79 



tributions, I, #4, pi. VII, f. 20) ; 5 $,6 9, Paratypes, Paradise, Nogales, 

 Huachuca Mts., Babaquivcra Mts., May, June and July; all Arizona. 



FOTA ARMATA form BRUNNEOGRISEA nOV. 



Another color form of F. arntata. The basal area of the primary brown, 

 contrasting with the gray ground. A brown streak usually present from reni- 

 form to apex, some of the brown tinting the reniform. Black streaks con- 

 necting the brown basal area with the orbicular and that spot with the reniform, 

 a long black streak below the cell, present in all males and one female. To 

 keep the type series uniform the females unmarked by black are not made types. 



The contrast between the brown and the gray markings gives this 

 form an entirely different appearance from the typical form. Like 

 form medioalba it apparently represents neither sex, season nor race ; 

 but is considerably less common than the type form. 



Type localities and number and sexes of types: Holotypc S , Paradise, 

 24-30 May; Allot>'pe 9, Paradise, July; 2 $ Paratypes, Nogales, 24-30 May 

 and Paradise, July; all Arizona. 



LeUCOCNEMIS VARIABILIS B. & McD. 



1918, B. & McD., Contr. Nat. Hist. Lep. N. A., IV, #2, 106, pi. XVII, 

 ff. 13-14, Leucocnemis. 



As stated by Barnes and jMcDtinnotigh, this species is extremely 

 variable, showing forms ranging from practically pure white to forms 

 possessing the type of maculation found in L. fuscimacnla. Additional 

 specimens have come to hand, now making the total of thirty-nine 

 before the authors. 



The males are usually mucli more poorly marked than the females 

 but the "Type S " is the specimen spoken of by Barnes and McDun- 

 nough as nearly matching the females. An average male and female 

 are illustrated by the figures quoted above. The average male has at 

 least considerable gray dusting of scales which does not show well hi 

 the photograph. 



Mr. C. A. Hill recently submitted a specimen which is practically 

 immaculate and which he evidently considered a new Grotella. The 

 superficial resemblance to Grotella is quite startling and notwithstand- 

 ing numerous structural differences the genera undoubtedly belong 

 much closer together than they are now placed. (See remarks Vol. 

 V, #1, p. 25, of this work). 



