-19— 



species of the genera, as well as detailed descriptions. The work seems 

 a good one, and Mr. Aaron figures the parts relied upon for specific and 

 generic characters. 



Revision of the Californian species of Lithocharis and allied genera. l]y 

 Thos. L. Casey. Bulletin No. 5, Calif. Acad, of Sci. January 1886, pp. 40. 

 Mr. Casey describes 25 new species from California, of which 8 are 

 referred to the new genus Caloderma; i to the new genus Oligoptcrus, 14 

 to Lithocharis proper, and 2 to the new genus Metaxyodonta. The name 

 Trachysectus is proposed for the eastern L. con/luens, the genus being 

 very briefly characterized. An appendix to the main paper contains the 

 description of the new genus Hesperobium for Cryptobiimi tiimidiim Lee; 

 a table of the genera oi Paederi with the 4th joint simple, and the de- 

 scription of Thvce marginata n. sp. 



On the Cynipidous Galls of Florida with descriptions of new species. By 

 William H. Ashmead. Tr. Amer. Fnt. See, XII, i)p. V to IX. (Monthlv Pro- 

 ceedings) 1886. 

 Studies on North American Chalcididse with descriptions of new species 

 from Florida. By William H. Ashmead, I.e., pp. X to XIX. 1886. 



In the latter paper Mr. Ashmead describes Chain's flavipes n. sp.; but 

 as there is already a species of that name by Panzer, the name must fall, 

 and we pro^iose pa //ipes as a substitute. He also describes Decatoma 

 flavicollis, which name is pre-occupied by Walker in the same genus; for 

 this species we propose the nzmt floridana. He also speaks of the genus 

 Euphdus — it should be Eupledriis. The error is a small one and would 

 not be noticed but for the fact that there is a coleopterous genus Eupledus, 

 and it is po.ssible to lead to some confusion if the correction be not made. 

 Second Report on the Injurious and other Insects of the State of New 

 York. By J- A. Lintner, State Entomologist. Albany. Weed, Parsons & Co. 

 1885. 80. pp. 265. ff. 68. 



Prof Lintner has given us in this report another sample of complete 

 and careful work. Fortunately there was no new pest that required 

 special attention, and the report is made up largely of complete histories 

 ^i'i some of the known pests, that for one reason or the other required 

 attention. The Report is very completely inde.xed, and there is an 

 appendix, containing among other matters a list of papers published bv 

 Prof Lintner during 1882 and 1883. The great majority are in Agri- 

 cultural papers not usually seen by Entomologists and the list is there- 

 fore a u.seful one. 



Society News. 



Brooklyn Entomological Society. March 2, 1886. — Fifteen members 

 present, the president in the chair. The Editor for Vol. J, Ent. Am. in-esented 

 his report, as follows: 



