— 211 — 



lo 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 Coleopleres, p. 115, in which the characters of the laparostict 

 Lamellicorn larvae are analyzed. Strangely enough, this table contains 

 the entirely fiilse 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 wliich have these folds or wrinkles, are de- 

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

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

 XVI) in the unsurpassed figures given by 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 larva? — 

 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 7>o.r, 

 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 Geolnpini and 7'rogiui, it seems doubly 

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

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

 their size and structure most indicated — i. e. the Liumiidcc. And that 

 it belongs to a member of this famil}-, an examination of the mouth parts 

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

 all the laparostict or even pleurostict Lamellicornes heretofore known, do 

 we find 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 so called PUocoma larva. That this, in ray opinion, 

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

 this larva was found deep underground — while as is well known Lucanid 

 larva live in decaying wood — I cannot admit, in view of the fact that no 

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



Note by Translator. This paper Irom the Stcttiner Ent. Zeitschrift for 1883, 

 pp. 436 450 has not attracted the attention it deserved from American students. Dr. 

 Horn urged its pubhcation long since, although he disagrees with the views of Dr. 

 Gcrstaecker. In the Classification and in Heiishaw's recent list the genus still retains 

 its old place. Mr. Rickseckcr's notices of one of the species have added something 

 to our knowledge: of its hi-tory and others of our Pacific Cast friends should be able 

 to complet- the work by finding the real larva of some of the species of the genus. 



J. B. Smitu. 



