NORTH AMERICAN GEOTRUPINAE — HOWDEN 281 



Dorsally, the iridescence is more pronounced. The ground color is 

 more often brown than black, and the elytral striae are usually deeper 

 in the males than in the females. There also appears to be a vague 

 difference in the slope of the elytral apices, but this is small and quite 

 variable. 



Variation, other than in size and sexual characteristics, is not 

 pronounced. The anterior angles of the pronotum show some varia- 

 tion, but are most often as depicted (pi. 2, fig. 2b). Depth of punc- 

 tures and striae vary within and between the sexes, but the sutural 

 stria is generally evident and unbroken throughout its length, begin- 

 ning at the scutellum. Color, punctures, width of angles of elytral 

 margin, and other characteristics are all quite constant within one sex. 



This species can usually be distinguished by its dark brown color 

 with the pronounced purplish kidescence, the double band of punc- 

 tures completely (in most cases) across the pronotum just behind 

 the straight inner edge of the anterior margin (pi. 2, fig. 3b), noticeable 

 elytral striae (particularly the sutural one) with intervals usually 

 convex, fifth stria represented by a straight regular row of punctures, 

 moderately deep punctures in all striae, and the rather sharp angle 

 between the line formed by a normal curve of elytron and the ex- 

 panded margin when viewed from the posterior (pi. 2, fig. 4b). 



The above description was largely made from a Gainesville, Fla., 

 specimen carefully compared by the author with the fragments of 

 LeConte's type, which included the head, thorax, one elytron, and one 

 male foreleg. It is possible that the elytron (and some of the other 

 fragments) could have come from a female specimen, as the rounded 

 contour of the posterior portion of the elytron matched a number of 

 females and was not quite like the male homotype selected. 



Very few specimens have been taken in the vicinity of Tampa, the 

 type locality. Gainesville specimens from which the description has 

 been made may have constant characteristics differentiating them 

 from the Tampa population. If these difl'erences occur they have 

 been overlooked because of the paucity of specimens from the type 

 locality. From the specimens examined, I believe that the various 

 populations, ranging along the west coast of Florida and inland to 

 Orlando, Gainesville, and Lake City, represent a moderately uniform 

 group. Future collecting from isolated sand ridges should provide 

 much useful and needed information concerning these interesting 

 beetles. 



Until Young's (1950) paper almost nothing was known about these 

 beetles. In his paper Young discusses the distribution and adult 

 habits of the species (here considered two species and one subspecies). 

 Most of the information that has been accumulated by Young and 

 myself concerns the Interlachen, Fla., population herein described 



