408 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1935 



PLATE 13 



(All figures one-half natural size) 



FiGUBB 67. Papilio lairdi, form brucei, from Vineyard, Utah; August 24, 1931. 



68. Same, under side. 



69. Papilio hairdi, form oregonia, from British Columbia ; June 12, 1898. 



70. Same, under side. 



71. Papilio machaon hudsonianus, female, from Kettle Rapids, Nelson 



River, Manitoba; July 8, 1914; type, U. S. N. M. no. 34478. 



72. Same, under side. 



73. Papilio machaon aliaska, from Alaska ; June 29, 1921. 



74. Same, under side. 



75. Papilio zelicaon. 



76. Papilio polyxenes, form americus, from Arizona. 



77. Same, under side. 



78. Papilio marccllus, summer form, from Cabin John, Md. ; Hugh U. 



Clark, July 29, 1928. 



Plate 14 

 (All figures one-half natural size) 



Figure 79. Papilio polydamas polydamas, from Texas. 



80. Same, under side. 



81. Papilio polydamas lucayus, from Bradentown, Fla. ; December. 



82. Papilio philenor var. acauda, from Washington, D. C. ; A. H. Clark, 



May 7, 1932. 



83. Same, under side. 



84. Papilio anchisiades idaeus, from Honduras. 



85. Same, under side. 



86. Papilio areas mylotes, male, Guapetes, Costa Rica ; June. 



87. Same, under side. 



88. Papilio areas mylotes, female, from the Zent District, Costa Rica ; 



"William Schaus, February 1907. 



89. Papilio marccllus, female, early spring form, from Great Falls, Md. ; 



A. H. Clark, May 2, 1926. 



90. Papilio celadon, Chokoloskee, Fla. 



91. Same, under side. 



Notes. — The specimen figured as Papilio thoas nealces and said to be from 

 Arizona (pi. 9, fig. 34, and pi. 10, fig. 42) would appear to be the Brazilian 

 Papilio thoas brasiliensis. There is no reason to suppose that the latter would 

 occur in Arizona. There is probably some mistake in the labeling. Lord 

 Rothschild and Dr. Karl Jordan have called attention to a similar error in the 

 case of Dr. W. J. Holland's figure of the same species. 



The black female of Papilio glaueus from Newfoundland (pi. 12, fig. 65) 

 emphasizes the fact that in Newfoundland this species is represented both by 

 the form canadensis, with both sexes alike, and by a dwarf variety of the 

 southern form ; between the two there are all possible intergrades. 



The author is dubious regarding the origin of the specimen of Papilio 

 celadon figured (pi. 14, figs. 90, 91) ; it probably came from Cuba. 



