146 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



10 1. Stnerinthus cerisyi Kirby. — Rather common some years in June 

 and July playing over water just before and after dark, in company with 

 geminaius. 



102. Sa?fiia Columbia Smith, var. nokoffiis Brodie. — What I have 

 listed as Columbia is probably referable to var. ?iokomts, articles on which 

 appeared in Can. Ent., XL, pp. 350-354, and 373-376, Oct., 1908. 

 The types of 7iokomis came from Carberry, Manitoba. 



103. Scepsis fulvicollis Hbn. — Red Deer River, July 5th, 1905, at 

 light. High River (Mr. Thomas Baird). It is probably not rare on the 

 prairies. 



105. Hypoprepia mitiiata Kirby. — Two more specimens from Pine 

 Creek are dated July 22, 1906, and I have occasionally taken others. 



106. Celama cilicoides Grt. — Sir George Hampson so named a speci- 

 men I sent him of the species I listed as pustiilata, the type of which, and 

 of nigrofasciata, are in the British Museum. He figures neither, but 

 figures a female as cilicoides from the Grote collection, which seems 

 browner and less marked than any of my specimens. 



107. Eubaphe i?nmaculata Reak , var. irimaculosa Reak., is the 

 correct name for this form, according to Dr. Dyar. Specimens which I 

 took at Windermere, B. C, in July, 1907, and which he called typical 

 tm?fiacul(ita, have a pinkish tinge, and as a rule less of the fuscous border 

 to secondaries, and sometimes lack the discal spot. One in my Calgary 

 series lacks the border, but none completely lack the spot. In both series 

 the border is sometimes broken into three blotches. A specimen from 

 Stockton, Utah, is quite immaculate. Two from Chicago, sent by Mr. 

 Kwiat, as immaculata, have discal spot, and one or two marginal blotches, 

 but are ochreous rather than pinkish. Specimens received as aurantiaca 

 from the same source are, in the male, more like the Calgary form in 

 colour, but have narrower, darker and more even border, and are smaller. 

 The females are of a more crimson red than the males, or than my only 

 Calgary female. Four Chicago males which Mr. Kwiat sent as riibicun- 

 daria^ are like his aurantiaca males, but immaculate. One is almost 

 exactly like the Stockton specimen, but shorter in wing. The Calgary 

 female and one male have whitish spots below the cell, as in Grote's 

 quinaria, which is referred as a variety of aurantiaca in our lists. A series 

 I saw in Mr. Baird's collection at High River were less maculate than the 

 average of mine. I have met with no more females besides the one 



