THE CANADIAIS ENTOMOLOGIST. 105 



De Selys separated from the great genus Gomphus* as he found it three 

 genera represented in our fauna, Ophiogomphus, Herpetogomphus and 

 Dromogomphus^ and divided the remainder into groups of species. My 

 breedings of the nymphs during the past three seasons in the main con- 

 firm these groups and show that three of them-at least are worthy to rank 

 as genera. 



One of the genuine surprises of this season was the finding here, at 

 Ithaca, of nymphs like those described by Hagen from Rocky Creek, Ky., 

 (Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc, XII., 281, 1885) and doubtfully referred by him 

 to Tachaptryx Thoreyi, and the rearing from them of Gomphus par- 

 vulus, Selys. " This extraordinary nymph combines head and antenn?e 

 of Hagenius with legs and abdomen of Gomphus,'' wrote Hagen in the 

 beginning of his very careful description. The length of the wing pads 

 showed the nymphs not to be young, as Hagen supposed, and made it 

 impossible to consider them as belonging to Tachaptryx, but fhat they 

 should yield this dainty little Gomphine was still a surprise. 



In June and July, i8g6, I bred Gomphus fraternus, Say, in numbers 

 at Havana, 111. The nymphs are exactly described by Hagen (loc. cit., 

 p. 262) as No. 13, G. adelphus (supposition). In May, 1895, I bred 

 Gomphus grasiniellus, Walsh, at Galesburg, 111. These, especially the 

 former, are very near to the typical G. vulgatissimus of Europe. 



' * Nomenclaitiral. — In the case o{ Aeshna vs. Gomphus I have examined the evidence 

 and find it is as follows : Linne included all tlragonflies known to him in one genus, 

 Libellula, Fabricius (1775. Syst. Ent., pp. 420-426) divided the genus into three, 

 Libellida, L. , Aes/uta, Fabr., and Agrion, Fabr., placing under Aeshna, among other 

 species, L. grandis, L., and L. foiripata, L. It is worthy of note that he left /.. 

 vulgatissina, L., in Libellula. Illiger (1802. Magaziii fi'ir Iiisekten kitndc, p. 126) 

 corrected the spelling to Aeschna, merely to accord with its etymology. Latreiile was 

 the first to designate types. He specifies (1802. Hist. Nat. Gust., Ms. Ill , 286) 

 L. depressa, L , as the type of Libellula : L. vulgalissima, L., as the type of Aeshna, 

 and L. virgo as the type of Agrion. With regard to the second, which alone concerns 

 us here, L. vulgatissinui, L., was described and figured by Latreiile uniler the name 

 '■'■Aeshna foiripata, Fabr.," as was shown later by l>oth Hagen and De Selys. Kirby's 

 Catalogue of Neuroptera Odonata (1890) gives the correct synonymy and thus con- 

 tains in itself the evidence which condemns the substitution it proposes. For if 

 the type named by Latreiile for Aeshna was vulgalissima, L., this species having 

 been excluded by Fabricius when he founded the genus, oannot be its type. Leach 

 (181 5. Edinburgh Encycl. VIII. part 2, p. 726, of Amer. reprint) founded the 

 genus Gomphus, with /,. vulgatissinui L. , for its type and placed under AesJina, 

 Fabr., the sole species L. grandis, L. However, Cuvier had previously (1798) 

 characterized Aeshna (as pointed out by De Selys, C. A'. Ent. Soc. Belg., 1890, 

 p. CLXI.) and described under it the sole species grandis, L. This usage has 

 since been universally followed until 1890, and one is glad to find theie is now 

 no reason for change. 



I follow De Selys in using the name Ophiogomphus, Sel., which seems tq 

 have been (juite properly given. 



