Introduction 35 



habits. They ha\-e been commonly divided into Cerambycidse, Bruch- 

 idse and ChiysomeUdse, but the last division should probably be much 

 subdivided, in harmony with the habits and character of the larvae. 

 Handlirsch (p. 1279) says there have been at least three lines of descent. 



RHYNCHOPHORA 



Have been lately discussed in the " Rhynchophora of N. E. America." 

 I have only to add a reference to Dr. Sharp's studies ^ by which Ithycerus 

 is shown to belong to the family Belidae; and Dr. Pierce's recent studies," 

 with which I cannot agree in some points, especially in the transfer of 

 Scolytidse from RhjTichophora to Phytophaga on the basis of tarsal 

 characters, which have been discussed at length above. The characters 

 developed by Leconte, the rigid palpi and the single gular suture, seem 

 to me to exceed in importance both tarsal and beak characters.' The 

 union of Phytophaga and Rhynchophora into a single series has fre- 

 quently been proposed, but there are weighty reasons against doing so; 

 I am free to say that one of the results of my study has been to dis- 

 courage all such forced unions and to seek the true lines of descent by 

 isolating aberrant forms. It is quite hkely that the resemblance of 

 Choragus to the Cryptocephahni, of other Anthi'ibids to the Bruchidae 

 and of certain Cossonids to Clavicomia, indicates more than one line 

 of ancestry for the Rhynchophora; it may also be urged that the resem- 

 blance between certain Scolytids and the Bostrichidse is the result of 

 convergence following smiilar habits. 



CONCLUSION 



Such matters, however, are outside the domain of the present essay. 

 My object has been to study the phylogeny of the Coleoptera sufficiently 

 to arrange the famihes as they exist at the present time, substantially in 

 accordance A\dth their relative degree of derivation from the piimitive 

 beetles. And even if it could be conclusively shown that Rhynchophora 

 were descended entu-ely from Phytophaga, and they in tvirn from Das- 

 cilloidea, which I do not believe, it would not justify a corresponding 

 arrangement of the catalogue. So far from being conclusively shown 

 are such speculations regarding the origin of Rhynchophora, and the 



» Joum. N. Y. Ent. Soc. 1918, pp. 215-218. 

 '- Proc. U. S. N. M. LI, 1916, pp. 461-464. 



