'Uif.3 j 
Pechuman — Neotropical ChrysopH 
117 
ti’iaiiKles. First sternite dull yellow with some vague dark 
markings; second sternite dull yellow with a faint indica- 
tion of a dark central spot; third sternite dull yellow with 
a lai’ge median spot; fourth and following sternites fuscous 
with a yellow posterior border. 
(.■erro Pelado, Paraguay (F. Schade), M. C. Z. No. 29080. 
I'aratypes: 1 female with same data as holotype; 1 female, 
A’illarrica, Paraguay (F. Schade) ; 1 female, Aregua, Para- 
guay, 20 September 1915 (Zurcher) ; 1 female, Tucuman, 
Argentina, October; 1 female. Gran Guardia, Territory of 
P^ormosa, Argentina, October, 1952 (J. Foerster). An- 
other female from Villarrica was studied, but since it is in 
])o*)i- condition and differs in several particulars from the 
re.st of the material, it is not included in the paratype series. 
Holotype and two paratypes No. 29080, in the Museum 
i)f Comparative Zoology, Oambridge, Massachusetts; three 
])aratypes in the collection of the writer. 
Variations : The series of specimens varies in length 
from 7 to 9 mm. The pollinose stripe on the frontoclypeus 
varies from a little longer to a little shorter than in the 
holotype. Some of the specimens show some indefinite dark 
sti'eaks on the frontoclypeus and slight darkening around 
the frontoclypeal pits. The denuded area on the lower por- 
tion of the cheeks varies in size, and in color, from yellow 
to black. In two specimens the two pale stripes on the 
dorsum of the thorax broaden anteriorly until they meet. 
In one specimen the dark marking of the second tergite is 
reduced so that the pale lateral triangles reach across the 
dark marking leaving leaving two dark spots near the 
posterior-lateral margins of the tergite. In one specimen 
the pale median triangle of the second tergite does not reach 
entirely across the segment although its upper portion is 
indicated by a paling of the dark marking in that area. 
Comparative Notes: C. patricia seems to be the species 
discussed by Krober (Konowia 4: p. 358, 1926) as uruguay- 
en.'^is. Krober, however, mentioned that his interpretation 
of nntguayensis differed from Lutz’ description of the wing 
pattern of the type. In some undetermined material at the 
Ihiited States National Museum, made available through 
the kindness of Dr. Alan Stone, the writer several years ago 
found a specimen from Buenos Aires, Argentina, which 
