230 NEUROPTERA. 
9, Micrathyria eximia. (Tab. IX. figg. 28-30.) 
Micrathyria eximia, Kirby, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. (6) xix. p. 609, t. 13. fig. 4 (not 3 as stated 
in the text and in the explanation of the plate) (entire insect ¢) (1897) °. 
The present specimens agree well with Mr. Kirby’s description’; their essential characters have been given 
on page 223. In both sexes the pale antehumeral stripe does not reach upward to the antealar sinus 
nor to the pale transverse line in front of the sinus. The dark stripe on the obsolete first lateral thoracic 
suture is forked in its upper half, the anterior branch of the fork uniting with the dark stripe which, 
below, borders the lower half of the humeral suture. A dark metepimeral stripe is well-developed. The 
pale markings on abdominal segments 1-7 of the female are longer and wider than in the male. 
Hab. GuatemMaLa, Puerto Barrios (Hine, O. S. U.: 2 6); Panama, David (Cham- 
pion: 1 2 ).—Braztt, Para !, Obydos 1. 
Taken March 6, 1905, at Puerto Barrios, Feb. 2 at Obydos!. 
NEPHEPELTIA *. 
Nephepeltia, Kirby, Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond. xii. pp. 259, 310 (1889) '; Cat. Odon. p. 44 (1890) *. 
Neothemis, Karsch, Ent. Nachr. xv. p. 256 (1889) °. 
‘lwo species are known, and may be distinguished as follows :— 
Triangular area on the metasternum with a long (1 mm.), strong, sharp spine; 
front wing with two cells between the internal triangle and the hind margin ; 
third tibia of the male with the spines of the inner and outer rows subequal 
in size and number (15-16 inner, 12-13 outer row). ¢: abdomen 16-17, 
hind wing 18-19mm.. 2. 2 6 1 ew ee ee we ee we we phryne. 
[Triangular area on the metasternum with a rounded tubercle to represent the 
spine of phryne; front wing with one cell between the internal triangle and 
the hind margin; third tibia of the male with the spines of the inner row 
much shorter and more numerous (35-36) than those of the outer row (12). 
Abdomen, f 17, ¢ 15; hind wing, ¢19°5,? 19mm... . . . . . . flavifrons +.] 
* Mr. Champion has ascertained for me that Mr. Kirby’s “ Revision of the Libellulins,” cited above ', was 
published on Aug. 14th, 1889. Prof. Karsch °, J. c. p. 343, gives Aug. 15th, 1889, as the date of publication 
of his paper in which the name Neothemis was proposed. 
[t [Nephepeltia] Neothemis flavifrons, Karsch, J. ¢.? 
Nannothemis prodita, Hagen, Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. xviii. p. 94 (1875) (no description; gives Nannophya 
inermis, Selys, no description, as a synonym). 
I have Hagen’s two specimens, from the M.C. Z. before me: a ¢ labelled “ Bres” and “ Nannophya 
inermis, DS.,” in de Selys’s hand, and a @ labelled “ W. prodita, Hag., Pernambuco (NV. dubia, Hag.),” in 
Hagen’s hand. Karsch’s unique ¢ type came from Lambare, Paraguay, and was captured by Rohde. 
The Brazilian specimens differ from the description * in having the inner limb of the broken, or angulated, 
anterior side of the discoidal triangle of the front wing at least twice as long as the outer limb, which was 
probably not the meaning of the “ etwas ungleichschenkelig” of Prof. Karsch ; a faint yellow tinge on the 
extreme bases of the wings, more extended on the hind pair, where it reaches to the first antecubital (¢), or 
submedian cross-vein (@ ). . 
Q. Metallic colour on frons superiorly and on vertex less brilliant, thorax blackish-brown with a pale 
