136 CUROULIONID^. 



[LeUonte. 



I have one specimen of the same, or a very similar species from Texas, 

 sent by Belfrage. The scales are, however, in great part abraded, and 

 although I perceive some differences, I am unwilling to indicate it as 

 distinct. 



MACROPS Kirby. 



The smaller species placed by Schonherr in Listroderes were separated 

 by Mr. Jekel as a distinct genus, Hyperodes (Ann. Ent. Fr. 1864, 566), 

 and undoubtedly the separation is a proper one. I find, however, that the 

 two species upon which Mr. Kirby founded his genus Macrops (Fauna Bor. 

 Am. 199), belong to the same set, and that name must therefore have pre- 

 cedence. 



This genus is easily distinguished from the preceding by the tibiie being 

 stouter and less strongly niucronate at tip, and by the first joint of the 

 funiculus being stouter and as long as the second, except in M. solutus, 

 where it is about two-thirds as long as the second; the seventh joint of the 

 funiculus is wider than the sixth, but is quite distinct in most of the species, 

 though in others it is rather closely connected.* 



It will be seen that in the characters by which this genus differs from 

 Listronotus it approaches PTiytonomus. The greatest differences will be 

 found, however, in the proportion of the ventral segments, which in the 

 last named genus are not very unequal, while in Macrops the third and 

 fourth are very evidently shorter, and together are not longer than each of 

 the others. 



The species are closely allied and difficult to distinguish. The descrip- 

 tions of Boheman and Gyllenhal, though minute, are not sufl^cient to 

 enable me to identify their species with reasonable certainty, and I there- 

 fore content myself with giving a list of those named in the books with 

 references, awaiting more abundant material and comparison with the 

 described types for a proper tabulation of the species: 



1. M. delumbis (GylL), Sch. Cure, ii., 283. 



2. M. lineatulus (Say), Cure, ii; ed. Lee. i, 272; (Boh.), Sch. Cure, vi, 

 2d, 195. 



3. M. sparsus (Say), Cure, ii; ed. Lee. i, 271; (GylL), Sch. Cure, ii, 282; 

 Listr. squalidus Gyll., ibid, ii, 181. 



4. M. spurcus (Boh.), Sch. Cure, vi, 2d, 196. 



5. M. ininiundus (Boh.), Sch. Cure, vi, 2d. 198. 



6. M. humilis (Gyll.), Sch. Cure, ii, 284; M. ■maculicolUs Kirby, Faun. 

 Bor. Am. iv, 200; pi. 8, f. 4. 



7. M. porcellus (Say), Cure. 11 ;ed. Lee. i, 271; (Gyll.), Sch. Cure, ii,284. 



8. M. vittaticollis Kirby, Faun. Bor. Am. iv, 200. 



9. M. solutus (Boh.), Sch. Cure, vi, 2d, 197. 



* The anal segment of the w^ is usually protuberant; the last ventral is im- 

 pressed in some Q Q , but never very deeply. The form of the beak, the size of 

 the scales, and the length of the setae afford good characters for the recognition 

 of many of the species, of which there are probably fifteen to seventeen in my 

 collection. 



