NOTES ON LYC.ENID.E. 195 



a problem that ha.^. vexed American entomologists for the past half 

 century, r/c, the correct identification of Boisduval's species is at last 

 satisfactorily disposed of. 



Taking Dr. Dyar's list as a basis (Bull. U.S. National Miis., no. 52, 

 1902), I shall offer a few notes on the various species, following the 

 order of the above catalogue ; the material at my disposal is contained 

 in the Barnes' collection. 



Theclin.^. 



Hahroilias tininiis, Rdv. — The generally accepted notion of this 

 species proves correct ; the ground colour on the underside of the type 

 specimens is rather yellower than anything I have before me, which 

 may possibly point to a local form; the species varies considerably m 

 the distinctness of the marginal lunules. 



Tlu'cla bonis, Bdv. — This is at present listed as a synonym of cali- 

 fornica, Edw., and I think correctly so. Unfortunately none of 

 Edwards' types of Lycaenidac in the Edwards' collection (now in the 

 Carnegie Museum at Pittsburg) are marked as such. Under califonuca 

 there are 1 ^ and 2 $ s, labelled "Calif. (O.B.)," 2 <? s, "Wash. 

 Terr. (Morrison)," and 1 5 , " Vane. Is." These all belong to a form 

 with greatly reduced red marginal lunules on secondaries and do not 

 correspond with the original description in this particular, so can 

 hardly be considered as types.' T. cuiiniia, Edw., described from a $ 

 from Nevada (Hy. Edwards), is represented in the Edwards' collection 

 by 1 J , " Nevada," and 1 5 , "Calif.," which are identical with horiix, 

 Bdv. It is possible that Edwards, having lost the true type of cali- 

 fdiitira, or returned it to Dr. Behr, and misidentified it at a later date, 

 redescribed the species under the name of ci/jiuiis. For the present, in 

 any case, the synonymy as given in Dyar's list will have to stand. 



Thecla auretorum, Bdv. — This species is unknown to me ; it is a 

 tail-less form in the 3- sex, apparently closest to tacita, Hy. Edw. 

 Skinner {Knt. News, xxv., 47) lists spadLv, Hy. Edw., as a synonym, and 

 Comstock {Jour. x\. Y. Ent. Soc, xxii., 34) places both tetra, Behr and 

 sj)adi.v, Edw., in the synonymy. I have not seen the types of either 

 species but the original descriptions of both certainly call for something 

 very dissimilar to Oberthur's figure, so for the present I can see no 

 reason for regarding these three names as applying to a single species. 



Thecla fii/lriniia, Bdv. — In the Bull. Brooklyn Ent. Soc, ix., 32, 

 Mr. Wm. Comstock has an excellent article on this species and its 

 allies with which we entirely agree. He lists the synonymy as 

 follows : — 



si/lriniiii, Bdv., 1852. ... ... San Francisco, Calif. 



var. itys, Edw., 1882 Prescott, Ariz. 



var. putnami, Hy. Edw., 1876. ... Utah. 



I have not seen much material from the lowlands of California 

 and have not been able to match Boisduval's type exactly ; specimens 

 from higher altitudes in California tend apparently to a diminution in 

 the size of the spots on underside ; the upperside is quite variable in 

 the amount of fulvous suffusion on secondaries ; the species may be 

 distinguished from californica, Edw., by the fact that the blue patch 



