130 MISC. PUBLICATION 4 7 0, U. S. DEF1 , OF AGRICULTURE 



Hosts. — The adults have been collected on pitch pine (Pinus rigida 

 Miller), northern white pine {Pinus strobus Linnaeus), longleaf pine 

 (Pinus palustris Miller), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda Linnaeus). 

 This species probably breeds in all varieties of pine, as most of the 

 writers simply record it as breeding in dead pines. 



Notwithstanding the wide area over which this species is distributed, 

 there seems to be very little variation, except in size and color, but the 

 specimens from the northern regions are darker in color than those 

 from the south. The specimens from the subtropical region -of 

 Florida are more strongly shining, more cupreous, a little more 

 sparsely punctured, and the legs and antennae are greener, and at 

 first glance would suggest a different species, but by comparison with 

 the darker forms no differences of specific rank can be found. This 

 may be the species described by Kerremans from Florida as lata, but 

 it is impossible to identify the species from his description. In a few 

 cases the pronotum is widest at the apical fourth, with the sides 

 obliquely converging posteriorly, and the small callosities on the 

 front of the head are absent. Sometimes the prosternum is smooth 

 at the middle, and without a median lobe, and the eighth abdominal 

 tergite of the male is slightly emarginate at the apex. The length is 

 from 7.5 to 13.5 mm. 



Chamberlin (1926) gives the type locality as Florida, which is 

 incorrect, as Gory (1S40) described this species from a specimen in 

 his collection from "Amerique Boreale.'' without giving any definite 

 locality. The name of the species was originally spelled "floricotta" 

 which was a typographical error, but was corrected to floricol-a by 

 Gory on the plate and in his table to the species in the same publi- 

 cation. The specimen from the District of Columbia in the Le- 

 Conte collection labeled "C. floricoJa Gory, calcarata Melsh., 

 femorata Lap.*' is probably the specimen which LeConte compared 

 with the types of Castelnau and Gory in the collection of Count 

 Mniszech in Paris, and from which he recorded his synonymy. 



(52) Chkysobothris adelpha Gemininger and Harold 

 (Fig. 52; fig. US, D) 



Chnjsobothris soror LeConte (not Castelnau and Gory 1837), 1859, Amer. 



Phil. Soc. Trans, (n. s.) 11: 232: Crotch, 1873. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 



Proc. [25] : 90. 

 Chriisobothris adetplia Gemminger and Harold. 1S69. Cat. Coleopt.. v. 5. 



p. 1423 (new name for soror LeConte. not Castelnau and Gory) ; Harold, 



1869, Coleopt. Hefre. v. 5. p. 121 : Saunders. 1871, Cat. Buprestidarurn. p. 99. 

 Clu-i/solotliris femorata Horn, 18S6. Anier. Ent. Soc. Trans. 13: 77-79 (part) r 



Kerremans. 1S92. Soc. Eur. de Belg. Mem. 1: 213 (part) : Fiske, 1902. 



Ga. State Hort. Soc. Proc. 26: 75. fig. 7; Chamberlin. 1926. Cat. 



Buprestidae North Amer.. pp. 150-155 (part) : Obenberger, 1934. in Junk 



(pub.), Coleopt. Cat., pt. 132. pp. 624-633 (part). 



This species resembles femorata very closely but it differs from that species 

 in having the clypeus acutely notched at the middle and not semicircularly 

 rounded on each side, the male genitalia slightly constricted behind the 

 middle, with the lateral lobes equal in length and the lateral spines transverse 

 on each side, the last visible abdominal sternite of the female strongly, trans- 

 versely sinuate at the apex, and the eighth abdominal tergite of the female 

 only slightly depressed on each side of the median carina. 



Lensrth 9-15 mm., width 3.5-6 mm. 



