Through the courtesy and co-operation of the authorities of the United States National Museum, I have recently been enabled to examine material and to make genitalic slides of a few species of North American Eupithecias not hitherto available to me for study. As a result the correct relationships of certain species have been ascertained and in this connection the following notes are offered. Included are also descriptions of several apparently new species.

While studying some of the smaller coccinellid beetles a method of mounting the genitalia has been developed which can probably be applied to many other groups with slight modifications.

Wilson (1930) has given a somewhat similar method for removing the genitalia from the beetle without the complete destruction of the specimen and mounting them in cardboard rectangles.

As noted below the two North American species described in Syndipnus by workers appear to belong in other genrra. In Europe the gunus is represented by nearly a score of species and has been reviewed in recent years by two writers (1, 2). North American collections contain very few representatives of the genus; after combining the material in the National Collection with that from the United States National Museum, the latter kindly loaned to me by Mr. R. A. Cushman, only thirty-seven specimens are available for study.

The North American species were discussed by Fall (1923), under the name Agaporus Zimmermann (1919: 192) . However, as has been pointed out by Giugnot and F. Balfour-Browne, Agaporus, with Hydroporus oblongus Stephens as its type, is a synonym of Laccornis Des Gozis (1914: 111). Des Gozis proposed Laccornis as a subgenus of Hydroporus, with H. oblongus as the type and only species mentioned.

The following notes concern the four northern species that fall to unicolor (Kby.) in Horn's key to the species of Macrobasis (1885, Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc., XII, 110). These species are more or less confused in most collections, and while all have been described, there remains some confusion regarding their nomenclature. It appears that the name unicolor (Kby.) is preoccupied and that it must be replaced with the name murina (LeC.).

Palpi, vertex, and thorax, fawn colored. Frons with appressed white scales, overhung with long ochreous scales.

Male. Fore wing above, light fawn; finely and uniformly reticulate with purplish black, two or three reticulations widened at the costal third, with the spaces between these reticulations reflecting cupreous and causing this area to appear as an indistinct costal spot; a similar costal spot two-thirds from the base, and one at the middle near the edge of the posterior margin; a small oblong discal spot at the end of the cell.

Barnes and Lindsey in their monograph of the American Pterophoridae mentioned the fact that they had examined a series of a Platyptilia in the Fernald collection from St. George and St. Paul Islands, Alaska, which was scarcely recognizable as P. pallidactyla Haw., but was placed under this species because of the poor nature of the series.

In the course of collecting several nests of Polistes fuscatus Fabricius and P. fuscatus var. pallipes Lepeletier (Hymenoptera, Vespidae), six were found to be highly parasitised by Polistiphaga arvalis Cresson. The female Polistiphaga normally deposits from two to six eggs either on the Polistes larva or in the cell with the larva (oviposition has not heen observed).

Head, legs, antennae and ground color of wings ochreous tan in male, straw color in female. Front and palpi in both sexes reddish. The fore wings subfalcate in the male, falcate in the female. T. a. line very faint, narrow, often obsolete at costa, starts one-fifth out from the base on the costa, runs outwardly oblique to the cell, thence curving usually evenly, sometimes slightly wavy sub-parallel to the outer margin, reaching inner margin about one-fifth out.

This new genus is apparently more closely related to the genus Dolichopsylla Baker 1906 than to any other known North American genus of Siphonaptera. But one specimen, a female, has been collected; however, it is so distinctive that the description of the genus is warranted.

It was with some surprise that the writer encountered a representative of this rare and, until recently, little known genus, from a locality in south-eastern British Columbia. The specimen in question is a female reared at Ottawa, by officers of the Forest Insect Survey of the Division of Entomology, Irom the cocoon of a Chrysopid beaten from Engelmann spruce, Aug. 26, 1938, by Mr. D. N. Ross of the British Columbia Forest Service, in the vicinity of Bayne's Lake, B. C. The adult parasite emerged in the laboratory, Feb. 20, 1939.

The opening of a new highway along the coast from Monterey to San Luis Obispo, California, made it possible to collect in a hitherto rather inaccessible region. In 1938 Dr. Michael Doudoroff of the Hopkins Marine Station, Pacific Grove, California, took near Monterey, a few badly worn specimens of an Incisalia which he believed to be new. Returning the ensuing year in June and following the highway south about thirty miles below Carmel, he stopped near Big Sur, Monterey County, and there, after rather strenuous collecting on the precipitous seaward slopes of the mountains, he succeeded in taking a small series (eleven males and two females) of these butterflies. These he very kindly sent to me for determination.

Since the publication of my revision of the North American species of this genus, the food-plants of the larvae of several species, at the time unknown, have been ascertained. The recording of these, together with a few other notes that have been made from time to time in the course of identification work, form the basis of the present paper.

In my revision of the North American Eucosminae (Bull. 123. U. S. Nat. Museum, p. 172, 1923) I applied the generic name Exentera Grote to a small group of closely related species including improbana Walker (=cressoniana Clemens) and spoliana Clemens. I did this upon the assumption that, in the main, Fernald and others had correctly identified the Grote species. Although I had gone over the Fernald collection at Amherst, Mass., I did not see the Grote types, and assumed they were in the British Museum and so stated in the revision (p. 174).