232 



Natural History Bulletin. 



TABULAR COMPARISON OF LISTS. 



Found 

 also in 

 Alaska. 



Lake Sup... 22 

 Mich. Pen.. 



Ottawa 



Labrador. . . 

 Behring St.. 

 White Mts.. 

 Ft. Simpson. 

 Rocky Mts. 

 So. Alaskaij— .. 

 Stikine Can. '20. . 

 Glenora | 4. . 



14., 

 17. 

 3- 

 I , 



10. 

 o. 



12, 



Found 

 also at 

 Little 

 Canon. 



22. 



14. 



6. 



O. 

 II . 



4- 

 10. 



20. 



!— , 



in . 



Found 



also at 

 Glenora. 



8. 

 6. 



4- 

 o. 



5- 



3- 



16, 



4' 



Percent. 



in 

 Alaska. 



22 . 



14- 

 17. 



3. 



I . 

 10. 



O. 

 12. 



20. 



4' 



Percent 

 at Little 

 Canon. 



37 



25 



23 



10 



o 



18 

 7 



17 

 33 



Percent 



at 

 Glenora. 



42-5 

 20 



15 



10 



O 



12. 5 



7.5 

 40 



10 



27-5 



No. of 

 species 



in 

 List. 



I23I 

 1786 

 1022 



53 



57 



221 



25 

 818 

 118 



71 

 46 



These figures would seem to indicate: 



1. That the fauna of Southern Alaska is less closely 

 related to our alpine, northern inland, or north-east coast 

 faunas than is that of the Stikine Canon or of Glenora. 



2. That the Stikine Canon fauna is more closely allied to 

 that of the North and East than is that of the coast, and 

 about the same as is that of Glenora. 



3. That the chief relations of all three are in the direction 

 of Lake Superior: with larger lists this affinit}^ might turn to 

 the Rocky Mountains, especially in the case of Glenora. 



Regarding the affinities of the faunae of the Coast, the Stik- 

 ine Canon and Glenora among themselves we find: 



4. That one-sixth of the Coast species extend up to the 

 Canon while only one-thirtieth reach Glenora. 



5. That the last-named fauna is much more nearly allied 

 to that of the Canon than to that of the Coast; nearly one- 



1 In making out percentages, this and the two following have been reckoned 

 at 100, 60 and 40 respectively, as several of the Aleocharini are not available 

 for comparison Avith other lists on account of bearing only manuscript names, 

 and of this group not having been worked over in compiling most of the cata- 

 logues consulted. 



