EUSATTUS DIFFICILIS LEG. 213 



Elytra evenly, moderately convex; surface very finely and less dis- 

 tinctly punctate, punctures finer than those of the pronotum, becoming 

 stronger with slight rugulosity on the apical declivity. 



Prosternum not strongly punctate, punctures rather close, sparse on 

 the process, which is not margined at tip. 



Abdomen finely, rather evenly and closely punctate, denser on the fifth 

 segment. 



Male. Somewhat narrower ; pronotum relatively broader ; abdomen 

 less convex. 



Female. Slightly broader; pronotum relatively narrower; abdomen 

 more convex. 



Measurements. Length, 10 mm. ; width, 5 mm. 



Type locality. Near Los Angeles, California. Collector, Dr. E. C. 

 Van Dyke. 



Holotype, female, in the author's collection ; paratypes in the collec- 

 tion of Dr. Van Dyke. 



Habitat. Dr. Van Dyke states that it occurs near Los Angeles, at 

 the entrance to the Griffith National Park. 



This is the first instance of finding a Coniontides on the mainland. 

 The characteristics of vandykei are the finer punctuation and less robust 

 facies. Seven specimens have been studied. 



Eusattus difficilis Lee. A large series of this species is before me 

 which was collected at San Diego and Coronado, in 1890 and 1891, during 

 the months of October, November, April and June. Part of the series 

 was taken by Mr. O. N. Sanford and Mr. G. W. Dunn. Casey gives San 

 Diego as the habitat of this species. My series gives an amazing amount 

 of variation in the characters used by taxonomists for the separation of 

 species. Casey considers epipleural characters of generic value and states 

 that Horn goes so far as to give such trivial characters as the margination 

 of the prosternal lobe precedence over the epipleural structure (Proc. 

 Washington Acad. Sciences, 10, 65, 1908). I am discussing here intra- 

 specific, not generic, characters. Margination of the prosternal process is 

 just as valuable in Eusattus as it is in Coniontis, and it is of no positive 

 value in either ; but is helpful in a limited number of species. Are differ- 

 ences only to be considered in the recognition of species, and must a pre- 

 ponderance of resemblances be overlooked with taxonomic acumen? 

 Study a series of Blapstinus, Coniontis, Eleodes, Cryptadius, Metoponium, 

 Telabis, Melanastus, Coelocnemis, etc., taken from a limited area of terri- 

 tory and what are ostensibly the same species ; compare them charac- 

 ter for character, sex for sex. Do they appear to have been cast in exactly 

 the same mold ? Does not the punctuation vary, also the margining of the 

 prosternal process, body form, relative length of the appendages in the 



