528 NEW YORK STATE MUSEUM 



The median labial lobe is very prominent ; the teeth on the edges of 

 the lateral lobes.are obsolete; the lateral setae are eight, and of these the 

 proximal one is a small one; the mental setae are about 13, of which the 

 eight outermost are a series of larger size. There are no dorsal hooks, 

 but there are some coarse hairs on the transverse apical carinae of the 

 segments, and there is a long brush of these springing from the apical 

 ventral margin of the ninth segment; there are no lateral spines, or the 

 merest vestiges of them remain sometimes on the ninth segment: the 

 appendages are all decurved, the inferiors most strongly ; the superior is 

 a little shorter than the inferiors, a little longer than the laterals; the 

 prothoracic spiracles are elevated to the highest point of the body. So 

 unique are a number of these characters, there is no confusing this nymph 

 with the others of the subfamily. 



MICRATHYRIA 



A single species of our fauna is referred to this genus. 

 Micrathyria berenice Drury 



1773Libellula berenice Drury, Illus. exotic ent. v. 1, pi. 48, fig. 3 

 1839 Libellula berenice Say, Acad. Dat. sci. Phil. Jour. 8:25 

 1861 Di pi ax berenice Hagen, Syuopsis Neur. N. Am. p. 178 

 1867 Di pi ax berenice Packard, Am. uat. 1: 311, pi. 9, tig. 3 and 4 

 1893 Micrathyria berenice Calvert, Am. ent. soc. Traus. 20 : 260 (de- 

 scription) 

 1895-97 Micrathyria berenice Calvert, N. Y. ent. soc. Jour. 3:47 and 



5 ; 94 (listed from Thousand Islands, New York and Sheepshead bay, 



L. I.) 



This is a species I have never seen alive. It is said to be common 

 down the valley of the Hudson. Its nymph is unknown. 



LADONA 



Of the three forms comprising this genus, originally described as 

 distinct species, two probably occur within the limits of New York state. 

 In what I have written concerning these hitherto, I have followed with- 

 out question the synonymy as given by Hagen and Calvert, according to 

 which both deplanata of Rambur and j u 1 i a of Uhler are but 

 varieties of e x u s t a Say, not even bearing a varietal name. A. P. 

 Morse has called my attention to some facts which seem to indicate that 

 these three may yet have to be considered as distinct species. I may add 

 that my breedings have furnished farther facts corroborating this opinion. 



Before the '' lumpmg " process began the bibhography of these forms 

 was as follows. 



1839 Libellula exusta Say, Acad. nat. sci. Phil. Jour. 8 : 29 



1842 Libellula deplanata Eambur, Jus. Neur. p. 75 



1857 Libellula julia Uhler, Acad. nat. sci. Phil. Proc. p. 88 



