Coleopierological Notices. 499 



alluded to, undoubtedly indicate an obscure and innate line of con- 

 sanguinity ; this is indeed quite conclusively proven by the fact that 

 in Ehipidandrus, which seems to be more closely allied to Cis than 

 to any other genus, the antennae are strongly pectinate toward 

 apex, the pectinate portion forming an angle with the basal portion. 

 This character however, when weighed against its general organiza- 

 tion, does not make it a serricorn, any more than the purely clavate 

 antennas of Hydnocera prove the latter to be a clavicorn. 



It does not seem possible in this connection to avoid attaching 

 some weight to the resemblance, pointed out by Lacordaire, between 

 the larva of Cis and Cryptophagus, 1 and, it may be added, the 

 superficial resemblance of certain cisides to Diplocoelus is very 

 remarkable, even more so in fact than the real resemblance of any 

 species of the former w r hich I have examined to any anobiide or 

 bostrichide. 



The retraetibility of the head in Cis is generally very slight and 

 is scarcely greater in degree than in some species of Atomaria. In 

 the latter I do not find the anterior coxae rounded, but transversely 

 oval, exactly as in Cryptophagus. Sphindus is quite certainly 

 not entitled to rank as a distinct family whatever be the position 

 assigned it; the enlarged basal joint of the antenna? is analogous 

 to that of Atomaria. In the latter genus the anteriorly prominent 

 clypeus between the antennas is indicative of a characteristic which 

 becomes very prominent in certain cisides. 



In the Crvptophagidae as here considered, the parts which seem to 

 offer the greatest diversity of form are the clypeus and tarsi ; most 

 of the other characters appear to be very persistent in structure. 

 The tarsi of Telmatophilus and Loberus are analogous in taxo- 

 noniical import to .those of Telephanus and Psammaechus of the 

 Cucujidae. 



It should be noted in conclusion that the scope here proposed for 

 the families Cucujidae and Crvptophagidae, brings together in the 



1 In placing the Cisidae near the Ptinidae DuVal (Gen. Col. Ill, p. 236), 

 seems to imply by the language used that the resemblance of the larva of Cis 

 to that of Cryptophagus is a matter of very slight importance, as so little is 

 known of larval affinities, but two pages before in maintaining that the Lyctinae 

 do not belong near the Cucujidae, he assumes the divergence of larval form as 

 a very powerful factor in his argument — an inconsistency which, it may be 

 added, greatly reduces the weight of M. DuVal's conclusions as far as com- 

 parative studies of the larvae are concerned. 



A.vxals N. Y. Acad. Sci., V, Nov. 1890.— 33 



