AMERICAN COLEOPTERA. 



175 



trivial characters, this tribe has become the most difficuh to study of 

 any in the Carabidse excepting possibly the Lebiini. Characters drawn 

 from the ligula and paraglossae have here as in the Lebiini been pushed 

 to an extreme, and a study of them from my own dissections proves 

 that in both tribes they have not the great value which has been assigned 

 to them. It seems to me better to reject them almost entirely, certainly 

 as a means of separating tribes or groups and possibly even genera. 



The tribe Harpalini as here intended contains the Ditomides of 

 Lacordaire, (G-enera i, p. 165), the Cratocerides, Anisodactylides and 

 Harpalides of the same author, and I add also Glt/ptus. 



From the Ditomides all authors who have studied it agree that 

 Apntomui^ should be removed. From the Cratocerides Cydosonms 

 should be removed as suggested by Schaum and Chaudoir and placed, 

 as indicated by the latter in the Lebiini, ^Bull. Mosc. 1872*. ISomo- 

 platus and Macracnnthus are allied to Masoreus, (Schaum, Berl. Zeits. 

 1800, p. 178; Chaudoir, Bull. Mosc. 1870, Monog. des Masoreides\ 

 After all this dismemberment Chaudoir forms of Crafocerus, Bruchidio 

 and Basolia a special group, " plus ou moihs voisin des Drimosfoma:' 

 Among the Anisodactylides Orthogonius and Mlgodops should be re- 

 moved, the former constituting a distinct tribe near the Lebiini, the 

 latter being a member of the first sub-family. The Harpalides does not 

 appear to contain any offending material. 



To the tribe must hi added Fo/pochi/u (for wliicii however, Lacor- 

 daire uses a synonym Melunotna Dej. , and Stenomorphus, the affinities 

 of the latter having been properly recognized by Schaum. 



From my own study I am convinced that Gtyptus can find no better 

 place than as a group in the present tribe. The genus was described 

 by Brulle who placed it in the Ditomides, a position which does not to 

 me seem so erroneous as Lacordaire intimates. The latter author places 

 it in the most heterogeneous of his tribes (^Stomides) near Idiomorplius 

 to which it seems not to be greatly allied, although Schaum (Berl. Zeits. 

 1800, p. 178), says that these two genera are Orthogoniens, while Chau- 

 doir properly omits them from his monograph of that group, (Annales 

 Belg. xiv, 1872). Idiomorphus is known to me by the figure which 

 Lacordaire gives and I can therefore express no opinion. 



The characters of Glyptus are decidedly those oi' a Har[)alide and 

 I think it can very properly be compared with our own Geopinua. 

 In both genera it will be observed that the antenmii are rather short 

 and quite distinctly geniculate, the third joint feebly pubescent at tip 

 in Geopinus and almost entirely glabrous in Glypfus. In both genera 



