1971] 
Hlavac — A ntenna Cleaner 
55 
is 33 per cent in Hiletus (Figs, io, n), 37 per cent in Nomius 
Figs. 12, 13), 46 per cent in Pterostichus (Figs. 14, 15 ) and 52 
per cent in Plelluomorphroides (Figs. 16, 17 ). In each case the 
posterior spur is located close to or at the level of the most proximal 
clip seta. 
In a few carabid taxa, a large proximal development of the setal 
band has occurred without any movement of the posterior spur. For 
example, SB/Tb is 30 per cent in Trachypachus (Figs. 20, 21 ), 
40 per cent in Metrius (Figs. 24, 25), 55 per cent in Tropopsis 
(Figs. 26, 27), and 58 per cent in Gehringia (Figs. 28, 29). Bell 
(1964) stated that only one tibial spur is found in Gehringia. In 
fact, two small apical spurs are present (Figs. 28, 29) as well as 
a “spinose hair” which Bell thought earlier authors had mistaken 
for the posterior spur. 
The setal band in a few forms differs little in position from that 
of ring setae on the mesotibia (compare Figs. 3, 4, 6, 9). Addi- 
tional modification of the setal band occurs with (Figs. 16-19) or 
without (Figs. 20-28) a proximal shift in the posterior spur. In 
each case, the band is expanded and the tibia is modified in similar 
ways, (compare Figs. 14, 15, with 26, 27). Jeannel (1941) pro- 
posed the terms Isochaeta and Anisochaeta for two taxa based on 
the position of the posterior protibial spur. This arrangement was 
followed by Bell ( 1967) but not by Ball ( 1963) or Lindroth ( 1969). 
Basing conclusions on the relationships of higher categories or sim- 
plistic data from part of a functional system is unsatisfactory on 
methodological grounds. Jeannel’s arrangement is also faulty on 
practical grounds. The spur insertions of the mesotibia and of the 
least specialized protibiae are level or nearly so, i.e., the spurs are 
isochaetous. Yet, Jeannel considered some of these slightly differ- 
entiated forms to be anisochaetous, e.g., cicindelines, Opisthius. 
Figs. 6-31. Posterior (even numbered Figs.), and medial views of cara- 
bid protibiae. Figs. 6, 7, Opisthius richardsoni’, Figs. 8, 9, Carabus nemo- 
rails’, Figs. 10, 11, Hiletus ‘versutus; Figs. 12, 13, Nomius pygmaeus ; Figs. 
14, 15, Pterostichus lucublandus ; Figs. 16, 17, H elluomorphroides texana ; 
Figs. 18, 19, Agra sp. ; Figs. 20, 21, Trachypachus gibbsi; Figs. 22, 23, 
Metrius contractus, Figs. 24, 25, Mystropomus regularise, Figs. 26, 27, Tro- 
popsis mar ginicollis ; Figs. 28, 29, Gehringia olympica; Figs. 30, 31, Platy- 
cerozaena panamaensis. 
Setal aggregations, indicated by dotted lines, limits of antennal channel 
shown with a dashed line. Scale limits beneath odd numbered figs, indi- 
cate width of antennal segment 9. Lettered brackets enclose protibiae of 
the same grade of development; see text for explanation. 
