] 70 [January, 



and the " 9 post cubitals " are not in my mamiscript, but were probably 

 additions by my friend Uhler. The described female type belonged 

 to Mr. Escher Zollikof er, of Zilrieb, and is probably in the Museum of 

 that city. 



In Stett. ent. Z., 1863, p. 373, I stated that A. longipes is not 

 figured in Abbott's MS. in the Brit. Mus., and in Proc. Bost. S. N. H., 

 vol. xvi, p. 350, that it is equally wanting among the insects figured 

 by Abbott, in Dr. Le Conte's possession. But Mr. Escher Zollikofer 

 p'ositively assured me that he received the specimen from Mr. Abbott 

 himself, and, moreover, it was prepared as all others of Mr. Abbot's 

 insects, with arsenical soap on the under-side of the body. A fuller 

 description than in the Synopsis I have given in my notes (still before 

 me) in Yerh. Wien. z.-b. Ges., 1867, p. 5. The description of the 

 male will be found in a forthcoming publication ; its appendages are 

 6 mm. long. The two females from Florida are a trifle smaller than 

 those from Massachusetts. 



Concerning the specimen in the Dublin Museum, there must be 

 an error in Mr. McLachlan's measurements: the hind-wing is said to be 

 51 mm. long, therefore, the expansion of the wings cannot be 125 mm. 

 My Woodsholl specimens have expanse of wings, 110 mm., the Florida 

 females 105 mm. The ante-cubitals vary from 20 — 19, 18 — 16 in the 

 wings of the same specimen ; the post-cubitals vary from 8 — 9 to 11. 



Mr. McLachlan has some doubts about the identity of the Dublin 

 specimen with A. longipes, because the membranule is entirely yellow- 

 ish-cinereous, instead of black with white base. In my specimen the 

 membranule is blackish-cinereous, and the extreme base is white, 

 which colour does not reach the anal vein. Further, in my specimens, 

 the colour of the neuration is black, the costa yellow, in the Dublin 

 specimen the nervures are mostly pitchy-brown, and the network 

 reddish. I have not seen the Dublin specimen, but I think, in a 

 specimen more than 100 years old, which has, perhaps, been subjected 

 to the influence of sunlight, such changes could well arrive, the more 

 BO if the specimen had been a freshly-transformed one. At least, after 

 my experience with equally old specimens, I would not consider these 

 differences as deciding ones. I have also compared a male of A. 

 Jimius with a male of A. longipes, and find the differences exactly as 

 stated by McLachlan. If the genitalia of the 2nd segment should 

 prove similar to those of A. longipes in the Dublin specimen, I should 

 consider them identical. 



Cambridge, Mass. : November, 1883. 



