PLATE I 
Fig. 1. MELITAEA ALMA Stkr. Pyramid Lake, Nevada, 6. 
2. MELITAEA ALMA Stkr. Pyramid Lake, Nevada. ¢@ underside. 
3. MELITAEA ALMA Stkr. Pyramid Lake, Nevada. 9. 
4. MELITAEA ALMA Stkr. Pyramid Lake, Nevada. @ underside. 
The specimen figured in figure 1 has been compared with Strecker’s 
type, which is also a 6, and is almost an exact counterpart of this. The species 
has been generally confused with a suffused form of fulvia Edw. with which 
it is very similar, and until we received our Nevada material we had fallen into 
the same error. The specimen figured by Clemence (Can. Ent. XLIV 102, 1912) 
and misidentified by ourselves, is not alma @ but this suffused form of fulvia. 
The best point of distinction between the two species is found on the underside 
of the secondaries; in alma a subbasal black band is more or less indicated, 
being especially strong in the Q’s; in fulvia this band is entirely lacking. No 
mention is made in Strecker’s description of this band but the type ¢ distinctly 
shows the black costal spot and traces of black in the cell. Besides the Nevada 
locality, we also have received the species from Provo, Utah; it is evidently 
the most northern form of the fulvia group and approaches Jeanira in possessing 
the subbasal band. On the upper side the black markings are less developed 
than in the most suffused form of fulvia we have seen, and the pale yellow 
maculation tends to deepen in color and become lost in the ground color; this 
is especially noticeable in the median band and the spots towards base of wing. 
5. MeiTara FULVIA Edw. Santa Catalina Mts., Ariz. ¢ underside. 
6. MELITAEA FULVIA Edw. Santa Catalina Mts., Ariz. 9 underside. 
7. MEGATHYMUS NEUMOEGENI STEPHENSI Skin. La Puerta, S. Calif. 9. 
We would call attention to the much narrower macular band of the 
primaries as compared with the ?’s of the type form. The color of the spots 
is pale whitish yellow. 
