NEARCTIC BEETLES MELIGETHES — EASTON 95 



The characters of greatest value are the form of the ovipositor, the 

 shape and size of the antennal club, and the color of the pronotum. 

 The elytra and undersurface exhibit no differences of note, while the 

 variance in shape of the aedoagi, though deemed worth recording, is 

 in practice so slight as to be of little value as a distinguishing char- 

 acter. It will be observed that no reference has been made to the 

 extent and degree of explanation of the sides of the pronotum, a 

 character which has been given prominent place by previous authors 

 but which, in the writer's opinion, is too variable and difficult of 

 interpretation to be of use in diagnosis. 



The variability of both species must again be stressed, and it must 

 be conceded that an occasional example of either will externally so 

 resemble the other that certain determination, unless by means of 

 the ovipositor in the female, will be impossible. 



The question of color variation was considered in some detail by 

 Ext (1920, pp. 35-36), who, by basing his conclusions on the com- 

 bination of black head and pronotum with metallic green elytra, re- 

 garded M. rufimanus LeConte, M. moerens LeConte^ M. califomicus 

 Reitter, and M. viridipennis Motschulsky as synonymous with the 

 aberration dauricus Motschulsky of M. aeneus Fabricius, a form com- 

 mon in eastern Siberia. Ext did not consider M. mutatus Harold at 

 all; since it was regarded as a distinct species it did not come within 

 the scope of the subject matter of his paper. 



The interesting situation now emerges where we have in Europe and 

 western Asia a species (M. aeneus Fabricius) distinct from, yet ex- 

 tremely closely related to, another species (M. rufimanus LeConte) 

 inhabiting North America, with between them in eastern Siberia a 

 form {M. dauricus Motschulsky) allegedly an aberration of the former, 

 yet showing coloring typical of the latter. 



Happily, in the general collection of the British Museum there 

 exist a single specimen (9) labeled "Dauricus Motsch. nov. spec, 

 Dauria," and two (99) inscribed "viridipennis Mot, nov. spec, 

 Dauria," with which may be included one other (cf) bearing the data 

 "motschoulskyi Murray ^ n. sp. (viridiaeneus Motsch.^), E. Siberia." 

 These I have been privileged to dissect and remount, thereby proving 

 them identical with one another. Theu- great similarity to M. 

 rufimanus LeConte is striking. Nevertheless I do not believe that 

 they should be regarded as identical with this species, for though 

 agreeing exactly in color they appear from other characters (including 

 in particular the form of the ovipositor and the shape of the antennal 

 club) to He in an intermediate position between it and M. aeneus 

 Fabricius. 



' No description publislied. 

 309152—55 2 



