1988] 
Carpenter — Gayellini 
233 
Paramasaris brasiliensis Giordani Soika 
P. brasiliensis Giordani Soika, 1974: 105, 9(5 (type 9 MCZ) 
— “Brasile: Nova Teutonia, Santa Catarina.” 
Giordani Soika cited the holotype and allotype as deposited in the 
USNM, but both are in fact in the MCZ, along with the paratype 
collected on 1-1967. I have seen additional specimens, both in the 
collection of UCD, from “Brazil: Nova Teutonia, Santa Catarina, I 
1965 (F. Plaumann)”; and “Argentina: Haut Parana, Thu-Cuare 
pres San Ignacio, 191 1 (E. R. Wagner)” 
Paramasaris cupreus Giordani Soika 
P. cupreus Giordani Soika, 1974: 106, 9 (BMNH) — “Columbia: 
Caqueta, Florencia, 480 m,” 
Besides the holotype one of the paratypes mentioned by Giordani 
Soika is in the British Museum. New localities in Colombia include: 
“Putumayo, Mocoa, 30. X. 1974 (M. Cooper)” now in the MCZ; 
“Dept. Magdalena, Socorpa Mission, Sierra de Perija, VIII. 5- 
25.1968 (Borys Malkin)” 3 9 AMNH and MCZ. One of the Mag- 
dalena specimens is labelled 4 i500m.” The specimen from Mocoa 
has a label reading “collecting mud in forest.” I have also seen a 
specimen from “Peru: Loreto, Pucallpa 10. iv. 1965 (J. M. Schunke)” 
BMNH. 
Giordani Soika (1974) alluded to various differences in sculpture 
between cupreus and fuscipennis in his description, but several of 
these do not hold up in the additional material I have seen. The 
pronotal carina and tergal punctation are similar in most specimens, 
and the clypeus is not more narrowly emarginate in cupreus . The 
finer and sparser punctation on the dorsum of the mesosoma in 
cupreus is usually consistent, particularly the pronotum, but one of 
the Magdalena specimens has the punctures on the scutum and 
scutellum about as in fuscipennis . 
Paramasaris fuscipennis Cameron 
P. fuscipennis Cameron, 1901: 312, 9 (BMNH) — “Santa Fe Moun- 
tains, New Mexico.” 
Zethoides flavolineatus Cameron, 1904: 94, $ (BMNH) — “Panama 
(Pacific side).” 
