Dec, '05] ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. 339 



five brief sections are given, the short and interesting diversions are 

 instructive and pleasing, and are what might be termed rafinesque ; 

 where they discuss the subject theoretically they seem curiously unin- 

 formed, but where they reveal the personal observations of the author, 

 they contain genuinely valuable material. 



Twenty-nine new species and varieties are described, and fifteen others 

 previously described, but which have been little known or ignored by 

 previous writers, and here put on a firm basis. 



Del SudioT a specific name was an unfortunate piece of work ; the two 

 words should be connected by a hyphen, and with a small s, or the two 

 made absolutely into one word, which would be much better. 



Lyccena icariodes and dcedalus have certainly had more than their 

 share of trouble at the hands of systematists, but their troubles are not 

 over yet, as Mr. Wright has named both wrongly ; the discussion will not 

 be taken up here, as the writer is working on a revision of the group, 

 which he hopes will straighten things out. 



Lyccena maricopa probably refers to one of the preceding species. 



Lyccena antiacis is wrongly identified, the one Mr. Wright has under 

 this name hoin^ polyphemus Bd. Aniiacis is only found on the sand hills 

 near San Francisco, and is entirely distinct. It is neither figured nor de- 

 scribed in this book, but is closely allied to the one figured as mertila, 

 which is probably the same. The mistake is continued in the description 

 of behrii. 



Lyccsna ntelhnona described as new, is the same as Lyccsna eniigdionis 

 described in Ent. News for last May ; the latter has priority. 



Pamphila chiaspa described as new is the same as Pamphila tecumseh, 

 described from the high Sierras, in Ent. News, January, 1903 ; the last 

 name has priority. 



Pamphila errans probably never was taken in Yosemite ; its record 

 from there is a curious error which has crept in.* The species is an in- 

 habitant of the sea-shore from Santa Barbara to San Diego, a few feet 

 from the water. The larvae feed on grasses. 



The occurrence of Megathytnus neutnoegenii in Southern California is 

 certainly a very interesting fact. 



Nisouiades lacustra is the same thing as Nisoniades callidus described 

 in Ent. News for April, 1904 ; the last name has priority. 



The figures of Thecla spadix are very poor, or do not represent the 

 species at all. It is difficult to tell what species is intended to be repre- 

 sented here. 



Lyccena pheres is not named correctly ; I am not positive yet what spe- 

 cies is intended to be figured here. 



The forms figured as b and c under I.ycce7ia shasla are Lyccena tneli- 

 mona {emigdionis) , forms of it probably. There must be a curious po- 

 lymorphism here. 



Heretofore, eastern men have discussed the position and natural his- 



* Type collected by Dr. Dyar.— H. Skinner. 



