THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 105 



A. $ With costal fold. 



a. Stoutly built species, with deeply waved-toothed (tief wellen- 

 zahnigen) hind-wings, and with transparent spots on the fore- 

 wings. 



b. Hind-wings more deeply dentated, or with the margins entire ; 

 fore-wings without transparent spots. 



B. g Without costal fold. Hind-wings slightly dentated. 



a. Club of antennae longer than in the other species, bent behind 

 the middle, and thence to tip much reduced. Male with a 

 trace of the costal fold. 



b. Club of the antennae straight or only slightly bent, rounded 

 at tip. 



This is, after Pamphila, the least homogeneous genus, including species 

 either with or without the costal fold, and which show some differences in 

 the form of the club of the antennae. The Division A. a. differs besides 

 somewhat in habitus, and has therefore been regarded as a distinct genus. 

 Essential differences I have not been able to find ; moreover Proto, in its 

 habitus and expanse of wings, forms a connecting link between it and the 

 other species. If it should be thought proper to give them generic dis- 

 tinction, the older name Carcharodus of Hiibner would be confirmed, and 

 under which he had correctly assembled the species and had sufficiently 

 characterized them. Kirby places here (besides Tethys Men.) one other 

 species from America (Carcharodus mazans Reak.) which is unknown 

 to me. 



Alcece Esp. differs in the form of the club of the antennae from the two 

 next related, and in general from the other species of the genus. The 

 last fifth of the very thick club is (nearly as in Pamph. Alcides) remark- 

 ably reduced and bent backward, and also rounded at the end. Althaea 

 £ has a bunch of hair on the underside of the fore-wings ; Lavaterm has 

 none of these marks, but instead, particu 1 irly large hyaline spots. In the 

 Division A. b. stands the only species of Pyrgus whose tibiae (the middle 

 and posterior) are armed with spines, and those moderately short (e. g. 

 cribrelluiu). I have already mentioned this species as illustrating the 

 small value for systematic purposes of the tibial spines in this family. But 

 they offer a convenient mark for separating cribrellum and tessellum, which 

 are sometimes confounded. Proto connects the group A. a. to B., especi- 

 ally to Poggei, and would, if it had no costal fold, be more naturally placed 



