8 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol.64, 



to make the light bands appear arcuate ; the third light band is much 

 wider at the sides than mesally ; there is a fourth light band, broadly 

 interrupted mesally, its inner ends pointed. Wings not preserved. 



Horizon and locality. — Green River (Eocene) shales, Roan Moun- 

 tains, Colorado, July, 1922; Station 1, near the head of the Ute trail, 

 above Sellers Ranch [John Byram). 



H olotype. —C?ii. No. 69179, U.S.N.M. 



A beautiful specimen, although lacking the wings. It appears 

 to be close to S. umhellatorum Schiner, but considerably larger, with 

 dark scutellum. It is much larger than S. lithaphidis Cockerell, 

 found fossil in the Eocene of Cathedral Bluffs. 



HOMOPTERA. 



THAMNOTETTIX EOCENICUS (Cockerell). 



Eryihronenra eocenica Cockerell, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 57, 1920, p. 246. 

 A second specimen was found by Mr. John Byram at Station 5 

 in the Roan Mountains, Colorado, July, 1922. It differs from the 

 type in having the lower of the pale spots near middle of tegmen 

 absent on one side, and small and round on the other. This is doubt- 

 less only an individual variation. The hind wings are well pre- 

 served, and show the neuration of the Jassini, not that of Erythro- 

 neura. The insect must therefore be referred to Thamnotettix^ 

 a genus with members so similar to the Typhlocybines that Mot- 

 schoulsky (1863) described members of the latter group under the 

 former generic name. The base of the second apical cell of the hind 

 wing is very slender, and very narrowly truncate by a short, hardly 

 noticeable cross-vein. The base of the fourth apical cell is oblique, 

 not transverse, the lower corner more basad. This last character 

 agi'ees with Thagria signata Distant from Ceylon, but in that insert 

 the fourth apical is much shorter and broader. The base of the 

 fourth apical in our fossil is approximately half way between those 

 of the second and third. 



PROTOLIARUS HUMATUS CockereU. 



Mr. F. Muir writes that he believes this can not be one of the 

 Cixiidae (still less a proto-Cixiidae) , but is rather a proto-Flatid 

 or proto-Ricaniid. He considers that my subcostal vein is really the 

 costal, which is in the membrane in many Fulgorids. The true sub- 

 costa is fused with the radius at the base, as my figure shows. Mr. 

 Muir adds that the apparent cross-vein between the media and cubi- 

 tus may be the fourth branch of the media joining the cubitus, as it 

 often does in existing Flatidae. 



