xxxiii, '22] ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS 17 



Jesseana was usually over the shore-bordering zone of 

 sedges, alighting on stems and leaves, and, when back from 

 the water, on the bare twigs of the burned pines. It is very- 

 wary and difficult to approach, and is a good dodger either 

 when at rest or on the wing. In general habits it mostly 

 resembles L. auripennis. Other species associated with jess- 

 eona were Tramca Carolina, Coryphaeschna ingens, Ana.r 

 longipcs, a Progoinpluts, and Enallagma doubledayi. 



The question whether jesscana might not be a hybrid of 

 auripennis and some other species naturally suggested itself. 

 Libellulas generally are of wide distribution and their habits' 

 as imagoes render them conspicuous. No new species has 

 been added to the eastern North American fauna in over fifty 

 years, and the discovery of an undescribed species in Florida 

 was a great surprise. At first I was inclined to regard it as a 

 hybrid, but on farther study I have abandoned this opinion. 

 Its general appearance, due to wing coloration, at once sug- 

 gests auripennis. Dr. Calvert and Dr. Ris, writing indepen- 

 dently, see something of flavlda in it. but neither attributes this 

 to hybridization and Dr. Ris especially is convinced it is not a 

 hybrid. Dr. Kennedy also considers it specifically distinct 

 and not a hybrid. In its restricted distribution and its sug- 

 gestive synthesis of characters jesscana resembles another drag- 

 onfly in another subfamily which I know well. Macrouiia 

 ivabasJicnsis is known only along two or three miles of the 

 Wabash River near Bluffton, Indiana, where it has been 

 found continuously from 1902 to 1921. In characters it is 

 just what one might expect from the crossing of M. tacniolata 

 and M. pacifica, both of which species, as well as M. illinoicn- 

 sis, occur on the same stretch of river. If wdbashensis is a 

 hybrid it has certainly held its own for at least twenty years. 

 It is possible that failure to record it elsewhere may be due 

 to lack of collecting. This last factor can hardly be used to 

 explain the limited known distribution of L. jesscana. It 

 remains to be seen if jesscana maintains itself and is able to 

 extend its range from the single small lake where it is now 

 known to occur. 



