AMERICAN COLEOPTERA. 85 



I find it impossible to place either of the hxst two species in any 

 of the groups suggested by Chevrolat, the characters given boing very 

 indefinite. 



The maintenance of the Cebrionidfe as a family apart from the 

 Elateridse, is rather the result of universal agreement than from the 

 presence of any good reasons. 



" The principal differences between this and the preceding family is in 

 the greater number (sis) of the ventral segments, the well developed tibial 

 spurs, the expansion of the anterior tibiaa at apex, and the close connection 

 between the front and labrum. By the intermediate forms of the group 

 Plastoceri, of the previous family, all the differences except those of the 

 anterior tibiae become evanescent ; and I place the Cebrionidfe as a distinct 

 family, only in deference to the views of the most distinguished foreign 

 authorities." 



In the above quotation from Leconte (Classification p. 175), I fully 

 agree, and add that between the Plastoceri and Cebrio the dilatation of 

 the anterior tibiae is a matter of very little diff'erence and almost null. 



Chevrolat seems more satisfied with his results : 



" For the family of Cebrionites, I think I have united the elements 

 constituting a good classification and which present the most sharply 

 defined characters: males notably different from the females, winged, 

 elongate ; females apterous, short, stout ; the first having the antennje 

 slender, more or less elongate, flat, of variable form conical or triangular ; 

 the second having these members short, moniliform, gradually broader 

 externally ; the tarsi filiform in the two sexes." 



I have no further criticism of this than to refer the reader to a 

 comparison of the males and females of Aplastus and Euthijmnhia. 



From the above extracts, which form the substance of all that has 

 been said in defence of the retention of the Cebriqnidee apart from the 

 Elaieridse,^ it will be inferred that there are no characters at present 

 known which will separate these two families. 



RHIPICERID^. 



This family is represented in our fauna by two genera, Zemoa with 

 simple tarsi, Sandalus with lobed tarsi. Brachypsectrn placed here by 

 Dr. Leconte seems a veritable Dascyllide. 



After a careful study of the characters of the family I can find 

 nothing which will warrant us in retaining it apart from the Dascyllidae. 

 The presence of an onychium seems to be the only character at present 

 relied on and this is present in Stenocolus (Lichas Ww..), a genus which 

 one would not desire to separate from association with Dasvi/Uus. 



(17) 



