[March 1884. BULLETIN BROOKLYN ENTOM. SOC. VOL. VI. 121 
Remarks and Descriptions of new species. 
There is such a variation in size, color and markings of the Cicindelze 
that I feel rather diffident in venturing to describe a few species as new. 
I am fully aware that size, color and markings do not constitute a specific 
character, but when I consider that our greatest Entomologists have des- 
cribed three times as many as are recognized to day I wonder what 
specific characters they have made use of. 
Say described his scwfelarzs with green head and thorax and reddish 
brassy elytra, then Dejean describes the green variety as rugifrons, the 
black as modes/a and an immaculate green form as wnzcolor, and Halde- 
mann another as Leconfer, and to day everybody agrees that there is no 
specific difference between them except in color. It is not necessary to 
cite more of the numerous instances of this kind, the aspect of our varie- 
ties and synonyms show plainly enough the truth of my assertion. The 
number of our species becomes gradually reduced and that ofthe varieties 
increased and I have no doubt there are some more species which may 
in time be degraded as varieties, e. g. Willistont Lec, a variety of /uleda 
Say, Hentz Dej. a variety of rufiventris Dej.; striga Lec. a variety of 
severa Laf., especially when we consider that “mébata Say and hyperborea 
Lec, are the same species and that decemnofata Say is but a variety of fer- 
purea; 1 would say the same thing about cuprascens, puritana and macra, 
if Dr. Horn had not clearly proved that they invariably differ by the 
shape of the elytral apex from each other, 
Two of my new species show rather a tendency to unite two species 
being intermediate forms. 
Omus ambiguus, n. sp. This species resembles Zeconéec Horn and 
Audouini Reiche; it belongs to my second group, the lateral margin of 
the thorax attaining the basal margin; from Leconte: Horn it differs by 
the shape of tne elytra, agreeing therein with that of Auz/ouzni7, by the bisin- 
uate labrum, by the much deeper frontal impressions, by the smoother thor- 
ax, with hind angles more prominent, by the elytra more irregularly con- 
fusedly punctured, and smoother near the.middle; from a large specimen 
of Audouini Reiche it differs by lateral margin of the thorax united to the 
basal, by much smoother and less confluently punctured elytra and by 
markedlv stouter antenne. 
One male from Mt. Shasta District, Cal., received from Mr. Hy, 
Edwards. 
