to begin with : but to place it as even closely related to the Geotrypini 

 proves entire ignorance of the larva of the latter. To be sure Osten-Sacken 

 refers only to a table by Chapuis and Candeze in their Catalogue des 

 larves des Coleopteres, p. 115, in which the characters of the laparostict 

 Lamellicorn larvae are analyzed. Strangely enough, this table contains 

 the entirely false statement that the segments of the Geotrypid larvae are 

 furnished with transverse foldings, which is not the case ; while in the 

 same table the Lucanid larva which have these folds or wrinkles, are de- 

 clared to be without them. As little as Frish, Mulsant and Erichson 

 mention such wrinkles or folds, so little does Schiodte (Band IX, Taf. 

 XVI) in the unsurpassed figures given bv him. So in this direction it is 

 impossible to speak of any relation between the smooth ringed Geotrypid 

 larva, and the wrinkled, so called Pleocoma larva. The Trogid larvae — 

 which are still further removed by their size from this " Pleocoma larva 



seem, according to Chapuis and Candeze figures to have such wrinkles, 

 but they seem to extend the full length of the larva, while in Osten- 

 Sacken's figure they do not exist on the two enlarged end segments (in 

 Trox these segments are narrow and tapering). In addition it appears 

 however that this newly discovered larva does not agree with that of Trox, 

 either in the structure of the mouth parts, nor yet in that of the antennae: 

 especially the latter, which by their, greatly elongated basal joint prove 

 typically different. In view of these mistaken remarks of Osten-Sacken 

 as to the relationship with the Geotrypini and Trogini, it seems doubly 

 strange that in his search after the nearest allies of the supposed Phocoma 

 larva, he failed to hit on just that group of laparostict Lamellicorns which 

 their size and structure most indicated — i. c. the Lucanidce. And that 

 it belongs to a member of this family, an examination of the mouth parts 

 and antennae leaves hardly doubtful. Only in the Lucanid larvae, among 

 all the laparostict or even pleurostict Lamellicornes heretofore known, do 

 id the characteristic slender three-jointed antenna, on which the first 

 joint is especially noticeable from its great length, which is so well shown 

 in the figure of the s<> called Photoma larva. That this, in my opinion, 

 only possible view, can be in any way contradicted by the statement that 

 1 1 was found deep underground — while as is well known Lucanid 



! \e in decaying wood I cannot admit, in view of the fact that no 

 s in reference to the finding of the larva are given. 

 Note by Translator. Thi papei from the Stettiner Ent. Zeitschrift for 1883, 

 • 450 has n A attrai ( d the attention it deserved froraAmerican students. Dr. 



1 ;ed its publication long since, although he disagrees with the views oi Dr. 



(, er. In the Classification and in Henshaw's recent list the genus still retains 



it 1 Mi r's notices of one of the species have added something 



t iwledgc ol its hi tory ai d others "four Pacific Cast friends should he able 



t ■ te the work by li iding the real larva of some of the species of the genus. 



J. B. Smith. 



