71 



" No. 64. This is most probably D. elongatus, although it is 

 longer. The specimen now marked 907 was sent me by Dr. 

 Harris under that name, but it chffers from this materially, and, 

 except for its length, which agrees with Say's description, it 

 can hardly be referred to that species. The thorax in 907 is 

 shorter and wider d,t base. The whole insect is shorter ; and 

 the name elongatus seems at first sight to be misapplied. Be- 

 sides that, the elytra offer differences. In 907, between the 

 suture and the humeral elevated line, there are five interstitial 

 lines, three of which are not uncommonly convex, but the two 

 intermediate ones are remarkably convex, and, visible to the 

 naked eye, continvie so till they reach the humeral elevated line 

 near the apex. Moreover, the three striae between the hu- 

 meral line and the margin are very distinctly punctured, and 

 the others near the apex are obscurely so, whereas in No. 64 

 the punctures are obsolete, and even wanting on the marginal 

 strise, as well as at the apex." 



[" No. 64. This has two impressed dots, each with one hair, 

 on the margin of the thorax. It is probable that this is the 

 same as D. si7nplex of Dejean, and that he described the variety 

 labelled (64 ? ?) in my collection, or else that is D, simplex^ 

 and I do not possess D. elongatus.'''' Hentz's mss. Catal.] 



HARRIS TO HENTZ, 



Milton, June 5, 1829. 



Your Macrodactylus I have compared with numerous speci- 

 mens of our rose-bug ; the colors and size of which (namely, 

 our insect) are very uniform in different individuals. Setting 

 these circumstances aside, your insect appears prima facie to 

 differ sufficiently to constitute a distinct species ; being pro- 

 portionately more elongated and slender than ours, and having 

 the four posterior tarsi distinctly annulated with white bristles. 



