62 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [Feb., '04 



Notes on some Orthoptera from British Columbia. 



By a. N. Caudell, Washington, D. C. 



The collecting trip to British Columbia made this Summer 

 by Dr. Dyar, Mr. Currie and myself, while generally success- 

 ful, was a dismal failure orthopterologically so far as actual 

 number of species taken are concerned. Less than one hun- 

 dred specimens were collected and over a third of these were 

 Melanopius atlanis. This widely distributed species occurred 

 rather commonly in the valleys visited ; but its congener, M. 

 femur-rubrum, was not often met with in the vicinity of 

 Kaslo, where most of our collecting was done. M. dawsoni 

 var, tellustris and M. fasciatus were also taken, but in limited 

 numbers. The former was raised from nymphs collected above 

 the snow banks back of. Bear Lake at an altitude of about 

 6500 feet on July 29th, the adults issuing on August 12th. 

 M. fasciatus was taken at Mirror Lake, a small lake a couple 

 of miles below Kaslo, on July 17th. 



Besides Melanopius atlanis but one grasshopper occurred in 

 any considerable number, Circotettix suffusus. The first mature 

 specimen of this was taken at Kaslo on July 13th. One spe- 

 cimen belonging to this genus was referable to Kirby's species 

 verruculatus . These two species are very nearly related and 

 will very probably prove to be forms of the same species. 



Camnula pellucida, often so injuriously common in some 

 localities, was seen but twice, a mature female being taken at 

 Kaslo on August 5th, and a nymph on June 24th. 



Of grouse-locusts three species were taken, Tettix gra^iula- 

 tus, T. crassus and T. brunneri. Brunneri occurred in both 

 the macropterous and the brachypterous form. I owe its de- 

 termination to Dr. J. L. Hancock who will later describe the 

 long winged form, which he writes me is new. Crassus has 

 previously been reported only from Michigan, Nebraska, Colo- 

 rado and New Mexico. The single specimen taken by us 

 agrees with authentic specimens of this species identified by 

 Hancock. 



I take this opportunity of expressing my perfect inability 

 to use Dr. Hancock's synoptic tables. They seem carefully 

 prepared, yet the dichotomous method is not con.sistently pur- 



