117 



Camp Baldy, S. Bernardino Mts., but we have other specimens from 

 San Diego, Pasadena and Havilah. We have seen no battoides from 

 east of the Sierras and imagine such records refer to enoptes. Wright's 

 description of battoides is quite misleading ; he evidently did not know 

 the species and his statement that it possesses tails is wrong entirely. 

 We figure specimens of both races. 



P. glaucon Edw. (PI. XI, Figs. 2, 5). 



The species was described from $ and 9 taken in Nevada by 

 Henry Edwards; in the W. H. Edwards' Collection the series under 

 glaucon is very mixed, most of the specimens being enoptes pure and 

 simple; a couple of specimens however from Colorado represent a dif- 

 ferent form; there are no Nevada specimens present which could be 

 considered as types, the only ones from this region having, according 

 to the label, been captured by Morrison. In the Henry Edwards' Col- 

 lection in New York under glaucon is a 9 from Nevada which agrees 

 excellently with the original description and which is very probably 

 one of the original types ; the fulvous shading on the submarginal spots 

 on the underside of primaries is present, but not at all strongly marked ; 

 a $ is also in the collection and is certainly the same species, but 

 shows no fulvous shading on primaries beneath, so we would hesitate 

 to call it a type. These specimens agree with the Colorado ones in 

 the W. H. Edwards' Collection mentioned previously and we think 

 without doubt represent the true glaucon; we have the species in series 

 from Utah localities and it apparently represents a Great Basin form ; 

 in the color of the underside it is close to enoptes, but the black spots 

 are rather heavier and the orange band of secondaries much broader, 

 making the species intermediate between battoides and enoptes; 

 according to our series the fulvous shades on the underside of pri- 

 maries are not constant— in fact the majority of our specimens are 

 without them; the $ genitalia point to a close relationship with 

 enoptes. We figure what we consider typical glaucon from Provo, 

 Utah as well as enoptes from Mineral King, Tulare Co. Calif. (PL 

 XI, Figs. 1, 4) and our recently described rita from Arizona (PI. XI, 

 Figs. 3, 6) for comparison. 



Glaucopsyche xerces Bdv. (PI. XI, Fig. 18). 



It has been pretty well proven as we have already stated (Ent. 

 Record 1914, p. 200) that this species occurs in two form i. e. with 

 and without black centers to the white spots of the underside ; typical 



