INSECTA — COLEOPTERA. 
185 
( Tropisternus) dorsalis, Br., from Brazil; H. Tr. lepidus, Br., from the 
Parana in Entre Rios ; also H. (Philydrus) pallipes, Br., from Monte 
Video ; II. Ph. striatus, Br., from Corrientes ; H. Ph. gibhus, Br., in 
the Parana behind Corrientes ; H. Ph. femoratus, Br., from Corrien- 
tes ; Berosus pallipes, Br., in the Parand in Corrientes ; B. alternans, 
in the Rio Negro. 
Lamellicornes. — Mulsant has published an important work on this 
family ; “ Histoire Naturelle des Coleopteres de France, Lamellicornes, 
Paris, 1842.” Much praise is due to him for his extension of the 
nomenclature, and the attention he has bestowed on the natural history 
of these insects, especially in their earlier states. We have descriptions 
^nd figures of the larvae of Onthophagus vacca, Apjhodius pecari, 
Valgus hemipterus, Borens parallelopipedus, JEsalus scarabceoides, 
and Sinodendron cylindricum. The division, in general, is pretty much 
the same as that of Latreille ; the Lamellicornes are separated into 
the naturally very different Petalocerides and Priocerides, the former 
into the groups of the Copridee, Aphodidw, Trogidice, Geotrupince, 
Oryctesiee, Callicnemice, Melolonthince, and Cetonice, all very correctly 
determined ; but the group of the Callicnemice cannot be maintainable, 
since, of the two genera which compose it, Calicnemis and Pachypus, 
the former appears to me to belong to the preceding, the latter to the 
following group. In the farther division, Mulsant has much that is 
new and peculiar, so that we must often recur to this work. As, how - 
ever, in his systematic researches, he has confined himself to the French 
Fauna, a great part of his divisions will require a wider foundation. 
Every variety should not be granted a peculiar name, for where, then, 
would be the limit of nomenclature ? 
Leon Dufoui* (Ann. d. Sc. Nat. xviii. p. 162, t. 4, 5) has made a com- 
parison of the larvae of Cetonia aurata, and Dorcus parallelopipedus, 
according to their external as well as internal structure, and has come 
to the conclusion that the Scarabceidee and Lucanidee may be divided 
into two families. In the former, the abdominal plexus of the nervous 
system is composed of a mass of ganglions soldered together; in the 
latt», of a chain of knots proceeding from each other. The alimentary 
canal in the former has three collars of blind bags, a large lateral 
caecum, and the gaU vessels ending in numerous windings, closely 
applied to each other; in the latter, the canal has a single collar of 
rudimentary blind bags, a caecum not lateral, and simple gall-vessels. 
He also brings forward many external differences, but which are 
not comprehensive, as they only refer to the C. aurata. It is to be 
desired, that anatomical researches were multiplied. He is not ac- 
quainted with De Haan’s important work on this subject. 
Reiche (Ann. d. 1. Soc. Ent. d. Fr. xi. p. 59) has commenced a 
correct description of the Coprophagi, beginning with the Ateuchidee 
229 
