1930 ] 
Permian Insects of Kansas 
357 
abdomen, as thought by Tillyard, for all the specimens 
with the four wings preserved are in that position. This 
condition, of course, obscures or confuses the venation to 
such an extent that we cannot distinguish satisfactorily 
the fore and hind wings. Two specimens in the Yale col- 
lection are preserved in the position of rest, but both of 
these lack the bases of the wings. When we consider the 
species of Doter, therefore, we must bear in mind that we 
may be describing the fore and hind wings as separate 
species, although from the condition in the Protohymenidse 
we should not expect much difference in the venation. 
From a study of the forty-three specimens of Doter in 
the Harvard collection and the eleven Yale types, I am 
convinced that several of the species described by Tillyard 
are not valid. The data on which I base this conclusion 
follow : 
(1) Dunbari. The true shape of the wing of the 
holotype is not shown in Tillyard’s figure. The basal part 
of the holotype wing was hidden when he studied it by 
a small piece of the limestone matrix. When I removed 
this chip of rock, the whole wing was exposed, revealing 
an outline much like that in Tillyard’s figure of affinis. 
The subcosta is quite clear in the type and is represented in 
Tillyard’s figure, although it is not labeled. The costal 
space is broader basally than shown in the figure. There 
is a distinct cross-vein between R1 and R2 + 3 (R and M, 
Tillyard), although the supposed absence of this cross-vein 
was given by Tillyard as a key character. 
(2) Affinis. The base of the wing of the holotype is 
not very well preserved, but nevertheless it shows a broad 
costal space. I am not sure whether the basal cross-vein 
between Cul and Cu2 is present or not; at any rate, the 
wing is so faintly preserved here that its possible absence 
in the fossil might easily be due to lack of preservation. 
(3) Gracilis. The holotype wing is not so slender as 
shown in the figure; the costal space is broadened basally 
even more than represented. The pterostigmal area is dis- 
tinctly darkened, even more than it is in the type of stig- 
matazans. A careful examination of the holotype under 
