80 



HESPERIIDAE 



Pamphila horus Edw. 



This species was placed in our List next to Lcrema accius A. & S. 

 following the generally accepted idea. A recent examination of the 

 type 2 in the Cambridge Museum shows that it has nothing in com- 

 mon with this species ; the stout antennal club with short point at once 

 separates it generically from accius which has a rather slender club 

 with long bent point. Hants would seem to be best associated, there- 

 fore, with the Pamphila group of genera but until the receipt of a S 

 specimen its exact position is doubtful. The type is a rather large, 

 almost unicolorous brown, specimen, as large as a good-sized attalus 

 or leonardus $ , and may be a melanic form of some well-known 

 species ; the only traces of maculation are semihyaline subterminal 

 spots in the interspaces of veins 2 and 3, and 3 and 4 on the under- 

 side and the usual small costal spots, all of which are however very 

 obscure. 



Atrytgne kumskaka Scud. 



This species, described in 1887 (C. Ent. XIX, 45), has been 

 omitted from our list and indeed from all recent lists except Skin- 

 ner's Supplement to the Diurnal Catalogue; it is based on specimens 

 from Denison, Iowa, misidentified as conspicua Edw. by Scudder in 

 his paper in Tr. Chicago Acad. Sci. I, 336, on Iowa butterflies. Judg- 

 ing by the description the species must be very close to byssns Edw. 

 which, however, we only know from Florida; the $ genitalia of this 

 species, viewed superficially, also shows a close resemblance to Scud- 

 der's figure of this organ ; material from Iowa, however, is much to 

 be desired in order to definitely establish the identity and relationship 

 of this species. 



