282 
carolinensis from a nymph at Gatlinburg, 
Tenn., and the collection of a series of 
and adults 
nymphs from the Smoky 
Fig. 49—Nymph of Acroneuria carolinensis. 
Mountains region, the adults of which 
agree perfectly with the types in the Mu- 
seum of Comparative Zoology. 
Because of a lack in the past of definite 
tangible characters for the separation of 
lycorias and carolinensis, the latter has ap- 
peared in literature as a species with a 
very restricted distribution, It is very 
probable that some of the adult records 
given by Needham & Claassen for lycorias 
apply to carolinensis, since Illinois Natural 
History Survey material shows carolin- 
ensis to be present in several of the states 
of the Appalachian region. Since the head 
pattern of Acroneuria adults, within cer- 
tain limits, has some value when making 
InLttnois NaturaAL HisTory SuRVEY BULLETIN 
Vol. 22, Ar 
determinations, an illustration of it is 
given, fig. 48, to compare with similar 
illustrations which I have given for other 
species of the same genus. 
Nympu.—Although Claassen (1931) 
has given a photographic illustration of the 
nymph of carolinensis, under the name of 
lycorias, | think it highly desirable to in- 
clude here the reproduction of a drawing 
of the nymph. A brief description of the 
nymph is as follows: General color of 
body and appendages yellow with brown 
or dark markings as in fig. 49; particular- 
ly important features of the color pattern 
are the arrangement of the light and dark 
areas on the dorsum of the head and the 
banding of the abdominal tergites ; in color 
pattern the nymph is very similar to 
lycorias, but it differs from the nymph of 
lycorias in the lack of anal abdominal gills. 
No occipital transverse ridge on the pos- 
terior part of the head. Maxilla, labium 
and mandibles as in fig. 48. 
The typic series of carolinensis consists 
of two females and one male, No. 11,320, 
from the “Black Mts. VI N.C.> imatie 
collection of the Museum of Comparative 
Zoology. Specimens in the Illinois Natu- 
ral History Survey collection have been 
compared with these types. Through the 
kindness of Dr. Nathan Banks, I was per- 
mitted to clip off the apical abdominal seg- 
ments of one of the typic females, relax 
it and study it in fluid, a procedure which 
enabled me to establish that these typic 
pinned specimens did not possess anal gill 
remnants on the subanal lobes. 
It should be mentioned, at this time, 
that I believe Perla lurida Hagen (1861) 
is the same species as carolinensis, but hest- 
tate to place carolinensis definitely as < 
synonym of lwrida, which would have pri: 
ority, until more information is available 
about the Acroneuria fauna of Georgia 
Alabama and Louisiana. ‘The type © 
lurida is a female, No. 246, in the collec 
tion of the Museum of Comparative Zo 
ology, and bears the data “N, Orlean 
Pfeiffer 1858,” which agree with state 
ments in the original description. Th 
apical abdominal segments of this type; b 
permission of Dr. Banks, were clipped o 
softened in potassium hydroxide, an 
studied in fluid. The subgenital plat 
seems to be almost identical with that 0 
carolinensis, and the lack of any anal gl 
remnants on the subanal lobes is a furthe 
