APPENDIX SS. 1851 



This is a variety of the preceding, in which the dark scales which accompany the 

 venations of the under surface. are wanting-, and generally destitute of the dark marks of 

 the other form ; the male has sometimes a distinct black spot in the middle of the 

 upper surface of primaries, hut is frequently without it. It was observed and taken 

 in considerable numbers in most places along the route. 



Pieris Prolodicc. 



Pieris Protodice, BOISDUVAT, & LECOXTE, Histoire Generale et Tconographie des Lepidop 

 teres et des Chenilles de I Amerique Septeiitrionale, p. 45, t. 17 (1833) ; Species Geuerai, i. p 

 543 (1836). MORRIS, Syn. Lep. N. Am. p. 17 (1862). 



This is another species of wide distribution, occurring in the Canadas and in all parts 

 of the United States and Territories from the Atlantic to the Pacific. 



The survey captured many examples at Pagosa Springs, along the Rio Piedro, and 

 at other points where it was in abundance, from middle of July to end of August. 



Pieris Occidental ix. 



Pieris Occidentalis, HEAKIKT, Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Philadelphia, vi, p 



133 (1866). 

 Pieris Calyce W. H. EDWARDS, Trans. Am. Ent. Soc. iii, p. 189 (1870). 



A single male was taken July 21 at Pagosa Springs, Colo. Though not as common 

 as Protodice, to which it is nearly allied, it is by no means a rare species in Colorado, 

 California, and Oregon ; its position is between the preceding and the European Alpine, 

 Callidice Esper. 



Genus NATHALIS Bdl. 

 Nathalis lolc. 



Nathalis lolc, BOLSDUVAL, Species General des L6pidopteres, i, p. 589 (1836). 

 Nathalis Felicia, POKY, Mem. Cuba, i. p. 443, t, 18 (1851). 



Nathalis Irene, FITCH, 3d Report 1ST. York State Agr. Soc., snppl. p. 485 (1856). 

 Nathalis Luteolus, REAKIUT, Proc. Ent. Soc. Phila. ii, p. 350 (1863). 



One female, August 8, in Rio Navajo Valley, at upper part of the river. 

 This pretty little insect is found in Texas, Louisiana, Antilles, Colorado, California, 

 Mexico, and Central America. 

 Nathalie is closely related to the exotic genera Idmais Bdl. and Teracolus Swains. 



Genus COLIAS Fabr. 

 Colias Philodice. 



Colias Philodice. GODAUT, Encyclopedic M6thodique, ix, p. 100 (1819). SWAIXHOX (Eurymus 

 P.), Zool. 111. ii, 2d ser. t, 60 (1831). BOISDUVAL &amp;lt;fc LECOXTE, Lep. Am. Sept. p. 64, t. 21 

 (1833). 



Papilio Palceno, CRAM., Pap. Exot. i, t. 14 (1875). 



Zerene Anthyale, HUB., Zutr. Ex. Schmett, f. 307. 308 (1823). 



Colias Huropome, STEPH., 111. Brit. Ent. Haust. i, p. 10. t. 1 (1828). 



Colias Chrysotheme, Nastes et Santes, FITCH, Rep. X. York State Agr. Soc. viii, p. 378 (1854). 



Colias Eriphyle, W. H. EDWARDS, Trans. Am. Ent. Soc, v, p. 202 (1876). 



A number of examples of both sexes, July 21 to September 15, at Pagosa Springs ; 

 along Weemiiiuche Creek to Rio Piedro and at Rio de los Pinos near crossing of the 

 upper road. 



The Colorado examples in some instances are exactly like those found east, while 

 others present some differences, being of a more delicate shade of yellow and having 

 the disk of under side of primaries suffused with pale orange. Some are of a more 

 greenish tint on under surface of secondaries. Examples agreeing with these latter 

 occur in British Columbia, and were described by W. H. Edwards as a distinct species 

 under the name Eriphyle. One of the reasons he gives for their distinctness was that 

 they invariably have the orange spot of upper surface of secondaries present ; two 

 males of the present suite show 110 trace whatever of these orange spots. 



He further says in allusion to Colorado examples: &quot; Mr. Mead brought from Colo 

 rado in 1871 a Colias very close to this (Eriphyle) from Lake Labache, and which in 

 Reakirt s paper on the Butterflies of Colorado (Proc. Ent. Soc. Phil. 1867, p. 14*) is 

 doubtless the one called Philodice. The same form was brought from Montana by Dr. 

 E. Cones, when engaged in the boundary-line commission. For the present I shaH 

 give no opinion as to these, but they seem to me nearer to Eriphyle than to Philodice. 



The examples of Reakirt s above alluded to passed into my keeping ; they are in no 

 wise different from those found in Pennsylvania, &c. ; systematists have created by 

 far too many species of our CoUades, making of every local variety a different species. 



* Should be p. 1,35, not 14, as Edwards erroneously cited. 



