Amerig4na 



VOL. III. 



BROOKLYN, NOVEMBER, 1887. 



NO. 



NOTES ON LACHNOSTERNA. 



By George H. Horn, IVI. D. 



There is probably no genus of Scarabceidie in our fauna about whicli 

 so little is known by the numerous collectors in our country as Lachno- 

 sterna. This too in face c>f the fact that the species are for the most part 

 (if large size and arbundant whenever found. Unfortunately there are no 

 .striking differences between the species which arrest the first glance. A 

 few seem to have met easy recognition and are correctly named in every 

 series exammed such as crenulaia, hu-suta, hirtLuIa, micans, trisiis and 

 fusca although several species are often mixed under the latter name. 



It is not surprising that attention has not been given to the species 

 as the literature at present available does not give great assistance, and in 

 my own case there was almost equal difllculty in arriving at a correct de- 

 termination of the species with the types for comparison along with the 

 literature. 



Lachnosterna is certainly one of the most diflicult genera in our fau- 

 na and the correct determination of the species has been rendered uncer- 

 tain by the large proportion described from uniques. 



For more than twenty years I have had in mind a careful study of 

 the genus and have allowed no opportunity to escape that would add to 

 the material on hand and many a time in the slow accumulation my 

 Lachnosterna boxes have served as a relaxation when other work has 

 been burdensome. 



While on a visit to the Museum at Cambridge during the past Sum- 

 mer I had an opportunity through the kindness of the Curator, to com- 

 pare a selected series from my own cabinet with the types of Dr. LeConte. 

 With this as a basis it became necessary to go over the works of pre\ious 

 authors to verify the determinations and eliminate error as far as possible. 



Entomologica Americana. Vol. hi. 20 Novembkr 1887. 



