25 



is not nearly so strongly chitinized as the $ clasps, and very possibly 

 much more subject to slight distortion during copulation (it is safe to 

 suppose that copulation had already occurred, as all 9 ? examined 

 showed signs of wear). 



We have given the name iicitmocgcni to those 9 9 which agree in 

 genital structure with the 9 which had been compared with the type ; 

 it is fairly reasonable to suppose that as the specimens comprising the 

 type lot were all taken at the same time and place (See Ent. News, VI, 

 2i8) the association was correct. The other 9 9 we have placed with 

 aryxna. 



We have only two good 9 9 and one very poor one of ncumoegeni 

 before us ; these all correspond with Fig. 4. From such a small series 

 very little concerning the variation of the yellow band can be determ- 

 ined ; the underside and the basal fulvous hairs correspond with the 

 S sex. 



A strange fact and one for which we can offer no solution, is that 

 during the past two summers our collectors in Arizona have sent in 

 many S S oi ncumoegeni but none of aryxna, whilst with the 9 9 

 just the opposite has occurred ; the few 9 9 received belong all to 

 what we have termed aryxna. To some this might be regarded as a 

 proof that we are after all dealing with but a single species ; this 

 would, however, not explain the difference in S genitalia associated 

 with distinct differences in maculation. Others might suggest that the 

 9 has been associated with the wrong S ; how would they then ac- 

 count for the two sexes being together in the type lot? A third 

 explanation would be that the differences in genitalia do not actually 

 exist and are merely creations of our own mind. To this we can re- 

 ply nothing; we have endeavored to approach the subject with an abso- 

 lutely impartial spirit and to depict things as we saw them ; if it can 

 be proved that we are in error we will gladly accept correction ; the 

 attainment of correct scientific knowledge is of far greater importance 

 than the whims and idiosyncracies of single individuals. 



The Claw segment is identical with that of the following species. 



Genitalia. $ . Uncus (PI. IV, Fig. 13) well separated from Teg- 

 umen by a deep lateral incision at base, spatulate, bluntly truncate at 

 apex. Clasp (PI. V, Fig. 5) of fairly even width throughout; Blade 

 upcurved, terminating in a sharp hook, dorsal margin strongly spined ; 

 Proharpe provided with numerous stout spines, slightly narrowing from 

 base to apex ; Lobe rounded apically, slightly ridged on the portion con- 



