following notes I have gathered from the authors such infor- 

 mation as has been published, which has a direct bearing on the matter 

 of distribution. 



Amblyeliila I'iccoloininii Reiche, Ann. Fr. 1839, p. 557. 



" Our colleague M. Dupont received, about the end of 1838, a collec- 

 tion of Coleoptera containing among others some specimens from New 

 California, among which was found a large Cicindelide." 



From our knowledge of the distribution of Amblycliila it has been 

 doubted whether the specimen was taken in California, inasmuch as that 

 State has been very thoroughly collected over by many competent persons 

 and no trace of that insect found. This is however merely negative 

 evidence. The matter would have very little importance were it not that 

 Reiche and Chaudoir insisted on the distinctness of this species from 

 cyliridriformis Say, basing their argument as much on the locality as on 

 any usual specific characters. The type has been seen by Dr. LeConte 

 and myself and does not differ in any appreciable manner from specimens 

 collected in New Mexico. 



Pasi madias califoniicus Chaud., Bull. Mosc. 1850, ii, p. 437. 



" This insect was collected in California by M. Piccolomini and has 

 been sent me by M. Dupont. He is the same traveller who collected 

 Amblychila Piccolominii Reiche." 



The occurrence of Paainutchus in California is also in opposition to 

 our ideas of generic distribution. The species remained unidentified 

 until a specimen from Chaudoir demonstrated that it was a species 

 occurring in the Texas region and known as validus Lee. 



Pangus ailiericaiiux Mots., Bull. Mosc. 1859, iii, p. 237. 



This insect was recognized as a Discorferm by Dr. LeConte twenty 

 years ago. The figure and description by Motschulsky are equally 

 insufficient, but I feel fully justified in considering it D. impotens Lee, 

 which is not rare in western Texas. 



The type was given to Motschulsky by Dupont doubtless from the 

 Piccolomini collection. 



Agaosoma califbriiicum Menet., Bull. Ac. Petr. 1843, ii, p. fi3. 

 It is now recognized that Agaosoma Men., does not differ from Steno- 



