52 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [Feb., '14 



Legs paler, last femora largely pale; pallidus, submedianus, 

 subaipicalis. 



MATERIAL EXAMINED AND LITERATURE. 

 Gomphus pallidus Rambur. 



Through the great kindness of Mons. Guillaume Severin and 

 Mr. Samuel Henshaw, I have been able to study the classical 

 material of de Selys and Hagen. De Selys' material consists 

 of one male and three females, including the two female types 

 of Rambur. In addition Mons. Severin sent me the single 

 specimen of G. villosipes in the de Selys collection.. For con- 

 venience I have designated these specimens numerically. 



De Selys i, G. villosipes male, a slightly teneral, badly faded speci- 

 men, labelled in de Selys' hand, "G. villosipes $, Philadelphia, Cal- 

 vert.' >!| This is lightly smaller and less robust than Pennsylvania, 

 Ohio, Indiana and Illinois specimens in my collection. However, I 

 believe all represent a single species. 



De Selys 2, labelled, "Gomphus pilipes. Hag. $ ( $ de pallidus.") 

 "N. America.". "Gomphus pallidus R. $ ." 



De Selys 3, labelled "Gomphus pallidus R. $ ." 



of WSs. Drf. Vol. IX, April 1911, Bull. Wis. Nat. Hist. Soc., pp. 36, 

 37, plate IV. "A single male in the Brooklyn Museum, locality un- 

 known.") The type of lentulus is stated to be in the collection of 

 Mr. C. A. Hart, but this is a mistake as the following quotation from 

 a letter of April 21, 1913, from Mr. Hart shows: "As to lentulus a 

 university student captured it, and I attempted to name it. It was 

 badly broken and I attempted to mend it; in so doing I disturbed the 

 genitalia, but as I had already studied these carefully and they seemed 

 unlike anything I had ever seen, I managed to keep them about as 

 they were. The question of the location of the type has come up before. 

 I can only say that it is not in the State Laboratory Collections, so 

 far as I know, and that I have no dragonfly collection." This loss 

 is the more unfortunate from the fact that lentulus, like australis, was 

 not figured, nor were characters for separating them from their 

 closest allies pointed out. It seems to me that australis is probably not 

 closely related to species included under Arigomphus in this paper. 

 The larva of australis (supposition) is known, but it is possibly pal- 

 lidus, since the Illinois specimens, described by Needham and Hart 

 as pallidus, are not that species. 



*[As I never obtained villosipes in Philadelphia, it is likely that this 

 specimen is from one of the Pennsylvania localities cited on p. 245, 

 Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc. vol. xx, with my original locality label 

 displaced. P. P. CAI.VERT.] 



