HENRY SKINNER 205 



Expanse. Male 14 mm., female 15 mm. 



"Smaller than persius. Conspicuous cinereous patch enclosed between 

 vitreous spots of the fore wings— scarcely more than indicated in persius. 

 Lighter gray hue of apical half of fore wing, submarginal row of dark spots 

 recedes less from outer border of lower half of fore wing than in persius." 

 (Scudder, Butterflies New Eng., ii, p. 1462.) 



The following distribution is given by Scudder. London, 

 Ontario; Yellowstone Park; Holyoke Range, Amherst, Andover, 

 Princeton, Boston, Springfield, Cape Cod, Wood's Hole in Massa- 

 chusetts; New Haven, New Britain, Guilford, Connecticut; 

 Michigan (Newcomb). 



Lintner says it is a common species at Schoharie, New York and 

 also gives the following data for captures during the year 1870. 

 Bethlehem, Albany Co., New York, May 16, July 9, 28, August 26, 

 September 9, 14. Centre, New York, July 6. On August 25 and 

 28, five butterflies were obtained from larvae collected atBethlehem. 

 September 9, young larvae were taken. He says there are two 

 annual broods and possibly a third. The transformations are 

 described (Lintner, Thirtieth Report of the New York State 

 Museum of Nat. Hist., for the year 1876; Ent. Contributions No. 4, 

 p. 67). Larvae reared on Aquilegia canadensis. ■ 



Strecker (Catl. Amer. Macrolep., 187, 1878) considered lucilius 

 a variety of persius. 



Scudder quotes Edwards as having reared it on pig-weed iChen- 

 opodium album). He also figures the male in color (Butterflies 

 E. U. S. and Can., iii, pi. 9, f. 4). Ljntner in describing the species 

 gives the following differences between it and persius. "The 

 males of the two species are not Hable to be confounded. In 

 persius the anterior wings are of a uniform fuliginous hue, and conse- 

 quently much less conspicuously marked than those of lucilius. 

 The hyaUne spots are smaller and less constant. Very rarelj^ are 

 there two of these spots present between the median nervules; 

 often the apical ones only appear, and occasionally these are 

 obsolete." 



Beutenmuller (Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., v, 300, 1893) gives 

 descriptions of the larvae and chrysalis, and the food plants as 

 Wild Columbine (Aquilegia) and Chenopodium. 



Lucilius and persius compared. I have never been satisfied 

 that we had two species represented by these names. The records 

 and distribution given for them would seem of doubtful value as 



TRANS. AM. ENT. SOC, XL. 



