266 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol. xxxv. 



maculate to forms with a discal spot and two irregular transverse 

 lines on all wings. 



Expands, 1.32-1.52 inches = 33-38 mm. 



Habitat. — Arizona ; January, May, August. 



Types.— Coll. U.S.N.M., Coll. No. 12029; also cotypes Coll. Rut- 

 gers College and Doctor Ottolengui. 



Only 2 of the 18 examples before me have specific localities — - 

 Phoenix and Nogales — but several of them are dated. There are 13 

 males to 5 females, and the difference between the sexes is conspicu- 

 ous. The females are all very even, but by no means alike, since the 

 ground varies in shade and no two are alike in the relative distinctness 

 of the lines, especially of the s. t. line. In the males the chance for 

 variation is greater, because the median space darkens or deepens in 

 tint outwardly, and because there is a tendency to lighten up the ter- 

 minal area in greater or less contrast to the s. t. space. 



Whether this species is really distinct from rubi is perhaps a ques- 

 tion. It seems so to me at present, judging from the scanty material 

 of rubi now in my hands. As the species stand now, rubiata is al- 

 ways of some shade of dull yellow-brown and has a peculiar dead 

 flat tint. Rubi, on the contrary, is gray, and lias no obvious red or 

 yellow shadings at all. The differences may be racial or geographic, 

 or they may prove merely individual when better material is at hand. 



The spinulation of the middle tibia is sparse and often difficult to 

 make out in the vestiture. The middle femora of the male have no 

 obvious tuftings, and there is no mass of specialized scales. 



The male genitalia are not markedly asymmetrical ; the harpes dif- 

 fer a little in width and outline, but are similar in length and curva- 

 ture. Compared with those of rubi they are distinctly broader and 

 stouter. 



In the female there is not much evidence of modification on the 

 upper surface of the penultimate segment. Beneath, the lobes are 

 similar in size and form, with the opening to the copulatory pouch 

 from the upper inner angle, and mostly from the inner margin. There 

 is very little difference in detail between rubi and rubiata, and such as 

 there is can be better determined by a comparison of the figures. 



PHffiOCYMA RUBI (Henry Edwards). 



1881. Homoptera rubi Henry Edwaeds, Papilio, I. p. 28. 



Gray, tending to smoky. Head concolorous; collar with a black 

 median line: thorax in the specimens before me without markings. 

 Primaries very uniform in tint, without strong contrasts except that 

 the s. t. line is distinctly black. Basal space a little darker to the 

 bund like t. a. line, which consists of geminate, very narrow blackish 

 lines, with the intervals dusky filled. It is preceded by a pale line 



