STUDIES IN THE AMERICAN BUPRESTIDiE II5 



tentatively placed in the above table, for the remarks appended to the 

 original description are so ambiguous that it is quite impossible to 

 state anything definite concerning its relationships. The author at 

 first places it in a group with gibbsi and conjluenta, which are alto- 

 gether dissimilar species, and he finally states that it has elytra some- 

 what as in adjecta, which is certainly not to be inferred from the lan- 

 guage of the description; adjecta having no striae in the usual accepta- 

 tion of that term. The villosa, of LeConte, is appended in the com- 

 plete language of the original description. The species is really not 

 described, for while the few remarks concerning the prothorax would 

 seem to signify alliance with Buprestis proper, as here limited, the 

 elytra are said to resemble those of aurulenta. The name aurulenta 

 Linn., has been until recently applied to two very different species, 

 so that it is impossible to determine whether LeConte had in mind 

 ornata Fab., or his own lauta. The locality "California" appears 

 furthermore to be very doubtful. 



The species near nmculipennis are difficult to separate and my results 

 are not given with entire confidence, the only opinion that can be held 

 with certainty being that a number of distinct species are generally 

 confused in our collections. The original descriptions of Kirby's 

 species are alone utilized for the characters given in the above diag- 

 noses. Nuttalli, by the maculation of the coxae, may be allied more 

 closely to consularis than to alternans, but the abdominal spots, ranged 

 in a single series at each side, shows that is different from either. The 

 inflation of the basal part of the prothorax in nuttalli is assumed, as 

 no mention of such a character is made by Kirby. Of rusticorum I 

 have two specimens; the outline is evenly fusiform and the sides 

 of the trapezoidal prothorax are inwardly arcuate basally, which may 

 account for the rather ambiguous language of the original diagnosis; 

 the under surface is strongly and closely punctate and the elytral 

 apices are obtusely subtruncate or apparently almost broadly rounded; 

 the last ventral in these two females is truncate at apex, the sides of 

 the truncature feebly subdenticulate, but this is a variable character. 

 There can be little or no doubt that these specimens represent the true 

 rusticorum and it differs considerably from those following it in the 

 table, such as fusca and adducta, which have generally been assumed 

 to represent the species. Paganorum seems to be very closely allied 

 to rusticorum and may be merely a subspecies. I have assumed to 



