8 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. Ill 



Roberts, A. W. R.,, 1919-1928: In these four papers Roberts 

 describes representatives of Agriotes, Athous, and Ludiits { = Corym- 

 bites). All are useful descriptions. However, his principal contri- 

 bution is the excellent detailed morphological study of the larva of 

 Agriotes obscunis (Linnaeus) (1921). This is a well-illustrated, 

 careful study, the head, mouthparts, and spiracles being especially 

 carefully done. It has been a most useful guide to ambitious modern 

 investigators. In his 1922 paper Roberts includes a key to genera of 

 Elateridae occurring in Great Britain. This he adapted from Henrik- 

 sen and it contains little that is new. 



Horst, Albert, 1922 : Realizing the importance of detailed mor- 

 phology, this author has undertaken to supply omissions in Beling's 

 descriptions of the larvae of Elater sanguineus Linnaeus, Ludius 

 aeneus (Linnaeus), and Lacon murinus (Linnaeus), and to describe 

 fully Agriotes obscurus (Linnaeus). The work is rather carefully 

 done, but without closely related species for comparison the author 

 has described in much detail structures that are of no specific value 

 and he has overlooked some of the more pertinent details. Good- 

 sized figures illustrate the gross morphology of the species examined, 

 but important details are lacking. There are no keys. Useful notes 

 on biology are included in the lengthy section on this subject. 



Hyslop, J. A., and Boving, A. G., 1935 : This is an excellent 

 contribution to the morphological literature. Detailed observations 

 are recorded in an orderly fashion and through an appropriate 

 terminology. It is a useful model for future investigators to follow. 

 Unfortunately, several of the figures are too small to reveal the de- 

 tail that they were intended to illustrate. A brief key separates the 

 genera Hemirhipus and Tetrigiis. 



Lanchester, LI. P., 1939: This splendid paper on the mor- 

 phology of the larva of Limonius canus LeConte is probably the most 

 detailed record in the elaterid literature. It is intended as a basis for 

 future comparative studies. The text is illustrated by 16 good-sized 

 drawings, and there is no doubt that the study has been performed 

 with much care. In several instances the author has departed con- 

 siderably in his interpretation of structure, and consequently in his 

 terminology, from that of such workers as Boving, Snodgrass, and 

 Anderson. It is doubtful if this departure has enhanced the value 

 of the contribution. 



