Mr. G. Lewis on Histeridai //'O^i Vene~ue/a. 45 



two vertebrge of Meiolania with the same elements of any 

 Pleurodiran. There is a fundamental difference. These ver- 

 tehrce are iypicaJlij Cryptodiraii in Meiolania. 



12. " If Dr. Baiir were acquainted with the structure of 

 the hyoid in the FeloinedusidaB he could not have pointed to 

 the character of the hyoid bones as proving the Testudinoid 

 nature of Miolania.'''' 



The hyoid apparatus of Sternotlicerus niger before me is 

 very different from that of Meiolania. The co])ula and 

 the proximal parts of the third pair of cornua are entirely 

 coossified ; in Meiolania we only have the ossified great 

 cornua, and these show some resemblance to the same elements 

 in ISternotluerus ; but such a similarity is not an affinity. I 

 do not know the hyoids of Pelomedusa. In young specimens 

 of Podocnemis only the great cornua are ossified. 



EXPLANATION OF PLATE VI. 



Fi(j. 1. Atlas of Podocnemis Dumeriliana, frout view, i. 

 Fitj. 2. Atlas and axis of Podocnemis Dumeriliann, from below, -J-. 

 Fi(j. 3. Atlas of Tesfudo jwlyphemus, frout view, -f. 

 Fi(/. 4. Atlas and axis of Testudo po/f/phcmus, from below, -f . 

 Fiff. 5, Atlas, axis, and part of occipital condyle of Meioldrda platjiceps, 

 ^, from below. Tke elements are placed iu the right position. 



e^=intercentrum 1. 

 ^" = intercentrum 2. 

 0= condyle. 

 c = centrum of atlas. 

 c' = centrum of axis. 



New Haven, Conn., 

 April 2, lS<Si>. 



IV. — Notes on the Histeridas take^i in Venezuela hy Mons. 

 E. Simon. By G. Lewis. 



The object of this paper is to enumerate the species of 

 Histeridte captured in Venezuela by M. E. Simon during a 

 journey extending through December 1887 to April 1888, 

 and it will form, I believe, one of a series of memoirs relating 

 to other insects taken by him at the same time. Almost 

 every collection made in the warm parts of America brings 

 to light some curious new form of Histerid, and the present 

 one is not an exception. The Phelister Simoni noticed here 

 is a most remarkable species and one which I only place in 

 the genus with doubt. As, however, I have given an outline 

 of the sternal structure (which differs so much from the 

 structure in Phelister venustuSj Leconte, the type of the genus) 



