AMERICAN MACROLEPIDOPTERA NORTH OP MEXICO. 



155 



(Eneis Gigas, Butt., Cat. Satyr. B. M., p. 161, t. 2, 

 (1868); Kirby, Cat,, p, 69, (1871); (C/won. (7.) 

 W. H. Edwds., Butt. N. Am., II, t, 1, Chion., f. 5, 

 6, ?, (1874), 1. c., t. 2, Chion., f. 1, 2, d\ (1875); 

 (Oeneis G.) Scud., Buff. Bull., II, p, 240, (1875). 



Chion. Cnlifornica, JldL, Lq>. Cal., p. 62, (1869); 

 ((Eneis C.) Kirby, Cat., p. 69, (1871); (Chion. C'.} 

 W. H. Edwds., Butt. N. Am., II, t. 2, Chion., f. 

 3-6, (1875). 



C7wYw. Iduna, W. H. Edwds., Butt. N. Am., II, t, ], 

 Chion., f. 1-4, (1874) ; (Oeneis I.) Scud., Buff. Bull., 

 II, p. 240, (1875). 



It is nearer to Aello than any other old-world species. 



There are no possible grounds tor considering Gigas, Cali/ornica 

 and Iduna as distinct species from Nevudensis. Mr. W. H. 

 Edwds. in his Butt. N. Am. dwells at considerable length on 

 what he imagines are many differences of specific value, but 

 which I consider nothing more than the slight differences 

 usually found between different individuals of the same spe- 

 cies. Much stress has been laid by both Scudder and W. H. 

 Edwds. on the shape of the discal band of under side of sec- 

 ondaries in the various species of this genus. To show 

 the fallaciousness of any distinction founded on such a basis, 

 I would say that on one of the seven original examples 

 that furnished W. H. Edwds.' types of Iduna. received by me 

 from Jas. Behrens, the inner edge of this hand is not at all 

 like the figures in W. H. Edwds.' work, but is almost the 

 same as in the figure of Ncvadensis in the great work of 

 the Novara. Farther, Scudder in Proc. Phil. Soe., 1865, held 

 Chryxus and Calais as different species, attempting to prove 

 their distinctness by the different outline of the discal bands, 

 of which he gave figures. Nevertheless, he himself after- 

 wards (though wrongly) united the two, placing Calais as the 

 9 ofChryxus; Calais, however, really is Tayyete, Hub., from 

 which Scudder in same article also separated it by outlines of 

 discal band. This same Taygete, in a long suite of examples 

 now before me, presents as great differences in the outline of 

 the discal bands as is seen between any of the figures of Iduna, 

 Gigas, California! and Nevadensis. In various examples of 

 Uhleri the difference is yet greater ; in some the band is dis- 

 tinctly defined on its outer edge, in others it has no limit, 

 but the marbling continues indiscriminately to the outer mar- 

 gin of the wing. 



The number of ocelli or spots on upper side vary in different 

 examples of the same species very much ; of Norna I have 

 examples with two spots on primaries and none on seconda- 

 ries, with two on primaries and one an secondaries, with one 

 on primaries and one on secondaries, with one on primaries 

 and none on secondaries, and with three on primaries and 

 two on secondaries; of Uhleri one of the types has three on 

 primaries and four on secondaries, the other has four on 

 primaries and five on secondaries, one of which (the sub- 

 apical) is quite small and was overlooked by lieakirt in his 

 description ; other examples have only one spot on primaries 

 and two or three on secondaries. Chryxus I have with one 

 spot on primaries and none on secondaries, and another with 

 two on primaries and one on secondaries. 



Chion. Tarpeia, an Altaian species, has been by some authors 

 placed with the N. Am. fauna, but without doubt erroneous-*, 

 ly ; I do not believe it ever has been or ever will be found 

 to occur in this country ; but as some may feel further in- 

 terested in the matter, 1 here give its nomenclature. 



TAKPEIA, PALL., Reis., I, p. 18, n. 59, (1771) ; Esp., Schmett., 

 I, 2, p. 190, t. 83, (1783) ; Brk., Schmett., I, p. 101, (1788) ; 



