oe 
Neonympha canthus: Worthington 1880:48. 
Satyrodes eurydice: Holland 1931:178. 
Lethe eurydice: Klots 1951:68; dos Passos 1964:99 (No. 
638). 
Illinois records.—Map 95. 
Until very recently, this species and the following, 
Lethe appalachia R. L. Chermock, were regarded as a 
single entity, with the latter taxon a subspecies of the 
former. However, Cardé et al. (loc. cit.) discovered that 
they are actually distinct, widely sympatric, sibling spe- 
cies. Although the same conclusion was reached inde- 
endently and almost simultaneously by dos Passos 
(1969b), the results of his investigation, including his 
taxonomic assignments of the entities involved, differ 
somewhat from those of the former authors. 
Shapiro studied all material in the Field Museum 
and Natural History Survey collections. He found that 
both species exist in the state. L. eurydice, however, 
is much more widespread than L. appalachia; the former 
is locally common in northeastern Illinois, whereas appa- 
lachia has thus far been recorded only from Cook 
County. Only records based upon the material exam- 
ined by Shapiro have been included herein. Records of 
“eurydice” from a number of other localities in Illinois 
were obtained during this study, but they have been 
ignored because it was not possible to check the speci- 
mens on which they were founded to determine their 
true identity. 
Foremost among the biological differences between 
the two species, which initially led to the discovery of 
their distinctness, is their definite restriction to divergent 
habitats. L. eurydice occurs in open sedge marshes and 
meadows, occasionally in dry grassy areas, whereas L. 
appalachia inhabits wooded areas and shrub swamps 
(Cardé, et al., loc. cit.; Shapiro, personal communica- 
tion). None of the Illinois material which was re-ex- 
amined was habitat associated, and thus this useful 
additional confirmation of identity is lacking. Future 
collections of eurydice and appalachia should be care- 
fully labeled as to habitat. 
Morphological differences between eurydice and ap- 
palachia are not great. The genitalia differ somewhat, 
and Cardé et al. (loc. cit.) described and figured them. 
However, color and pattern characters are almost always 
sufficient for the separation of the two species. One of 
the most constant of these is the shape of the postmedian 
lines on the undersides of both wings. In eurydice, these 
lines are jagged and irregular with sharp points, especial- 
ly near the anal angle of the secondaries, whereas in 
appalachia they are straighter and less jagged, sinuate 
rather than irregular. The dorsal ground color of eury- 
dice is pale brown, the ventral somewhat yellowish; in 
appalachia the dorsal ground color is darker, grayish 
or mousy brown, with that of the underside tinged with 
purplish or lilac iridescence. In both nominate eurydice 
and in appalachia, there is considerable contrast between 
the limbal and the basal and discal areas of the dorsal 
primaries; in L. eurydice fumosa, unrecorded from Illi- 
nois, there may be less such contrast, giving these wings 
a more uniform ground color, which is usually darker 
than in L. eurydice eurydice, especially in males. 
L. eurydice is single-brooded in Illinois. The dates of 
capture range from June 14 to August 1. 
Lethe appalachia R. L. Chermock 
Lethe eurydice appalachia R. L. Chermock 1947:32 
(type-locality “Conestee Falls, near Brevard, North 
Carolina”) ; Klots 1951:68; dos Passos 1964:99 (No. 
638d). 
Lethe fumosa appalachia: dos Passos 1969b:121. 
Illinois records.Coox County: River Grove, July 
4, 1950, July 16, 1959, Kistner (FMNH) ; Edgebrook 
[Chicago], July 4, 1913, Wyatt (FMNH); Elmwood 
Park, July 8, 1934, Herz (FMNH) ; Schiller Park, July 
13, 1940, Camras (FMNH) ; Palos Park, July 10, 1948 
Wren (INHS); Glenview, July 14, 1918, Mares (IN 
HS) ; Chicago, July 6, 1913, Gunder (AMNH). 
The recent elevation of this taxon to full specific rank 
is discussed above, and the species 1s characterized_ ir 
relation to L. eurydice. All of the Illinois records quotec 
above are based upon material studied by Shapiro, non 
of which was habitat associated. 
In addition to the pattern characters described unde 
L. eurydice, and those summarized by Cardé, Shapirc 
& Clench (1970), we have noticed that there is occasion 
ally a tendency toward obsolescence of one or more 
the ocelli of the upper side of the fore wings in appala 
chia, which does not seem to occur in eurydice. 
Localities suitable for the occurrence of appalach 
exist in northeastern Illinois elsewhere than in Coo 
County and ought to be investigated for its possib! 
presence. 
Euptychia gemma (Hubner) 
Gemmed satyr 
Neonympha gemma Hibner “1818” [1818]: Plate 4 
(type-locality “Georgia”) ; Worthington 1880:48. 
Euptychia gemma: Holland 1931:179; Klots 1951:7! 
dos Passos 1964:100 (No. 639). 
Illinois records.—Map 96. 
This Lower Austral butterfly (Fig. 3) 1s an esta 
lished resident of the extreme southern counties of I] 
nois. It is local but common where it occurs. We ha 
records of the species between April 24 and October 
Euptychia hermes sosybius (Fabricius) 
Carolina satyr 
Papilio sosybius Fabricius 1793:219 (type-locality 1 
stated). 
Neonympha sosybius: Worthington 1880:48. 
Euptychia sosybia: Holland 1931: 180. 
Euptychia hermes sosybia: Klots 1951:69. 
Euptychia hermes sosybius: dos Passos 1964:100 (1 
645b). 
Illinois records.— “Illinois,” 161%, no further d 
(CM, ex Marloff collection) . 
We suspect that E. h. sosybius occupies the sa 
general range in Illinois as does E. gemma. It is pre 
bly not common and may be overlooked because of 
resemblance to the abundant E. cymela on the wing. 
Euptychia cymela (Cramer) 
Little wood satyr 
Papilio eurytus Fabricius (nec Clerck, nec Linnae 
