152 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [May, '03 



sandbar in Crabtree Creek, July 10, 1902, and others, ap- 

 parently this species, also seen. Their habits were much like 

 those of Progomphus obscurus. 



[9. Ophiogomphus carolinns Hagen and Needham, 2 '^, N. Carolina, A. 



N. S. I ^ 2 9, N. Carolina, C. U. lot 35, Mus. Comp Zool.*]. 



[10. Tachopteryx thoreyi Hagen. N. Carolina, A. N. S., i %\ 



11. Gomphaeschnafarcillata (Say). . 



A teneral male taken by myself, April 28, 1899, as it was 

 resting on the trunk of a tree in mixed woods, and another 

 not far from the same place, April 25, 1900. Sherman took 

 an adult male, at Raleigh, June 5, 1901. 



12. Boyeria vinosa (Say). 



Homestead, Graham Co., September 11, 1902, by Sherman. 

 [Magnetic City, July 27, 28, 1899, i ^ 2 9 , A. P. W. Ley ; 

 Blowing Rock, one female nymph, July 8, 1898, J. P. Moore; 

 coll. P. P. C.]. 



1 3. Nasiaeschna pentacantha ( R ambur ) . 



One specimen taken flying over a small pool of water, July 

 I, 1902 ; it was quite tame compared with other ^schnids, 

 not being frightened away by several unsuccessful sw^eeps of 

 the net. 



14. Epiaeschnaheros (Fabr.) 



Rather common in late spring and early summer ; very ofton 

 flies at dusk around houses and among shade trees ; occasion- 

 ally enters houses ; has been taken from May i to June 28. 



15. Anax Junius (Drury). 



Our commonest ^schnid ; has been observed from April 22 

 till late in September, but does not become common till August ; 



[* Comparison of these 2 'S in the A. N. S. with the single '^ , M. C. Z., 

 shows that the latter — presumably the individual from which Prof. Need- 

 ham's figures (Can. Ent. xxxi, p. 237, ff. 8 and 17) were made— has the 

 extreme tips of the superior appendages broken ofif, as may also be seen by 

 a careful examination of the specimen, and that the superior appendages 

 are in reality much more sharply pointed in this species than the figures 

 cited show. The 2 (^, A. N. S., further show variations in the width of 

 the interval between the two branches of the inferior appendage and in the 

 shape of the two branches, as they have the interval much wider and the tip 

 of each branch less deeply emarginated than in the % M. C. Z. — P. P. C.]. 



