168 
We have next to notice the fact that the above account of the 
history of this species does not agree with that given by Prof. A. 
J. Cook in his Ingham paper, in which he says: 
“This species is without doubt two-brooded. In March they were 
seen by Mr. Ezra Jones, through whose kindness I have been sup- 
plied with specimens. In April and May they were very numerous. 
The last of May the beetles disappeared. Now, June 19, they are, 
for the most part, in the pupa state, in earthen cocoons, about an 
inch and one-half beneath the surface of the ground. I find many 
full-grown grubs or larve, and a few smaller larve which were 
found to be feeding on the tender rootlets. Certainly in July another 
generation of beetles will come forth. Whether there are more than 
two broods or not, I am unable to state, but shall be able to de- 
termine during the season. I presume they pass the winter as 
imagos, from their early appearance as beetles in the spring. They 
may exist in the winter as pupx, and very likely some do, which 
would account for their scattering along as they do, during the 
season.” 
In my earlier papers on the life history of this species, I followed 
Prof. Cook in his statement that it was double-brooded, not having 
seen, until this autumn, his revised account of the life history of 
Paria in the Report of the Michigan State Board of Agriculture 
already cited. In this he says: 
“This species is either two-brooded, or else the beetles which come 
forth in July and August hibernate, ‘and do not lay their eggs until 
the next spring. * * * Tp July the beetles came forth. That 
these beetles lay eggs again that season is possible, but I think 
they remain until the next season, and do not pair and lay eggs 
until the following spring.’ 
My own investigations had led me to believe, however, that Paria 
was single-brooded, and that the larve and pupz to be found in the 
ground in early spring were those of another species, having no 
connection with the Paria beetles at that time on the leaves. 
Any further uncertainty as to the identity of the conditions oc- 
curring in Michigan and in Southern Lllinois, was dispelled by the 
receipt of Scelodonta, larva and imago, from strawberry fields at 
Lansing, in collections of root-worms and leaf-beetles kindly sent 
me by Mr. C. M. Weed,—the larva on the 25th of June and the 
beetle on the 26th of July. 
Scelodonta pubescens, Mels. 
LITERATURE. 
{Plate VII, Fig. 7; Plate VIIT, Fig. 5; and Plate IX, Figs. 1 and 2.1 
This species has a shorter bibliography than the others, a has 
never before been mentioned as an injurious insect. 
It was described as Humolpus pubescens by Melsheimer, in 1847*, 
and placed by Leconte in the genus Heteraspis of Chevriolat in 1859+. 
This genus was identified with Scelodonta of Westwood, in Hen- 
shaw’s index to Leconte’s descriptions of Coleoptera}, and our species 
* Proc. Phil. Acad. Nat. Sci., Vol. III. p. 169. 
+ Smithsonian Contributions, Vol. XI, 
t Trans. Amer. Entomological Society, VoL IDG Vo PAA 
