American Caraboidea 185 



the first, or true horealis, having a larger prothorax, only about a 

 fourth wider than long, with the sides basally becoming broadly 

 and feebly but distinctly sinuate; the second, from Newfoundland, 

 having a relatively smaller prothorax, with the sides arcuate from 

 apex very nearly to the base, becoming just visibly sinuate for a 

 short distance before the more obtuse basal angles; the prothorax 

 in the Newfoundland specimen is fully a third wider than long. 

 Now the species which I named hrtimalis, from W. St. Modest, 

 Labrador, much more nearly resembles the Newfoundland species 

 than it does borealis Schf., but it differs from both of those men- 

 tioned, in the relatively smaller fourth antennal joint, this being 

 shorter than the second joint, while in the two just compared, the 

 fourth joint is distinctly longer than the second, more evidently so 

 in borealis itself. So we are entirely safe in considering hrumalis 

 and horealis as different species, and I think that the Newfoundland 

 species is also valid and still undescribed. 



About a month before my article on Trechus appeared, a genus 

 Thalassotrechus was published by Dr. Van Dyke, founded upon a 

 species called nigripejuiis; this proves to be congeneric with my 

 interpretation of Trechus barharce Horn, as I see from specimens of 

 nigripennis kindly sent me by Dr. Blaisdell; it seems apparent 

 therefore, that Anatrechus Csy., must be placed in synonymy. 

 T. nigripennis is more elongate and slender than my assumed 

 barbarce and has much shorter antennae, but the peculiar coarse 

 elytral punctures are nearly alike in the two, which would make 

 the language of G. H. Horn, in describing barbarce, altogether 

 inexplicable. I am also unable to understand the pin label "Pasa- 

 dena" on my specimen of what would appear to be barbarcB, as 

 received from the collection of the late Mr. Fuchs. As Dr. Horn 

 was usually a careful observer, it is possible that T. barbarce may 

 not be exactly the same as the species which I assumed represented 

 it, and, if the conditions are really as described by that author, 

 barbarce and nigripennis would have to be placed in different genera; 

 it is desirable that the type of barbarce should be again inspected. 



Patrobus Dej. 



The species identified and described by me as tenuis Lee. (Mem. 

 Col. Vni, p. 396), is not the tenuis of LeConte at all, but an entirely 



