THE BROAD-NOSED GRAIN WEEVIL. 21 
at base punctured but neither coarsely nor closely, punctures at apex obsolete, inter- 
vals moderately convex, indistinctly punctulate. Body beneath sparsely punctured. 
Anterior tibize sinuate within. [Horn.] 
The eighth stria, as pointed out by Horn, is slightly oblique and 
joins the seventh slightly behind the humerus. The interval between 
- the ninth and marginal striz is reduced to an extremely narrow carina. 
The union of the seventh and eighth striz is an unusual character 
in the genus Cossonus, but is the usual form in the genus Rhyncolus. 
According to Champion’s table this species may be separated from 
the other three, which he describes, by the elytra being more than 
twice as long as the thorax, with the elytral intervals simply convex 
at the apex and closely punctate. 
Caulophilus sculpturatus Woll. was described from a single specimen 
and Wollaston, when writing in after years, remarked that the type 
was still unique. LeConte,’ writing of the probable identity of this 
species and latinasus, said that, except that the punctation of the 
thorax is coarser in the figure furnished by Wollaston than in the three 
specimens in his collection, he should not venture to declare them 
different species. 
Wollaston compares Caulophilus sculpturatus to the European 
Rhyncolus cylindrirostris Oliv. (=lignarius Marsh.), but structurally 
it differs from this and allied genera. From Phleophagus, with 
which it is most likely to be associated, the genus Caulophilus is said 
by Wollaston * to be distinguished by its linear outline, depressed, 
deeply sculptured surface, and comparatively large eyes and scutellum. 
It differs from indigenous species of Phlaeophagus by only the last 
two of the characters mentioned. It should be stated that it resem- 
bles also Pentarthrinus, a genus closely related to Phloeophagus. 
If, in addition to what LeConte says of the difference between his 
specimens and the figure of the Madeira specimen, we consider the 
likelihood of Wollaston’s find having been a wanderer from some 
merchant ship returning from one of the then Spanish-American 
colonies to the home country, is it not more than probable that we 
have here one and the same species? If a comparison of types should 
prove such to be the case, Say’s name would take precedence, since 
Wollaston’s description did not appear until 1854. 
At present the writer is inclined to believe in the specific identity 
of the Madeira and American specimens, for the indications are that 
the illustration furnished by Wollaston, although attributed to West- 
wood, does not agree, as so often happens, with the description. 
The punctation of the prothorax in the figure is extremely coarse, 
while in the text Wollaston expressly says ‘“‘head and prothorax (espe- 
cially the latter) deeply and closely punctured.’ (The italics are the 
writer’s. ) 
