364 EUCHIKIN.Ti:. 



The organs of the inoulh clearly indicate the liquid nature of 

 the food taken by the mature beetles. There are no cutting or 

 grinding parts, and the apparatus rather closely resembles that 

 of the Cetoniix.e ; but this in my opinion is due rather to con- 

 vergent development than to any close relationship. The labrum 

 is extruded, highly chitinous and fringed with hairs (not mem- 

 branous and concealed, as in the CETONiiNyE and Dykastin^) ; 

 the mandibles are only chitinous externally, the inner half being 

 completely membranous or leathery and thickly covered with hair, 

 the hard chitinous part not extending to the tip, as in the 

 Cbtoniinve. The maxilla consists of a single lobe, with two or 

 three slight blunt teeth internally ; it is almost covered with long 

 hairs, which form a very long brush at the end. The labium is 

 short, with a well-marked broad ligula, tufted on each side, and all 

 the palpi are rather stout. 



There is no production either of the prosternum or meso- 

 sternum, all but the front coxa? reach the middle line of tlie body, 

 and the mesothoracic epimera do not ascend between the pronotum 

 and elytra, as in the Cetoniix.e. The elytra are long, nearly 

 covering the abdomen, and have fairly well-developed epipleurae. 

 The pygidium is rather small, and the abdomen consists of six 

 segments beneatli, divided by complete sutures. 



The size of these creatures, as well as their elongate fore-legs, 

 not unnaturally led the early systematists to associate them with 

 the giant Dynastiiv^e, but they have none of the actual distinctive 

 features of that group, and their mouth-apparatus and claws 

 -emphatically exclude them equally from that and from the 

 BuTELiNiE. It has been said above that the organs of the moutli 

 have a marked resemblance to those of the CETONii^S'iE, and this 

 led Burmeister to refer them positively to that group, declaring 

 the genus Inca to be that most nearly related to them. But the 

 general conformation of the body is very different from that charac- 

 teristic of the Cetoniin.e, while the horny extruded labrum, the 

 toothed claws, transverse front coxae, and other features, are entirely 

 alien to tliem. An actual comparison with the American genus 

 Inca reveals extremely little real similarity. There remains the 

 Meeolonthin.e, to which alone, as Klag and Erichson first 

 recognised, the toothed claws assimilate them, and it is to those, 

 as is now generally admitted, that they are actually most nearly 

 allied. A careful comparison of any species of Euchieiis'^ with a 

 primitive Melolonthine genus, such as Pacliytricha, will show no 

 such dissimilarity in the structure of the mouth-parts, legs, or any 

 other part, as appears on comparison w ith Inca. The large size and 

 general peculiarity of appearance of the insects, rather tlian any 

 particular structural features, have probably been responsible for 

 their exclusion from this large and not very homogeneous group ; 

 but this exclusion is no doubt justified and the box-like form of 

 the antennal club, hitherto unnoticed, may be I'egarded as an 

 important diagnostic chai-acter of the subfamily. 



No light upon this interesting little group has hitherto been 



