201) Journal New York Entomological Society, [^oi. xxviii, 



oped, rounded. Elytra 2^4 to nearly 3 times as long as wide, parallel and 

 straight at the sides, gradually narrowed at apex, distinctly wider than the 

 head; ridges feeble, the second and third alone distinct. Under surface 

 densely scaly. Length 8.5 to 9.7 mm. width 2.0 to 2.2 mm." Recorded from 

 Indiana. Occurs also in Md., Kans., Fla., Texas, Mich., and N. Y. (Leng.) 



The writers have been unable to see the type of oculatus, and it is 

 doubtful if Blatchley (24) had seen a specimen when he considered 

 it a variety. It seems to be quite distinct and as an amplification to 

 the original description the following is quoted from a letter from 

 Col. Casey and a sketch showing the difference in elytral sculpture is 

 included with the figures. 



'* In concolor the body is more elongate and slightly larger than 

 in oculatus and the antennae are longer and more slender. In oculatus 

 the head is transversely sulcate between the eyes, there being no 

 vestige of the sulcus in concolor: the head and prothorax are very 

 similar in habitus in the two but in concolor the sides of the latter are 

 deplanate and not sharply reflexed as they are in oculatus and the 

 median ridge of concolor is broader. 



. " The most striking difference is, however, in the sculpture of the 

 elytra. In concolor the punctures of the double series are coarser, 

 more close set and quadrate, while in oculatus they are elongate, rela- 

 tively narrower, more distinctly so than shown in the drawing sent 

 herewith, and the series in concolor are very much more approximate 

 than in oculatus. 



" The coloration of the two is nearly alike, being pale ochreous- 

 gray, feebly mottled with darker. In my opinion there is no possi- 

 bility of these not being two distinct species in the material at hand, 

 the only point being as to whether or not Westwood's species is cor- 

 rectly identified. As my identification coincides completely with that 

 of LeConte, I, however, have no doubt on this score." 



Following his description of Cupes serrata LeConte (8) added a 

 consideration of the species known at that time, all confined to the 

 genus Cupes, in which he pointed out the most important characteral 

 differences of the species. He said, " It will probably be found on 

 dissection that the characters separating our three species of Cupes 

 will warrant them in being considered as belonging to distinct gen- 

 era." Some time later LeConte (10) did separate the most widely 

 differing species, serrata, erecting the genus Priacma for its reception. 



