112 



it will probably not be far wrong to fix the type locality of saepiolus 

 as the high mountains of Placer and Sierra Cos. Long series before 

 us from Lake Tahoe region, and Nevada Co. show only the brown 

 9 's so that the blue 9 's are either very local or confined to high alti- 

 tudes; this latter theory would be borne out by the fact that in the 

 north of the continent i. e. Northern British Columbia, Saskatche- 

 wan, etc., the blue 9 is apparently the usual and possibly the only 

 one; it is also found in the high altitudes of Colorado (Hall Valley, 

 Silverton) and in southern Utah and White Mts., Ariz. 



The brown 9 form of northern and middle California may have 

 the name rufescens Bdv. applied to it ; it is usually of large size with 

 obsolete reddish marginal lunules ; the $ 's cannot be distinguished 

 from saepiolus $ 's, the width of the dark border being very variable 

 in specimens from the same locality ; the brown 9 extends into South- 

 ern British Columbia and is also prevalent in the Yellowstone Park 

 region. Holland figures a typical specimen as daedalus (PI. XXXI, 

 Fig. 12). 



In the high mountains of Southern California we find a form 

 with very heavy spots in both sexes on the underside, with broad dark 

 border on upper side in $ and with the 9 's rather small and much 

 darker on upper side (usually black-brown) with consequently more 

 prominent marginal red lunules; this has been named hilda by Grin- 

 nell but we fear this name must fall before aehaja Behr, described 

 from the Tuolumne meadows, and compared by Behr to alexis 

 (astrarche) of Europe. Behr mentions both sexes as brown but we 

 imagine he had only 9 's before him as the description can only apply 

 to saepiolus and there is no species of Lycaena known in California 

 with brown $ 's (fuliginosa is not a Lycaena but a Thecla). 



After a careful reading of Behr's description of daedalus we can- 

 not see how it can be referred to saepiolus as has been done by Wright 

 (1. c. PI. 29, Fig. 361). Behr knew saepiolus as he lists it in the same 

 paper and states his aehaja was found flying with this species which 

 is not to be wondered at when we recognize that the name was based 

 on 9 saepiolus; we think daedalus is some aberrant form of icarioides 

 with which it was associated in the first place by Behr himself. 



P. podarce Feld. 



What Wright figures as podarce (Fig. 375) is totally wrong; his 

 figures apparently represent a form of pseudargiolus. 



