456 MR. B. p. UVAROV ON THE GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTIOK 



Da,ghestan, since it is not distributed all over this distvict but 

 confined to its eastern parts ; finally, Locusta ccmdata caudata, 

 Decticus verracivorus verrucivorus, and Orphania scutata zacharovi 

 are the typical mountain forms and, doubtless, came to Daghestan 

 from the adjacent mountainous district of Eastern Caucasus. It 

 is evident, therefore, that there exists but very little difierence 

 between the Daghestanian fauna and that of the Kuban-Terek 

 district, and that this difference is of a recent date and of an 

 accidental origin. On the contrary, the resemblances between them 

 are far deeper, for nearly all the chief characteristic steppe forms 

 (such £>s Arcyjitera flavicosta flavicosta, Celes variabilis variabilis, 

 StauroHotus brevicollis) range into Daghestan, but not farther 

 southwards where (in the tSomkheto-Kakhetian district) they are 

 either entirely absent or replaced by other subspecies. Thus, the 

 steppe Arcyptera flavicosta jlavicosta gives place in the Somkheto- 

 Ka,klietian district to the distinct race A.Jiavicosta transcaiccasica ; 

 Celes variabilis variabilis is represented there by the subspecies 

 C. variabilis carhonaria and so on. But the most striking- 

 difference of the Daghestanian fauna from the Somkheto- 

 Kakhetian (resp. Balkano-Ana.tolian and even Mediterranean) is 

 in the negative features of the first : the numerous non-flying 

 Phaneropteridee, which are very characteristic of the Somkheto- 

 Kakhetian fauna, are strange to the Daghestan, where only three 

 of them exist : one Orphania, one Foecilimon, and Leptophyes 

 albovittata — all three not cliaracteristic of the Somkheto - 

 Kakhetian district ; the numerous endemics of the latter do not 

 range into Daghestan at all. 



All the above-mentioned facts lead us to the conclusion that 

 the recent Orthopteran fauna of the Daghestan is in more 

 intimate relation to the fauna of the Kuban-Terek district than to 

 that of the Somkheto-Kakhetian. I think, thei-efore, it should 

 be right to regard Daghestan as an independent zoogeographical 

 district of the Steppe subregion, characterised by the purely .steppe 

 Oi'thopteran fauna with but slight admixture of mountainous 

 forms and of endemics as well as of some "ancient-Mediterianean" 

 species (see p. 452), like Nooarodes serricollis, or an undescribed 

 species of Paradryviadusa, known to me from Daghestan only in 

 females. I think that further investigations of this interesting- 

 district may clear up some details concerning thecompo.sition and 

 origin of its fauna but will not change the views expressed above. 



Turning to the establishment of the boundaries of this district, 

 we can only definitely state the north-western and south-western 

 ones, which coincide with the lower limits of the alpine district 

 of tlie Eastern Caucasus. As for the eastern boundary of the 

 Daghestan it should be presumed to go along the extreme eastern 

 chains nearly pai-allel to the Caspian Sea shore, leaving a narrow 

 strip along the shore itself bearing quite a different Iranian 

 fauna of the district of Caspian Transcaucasia. The most obscure 

 are the boundaries between Daghestan and the districts of 

 Kuban-Terek and of Somkheto-Kakhetia. 



