Metter ttre dae’ deAae bahia fer) ’ 4 raid, 0 ote a Gal | 3 Keine mabthe bed eal é i? iit ¢ ai ¢ A ' Pye roe rrs Sree 2) 8 aie h sit of eg 4 PERNT I aynoynaat 4 CoP EIEN tate St ; 6 dais ace iat ait dedeatiecintetagtat iH ter ares biney tee yt) at: be fae 1) ap nn pisdan it re on Popa tel Bit HaHa Ey Tey ae Rey i it EA Hy ye y soe ae { inte ‘ PE Liese ih - 4 aM. (ieshiet i Pete teo ss Sa Saenee ae itty , . Tesi eis ore Romie fia h ae er bry ty TPE rier Poe Pi) Sah o i 13 UPR ROL. i ’ ; Wy) * PRATHER ae ah Sie Gigiahe wage f , eine 0 18 ate Sa ee = fe By tet ake SES Sees or z' . sat fo orers tod oes vs = rg 4g . < we a My Vp b > i i ws ‘ ’ ian | ‘ng oS ie ( j ‘ae CS aa p 4 rte Baty D : Cee: ‘ Mi ay Ra 0 eee: a CAG) ae hei a f Yh by eee al Paty) ab ; ] Me ENTOMOLOGIST ILLUSTRATED JOURNAL OF GENERAL ENTOMOLOGY. — EDITED BY JOHN T. CARRINGTON, F.L.S. WItH THE ASSISTANCE OF FREDERICK BOND, F.Z.S., F.E.S. J. JENNER WEIR, F.LS., F.Z.S. EDWARD A. FITCH, F.LS., F.E.S. F. BUCHANAN WHITE, M.D., JOHN A. POWER, M.D., F.E.S. F.L.S., F.E.S. * By mutual confidence and mutual aid Great deeds are done and great discoveries made.” Porn’s ‘ Homer. VOLUME THE EIGHTEENTH. 22343 I LONDON: SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, & CO., STATIONERS’ HALL COURT. 1885. “But who can paint Like Nature? Can imagination boast Amid its gay creation, hues like her’s ? Or can it mix them with that matchless skill, And lose them in each other?” Witt1am TxHomson. CONTENTS. NE ALPHABETICAL LIST Avy, J. Mortimer, 262, 293, 301 ANDERSON, Ernest, 327 ANDERSON, JosEPH, 241 ANDERSON, JosEPH, jun., 43, 173, 242, 243, 258, 302, 324, 327 ANDERSON, R. J., 290 ArmorE, Epwarp A., 167, 172 Batnry, G., 316 Baupine, Grorce, 41, 122 Barctay, F. H., 24, 261 Barnard, GEorGE, 160, 248 Brut, A., 293 Benson, Henry, 261 BieNELL, G. C., F.E.S., 152, 247, 248, 286, 303, 326, 327 Bisuop, HK. B., 74, 242 Buaser, W. H., 168, 263, 297, 303, 316 Buanprorp, W. F., 294 Buanprorp, W. F. H., 128 Boprn, C. J., 317 Bonz, G. H. K., 263 Borer, James, 165 Bosrocr, F., jun., 259 Briveman, J. B., F.L.S., F.E.S., 13, 100, 205 Brieas, Cuarues A., F.E.S., 129 Brieut, P. M., 78, 79, 303 Brooxs, W., 290, 297 Campriper, Rey. 0. Picxarp, F.L.S., 249 Capron, E., M.D., F.E.S., 220 Carrineton, Joun T., F.L.8., 79, 108, UB THA) aia, Ils alsiig Use IG 293, 303, 328 CavEe-Brownez, Rey. 8., 260 CHITTENDEN, D., 262 Cuitty, Hersert, 46, 76 Crirrorp, J. KR. 8S: 21, 22, 51, 147, 254, 293, 301, 315, 325 CockERELL, T. D. A., 20, 56, 74, 120, 127, 246, 300 Coox, A. C., 259 Cooxr, Epwarp, 125 Cooper, Bernarp, 217 Cooprr, J. A., 243, 245, 246, 294 CorpEAux, JoHN, 267 Coste, EH, P., 293, 317 OF CONTRIBUTORS. CovERDALE, GrorcE, F.E.S., 48, 112 125, 152, 183, 218, 225 Cratuan, G. E., 262 Crecor, J. P., 294 Cross, Mrs. EnizapetH, 22 Daztr, C. W., F.E.S., 73 Distant, W. L., F.E.S., 146, 289 Druitt, A., 258 Dunnine, J. W., M.A., F.L.S., F.Z.S., F.E.S., 73 Epernu, Dover C., 316 Exuison, S. T., 245 Estowr, GrorcE V., 201 FansHAwe, Lyonrnu, 65, 136, 190 Farren, W., 74 Fitcu, Epwarp A., F.L.S., F.E.S., 13, 100, 205, 299, 300 FowLeR, Rev. W. W., M.A., F.L.S., BY Sea oi: Fox, N. P., 241 Freer, R., 121 Frouawk, F. W., 257, 302 GARDNER, EpmunpD, 266, 267 GARDNER, J., 166, 218 GoLDTHWAITE, OntveR C., 131, 260, 261 Goss, Hersert, F.L.S., F.G.S., F.E.S., 122, 196, 313 GRAPES, Gro. G., 253 Greason, C. S., 52, 118, 150, 165 Haun, C. G., 148 Harpine, Martin J., 51, 147 Harker, Gro. A., 262 Harrison, J., 244 Hawes, F. W., 265, 282 Hint, Lewis F., F.E.S., 241 Hitt, THomas, 73, 193 Hopexrnson, J. B., 54, 76, 122, 266, 322 Hupson, GEorGE VERNON, 30, 153, 168 Hunt, C. B. Horman, 324 Incupaup, Peter, F.L.S., F.E.S., 36, 124, SLL | JAGER, J., 317 lv CONTENTS. Jerrerys, T. B., 121, 150, 244, 316 JENKIN, ALFRED H., 121, 291 Jones, A. H., 293 Joy, Ernest, 241 Kanz, W. F. pve V., M.A., M.R.I.A, F.E.S., 45 Kay, R., 295 Kure, W. J., 262 Kerry, F., 258, 261 Kine, T. W., 262 Lane, Henry C., M.D., F.L.S., F.E.S., 50 Lanspreun, Rev. Dr. Henry, 247 Lrwcocr, G. A., 24 inv We, MED. 51, 77 Lnoyp, A., F.C.8., F.E.S., 302 Lowe, Rev. Frank H., 217 LupeGrovn, THomas, 124 Macuin, WI.LIAM, 246, 264, 301 Macminnan, W., 243, 260 McRaz, W., 294, 296, 298 Marriot, F. F., 299 Maruew, Gervase F., R.N., F.L.S., ASS, 2AO)5) Metpora, R., F.R.A.S., F.C.S., F.E.S., 294 Miuter, H., jun., 262 MircHEetn, ALFRED T., 319 Mourtcn, J. P., 259 55, 169, 173, 245, Nasu, W. G., 243 Nicnouson, Wiuuiam E., 261, 307 Norris, Herpertr B., 258, 303 Nowers, J. E., 317 Pearce, W. A., 268 PrGLER, STEPHEN, 121, 127, 293 Fommumiv (Ce MMA) locliyshs IMtBASL, S58) 194, 264, 300 Portrr, JosepuH, 318 RamspEN, HILDEBRAND, I’ E.S., 10 Raynor, Rev. Ginpert H., 23, 51, 194, 2438, 315 WiloiNe, JOSIbHSE, RenpALu, Percy, 22, 218 Ripine, W. S., B.A., M.D., 1, 287 Roprnson, A., 299 Rosr, Artuur J., 131 Sasrne, E., 48 Sr. Joun, Rev. J. Szymour, 116, 257, 258, 263, 292 Sanprorp, Harry C., 123, 192, 321 Sana, J., 21 Suarp, H., 77, 316, 323, 324 Surenpon, W. G., 315, 318, 323 Sims, G. E., jun., 220 Suapen, Rey. C. A., 300, 323 Sornespy, R. M., 55 Sourn, Ricwarp, F.E.S., 3, 11, 96, 171, 195, 273 Strack, H,, 213 Swinton, A. H., F.E.S., 21 Trro, C. K., 194 THoRNEWILL, Rev. Cuarnes F., 167 Trrr, Grorce H., 241 Tomuinson, J. W., 257 Trimen, Rouanp, F.R.S., F.L.S., F.E.S., PAR, Gy Tristram, W., 259 Torr, J. W., 54, 70, 75, 94, 122, 169, 188, 195, 218 VauGuHan, Howarp, F.E.S., 229 VENABLES, J., 260 Watrer, Rey. Es AY D:D. ELIS aah, (Oy as eadal Watstncuam, Rt. Hon. Lord, M.A., INU GShy Wb4ashy ADA, Gch, teil Warren, W., 126 Wess, H. J., 174 Wetr, J. JENNER, F.L.S., F.Z.S., F.E.S., cil, PAIL, Bll = Wetuiman, J. R., 294 Waitt, F. BucHAnan, ES.) 2 Wuirt ez, F. G., 244 WituiaMs, James T'r1mmMer, 260 Woop, THropore, F.E.S., 261 Woopsrince, Francis C., 162, 259, 299 Wricut, W. H., 88 MED; E-GSe ALPHABETICAL LIST OF SUBJECTS. Abbott's Wood, notes from; 265 Absyrtus, 15 Acherontia atropos, abundance of, in Kent, 72; at Chichester, 243; in Somerset, 243; at Harwich, 258; in Huntingdonshire, 258; larva, 295; at sea, 295; larva producing sound, 301; at Burton-on-Trent, 317 Acidalia virgularia, double-brooded, 51 Aciptilia tetradactyla, 99 Acronycta alni, 194; at sugar, 218; strigosa in Cambridgeshire, 128 Agdistes bennettii in Norfolk, 172 Agrotide, on the identity of certain, 148, 149, 165, 166, 167, 188 Agrotis, on the genus, 94; precox near Cambridge, 262 CONTENTS. Vv Amblyptilia acanthodactyla, 97; cos- modactyla, 97 Anacampsis (Gelechia) albipalpella, 245 Angerona prunaria, on breeding varieties of, 253 Anosia archippus in Cornwall, 290; plexippus, 305, in Cornwall, 291 Apanteles glomeratus, 326 Apatura iris in Hampshire, 284 Aphides, their partiality to strongly scented plants, 173; unusual mi- gration, 254; abundance at Peter- borough, 267; migration of, 303 Aporophyla nigra in Dorsetshire, 299 Appearance of Lepidoptera, unusual dates, 21, 22, 244, 323 Appias andersoni, n.sp., 146 Apterous sawfly, 247 Arctia mendica feeding on birch, 194 ARGYLLSHIRE—Lepidoptera, 229 Argynnis latona (lathonia) at Brighton, 241; pandora, late appearance of, 21; time of appearance, 50 Argyrolepia mussehliana at Deal, 218 Assam, silk in, 213 Asthena blomeri, 263, 300 Attractions for Lepidoptera, 151 Bankia argentula, larve of, 128 BrERksHIRE—Captures in, 266; Thecla pruni, 266; Maidenhead, Ocneria dispar, 243 Bombyx rubi, urtication of larvee, 324 Books REVIEWED :— ‘Russian Central Asia,’ by H. Lans- dell, D.D., 174 ‘Entomologica Americana,’ vol. i., no. 1, 198 ‘Elementary Text-book of Entomo- logy,’ by W. F. Kirby, 199 ‘Highth Report on Injurious Insects,’ by Miss E. A. Ormerod, 221 ‘Transactions of the Entomological Society of London, 1884,’ 269 ‘Handbook of European Butterflies,’ by W.F. de Vismes Kane, M.A., 304 Bournemouth, local list of insects, 79 Bryophila alge, 122; par in Cam- bridge, 128 Burton-on-Trent and neighbourhood, Lepidoptera of, 177, 208, 231 “By mutual confidence and mutual aid,” 78 Callimorpha hera in Devon, 297, 317 CAMBRIDGESHIRE —Acronycta strigosa, 128; Agrotis precox, 262; Bryophila par, 128 Campoplex, 15 Casinaria, 103 Catocala fraxini in Hyde Park, 318 Cheerocampa celerio at Retiord, 121, 298 ; at Berkeley, 165; in Surrey, 260; at Cromer, 261; at Lewes, 261; at Dovercourt, 259; at Pevensey, 259 ; at Ramsgate, 261; in London, 261; at Christchurch, 262; at Crosby, 262; in N. Wales, 262; at Holm- wood, 262; at Felixstowe, 262; at Ealing, 293; in Essex, 294; at Folkestone, 294; at Bournemouth, 294; in Devonshire, 294; at Ply- mouth, 294; in Sussex, 275, 316; at Andover, 300; nerii at Hartle- pool, 218 Charagia virescens, life-history of, 30 Charops, 100 Choleva spadicea near Nottingham, 124 Cidaria flavicincta, double-brooded, 22 Cleoceris (Hpunda) viminalis, 244 Cnemidophorus rhododactylus, 96; life-history of, 275 Coccyx scopariana, 266 Coleophora artimesiella, 55; bilinea- tella, 228; saturatella, 229; spar- tiella, 228; tinctoriella, 225, 228: vibicigerella, 246 Coleophore, notes on, 55 Coleoptera, notes on capture and pre- servation:—I. Apparatus, collect- ing in winter, 65. II. Killing and preserving, 136. III. Collecting in summer and autumn, 190 Colias edusa, economy of, 21; at Ware, 241; near Lyndhurst and Seven- oaks, 241; at Chichester, 243; plentiful at Frome, 257; near Newark, 257; near Cudham, 257; abundant in North Kent, 293; in North Devon, 293; at Lyme Regis, 294; abundant in Ireland, 322; in Sussex, 316; and C. hyale, 316; helice at Chichester, 258 Corx—Lepidoptera in Co., 123; notes from, 192 Cornwatyt — Anosia archippus, 290, plexippus, 291, Deiopeia pulchella, 121, notes from, 287, Polia xantho- mista, 287 Crambus alpinellus in Norfolk, 172; myellus in Glen Tilt, 245 Cucullia artemisiz added to the British fauna, 290; verbasci, abnormal appearance of, 22 Cymodusa, 100 Dasydia obfuscata im Rannoch, 135 Deiopeia pulchella in Cornwall, 121; at Folkestone, 262 ; in Hampshire, 298 DrrpysHtre—Lepidoptera, 318 DrvonsHirnE—Callimorpha hera, 297, 317, Chcerocampa celerio, 294; at Plymouth, 294; North, Colias edusa, 293 Diptera, leaf-mining, in 1884, 124 Diurni of the Upper Engadine, 307; diminutive, 316 Donacia sparganii, 24 vi CONTENTS. DorsersHirE—Anosia plexippus, 305, Aporophila nigra, 299, Gonepteryx rhamni, 21, 73, lLycena argiades (n. Brit. sp.), 249, Vanessa antiopa, 293 Dryinus formicarius at Shiere, 220 Duruam — Hartlepool, Chcwrocampa nerii, 218 Enromonogicat Societies. - Cambridge, 128; North Kent, 174; London, royal charter for, 237; South London, 268, 328; Haggerston, 327 ‘Entomologist’ List, 10 Ephippiphora obscurana, 173 Epischnia farrella in Norfolk, 172 Erastria venustula, 243 Eremobia ochroleuca Gravesend, 244 Kriogaster lanestris, 121 Eriopeltis festucz, a scale-insect new to Britain, 286 Errata, 24, 56, 79, 152, 303 Essex — Cherocampa celerio, 294, Pyrameis huntera not in (correction), 24: Dovercourt, Sphinx convolvuli and Cheerocampa celerio, 261; Epping Forest during 1884, 88, notes from, 201, Lycena corydon, 242, Pedisca oppressana, 245, Ochsenheimeria vac- culella, 264; Harwich, Acherontia atropos, 258; Walthamstow, Sphinx conyolvuli, 260; Walton-on-the- Naze, Chcerocampa celerio, 294 Euphrasia catena near Nottingham, 167 EKupithecia, collecting the genus, 108, 139; curzoni, 52, 76; linariata, double-brooded, 51; nanata, varia- tion of, 75 Exchanging, 23, 48, 50, 77, 126, 127 abundant at Flies, a pest of, 220 Fossil insects, 196 Fruit v. sugar, 160 Gall collecting, notes on, 173 Gall-gnats, a year’s work among, 36, 311 Geotrupes stercorarius, economy of, 325 GuoucrsTERsHIRE — Berkeley, Cheero- campa celerio, 165 Goniodoma, the genus, 112 Gonepteryx rhamni in Dorsetshire, 21, 73; on pink flowers, 300 Grapholitha (?) cecana, 122; at Deal, 218; discovery of larva, 218 Hampsutre—Apatura iris, 284, Deiopeia pulchella, 298 ; Andover, Colias edusa, 300; Bournemouth, local list of in- sects, 79, Chcerocampa celerio, 294, Sphinx convolvuli, 296 ; Christchurch, Sphinx convolvuli, 258, C. celerio, 262, G. celerio abundant, 296, autumn sugaring, 301; Lyndhurst, Colias edusa near, 241; New Forest, ‘‘ Tres- passers will be prosecuted,” 303, 311, past season, 319, Rhopalocera, 282 Heliothis peltigera in Yorkshire, 264 Hepialus humuli, late appearance, 21; in September, 123 Hermaphodite-Lepidoptera, 168 Herrs—Ware, Colias edusa, 241 Hounrineponsaire—Acherontia atropos, 258 Ichneumonide, introductory papers on, 13, 100, 205 Ichneumons bred, other than from Lepidoptera, 152 Trevanp — Cork, Lepidoptera, 123; South, Lepidoptera, 321 Japanese insects, relation between British and, 325 Kent—Acherontia atropos, abundance, 72, Chcerocampa celerio, 294, Lepi- doptera, 70; North, Hntomological Society, 174; abundance of Colias edusa and Vanessa cardui, 293, re- appearance of Vanessa io, 315; Brom- ley, Lepidoptera in 1883, 20, 56; Chislehurst, Tripheena ianthina, 300; Cudham, Colias edusa and Hre- mobia ochroleuca, 257 ; Deal, Argyro- lepia mussehliana, 218, Grapholitha cecana, 218; Folkestone, Deiopeia pulchella, 262; Gravesend, Hremobia ochroleuca abundant, 244; Greenwich, Myelois ceratoniz, 54; Maidstone, Sphinx conyolvuli, 260; Ramsgate, Cheerocampa celerio, 261; Rother- hithe, Sphinx convolvuli, 259; Seven- oaks, Colias edusa, 241; Sidcup and Footscray, Sphinx convolvyuli, 260; Tunbridge Wells, Tz#niocampa leuco- grapha, 168, Liparis monacha, 263 LancasHireE—Bury, Sphinx conyolvuli, 295; Crosby, Chcerocampa celerio, 262; Preston, stray notes, 266; Southport, Lepidoptera, 300 LEICESTERSHIRE — Leicester, Sphinx convolvyuli, 259 Leioptilus osteodactylus, 99 Light, Lepidoptera at, in 1884, 74 Lighthouses in 1884, notes on insects, 267 Limneria, 104 Liothula omnivyora, life-history, 153 Liparis monacha at Tunbridge Wells, 263 List of insects, local, Bournemouth dis- trict, 79 Luperina gueneei, 54; dumerilii, 54, Lycena argiades new to Britain, fig., 250, in Somerset, 292, note, 293; CONTENTS. vil artaxerxes in Rannoch, 131; bel- largus, 242; corydon in Epping Forest, 242, on Barnes Common, 316; icarus, var. at Rannoch, 133, probably single-brooded in Cork, 192 Macroglossa stellatarum, late occur- rence, 147; at sea, 295 Malay Peninsula, new species of Pierine, 146; new species of My- calesis, 289 Melanic variation in Lepidoptera of high latitudes, probable causes, 82, 122 Melanippe tristata, 244 Melanism in Renfrewshire, 322 Meleana flammea, 241 Melita aurinia in Co. Cork, 123, un- usual altitude, 147, in Argyllshire, shire, 229; cinxia, 217; athalia in Sussex, 265 Microgaster alvearius, 248 Microplitis ocellate, 327 Mrpptesex—Haling, Cheerocampa cele- rio, 293; Holloway, Sphinx convol- vuli, 259; London, Chcrocampa celerio, 261, Vanessa polychloros, 815, Catocala fraxini in Hyde Park, 318 Migration of Aphides, 254, 303 Mimeseoptilus bipunctidactylus, 98; plagiodactylus, 195, life-history, 273; scabiodactylus, 150; zopho- dactylus, 99 Mimiery in insects, 25, 57, 248 Mounting Lepidoptera, 185 Mycalesis ustulata, new species from Malay, 289 Myelois ceratonie, 152; at Greenwich, 54 Naphthaline, 55, 125 Nola albulalis, scarcity, 72 Nomenclature, scientific, 46, 76, 120, and Lang’s European butterflies, 45; natural history, 118 Norroutk — Agdistes bennettii, 172; Epischnia farrella and Crambus alpi- nellus, 172; Cromer, Sphinx convol- vuli and Cheerocampa celerio, 261 NortHAMPTONSHIRE — Northampton, Sphinx conyolvuli, 259; Peter- borough, abundance of Aphides, 267 Notes from my diary, 246, 300 -Notodonta trepida and trimacula in Savernake Forest, 300; bicolor and Sehirus bicolor, 300 NorTINGHAMSHIRE — Choleva spadicea, 124; Newark, Colias edusa, 257; Nottingham, Kuphrasia catena, 167 ; Retford, Choerocampa celerio, 121, 293 Ositvuary — Cooke, Nicholas, 175; Cooke, Thomas, 200; Rye, Edward Caldwell, 79; Smith, Sidney, 56 Ocneria dispar at Maidenhead, 243; os Warwickshire, 263; correction, 303 Ochsenheimeria vacculella in Epping Forest, 264 Opheltes, 13 Ophionide, 13, 100, 205 Oriental entomology, 6, 39, 91 Oxyptilus distans, 89; piloselle, 98; hieracii, 98; parvidactylus, 98 Pedisca oppressana in Epping Forest, 245 Pairing of Lepidoptera of different genera, 150 Paniscus, 13 Papilio machaon at Wicken Fen, 241 Perforated ova of Lepidoptera, 324 PrERTHSHIRE—Glen Tilt, Crambus my- ellus, 245; Rannoch, nine days at, 131 Phibalapteryx polygrammata [not] in Essex, 299 Fhorouery2 upupana near Warley, 24 Phothedes captiuncula, 266 Pierine, new species from Malay, 146 Pieris daplidice, 217 Platyptilia, the genus, 171; bertrami (ochrodactyla), 97, life-history, 279 ; gonodactyla, notes, 169, 195; iso- dactylus, 97 Plusia interrogationis at light, 299 Polia xanthomista in Cornwall, 287 Porthesia chrysorrhea, urticating pro- perties of hairs, 22 Pterophori, British, larve, 96; contri- butions to the history (with plate), 273 Pterophorus monodactylus, 99; life- history, 277 Pyrameis huntera [not] in Essex, cor- rection, 24 Rannoch, nine days at, 131 Reference collection, 127 Reflector, for examining ventral surface of Lepidoptera, 125 Renfrewshire, melanism, 322 Resemblances, protective, in insects, 25 Retarded appearances of Lepidoptera, 323 Retinina turionana, 169 Rhopalocera in the New Forest, 282 Sagaritis, 101 Sawfly, an apterous, 247 Scoparia, the genus, 129 Scythropia crategella, 246 Season, lateness of the past, 21; notes, 319 Vill Sehirus bicolor and Notodonta bicolor, 300 Setting Lepidoptera unpinned, 183 Silk in Assam, the trade, cultivation, and experiments, 213 Silkworms, wild and domesticated, 213 Sirex juvencus, 302; at S. Norwood, 302; at Bognor, 302 Soaring habit of Vanessa atalanta, 51, SoMERSETSHIRE—Lepidoptera, 51, 116, Lycena argiades, 292, Sphinx con- volvuli, 260; Frome, Colias edusa abundant, 257 ; Somerset, Acherontia atropos, 243 Sound-producing larvee, 301 Sphinx convolvyuli, 243, 258, 294; at Chichester, 258, 259: at Christ- church, 258; at Rotherhithe, 259; at Holloway, 259; at Leicester, 259; at Northampton, 259; near Maidstone, 260; near Footscray and Sidcup, 260; at Walthamstow, 260; in Somerset, 260; in Surrey, 260; at Cromer, 261; at Lewes, 261; at Dovercourt, 261; at Bury, Lane., 295; South of England, 295; abundance at Bournemouth, 296 ; in Sussex, 297, 316 StTarrorDsHIRE— Captures in South, 193; Burton-on-Trent Lepidoptera, 177, 208, 231; Burton-on-Trent, Acherontia atropos, 317 Stilbia anomala, larva, 1, 53 Surrotk — Felixstowe, Chewrocampa celerio, 262 Sugar, fruit versus, 160; Acronycta alni at, 218 Sugaring at Christchurch, autumn, 301 SurrEy—Sphinx conyolyuli and Che- rocampa celerio, 260; Barnes Com- mon, Lycrna corydon, 316; Esher, Donacia sparganii, 24; Holmwood, Cheerocampa celerio, 262; Norwood, Sirex juvencus, 302; Shiere, Dryinus formicarius, 220 Sussex—Colias edusa, 316, Melitea athalia, 265 ; Bognor, Sirex juvencus, 302; Brighton, Argynnis latona (lathonia), 241; Chichester, Ache- rontia atropos and Colias edusa, 243, Sphinx convolyuli, 258, 259, Colias helice, 258 ; Eastbourne, past season, 319; Hurstpierpoint, Chcrocampa CONTENTS. celerio, 295; Lewes, Sphinx convolvuli and Cherocampa celerio, 261, 316 ; Pevensey, Cheerocampa celerio, 261 Teniocampa leucographa near Tun- bridge Wells, 168 Telenomus phalenarum, 247, 303 Thecla pruni in Berkshire, 266 Thymaris, 100 Timarcha levigata, 267 Tortrix larve, abundance, 194; dana, 245 ‘““Trespassers will be prosecuted,” 303, viri- Trigonophora flammea, life-history, 162 Triphena ianthina at Chislehurst, 303 United States National Museum, ento- mological collections, 197 Urticating hairs, of some Lepidoptera, 3, 41, 43; 74: (of Porthesia chrysorrhea, 22 Urtication by larve of Bombyx rubi, 324 Vanessa antiopa in Dorset, 293; ata- lanta, 121, soaring habit, 51, 73, abundance, 51; cardui, abundance, 51, in N. Kent, 293; io, reappear- appearance in N. Kent, 315; poly- chloros in London, 315 Vanesside, habits, on emergence, 241 Variation, of Eupithecia nanata, 75; melanic, probable causes, 81, in Lepidoptera of high latitudes, 122 Varieties, of Angerona prunaria, breed- ing, 253 Watres—North, Merionethshire, Cheero- campa celerio, 262 WanrwICcKSHIRE—Ocneria dispar, 263 Weather, influence on Lepidoptera, 122 WILTSHIRE—Savernake Forest, Noto- donta trepida and N. trimacula, 300 WoRkCESTERSHIRE—Malvern, past season at, 319 Xanthia ferruginea feeding on ash, 301 YorksHtrE—Heliothis peltigera, 264 Zygeena filipendule impaled, 317, var. ochsenheimeria, 317 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Vor. XVIIL] JANUARY, 1885. [No. 260. NOTES ON THE LARVA OF STILBIA ANOMALA. By W. S. Ripine, B.A., M.D. THIRTY-FOUR eggs were laid, early in September, 1883, by some worn females of Stilbia anomala, which had been beaten from the heather at Woollacombe, N. Devon, some days before. They were globular, pale-straw in colour (soon changing to pink), and closely striated vertically. They were laid in batches. Though kept exposed to the open air, the larve emerged on October 25th, by a small hole in the side of the eges. They did not eat the shell. The young larve were semi-transparent, dingy green, with a pale brownish tinge underneath, and covered with some thin hairs, both arranged longitudinally and scattered. Each had three pairs of true legs and three pairs of claspers, four very indistinct elevations in front of the claspers indicating two rudimentary anterior pairs. In moving, they looped like Geometers. When at rest, they assumed a characteristic position on the top of the blades of grass, the third part of the body being fixed, the back arched, and the head tucked in under the front segments, looking just like so many minute sea-horses. They were easily disturbed, and in falling coiled themselves in rings. On November 4th, many were noted as having the anterior rudimentary claspers distinctly visible and the head pale brown. On the 18th, a white spiracuiar line was observed, and on the 25th, when some of the larve had grown to a size of five lines in length, and after their second moult, the colour had changed to ENTOM.—JAN., 1888. B 2 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. reddish brown, and the dorsal and subdorsal as well as the spiracular lines were apparent. On December 5th, the most developed were seven lines in length, and stretched themselves along the blades of grass when at rest, and were no longer so easily shaken off the food. The claspers on the seventh and eighth segments were by this time fully developed and the spiracles also conspicuous. From this date the larve gradually increased in size and the final markings became more distinct, till about the middle of January, 1884, when several appeared full-fed. Of these the following is the description: — Body, rather stout, cylindrical, smooth, tapering slightly towards each end, but mostly towards the posterior ; length, 12 to 13 lines; head, semi-transparent, pale brown, spotted with a darker shade on the cheeks, and with a few scattered fine hairs. Ground colour of body pale-yellowish or reddish brown, closely spotted with darker. Dorsal line paler- edged, with dark brown shading off externally; the dark edge much intensified at the centre and division of the segments, especially at the latter, so as to give a dotted appearance, much less conspicuous on the three last segments. Sub-dorsal lines paler-edged, with continuous dark brown. Between these lines, on each segment except the two last, is a dark brown spot. The ground colour gradually deepens towards the spiracular line, above which it is rich dark brown, almost black. The spiracles have a black circumscription. The spiracular line is con- spicuous, yellowish white in colour, spotted with very pale reddish brown. Below it the ground colour is much paler, so as to show amarked contrast between the upper and under surfaces. This paler band is succeeded by a similarly spotted darker one, and separated from it by an interrupted dark brown line. The second band is followed by another dark brown one, internal to the insertion of the legs. Claspers ten, the four front ones very slightly smaller than the others, but to such an extent as to be scarcely noticeable. Up to this date the mortality had been small, only three larvee haying died. Between January 20th and February 17th the larve by degrees disappeared and were supposed to have pupated. The earth was not disturbed till the end of March, when it was carefully examined to remove the cocoons. It was then found that only three of the larve had gone down, and with ON THE URTICATING HAIRS OF SOME LEPIDOPTERA. 3 the exception of four shrivelled-up bodies, there were no remains of the others to be seen, though it was impossible for them to have escaped from the cage. The larve must therefore be cannibals, at all events in confinement. They had been freely supplied with plenty of fresh sods, —of species of Poa, mostly P. annua,—and kept in an ordinary-sized cage. Imagines, not having emerged from the three cocoons at the end of last month, the latter were opened and found to contain only dried-up larve which had undergone no further change. The cocoons were oval, made of earth and silk, and tough. It appears to me the true position of Stilbia anomala amongst its congeners will only be realized in a future classification of Lepidoptera based on the development of their larve. 25, Endsleigh Gardens, N. W., Nov. 7, 1884. [It will be seen that in the ‘Entomologist’ List of British Lepidoptera Mr. South has removed Stilbia anomala from the end of the Noctue, and placed it among the Caradrinidee.—ED. | ON THE URTICATING HAIRS OF SOME LEPIDOPTERA. By RicuHarp SoutuH. Neary twenty years ago, that is in the summer of 1865, a cousin of mine, the late Mr. William Calvert South, and myself were collecting moths in the neighbourhood of Kingsbury, where we met with several imagines of Porthesia similis (Liparis auriflua) at rest on an old fence. We each secured specimens, which we killed there and then, by a method involving the use of the thumb and index finger of the left hand. Some little time after leaving the similis fence I began to feel an unpleasant tingling about the eyes. This gradually increased, until at last it became almost intolerable. Further collecting was not in accord with my inclination for that day, so we set out on the homeward journey. Before I reached home my eyelids were considerably swollen, and large wheals appeared on the throat and neck. Altogether I was an object of pity and compassion, and continued so for a day or two. Curiously enough, my cousin, who had handled P. similis in the same way as myself, did not 4 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. suffer any unpleasant effects whatever. This fact would seem to render absurd any attempt to connect P. similis with the symp- toms developed almost immediately after handling the insects in my case. Still I have always been under the impression that “the goldtail moth” was the cause of my discomfiture on that particular summer’s day in 1865. I may say that I am glad that Mr. Joseph Anderson can so satisfactorily connect cause and effect as he has done in his note respecting the urticating properties of the imago of Porthesia similis (Liparis auriflua), Entom. xvii. 275. Mr. Anderson must not suppose that I rejoice in his misfortune; I am only glad that he so directly traced the irritation he experienced to its proper source. I have several times collected larve of Porthesia (Liparis) chrysorrhea and bred imagines therefrom. In collecting the larve I had of course to handle them, but I had no occasion to touch the cocoons, and when the imagines came out they were pill-boxed and transferred to the ammonia jar, only touching them in the process of pinning. No symptoms of irritation resulted from contact with either larva or imago of this species. Had I interfered with the cocoon, irritation might have ensued, but of this I am by no means certain. Figuratively speaking, entomologists are not as a rule “ thin- skinned.” But as a fact, the cuticle of most people—entomo- logists or not—is more or less sensitive to irritants of any kind. I knew a man whose skin was so extremely sensitive that the immediate contact of a woollen under-garment therewith gave rise tosymptoms analogous to “ nettle-rash,” if it did not indeed cause true urticaria. One individual may be far more susceptible than another to the urticating properties of certain Lepidoptera. Probably even the same individual may at some periods of his life be more prone than at others to suffer from contact with the larva, cocoon, or imago of urticating Lepidoptera. I should think that when one has been hard at work collecting, and the “pores of the skin” are freely opened, one would be very liable to experience the full irritating power of certain larval hairs, &e. Since 1865 I have only once experienced anything like the torments inflicted on me by the P. similis imagines. The instance I refer to happened on my first introduction to the larva of Bombyx rubi in 1874. Thad been picking up a large number ON THE URTICATING HAIRS OF SOME LEPIDOPTERA. 5 of those larve, and the exertion caused perspiration. After passing my hand across my perspiring brow, I had a repetition of the similis attack, but in a much milder form. Since then I have, nearly every season, taken up odd larve of Bombyx quercus, B. rubi, and Odonestis potatoria, and in every case have noticed that the tips of my fingers and thumb were thickly “felted” with the hairs of the larva handled. Since my B. rubi experience I have always been studiously careful not to touch my face or neck. At the same time, when my hands have been hot I have frequently found a slight itching between the fingers, but the hairs sticking into the thicker skin of the thumb and fingers, did not cause any itching in those parts. Mr. Swinton, in ‘ Notes on the Urticating Property of the Hairs of the Larve of Liparis auriflua (Porthesia similis),’ communicated to the Entomological Society of London, August 6th, 1879, expresses his opinion that the hairs of the larva are covered with a poisonous liquid, exuded from the scarlet warts on the hinder segments. ‘This is the only suggestion I can find as to the probable cause of the intense irritation set up by the hairs of the larva of this species. Assuming Mr. Swinton to be right with regard to the hairs of the larva, what about the hairs of the imago? Are these also coated with a poisonous liquid ? The hairs of larve of the genus Cnethocampa are barbed (one species of the genus, pityocampa, was reported as occurring in Kent, in 1873-4), and possess great urticating power. The hairs of the larva are perhaps the most virulent, but the hairs of the imago, and even the dust of the web, are capable of causing sreat irritation. It may be supposed that the greater irritation of the larval hairs as compared with those of the imago or the dust from the nest, is due to their barbed points. Especially would this appear to be the case if, as I have been informed, irritation in its severest form is apt to return at intervals for years after contact with the hairs of the larva. Whether irritant poisons are or are not introduced with the hairs, may afford matter for discussion; but it does not appear altogether unreasonable to suppose that the hairs in themselves— especially barbed hairs — are quite capable of producing a considerable amount of discomfort, if not absolute pain, when introduced liberally into the human skin. That pain is, sometimes at least, due to other than mere 6 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. mechanical action of the hairs, is suggested by the following incident I remember to have read in an entomological work, the title of which does not occur to me at the present moment. A traveller in some part of South America picked up a large hairy caterpillar. In handling it he sustained something akin to an electric shock. This was given with such power as to render his arm useless for a time! Other “ big things” in the way of caterpillars with unpleasant urticating properties are found in Brazil. The greatest efforts of our stinging species are but puny, when compared with the very disagreeable way these Brazilian larve have of resenting any in- terference with their liberty, as the following extract from ‘Pioneering in Brazil, by Mr. T. P. Bigg-Wither, will show. Writing of a tribe of phosphorescent hairy caterpillars, the author says :—‘ The varieties of these caterpillars were legion. Their bodies were protected by triple coats of mail, that is to say they were covered with a hairy substance, which in some species took the form of moss, and in others of groups of stag antlers. To attempt to touch these creatures with the naked hand was a scarcely less hazardous undertaking than plunging one’s hand into a live hornet’s nest. Hach hair, or point, has the power of inflicting a sting as painful as that of a certain venomous species of red ant very common in parts of the forest, so that, if by chance, as not unfrequently befel us when working on the picada, one of these caterpillars happens to drop off a tree on to the hand, or, worse still, on to the nape of the neck, the pain is almost unbearable, the spot on which the creature falls immediately becoming inflamed, and afterwards swelling up to a great size.” 12, Abbey Gardens, London, N.W., December 9th, 1884. ORIENTAL ENTOMOLOGY. By tHE Rev. F. A. Wacker, D.D. THE accompanying observations are founded principally on the Appendices to my work, ‘L’Orient,’ March 1—June 30, 1882, as well as those to ‘Nine Hundred Miles up the Nile,’ November 3, 1883—February 9, 1884. Of all butterflies that I noticed during my two expeditions to ORIENTAL ENTOMOLOGY. % the East, no species that may fairly claim to be termed Oriental proved so abundant as Thais apollina and Danais chrysippus, the former occurring in Palestine and Syria, during the months of March and April, 1882, and the latter in Egypt, durmg November and December, 1883; or I might state with correctness that these two kinds were the commonest of all, Vanessa cardui alone ex- cepted. Both Thais apollina and Danais chrysippus are easy of capture, the former affecting the Plain of Sharon and slopes of the Mount of Olives, as well as the meadows in the vicinity of Baalbec and Shtora, and the latter frequenting the gardens at Heliopolis, the Island of Roda, and the grounds of the palaces and villas in the neighbourhood of Cairo. It is probably owing to the scarcity, comparatively speaking, of wild flowers in Egypt, that the Danais was generally found fluttering round the scarlet poinsettias, or settled on the gay blossoms of a large bed of zinnias, but rarely outside the region of cultivation, whereas the Thais, which I never saw till after reaching Palestine, disported itself on and among the variously-coloured vetches, the scarlet anemone, no less brilliantly tinted tulips (Ranunculus asiaticus and Tulipa oculisolis), Star of Bethlehem, and sundry other blossoms of the flowery plain or hill-side. Both Thais and Danais were, generally speaking, in good condition. Early spring is evidently the season for the former, late autumn and the beginning of winter the time for the latter species; but by the middle of January, on my return to Cairo, after three weeks’ absence up the hills, colder weather had set in, and all butterfly-life, for the time at least, disappeared. A perfectly fresh specimen of 7’. apollina has a dark gauze-like appearance over the whole of the upper wings, and a primrose tint (with the exception of the red and dark blue of the ocelli that form the border) over the lower. In the case of a more worn individual the gauze-like appearance is the first to go, in one still more faded the primrose tint also, until the upper wings are nearly transparent, except for the three black spots which mark its affinity with the Apollinide. Whether or no the sexes are distinguished by the respective faintness or vividness of the markings is more than I have knowledge in this instance to say. I was also fortunate enough to see six or seven specimens of Thais cerisyi in Syria and to capture three, two at Shtora and one at Baalbec. I attributed its scarcity to the fact that I was 8 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. too early in the field for this particular kind, but have had reason to correct this view, owing to Mr. Butler’s informing me that I was too late, and that, on the contrary, it is on the wing before T’. apollina. Among Pieride A poria crategi was decidedly the most common. So torpid was this insect on our arrival at Ephesus, on May dth, that it could be taken with ease by the fingers in the course of the afternoon, off the abundant blossoms and flowering shrubs on the lower slopes of Mount Prion, as we ascended to the stadium and tomb of St. John, or else was only roused to settle again. P. daplidice has a tolerably wide distribution, occurring on the banks of the Jordan, and half-way between Jerusalem and Jericho, and in the bed of the then dried-up stream of the Sara-kisi above Philadelphia, and by its capture at Colonos and Cerameicus recalling classic memories alike of blind (idipus and Antigone, as well as of the first year of the Peloponnesian war. P. brassice and P. rape occurred, but only sparingly. There were several specimens, but all female, of Huchloé carda- mines, on or about the rock of the Acropolis. Of two foreign species, A. belemia and A. belia, I captured three of the former, namely, one at Beyrout and two between Jaffa and Latroon, and one of the latter in the bed of the Sari-kisi above mentioned. On the upper side both A. belemia and A. belia closely resemble A. cardamines female, but are both smaller insects, belemia decidedly so, and this butterfly has the green spots or blotches of cardamines replaced by stripes. A. belia and A. cardamines are more nearly alike, but the white between the green spots of A. cardamines is silver on the under side of A. belia. Colias edusa, as a matter of course, was generally distributed, and Gonopteryx rhamni and G. cleopatra were both noticed. Neither species were plentiful; the former occurring at Shtora on April 18th ; of the latter I captured a female at Alexandretta, on April 28th, and saw the males for the first time in June, among the highly-scented scrub vegetation of cistus, arbutus, myrtle, and heather, and subsequently in Corfu. Three of the four Kuropean species of Papilio were captured, P. machaon at Smyrna and Ephesus, P. podalirius at Baalbec, and P. alexanor at Ephesus. Of this last-named kind this was the only specimen that I have ever seen alive, and a large one and in fine condition. ORIENTAL ENTOMOLOGY. 9 To come next to the Satyride, Minois actea and anthelea, and Satyrus semele were common in Deceleia road to Laurinum and other places in the neighbourhood of Athens, as also Arge titea and A. galathea on the Acropolis and road to Hleusis. A. titea was rather the more abundant of the two, but the difference between these two species is not discernible on the wing. I also took one specimen of Satyrus ida in Corfu, and a Yphthima, species undetermined, at Alexandretta, of which last I regret I had only one indifferent specimen, as I have been unable to find it in the national collection, but can certify to its also occurring above the Nahr-el-Kelb. Of Fritillaries I only captured five species: Melitea trivia at Ephesus, Argynnis lathonia and Melitea athalia at Philadelphia, M. cinzia at Belgrade, and M. didyma in Corfu. The remaining butterflies may be briefly enumerated: V. camilla in Prinkipo, Lycena melanops at Alexandretta, C. phleas and P. alexis at Ephesus, and Pamphila linea and alcee at the Acropolis, Athens; and, on my second visit to the Hast, two species of Deudorix, Lycena betica, Tarucus nana, and Zizera, possibly Kassandra, at the end of November and beginning of December, as well as Pamphila nostradamus in and about Cairo. Lycena betica and Vanessa cardui were also seen at Aboo Simbel. Vanessas were neither abundant in number, with the exception of V. cardui, nor in kind. The only rare insect that I came across of this tribe was a solitary specimen of Grapta egea, which I unfortunately missed, in the bed of the Sari-Kisi. Of moths the number of species is very scanty, so far as my personal observation went,—to wit, Saturnia pyri at Beyrout, Arctia villica on the banks of the Meles, Zygena brize in the Stadium and Page, at Athens, and Z. carniolica in the Pass of Daphne, Dasydia obfuscata (Scotch annulet) at Alexandretta, Venilia maculata (speckled yellow) at the entrance to the Wady Ali, and, on my second journey, Cherocampa celerio at the New Hotel, Cairo, in December. (To be continued.) ENTOM.—JAN., 1885. Cc 10 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. REMARKS UPON THE ‘ENTOMOLOGIST’ SYNONYMIC LIST OF BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA. In Mr. Dunning’s review in the ‘Entomologist’ (vol. xvii. p. 213) of this list, and his enumeration of the species mentioned in it, there is a clerical error which requires correction. Mr. Dun- ning states the number of Tortrices recorded in it to be 245, whereas the number really is 343, and this correction will bring up the total number of species in the list to 2080 instead of 1982, the whole number mentioned according to Mr. Dunning. In any new edition of the list Mr. South will doubtless pay attention to the valuable suggestions contained in Mr. Dunning’s critical review of it, but I would add for Mr. South’s considera- tion one or two further remarks on the contents of his list. The genus Aporophyla of Guenée appears in two places, first among the Apameide (p. 6), and again smong the Hadenide (p.9). The genus Calamia, too, of Hubner, appears on page 5, and again on page 6. In compiling his list in conformity with the law of priority, Mr. South appears to have overlooked the desirability of avoid- ing the same name for different insects. In Doubleday’s list the same specific name was occasionally used to denote more than one insect, but these instances are few in number, viz., comma, crategi, ligustri, populi, quercus, rubi, urtice, and the insects denoted in Doubleday’s list by the same specific name belong to different groups. Mr. South, however, appears to have considerably increased the inconvenience thus occasioned, for in over 70 cases the same specific name is applied in his list to different insects—often, moreover, to different insects in the same group, and in many instances with the same author’s name following. The confusion that must necessarily ensue in the minds of young and indeed old entomologists, will be gathered from the following instances which are taken from the list, especially when it is borne in mind that entomologists are careless as to postfixing the name of the author to the specific name. For facility of reference I have numbered consecutively the species enumerated in Mr. South’s list and indicate them accordingly :— ON THE ‘ ENTOMOLOGIST ’ SYNONYMIC LIST. iil 32 Aithiops, Hsp. 1588 AXthiops, Westw. 413 Affinis, L. 1580 Affinis, Dowgl. 1012 Ahenella, Zinck. 1801 Ahenella, Wk. 1405 Albipunctella, Haw. 1532 Albipunctella, Hb. 1190 Angustana, Hb. 1319 Angustana, Hb. 1835 Apicella, Sta. 2039 Apicella, Sta. 1392 Arcuatella, Sta. 2060 Arcuatella, H. S. 506 Argentula, Hb. 1886 Argentula, Zell. 1586 Artemisiella, 7x. 2011 Artemisiella, H. S. 1777 Auroguttella, St. 1793 Auroguttella, Lisch. 556 Autumnaria, Wernbd. 679 Autumnaria, Gn. 1365 Avellanella, Hb., Sta. 1784 Avellanella, Sta. | Sta. 41 Betule, L. 995 Betule, Goze 1787 Betule, 1112 Bifasciana, Haw. 1348 Bifasciana, Hb. 3 Brassice, L. 294 Brassice, L. 13836 Ciliella, Hd. 1526 Ciliella, Sta. 64 Comma, L. 247 Comma, L. 1078 Corticana, Hb. 1199 Corticana, Hb. 221 Coryli, L. 1959 Coryli, Nic. 1488 Costella, /b., Sta. 1589 Costella, Westw., Sta. 838 Crategella, Hb. 1468 Crategella, L., St. 2 Crategi, L. 164 Crategi, L. 130 Cribrum, LZ. 974 Cribrum, Schiff. 412 Diffinis, L. 1562 Diffinis, Haw., Sta. 46 Dispar, Haw. 158 Dispar, L. 1236 Distinctana, Bent. 1284 Distinctana, Hein. 1459 Fasciellus, Pb. 1667 Fasciellus, Hb. 252 Flammea, Cwrt. 441 Flammea, Hsp. 1092 Fuligana, Hb. 1114 Fuligana, Haw. 996 Fusca, Haw. 1762 Fusca, Sta., And so on in seventy-six instances. HILDEBRAND RAMSDEN. 26, Upper Bedford Place, Russell Square, W.C., December 8, 1884. [We have referred the above communication to Mr. South, and append the following from that gentleman.—Ep. ]. Mr. Hildebrand Ramsden’s remarks on my list offer me an opportunity of saying afew words. Firstly, in extenuation and explanation of an oversight in the matter of the two genera Aporophyla and Calamia. Secondly, in reference to Mr. Rams- den’s observations on duplicate trivial names. Several gentle- men had already (Mr. Jos. W. Harris as early as August 18th, 1884) called my attention to the fact that the genus Calamia and the genus Aporophyla each occurred twice in my list. In my MS. list I had pencilled in Calamia above lutosa, and Apo- rophyla above lutulenta and nigra, thus indicating the genera in which these species occurred in ‘Staudinger’s List. On 1h THE ENTOMOLOGIST. sending the MS. to the printers I omitted to erase the generic names written in pencil, and in revising the proof-sheets the repetition escaped my notice. I need hardly say that I regret having thus laid myself open to the charge of carelessness. Such an imputation one reviewer has in fact brought against me, and in evidence thereof refers to these unfortunate repetitions. Apart from the inevitable strictures on my shortcomings, I did not suppose that my list would be accepted without comment. At the same time I may say that I was not prepared for such ob- jections as Mr. Ramsden has brought forward in regard to specific names. Mr. Ramsden says that I appear to have ‘“ overlooked the desirability of avoiding the same name for different insects.” With all due deference to Mr. Ramsden’s opinion in this matter, I must confess that I fail to recognise the desirability of altering specific names so as to facilitate the use of such names only. ‘T’o argue that a Nepticula, for example, should not bear the specific name of arcuatella, because a species of the genus Scardia already bore that name, is as illogical as to say that Smith’s son should not be called John, because the son of Jones was already named John, and in after life confusion might ensue as to their identity, because they were both named John. It does not appear to occur to Mr. Ramsden, that when two or three species bear the same trivial name, the generic name taken in conjunction therewith is of some importance in denoting the species we wish to refer to. He would seem to attach greater value to the author’s name following the specific name. To speak or write of comma, L., would not convey any dis- tinct idea of the species intended, butif we say or write Hesperia comma, L., or Leucania comma, L., we refer definitely to a species of Lepidoptera. It is a common practice of some lepidopterists to speak of the objects of their study by their trivial names only, and the generic name is never used by them if they can possibly avoid it, but “it is a custom more honoured in the breach than the observance.” I do not quite understand Mr. Ramsden where he says, “in over 70 cases the same specific name is applied to different insects.” But in looking over the interesting list of duplicate and triplicate specific names he has been at the trouble of drawing up, I find that in 71 instances two insects bear the same specific name, and in 5 cases three insects have each the same specific INTRODUCTORY PAPERS ON ICHNEUMONIDA. 13 name. As an example of the frequent use of the same specific name in different genera, in other branches of Natural History, I may mention an instance in the latest standard work on British Fishes (Dr. Day’s ‘Fishes of Great Britain and Ireland’) in which the trivial name vulgaris is indexed to no less than fifty- two genera, and this is by no means an isolated case. ; Ricuarp SourH. 12, Abbey Gardens, London, N.W. INTRODUCTORY PAPERS ON ICHNEUMONIDA. By Joun B. Bripeman anp Epwarp A. Frc. No. V.—OPHIONID: (continued), OpHELTES, Holmgr. Fulvous; part of head and thorax and apex of abdomen black. 1. glaucopterus, 7—9 lines. This fine species, of which the male is almost unknown (Entom. xu. 55), is not common in Britain. It is figured by Panzer (Scheef. Ic., pl. 82, fig. 3). It is a sawfly parasite, having been bred from the three species of Cimbex, thus being a con- spicuous exception to the general lepidopterous parasitism of the Ophionide. MHartig, Drewsen, Reissig, Giraud and Brischke bred it from Cimbex femorata (variabilis), Giraud from C. hume- ralis (axillaris), and Siebold from C. connata; the latter from eggs deposited by a virgin mother (Ent. Nach., x. 95). Paniscus, Schr. Almost entirely fulvous. A. 1st segment of the abdomen hardly shorter than the hind coxe and trochanters ; aculeus of female about as long as the Ist segment (males and females). a. Tarsi pale yellowish white, lighter than tibie. tarsatus, 44—54 lines, b. Tarsi and tibie of the same colour. * Sides of head behind the eyes, seen from above, parallel. + Larger; elevated line before apex of metathorax. 1. cephalotes, 6—94 lines. - ++ Smaller; no elevated line before apex of metathorax. ; JSuscicornis, 3—5 lines, xx Sides of head behind the eyes slanting. - 38. testaceus, 44—9 lines. B. 1st segment of abdomen shorter than the hind coxe and tro« chanters ; aculeus of female hardly exserted ; hind tarsi paler than tibie (male and female). . - . > 2. virgatus, 3—5 lines. 14 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. The species of Paniscus are amongst the commonest of our Ichneumons, but they are rather difficult to distinguish; they bear considerable resemblance to the species of Ophion in many respects, but the neuration will at once distinguish them. P. tarsatus, Brischke (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1881, p. 157), and P. fuscicornis, Holmgr. (Entom. xvii. 67), are added to the species included in Marshall’s catalogue. Neither species are un- common in Britain, the former appears to be especially attached to the species of Hupithecia ; its elongate, cylindrical, smooth, hard, black cocoon, with a narrow median pale band, is figured on plate ii., fig. 7. P. imquinatus, Gr., is omitted, as no author has referred to this species since Gravenhorst described the two females captured near Netley, by Hope; and he opines that their colour was not natural. It may either be a good species, or probably the same as Holmgren’s P. cephalotes. atzeburg has figured the wing of P. testaceus at Die Ichn., vol. 11, pl.i., fig. 25, and see Vollenhoven’s ‘ Schetsen,’ pt. 1., pl. i1., fig. 20. Boie mentions parthenogenesis in P. testaceus, in Wiegmann’s Archiv., ii.38. The life-history of Paniscus has already been fully referred to (Entom., xvii. 124; and see Ent. Nach., v. 221, 265); so we will here merely give the list of hosts :— 1. cephalotes, Holmgr., from Orgyia pudibunda, Peecilocampa populi; Brischke. Dicranura vinula; generally. D. bifida; Baker. Acronycta tridens, A. psi, A. megacephala, Cucullia scrophularie, C. thapsiphaga*, C. asteris, C. balsamite*, C. artemisie*, C. argentea* ; Brischke. 2. virgatus, Foure., from Odoutopera bidentata; Bignell. Eupithecia absynthiata, KH. sp.? Brischke. E. succentu- riata; Bignell. Drepana unguicula; Brischke. Dicranura bifida; (Richter) Grav. Cosmia trapezina; Bignell. Hadena pisi; Newport. Catocala promissa; Giraud, Brischke, Bignell. Halias prasinana ; Brischke, Bignell. 8. testaceus, Gr., from Smerinthus populi; Marshall. Bombyx pini* ; (Reissig) Ratzeburg. Phigalia pilosaria, Nys- sia pomonaria* ; Scharfenberg. Eupithecia castigata; Bignell. Dicranura vinula ; gene- rally, but often undistinguished from P. cepha- lotes, see Albin’s plate xi. D. bifida; Brischke. D. furcula; Ratz. Hybocampa Milhauseri* ; Taschenberg. Clostera anachoreta; Vollen- hoven. Acronycta leporina; Brischke. A. psi; Raynor, Warren. A. megacephala ; (Perris) Gir. Nonagria geminipuncta; Flet- INIRODUCTORY PAPERS ON ICHNEUMONID®. 15 cher. Mesogona oxalina* ; (Rogenhofer) Gir. Hadena pisi; Marsh. H. dentina, Xyliua rhizolitha ; Bignell. Cucullia scrophularie ; Siebold. CC. lychnitis; (Goossens) Gir. C. asteris ; Speyer. C. argentea* ; Brischke.? C. artemisize*; Grav. Toxocampacracce ; Kriech- baumer. Cimbex femorata, Clavellaria ame- rine; Bouche. fuscicornis, Holmgr., from Lithostege nivearia; Raynor. lLeucania obsoleta, Anarta myrtilli; Brischke. tarsatus, Brischke, from Eupithecia succenturiata; Brischke. E. cas- tigata; Brischke, Bignell. EH. virgaureata ; Bignell. E. vulgata; Fletcher. EH. absyn- thiata; Brischke, Bignell. . lariciata; Brischke, Bignell. EK. abbreviata; Bignell. E. exiguata; Brischke, Warren. Drepana fal- cula, D. unguicula Brischke. Azssyrtus, Holmgr. Fulvo-testaceous ; eyes and spot between the ocelli blackish (male and female). - - - - - - 1. luteus, 3—34 lines. Holmgren described this genus and species in his ‘Mono- graphia Ophionidum Suecie’ (p. 33); it does not appear to be rare. He there points out that it is mixed with Mesoleptus testaceus in collections. Itis also much like Paniscus virgatus ; but may be distinguished from the former by its pectinated claws; and from the latter by its subrotund metathoracic spiracles, and by the inferior tooth of the mandible being longer than the superior; the neuration of the wings also differs. The Absyrtus does not appear to have been bred. CAMPOPLEX, Grav. A. Back part of metathorax concave (males and females). a. Abdomen entirely black. * Scape of antenne pale beneath. - = - 10. myrtillus, 5 lines. *« Scape of antenne not pale beneath. : + Legs yellow; coxe, trochanters, hind femora, apex of middle femora, and base and apex of hind tibiz black. - nobilitatus, 6 lines. ++ Legs red; coxe, trochanters, apex of hind tibie and tarsi dark. 7. ebeninus, 24—44 lines. b. Abdomen more or less red or yellow. * Middle of abdomen and part of legs yellow. + Spaces between the punctures of the mesopleura reticulate. 1 (part). falcator, 74—104 lines. ++ Spaces between the punctures of mesopleura smooth and shining. 1 (part). oayacanthe. 4—82 lines. 16 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. * Abdomen and legs partly red or reddish yellow. t Hind femora entirely red. § Mesopleura in front with a vertical ridge. x Lower margin of 3rd segment of abdomen concave. ; Qnd and 8rd segments of abdomen with a brownish mark on the side. 5. cultrator, 8 lines. x x Lower margin of 3rd segment not concave. Middle of abdomen red. = : : - obreptans, 4 lines. §§ Mesopleura in front without a vertical ridge. Middle of abdomen red; 8rd segment without a lateral black streak. juvenilis, 343—44 lines. t Hind femora black, or partly black. o Hind tibie black; 3rd segment below not concave. + Abdomen red; base and more or less of apex black; between the punctures of the mesopleura reticulate ; no vertical ridge behind front coxe. - shh. $a - - erythrogaster, 44 lines. +-+- Middle of abdomen red; between the punctures of the mesopleura smooth, with a ridge behind front coxe (male). punctatus, 5 lines. oo Hind tibie not entirely black, more or less red or reddish yellow. ++ Mesopleura between the punctures smooth. eo Mesonotum between the punctures smooth. bucculentus, 5—6 lines. enor Mesonotum between the punctures reticulate. ? 8rd segment of abdomen more or less concave below. ' Abdomen in the middle widely, and legs yellowish or testaceous ; cox, hind trochanters and base of femora black; mesopleura without avertical line behind front coxe. 8. carinifrons, 8—10 lines. !! Middle of abdomen and part of legs red; mesopleura with a vertical line behind front coxe. - - - 6. nitidulator, 64 lines. ” 8rd segment of abdomen not concave below (female). rugulosus, 8 lines. ++++ Mesopleura between the punctures reticulate; transverse anal nervure divided below the middle. * 8rd segment of abdomen more or less concave below; forehead most frequently with an elevated ridge. + Mandibles and tegule black ; aculeus of female long. Middle of abdomen, greater part of front legs and middle of hind tibiz red. - - - - - terebrator, 5—6 lines. 4+ Mandibles pale; aculeus not long. 8rd, 4th, and sometimes 5th segments of abdomen red. t Transverse anal nervure of hind wings divided just below the middle; scutellum at sides marginated almost to the middle. § 8rd, 4th, and 5th abdominal segments and part of legs red. 2. pugillator, 53 lines. §§ 4th and 5th segments black. = = - unicinctus, 7 lines. tt Transverse anal nervure divided almost at the bottom. Post petiole with three longitudinal oblong depressions; middle of abdomen and part of legs red. - - trisculptus, 7 lines. «+ 8rd segment of abdomen not concave below. Mesopleura with a distinct vertical ridge behind the front coxe. o Fovea of antenne dilated above into a distinct ear-like process. Middle of abdomen red ; greater part of legs red. anceps, 5—5+ lines. oo Fovea of antenne not dilated above. 1. Forehead above the antenne furnished with several prominent vertical ridges. INTRODUCTORY PAPERS ON ICHNEUMONIDZ. 17 Middle of abdomen red; legs yellow, hind coxe, trochanters, base and apex black ; tarsi slightly brownish (male). costulatus, 54 lines. 2. Forehead without ridges above the base of the antenne. ” Apex of hind femora red. Apex of 2nd segment, 3rd entirely, and extreme base of 4th chestnut (female); legs and abdomen of male paler, red colour more extensive. - . - - femorator, 7—7+4 lines. ” Apex of hind femora not red. ! Middle of abdomen and greater part of front legs yellowish ; middle of hind tibie broadly yoleae 3rd segment without a lateral black streak. - - - confusus, 64 lines. !! Middle of abdomen red ; legs partly rad 3rd segment with a lateral black streak ; sides of metathorax moderately pubescent ; groove of metanotum regularly transversely rugose. tenuis, eee lines. B. Back of metathorax not concave (male and female). Middle of abdomen and legs partly red. 8. leptogaster, 4—5 lines. Gravenhorst’s original genus Campoplex has been broken up by Holmgren, in his ‘Monographia Ophionidum Suecie,’ into many subgenera, which may be arranged in two divisions—those having the metathoracic spiracles elongate, with one exception (Charops decipiens), forming the genus Campoplex ; and those in which they are circular, subdivided into eight subgenera. Later, Forster divided his family Campoplegoide into sixty-two genera, in his ‘Synopsis der Familien und Gattungen der Ichneumonen’ ; these have not been adopted. Forster’s ‘ Monographie der Gattung Campoplex, Grv.’ (Verh. z.-b. Ges. Wien, xviii. 761— 876, pl. x.; 1869), and Holmgren’s ‘Om de Skandinaviska arterna af ophionidsligtet Campoplex.’ (Bihang Sv. Ak. Handl., vol.i., pt. 2, pp- 1-90), must be consulted for this genus; seventy-nine species are described in the former and forty-two in the latter paper. There is a very great similarity in the coloration of the species ; Férster divided them into two groups according to the colour of the hind femora (red or black). Other distinctions are that the spaces between the punctures of the mesopleura are smooth or reti- culate; at the front part of the mesopleura, just above the anterior coxé, is an oblong depression into which the base of the front legs fits; this groove is sometimes smooth behind, or it is as it were separated from the mesopleura by a vertical ridge; the lower margin of the third segment of the abdomen is either convex or concave; the absence or presence of a lateral streak at the base of the third segment; the colour of the mandibles and tegule, &c. From these remarks it may be gathered that specimens of Campoplec gummed down on a card are almost ENTOM.—JAN., 1885. D 18 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. valueless. The best way is to set them lengthwise on a narrow strip of card not more than one-sixteenth of an inch wide, so that it does not project beyond the front coxee, and pin the card; if the insect is pinned in the ordinary way, the slender compressed abdomen has a remarkable tendency to break off. Marshall's Catalogue enumerates twelve species. Of these C. mixtus, Gr., has been cut up. It is impossible to say what has not been included under C. pugillator. Of Desvignes’ species the only true Campoplex is his C. myrtillus; his C. henaultii is certainly Casinaria vidua, Gr. and his C. placidus much resembles Lim- neria vulgaris, Tschek, or it may possibly be a Casinaria; it is not a Campoplex. C.anceps, Holmer. (Ent. Ann. 1874, p. 143), C. obreptans, Forst., C. confusus, Férst., C. erythrogaster, Forst., C. terebrator, Forst. (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1882, p. 149), C. bucculentus, Holmer., (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1884, p. 426), C. nobilitatus, Holmgr., C. wnicinctus, Holmgr. (non Gray.), C. tri- sculptus, Holmgr., and C. tenuis, Forst., are now known as British. C. punctatus, Bridgm., C. costulatus, Bridgm., and C. femorator, Bridgm., are new species. Holmgren says of C. melanariwus :—‘‘ Haec species structura metathoracis et abdo- minis ad propriam subdivisionem forte rectius referenda” (Mon. Oph. Suec., p. 37); later he considered it a Limneria. Tschek includes it in Sagaritis. For outline figure of Campoplex see Vollenhoven’s ‘ Schetsen,’ pt.i., pl. u., fig. 19. The species of this genus appear to be exclusively parasitic on Lepidoptera (records to the contrary belonging to other genera), and their economy is somewhat peculiar, as the cocoon of the parasite is frequently spun under and concealed by the larva-skin of its host. Boie says his ““C. caj@ emerged from the head of the young larva of A. caja at the end of June,” but this may be a Limneria. Ratzeburg first noticed this. He says:—“ The larva (of Orgyia antiqua) remained in good condition, but the parasitic larva (of Campoplex carbona- rius) had gnawn through its belly and pupated in a white cocoon, which closely adhered to the leaf; and it emerged as an imago, through a hole in the back of the larva of about the size of a millet seed” (Die Ichn., i. 93). A similar case is figured on pl. ii., fig. 23, which represents the cocoon of C. ebeninus under the larva-skin of its host (Orgyia fascelina). PI. ii., fig. 6, repre- sents the hard, smooth, cylindrical, black-veined, brown cocoon INTRODUCTORY PAPERS ON ICHNEUMONID2. 19 of C. oxyacanthe ex Himera pennaria; and fig. 24 represents the cylindrical, woolly, drab cocoon of the same species ex Fidonia piniaria. The following species have been recorded as bred; but, as has been said, their determination is sometimes uncertain :— 1. mixtus, Gr., from Orgyia pudibunda; Brischke. Biston hirtaria, Amphydasis prodromaria; Bignell. Pygera bucephala; Brischke, Marshall, Bignell, Nor- gate. Notodonta camelina; Osborne. N. ziczac; De Geer. Acronycta sp., Cucullia argentea*, C. sp.; Brischke. Anarta myr- tilli; Desvignes’ Coll. Halias prasinana ; Brischke. falcator, Thunb., from Pygeera bucephala; Norgate. Notodonta ziczac ; Bignell. oxyacanthe, Boie, from Himera pennaria; Bignell, Brischke (mesowan- thus, Forst.). | Fidonia piniaria; Fitch. Miselia oxyacanthe ; Boie. 2. pugillator, Gr., from ?Aporia crategi; (Reissig) Ratzeburg. Thecla betula ; Hedle. ? Zygeena filipendule; De Geer. Z. rhadamanthus* ; (Fallou) Giraud. Odontopera bidentata; Brischke. Amphy- dasis betularia; Bignell. Gnophos obscurata ; Drewsen and Boie. Corycia temerata, Big- nell. Selidosema teeniolaria*; Gir. Cheima- tobia brumata; Drewsen and Boie, Rothlieb. Eupithecia abbreviata; Bignell. E. absyn- thiata; Bignell, Wilson. Anticlea rubidata; Brischke. Notodonta dicteoides; Brischke. N. ziczac; Linné (query an Anomalon). Gonophora derasa; Rothlieb. Cymatophora ridens, T'eniocampa populeti; Bignell. He- catera dysodea, Cucullia sp.; Brischke. Heliothis marginata; Boie. H. dipsacea ; Gir. Halias quercana; Boie, (Perris) Gir. Phibalocera quercana ; (Richter) Gray. 3. carinifrons, Holmgr., from Macaria estimaria*; (Perris) Gir. Also bred by Bignell. 4. validicornis, Holmgr., from Eupithecia succenturiata, Cucullia arte- misiz* ; Brischke. 6. nitidulator, Holmgr., from Eupithecia venosata; D’Orville. 7. ebeninus, Gr., from Orgyia fascelina; Holmgren, Harwood, Bignell. Hyponomeuta evonymella , (Siebold) Ratz. carbonarius, Ratz., from Orgyia antiqua; Brischke, Ratz. O. gono- stigma; Brischke. OO. fascelina; Bouché, Nordlinger, (Graff) Ratz. | Teeniocampa populeti; Mrs. Hutchinson. Tortrix xylo- steana; (Graff) Ratz. 8. leptogaster, Holmgr., from Cabera pusaria; Brischke (not, teste Kriech- baumer), ? Boie (n.s. near mialus, Gr.). 20 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 10. myrtillus, Desv., from Anarta myrtilli; Desvignes. anceps, Holmgr., from Eupithecia acteeata* ; Brischke. ik bucculentus, Holmgr., from Odontopera bidentata, Lomaspilis mar- ginata, Heliothis marginata ; Brischke. confusus, Férst., from Teeniocampa populeti; Bignell. rugulosus, Férst., from Trachea piniperda; Norgate. erythrogaster, /érst., from Hybernia rupicapraria ; Bignell. eurynotus, Férst., from Thecla betule ; Kedle. n.? sp., from Tortrix forsterana; Elisha. ENTOMOLOGICAL NOTES, CAPTURES, &c. LEPIDOPTERA NEAR BroMuey, 18838.—Mr. Watchurst’s notes (Entom. vol. vii. p. 278) remind me of my own captures at light, at Lower Camden, between Chislehurst and Bromley, in 1883. I have already given a short list of some of the species taken up to August 15th (Entom. xvi. 233); an account of those taken after that date will perhaps prove interesting :—August 16th, a moon- light night, only Plusia gamma appeared. August 17th-27th, Anaitis plagiata, Lophopteryx camelina, &c. August 28th, the following appeared for the first time: Noctua plecta, Triphena comes (orbona), Luperina testacea, Noctua rubi, Cidaria silaceata, Melanthia ocellata. With regard to the last, Newman merely states that it appears in June; is it usual to have a second brood ? August 29th, Hugonia alniaria(tiliaria) and Cidaria testata appeared for the first time. August 30th, Rumia luteolata (crategata), first appearance ; took another M. ocellata. August 31st, first appear- ance of Hupithecia oblongata (centaureata) and Chareas graminis ; got one of each. The following were also taken at light, at Chislehurst, between July 26th and August 31st, but I have no notes of the exact dates :—Acidalia bisetata, A. dimidiata (scutu- lata), A. straminata, Hupithecia assimilata, H. linariata, Leucania conigera, L. impura, Hydrecia micacea, Miana arcuosa, Cara- drina taraxaci (blanda), and a single specimen of Noctua trian- gulum. I also obtained a number of Micros, but these I have not yet had time to work out. On July 18th the following came to light at Chislehurst :—Porthesia similis (auriflua), Hadena oleracea, Boarmia gemmaria (rhomboidaria), Leucania lithargyria, (two—one green and one brown one), Hemithea strigata, Cara- drina taraxact, Plusia chrysitis, Noctua augur, Nomophila noctuella (hybridalis), and a few others.—T. D. A. CockErEni; 51, Wood- stock Road, Bedford Park, W., December 8, 1884. NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 21 LATENESS OF THE PAST Srason.—Mr. Harding remarks in the ‘Entomologist’ (vol. xvii. 185), that after every promise of a remarkably early spring, the bitter east wind of April changed the whole aspect of affairs, whereby the appearance of many species was greatly retarded. Having passed the summer months entomologizing in south-western Spain, I may note that I there observed three butterflies appeared much after the dates assigned in Mr. Kirby’s books for their emergence. In the case of Argynnis pandora, a very common and conspicuous butterfly in north-western Spain, as A. aglaia is in Scotland, there could be no inaccuracy of observation, I think, involved. The newly- emerged males I first noticed in the environs of Valladolid, on the 12th of July, and the species was still flying in the Asturian mountain gorges in August. Kirby’s book says June and July.— A. H. Swryron; Binfield House, Waterden Road, Guiidford, December 9, 1884. [Dr. Lang, in his ‘ Butterflies of Europe,’ also gives June and July as the time of appearance of Argynnis pandora.—J. T.C.] Kconomy oF Conias EpusA.— The life-history of this species has been so far elucidated as to make it clear the deposition of eggs usually takes place about May, the work being performed by hybernated individuals, as in Gonepteryx rhamn. It is possible that in exceptional years a few larve might be produced in the autumn, which would pupate ere winter, as Mr. Tutt suggests (Entom. xvil. 270). That, from some peculiarity in the species, the hybernators are apt to die off, has been given as the reason why C. edusa is less abundant than G. rhamni, though much like it in some respects.—J. R. §. Cuirrorp ; Cambrian Grove, Gravesend, December 11, 1884. GONEPTERYX RHAMNI IN DorsETSHIRE.—I think that Mr. Mansfield (Entom. xvii. 271) is mistaken in thinking that buck- thorn is not a Dorsetshire plant. Both the British species of Rhamni occur in a native state in the county, and the common buckthorn (R. catharticus) is widely distributed, and in some places frequent.—F. Bucuanan WuiteE; Perth, Dec. 9, 1884. LATE APPEARANCE OF HrpiIaLus HuMULI.—At the end of August I netted what I thought was a Noctua, flying oddly over the grass. To my great surprise it proved to be a female H. humuli. In so hot a season it could hardly be a late emergence, 22 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. as the species was quite over the month before. The speci- men was in fine condition, but pale in colour, and very small. —J. Sane; 33, Oxford Street, Darlington. ABNORMAL APPEARANCE OF CUCULLIA VERBASCI.—I was sur- prised to find a specimen of Cucullia verbasci, just hatched out, in my breeding-cage to-day. Itis one of ten larve that I found in Hampshire, in July, 1883, all of which went into the pupa state the same autumn, but only three imagos have at present appeared. ‘The two previous specimens hatched in June last.— Percy Renpatzi; 20, Ladbroke Square, November 21, 1884. CIDARIA FLAVICINCTATA DOUBLE-BROODED.—Is Cidaria flavi- cinctata (ruficinctata) double-brooded generally? I procured some ova rather late this season in Rannoch. One larva rather quickly outgrew the others, but was by no means full-sized when it turned into a very small chrysalis. A few days ago it came out as a perfect and well-marked moth, rather small, but not much smaller than some I have taken in Rannoch; the others are all very tiny, but I hope to get them through the winter.— (Mrs.) EnizanetTu Cross ; Appleby Vicarage, Brigg, Noy. 27, 1884. THe Urticating PRoPerTIES OF THE Hartrs oF PoRTHESIA CHRYSORRH@A.—At least I suppose we must say it is the ‘“‘ hairs,” as stated (Hntom. xvi. 275), that cause with some persons such peculiar and painful irritation, while others are slightly affected, and others, again, not affected at all. During some years, a long strip of hedge on the old Dover road, between Gravesend and the village of Chalk, was the residence of a colony of Porthesia chrysorrhoa, hundreds of their nests, or even thousands, being conspicuous on the hawthorn, blackthorn and hazel. By-passers of both sexes were often, in the summer months, sufferers from the hairs floated by the wind off the larve or their cocoons, and it was rather amusing to hear the various conjectures which were made as to the cause of the irritation, never attributing it to the insects on the hedges. I had, in a local journal, more than once advised the removal of these winter nests, in the interest of the adjacent orchards, seeing that this species is reported to be injurious to fruit trees. The farmers and gardeners neglected this, but the extremely wet winters of 1882 and 1883 appear to have extinguished the species for the present. Returning, how- ever, to the matter of the urtication, I might say that, speaking NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 23 familiarly, there is not a pin to choose between the hairs of P. chrysorrhea and those of P. similis, only from the occurrence of the former species in colonies we are more likely to perceive the disagreeable influence of their protective coating. The theory has been put forward (has it not?) that from the scarlet cup-like - spot on the tenth segment of the larva a fluid is ejected which irritates, as in the case of Dicranula vinula, but I do not think this has been confirmed by dissection. It is amply proved that the cocoons cause irritation, as also the moths, concerning which Mr. Anderson’s suggestion is a plausible one. The oddest cir- cumstance is that the hairs of the larve seem to set up this irritation, not by puncturing the skin, but by simply lying upon it; of course the irritation once started, is generally increased by rubbing. Perhaps we may suppose that the hairs are beset with numerous fine particles, and these, falling off, are taken up by the pores of the skin. A lotion of arnica, applied cold, will probably be found the best remedy. It may be added that a similar effect has been experienced from the hairs of the larve of Arctia caia and A. villica.—J. R. 8. Cuirrorp; Cambrian Grove, Gravesend. —December 11, 1884. Excuancine.—Few of us can hope to form anything like a complete collection of British insects unless we have unlimited time and means at our disposal. Hence the necessity for your Exchange List, which is quite the recognised medium between collectors. ‘The system under which exchanges are effected, among advanced collectors at any rate, is that of ‘‘ marked lists.” Now it is about these that I have a word to say. Does it not stand to reason, that when a collector has obtained full series of more than half the British species, the shortest method, both for himself and his correspondent, will be to place a mark against those species only which he wants? Instead of this, my expe- rience is that if a friend wants, say two species out of a hundred, he will put his mark against ninety-eight and leave the two blank. Let such a person consider the waste of time thus caused to both contracting parties, and mend his ways. If any one knows the value of time, surely it should be an entomologist. ‘T'o the four virtues required of us in the pursuit of any science—patience, energy, observation, and accuracy—may surely be added a fifth, appreciation of the value of time. In the good old days, when “exchanging” specimens first began, it was comparatively 24 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. common to see a notice from some prominent collector, offering certain species to be given away to those who would send box and return postage. How rare is such a display of generosity now-a- days! Is it that, twenty or thirty years since, there were so few entomologists that a collector found it difficult to discover “the” man who wanted a particular species; or is it that we are becoming more selfish? Whichever may be the true solution of this question, I do not think certain persons, who have almost complete series of what macros are obtainable, would be injuring their cabinets or themselves if they encouraged beginners or outsiders by distributing a few of their superfluous specimens without expecting a return of any kind. This is surely the best way of promoting our favourite pastime. —(Rev.) GinBertT H. Raynor; Shenfield, Brentwood, October 22, 1884. DonaciA sparcani, Ahr.— While sweeping at Esher, on August 5th last, I netted a splendid coleopteron of the genus Donacia, and being doubtful as to which species to class it with, I kept it by me until Noy. 20th, when I exhibited several Donacie, in- cluding this one, at the South London Entomological Society’s Pocket-box Exhibition. Several coleopterists were present, but as no one seemed to recognise the beetle in question I referred it to your correspondent, the Rev. W. W. Fowler, who kindly replied :—“ The Donacia is D. sparganii, a good species; it is a pity you did not get more, as Donacia is usually a gregarious genus.” Respecting the gregarious habit of this genus, it may be well to note that I have found this to be generally the case, although I captured but one specimen on the above date, but this is attributable to the fact that I had to suspend operations at noon, and consequently lost the latter portion of the day, which I consider the best time for collecting these beetles.—G. A. Lrwcock; 40, Oxford Road, Islington, W., December 15, 1884. CoORRECTION.—PYRAMEIS HUNTERA NOT IN Essex. —I have pleasure in correcting a statement made by me (Entom. xvii. 41), through the medium of your Journal, that I had captured a specimen of P. huntera a few years ago; it turns out to be, as you surmised in your note, the variety of V. cardui figured in Newman.—F’. H. Barcuay; Leyton, Essex. THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Vou. XVIII.) FEBRUARY, 18885. [No. 261. PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCES IN INSECTS. By Rotanp Trimen, F.R.S., &c. Prof. Candéze has well observed that the main endeavour of every living being in nature is twofold, viz., on the one hand, to get enough to eat; and, on the other, to escape being eaten. To ensure this double object the most strenuous efforts are made ; and it is obvious that, in such a competition for the means of existence, the slightest superiority or advantage must tell in favour of its possessor. Upon avery little difference in strength, swiftness, tenacity, weapons, acuteness of perception, or intelli- gence, the issue of life or death will depend, where there is enough for one but not for two, or when it is a question of hair- breadth escape from a devouring foe. It is with regard to these all-important matters of obtaining a sufficiency of food, and escaping being fed upon, that the advantages of disguise and concealment become manifest. If the desert lion finds the advantage which his tawny hair gives him in stealing unobserved upon his prey, none the less does the desert antelope owe his safety to the isabelline colour of his coat. Nothing more strikingly illustrates the uses of concealment than the fact that in the wide unsheltered spaces where there is no cover of any description, all forms of animal life partake of the prevalent colour of the surface,—isabelline on the desert sands, pure white on the arctic snows. Mr. A. R. Wallace, who has devoted great attention to this subject, and published some excellent papers dealing with it, ENTOM.—FEB., 1888. E 26 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. points out how very generally dwellers among leaves or grass are green; instancing the parrots and green fruit-pigeons among birds, the iguanas and tree snakes among reptiles, and the tree- frogs among amphibians, as prominent cases of the kind. Among insects numbers of species haunting herbage and foliage are’ green, notably in such familiar groups as grasshoppers and caterpillars. From such general adaptations to surroundings as those just referred to, we may pass to that of a more specialized kind, which prevails very largely throughout Nature, embracing innumerable cases of more or less exact resemblance in colouring and in surface to inanimate or to vegetable objects. Peculiarities of the soil; of rocks and stones on its surface ; of the bark of trees and shrubs; of mosses, lichens, and alge; of leaves, flowers and stems ;—are everywhere reproduced in the aspect of the animals respectively frequenting those objects. It is when absorbed in seeking or taking food, or when sleeping, that most creatures are specially exposed to danger, and it is manifest what protection must be afforded them by more or less similarity to the things about them. The instances noticed are but samples of the large number known amongst vertebrate animals; and when we proceed to review the vast class of insects and their allies, so numerous are the cases in point that the difficulty is which to select as illus- trations. The colour of the bare ground is reproduced in many beetles—in South Africa notably by Curculionide and Hetero- mera,—and in'a multitude of grasshoppers and locusts. Some of the latter groups are exactly of the tint of the ground they haunt, so that it is next to impossible to see them as long as they remain motionless. ‘The most specialized case among those known to me of this kind is that of the wingless Acridian genus Batrachotetriz, which has more than one representative in South Africa. The best known species, B. bufo, has been dubbed the ““ Stone Grasshopper” by Mrs. Barber, and well deserves the title ; for in colouring, granulation of surface, and the singular flatness of the back, it precisely resembles the small stones which lie about on the surface of the ground which it frequents. Ina locality near Grahamstown, where this species was numerous, Mrs. Barber and myself found it most difficult to detect the insect, as it was remarkably sluggish, and hopped but feebly - PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCES IN INSECTS. 27 and reluctantly even when we literally kicked it up. A cir- cumstance most worthy of note is that the colouring of this curious grasshopper copies that of the particular little group of stones among which it lives; and I found this to be the case in quite a limited extent of ground, a set of mottled stones occupying a small space having among them Batrachotetrix of corresponding tints, while but a little way off a set of uniformly dark or light stones harboured grasshoppers of like hues. Several South-African butterflies are protected at rest by the similarity of the under-surface of their wings to the ground on which they settle. The beautiful Junonia cebrene and J. cleha are thus often rendered almost invisible; and as the former species has been observed by Colonel Bowker to be much hunted by lizards, no doubt the resemblance is of considerable service to them. The same kind of protective colouring is shown by many of the small butterflies belonging to the genus Zeritis—a very characteristic Cape group. The bark of trees and the lichens which cling to it find in- numerable faithful copyists among insects, whole groups of beetles and moths more or less exactly reproducing each rugosity and tint of their wonted resting-place. The most practised collector will frequently fail to distinguish the best disguised of these insects, which to ordinary eyes are practically invisible. Mr. Wallace records his obtaining in Borneo one of the “Spectres” or “ Walking-stick Insects” (of the orthopterous order), which was covered with foliaceous excrescences of a clear olive-green colour, so as exactly to resemble a stick grown over by a creeping moss or Jungermannia. Quite as marvellous an imitation is the widely-known one of the “ Leaf Insects” par excellence, a genus of the same family, many species of which occur in the islands of the Malayan Archipelago; and it is difficult to believe without close inspection that these species of Phyllium are not in reality the leaves of the plants on which they live. In the Karroo districts of this colony there occurs not uncommonly a very fine Walking-Stick Phasma (Palathus haworthii), attaining a length of seven or eight inches, which in its quiescent condition precisely simulates the dried-up rough greyish-brown twigs of the dwarf shrubby plants characteristic of the country. The whole order of the Orthoptera is remarkable for the 28 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. likeness to vegetation which very many of its members present, even the predaceous Mantide, or “ Hottentot Gods,” affording numerous examples, some of which are very striking. One Natalian species Phyllocrania paradoxa, is almost as close an imitation of dead leaves as Phyllium is of living ones; while the young of Harpazx ocellata, sent to me alive from D’Urban by Col. Bowker, have an extraordinary resemblance to a purple flower of the composite type. In this latter instance the resemblance is brought about by the position of the flat round abdomen, which is turned upward and backward over the hind and middle parts of the thorax, so that its lower surface, set with a central row and double lateral rows of purple foliaceous expansions, is fully exposed. This case of Harpax resembles that mentioned by Mr. Wallace of a Javanese Mantis which exactly resembled the pink flower of an orchid. We can readily perceive the advantage of this harmless plant- like appearance to such voracious devourers of other insects as the Mantide, whose habit it is to remain motionless among vegetation until some unwary prey comes within reach of their long spiny arms. As already mentioned, the unarmed race of butterflies and moths depends largely upon protective colouring, which, in accordance with the different posture of the wings in repose, is disposed in the former on the under-surface of the hind wings and of such part of the fore wings as is exposed, while in the latter it characterizes the upper surface either of all the wings or of the fore wings only. In South Africa I have noticed various butterflies possessed of this kind of protection in a high degree ; such as, for instance, Melanitis leda, which rests among dead leaves on the ground in shady places, and is then indistin- guishable from them; and the female Hronia leda, which settles on the faded bright yellow leaves of the Erythrina tree. Mrs. Barber noticed, near Grahamstown, quite similar behaviour in the conspicuous male Papilio cenea (Merope auct.), which twice deliberately settled in her garden, as a resting-place during a shower of rain, on a shrub whose yellow and brown seeds and flowers entirely resembled the colouring of the under side of his wings. But by far the most elaborate imitation of this kind among butterflies is the famous one, so well explained by Mr. Wallace, PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCES IN INSECTS. 29 of the Indian and Malayan Kallima inachis and K. paralekta. In these species, which on the upper side are deep-blue and orange, the under side copies with perfect accuracy the withered or shrivelled leaves of dead trees or bushes, the imitation going into such details as to reproduce in appearance even the minute fungi or moulds that grow on the leaves! But this is by no means all the extent of the mimicry; the shape of the wings when the insect is at rest exactly representing both the pointed apex and the foot-stalk of the leaf, and the attitude assumed both bringing into prominence these details and concealing such parts as the head and antenne which might impair the completeness of the deception. To give an idea of the exact- ness of the imitation, I may mention that Mr. Wallace had a case (which he showed to me) containing one of these butter- flies with expanded wings and a number of other specimens at rest in their natural attitude on a branch. When this case was exhibited to anybody not specially acquainted with such matters, it was his wont to ask how many butterflies were in it, and the answer would always be ‘‘ One ’’—meaning the con- spicuous blue-and-orange individual with outspread wings. Mr. Wallace would then explain the imitation, showing that the apparent leaves on the branch were actually butterflies. But he had cunningly left one real leaf among them, and when, after explanation, he would say, “ How many butterflies do you count now?” I believe that almost invariably the answer gave one too many, because the real leaf was counted by the spectator as one of the butterflies ! The numerous disguises assumed by Spiders have formed the subject of a special paper by Prof. Pavesi (Atti d. Societa Ital. d. Scienze Naturali, vol. xvili., 1875), and among them some of the most interesting are those presented by hunting or wandering spiders, which do not construct webs for netting prey, but trust to their activity or patience. Many species of Thomisus are well adapted to succeed by being coloured in resemblance to the flowers in or on which they await the arrival of their victims. One that inhabits Cape Town is of the exact rose-red of the flowers of the Oleander; and, the more effectually to conceal it, the palpi, top of cephalothorax, and four lateral stripes on the abdomen are white, according remarkably with the irregular white markings so frequent on the petals of Neriwm. 30 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. I was led to notice a yellow spider of the same group, in con- sequence of seeing that two of a number of butterflies on the flowers of Senecio pubigera did not on my approach fly off with their companions. Each of these unfortunates turned out to be in the clutches of a spider, and, when I released them, I observed their captors very narrowiy, and found that the latter’s close resemblance to the Senecio flowers was not one of colour alone, but due also to attitude. This spider, holding on to the flower- stalk by the two hinder pairs of legs, extended the two long front pairs upward and laterally. In this position, it was scarcely possible to believe that it was not a flower seen in profile, the rounded abdomen representing the central mass of florets, and the extended legs the ray-florets ; while, to complete the illusion, the femora of the front pair of legs, appressed to the thorax, have each a longitudinal red stripe which represents the ferru- ginous stripe on the sepals of the flower. On another occasion I witnessed the actual capture of a small blue butterfly (Lycanesthes) by a white spider of the same genus. The butterfly was engaged in honey-sucking on a white flower-head of Lantana, and explored each individual flower with its proboscis. While I was watching it, the butterfly touched and partly walked over what looked like a slightly faded or crumpled flower about the middle of the cluster. This turned out to be a spider, which instantly seized the butterfly, throwing forward its front legs somewhat after the fashion of a Mantis. In this spider the effect of the little depressions on the limb of the corolla was given by some depressed lines on the back of its smooth white abdomen.* LIFE-HISTORY OF CHARAGIA VIRESCENS. By Grorcr Vernon Hupson. Amone the very few Bombycina inhabiting New Zealand, the family Hepialide occupy by far the most prominent position, comprising many insects of very large size and conspicuous appearance ; of these perhaps Charagia virescens ig one of the * Part of an address delivered at the Annual Meeting of the South African Philosophical Society. LIFE-HISTORY OF CHARAGIA VIRESCENS. él best known, whose life-history I briefly describe in the following paper. The larva of this insect, unlike most of its family, tunnels the stems of living trees, feeding entirely on wood, which it bites off with its strong mandibles. The plant most usually selected by the caterpillar is Aristotelia racemosa, called by the settlers “New Zealand currant,” from its large clusters of rich-looking black berries which appear in autumn; in all other respects it does not in the least resemble currant, reminding one more of a tall cherry tree. Other food-plants are numerous, the “ black maize” (Olea apetala) and “manuka” (Leptospermum) being among those more frequently chosen. This larva for the most part inhabits the main stem of the tree, its gallery always having an outlet to the air, which is covered with a curtain of dull brown silk spun exactly level with the surrounding bark, and consequently very inconspicuous; these burrows usually run down towards the ground, and are mostly two or three inches from the surface of the trunk. In some instances the larve inhabit branches, in which case, if they are of small dimensions, the tunnels are made near the centre of each. These notes only refer to galleries constructed by young larve, as the tunnel made by the insect prior to becoming a pupa is of a very complicated character, and merits a somewhat detailed description; it con- sists of a spacious, irregular, but shallow, cavity just under the bark, having a large opening to the air, which is entirely closed with a thin silken covering almost exactly the same shape and size as the numerous scars which occur at intervals up the trunks of nearly all the trees. Three large tunnels open into this shallow cavity; one in the centre, which runs into the middle of the stem; and one on each side, which run right and left just under the bark. These are usually very short, but sometimes extend half-way round the tree, and occasionally even join one another on the opposite side. The central tunnel has a slightly upward direction for a short distance inwards, which effectually prevents it from becoming flooded with water ; after- wards it pursues an almost horizontal course until it reaches the centre of the tree, when it appears to suddenly terminate. This, however, is not the case, for, if the gallery floor is carefully examined a short distance before its apparent termination, a round trap-door will be found compactly constructed of very 32 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. hard, smooth silk, corresponding with the surrounding portion of the tunnel so exactly that it almost escapes detection. When this lid is removed a long perpendicular shaft is disclosed, which runs down the middle of the tree to a depth of fourteen or sixteen inches, and is about six lines in diameter; at the bottom of this the elongate virescens pupa sleeps quietly and securely in an upright position, the old larval skin forming a soft support for the terminal segment of the pupa to rest on. The upper end of this vertical shaft is lied with silk, which forms a framework on which the trap-door rests when it is closed; the lid itself, being of a larger size than the orifice, which it covers, causes it to be extremely difficult, if not im- possible, to open from the exterior, especially when it fits down very closely, which is nearly always the case as long as the insect remains in its burrow. The object of this most ingenious contrivance is in all probability to prevent the ingress of insects ; Blattz, slugs, spiders, and immature ‘‘ wetas” (Hemideina) are frequently found in both central and lateral tunnels, but they are quite unable to pass the trap-door, and are most likely entirely ignorant of the existence of the vertical burrow. When the pupa has left its dwelling it becomes the permanent home of these animals and many others; I have on several occasions found a small orthopterous insect (Libanasa (?) maculifrons) in the vertical portion of deserted galleries, which has very long antenne, and is agile in the extreme, leaping out of sight if possible the moment the tunnel is opened; it is a most graceful little insect, and I have never discovered it in any other situation, so conclude that this is its normal habitat. The galleries of different individual larve are all wonderfully alike, the only differences observable being in the length of the perpendicular shaft and direction of the horizontal burrow, which is sometimes curved. These variations are usually caused by the presence of other tunnels in the tree, which the larva invariably avoids, although how the insect can ascertain that he is approaching another tunnel, before he actually reaches it, I cannot understand ; I have never known a single instance when a larva has allowed his tunnel to communicate with a neighbouring one, whether inhabited or otherwise. The caterpillar, when full-grown, is of considerable size, measuring from twenty-eight to thirty lines or more in length ; LIFE-HISTORY OF CHARAGIA VIRESCENS. 393 it is tolerably uniform in thickness throughout, and of a dull yellow colour. The head is large, dark chestnut-brown, very irregularly striated, and covered with a few short yellow bristles. The prothoracic segment is hard and shining, with the back and sides ruddy brown, the ventral surface being dull yellow; its spiracle, which is very large, is situated near the posterior margin, and a little above it there is a dull black spot, filling a slight concavity about the same size as the spiracle itself. The second and third thoracic divisions are without breathing orifices, all the rest of the segments, except the last, being provided with a pair situated in the connecting membrane between them. Each of these has on its dorsal surface two corneous plates of an oblong form with rounded angles, the larger of which is situated on the anterior portion of the segment, except on the second thoracic, where the arrangement is reversed, the smaller one being in front of the other. These plates are all divided into two portions by a dorsal line of soft membrane which runs down the middle of the larva. On the sides of the two posterior thoracic segments there are several small plates of irregular shape resembling those on the back; on each of the abdominal segments there are also two plates of an oval form situated just below the spiracles, and lying one above the other ; these are all bright ochre in colour, hard, and shining. The anal segment is entirely corneous, and dull brownish yellow in colour. Prolegs are situated on the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth divisions of the abdomen; they are of a dull yellow hue, and are furnished with a row of very fine black hooks round the edges of that portion applied to the ground. Anal prolegs darker. The whole insect is sparingly covered with isolated yellow and black bristles. In many larve the ventral surface and connecting membrane be- tween the horny pieces is light purple. Younger specimens principally differ in being of an olive-green colour, which is con- siderably darker when they are very small. The last act performed by the caterpillar previous to under- going its transformation is the construction of the trap-door at the top of its burrow; this done the insect retreats to the bottom, its last segment resting on the termination of the vertical gallery; after this it becomes torpid and stiff, then violently wriggles, and the skin, splitting open on the thorax, is worked ENTOM.— FEB., 1885. F 34 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. down to the bottom of the burrow underneath the last abdominal segment of the pupa. The chrysalis of this insect varies much in size, ranging from twenty-four to thirty lines in length; it is of a very attenuated form, the widest portion being through the middle of the thorax; behind this it gradually tapers off towards the extremity, with the last segment abruptly truncated. Its colour is light ruddy ochre, with the head and dorsal portion of the thorax dark brown, and harder than the rest of the body. The edges of the abdominal segments are furnished dorsally with a row of small hooklets above and below all the dividing sutures ; on the ventral surface there is only a single one, which is situated in front of each articulation. As development progresses in the pupa it becomes darker in colour, especially on the wing-cases, which in some individuals show the future black markings of the moth as early as two months before emergence; others remain quite white and soft, the green wings suddenly appearing through their cases a fort- night or three weeks prior to the bursting forth of the imago. Previous to this change the pupa works its way up the vertical tunnel, forces open the trap-door, which yields to the -slightest pressure from within, and wriggles along the horizontal burrow until it reaches the air, the last three or four segments only remaining in the tree. The thoracic shield then ruptures, and the moth crawls out and expands its wings in the ordinary way, resting on the trunk of the tree until they are of sufficient strength and hardness for flight. Although nearly all the ‘“‘currants’’ in this locality are perforated by the larve of C. virescens, I have never yet found a living example in the open, and only twice have discovered remains of them; once a dead crippled specimen at the foot of a tunnelled tree ; on another occasion | found a pair of wings belonging to this moth in the middle of a road near Palmerston North. This specimen had evidently been devoured by some bird like its British relative, Zeuzera esculi, whose wings we so often observe on footpaths in the vicinity of London. Previous to the present year the obscure habits of this insect have prevented me from rearing the moth in captivity, and it was not until I had destroyed several examples of both larve and pupe that I discovered the true nature of its burrow. LIFE-HISTORY OF CHARAGIA VIRESCENS. 35 Since these preliminary disasters I have succeeded in extracting over twelve specimens, six of which died from time to time, three others have just appeared as moths, and the remainder are still alive and healthy, although exhibiting no signs of emergence at present. I therefore conclude that this insect is very delicate in its constitution, taking as I did every precaution with the pup, which were placed on rotten wood and covered with a thin layer of damp moss; a similar proportion of deaths occurring among chrysalids in the natural state would be almost sufficient to account for the apparent rarity of the imago. I will now give a short description of the moth when recently emerged, as most examples seen in collections are so much faded, and frequently mutilated, that very erroneous notions are often entertained respecting the insect’s natural appearance. The fore wings of the male are uniform apple-green in colour, with a series of fainter oval markings, between the longitudinal veins, enclosing a dark green kidney-shaped spot in the centre of each; there is also a diagonal row of obscure white spots near the dise of the wing, and a somewhat conspicuous spot on the costa close to the thorax, of the same colour. The posterior wings are much paler, especially near the body, where they become almost white. The head and thorax are dark green, without markings; the abdomen is white and downy, becoming pale green at the apex, and the antenne are very minute, of a rusty yellow colour. The legs are robust, dark green striped with blackish purple; the expansion of the wings ranges from three and a half to four inches. The female differs principally in having the wings of a more attenuated shape; the anterior pair are also ornamented with a number of black spots, chiefly situated on the costa, but extending across the wing to its posterior margin near the body. The hind wings differ from those of the male in being light greenish brown, and the basal portion of the abdomen is of the same colour, fading off into dark green on the two terminal segments. The expansion of the wings in this sex varies from four and a half to five and a half inches. Notwithstanding its large size and conspicuous appearance this is not at all a beautiful insect, its long abdomen and minute antenne giving it an ungainly and incomplete aspect which is far from pleasing even in the finest specimens. 36 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Before finally concluding this paper I wish to direct the attention of your readers to some caterpillars preserved in the British Museum, and labelled “‘Larve of Charagia virescens attacked by a parasitic fungus.” These insects are to be found buried in the earth, the fungus growing up out of the ground like a small plant. I have never discovered specimens myself, but have examined several obtained by others; in all these the parasite grew out of the connecting membrane between the head and prothorax, and projected somewhat forwards; the larve are also much shrivelled, and consequently unrecognisable ; but being found invariably in the earth and not in the stems of trees, it seems more probable that they are the subterranean larve of one of the other large Hepialide than those of the present insect. I have never heard of infested specimens being found alive, or anything at all resembling them; but as no systematic research has been at present brought to bear on the subject it is impossible to say to what species they belong, especially as the most absurd ideas are entertained by many persons respecting the origin of the fungus, some positively asserting that the caterpillar devours the seed of the “rata” tree (Metrosideros robusta), and then buries itself, the young tree afterwards grow- ing up out of the larva which it destroys ! Karori, Wellington, New Zealand, August 31, 1884. A YEAR'S WORK AMONG GALL-GNATS. By Peter Incupacp, F.L.S. We learn from Bergenstamm’s pamphlet on the Gall-gnats, ‘Synopsis Cecidomyidarum,’ published in Vienna, in 1876, that 606 species, duly named, exist in the world. A very large pro- portion of these Cecidomyide occur in Europe, and of these 75 have been tabulated by Mr. Fitch as having been noticed in Great Britain. I would draw attention to his admirable Synopsis, which appeared in the ‘Entomologist,’ July, 1880 (vol. xiii., pp. 146-154). Mr. Fitch has taken Bergenstamm’s Synopsis as his model, but his own personal experience has given additional interest to his lst, and his introductory remarks should be diligently read and studied by every investigator of Cecid-life. A YEAR'S WORK AMONG GALL-GNATS. 37 I have pleasure in submitting to your readers my year’s doings among this most fascinating group of insects, and could only wish that I had more to record than I have. Long years are needed to elucidate fully the habits of these tiny gall-makers among our Diptera. The first Cecid of the year is the little gnat that comes forth from the last year’s catkins of the birch (Cecidomyia betule). I have reared them abundantly both this season and last. They appear in March, or early in April, if the morning is sunny. The contorted wings are unfolded in about twenty minutes, when they begin their merry gnat-like dance. You must be an early riser to notice the transformation scene. No sooner does the cuckoo-flower (Cardamine pratensis) show its flower-buds than they are tenanted by the larvee of Ceci- domyia cardaminis, half-a-dozen or more occupying one bud, and making it assume such monstrous proportions as sometimes to be hardly recognised as the bud of our bonnie cuckoo-flower. After years of failure I succeeded this year in raising the gnat from the affected flower-heads of last year. Moisture is essential for its development; so that the flowerpot that contains the larve should stand in a saucer constantly supplied with water. I know no other secrets in rearing this merry httle Cecid. Winnertz says that he only reared it after long years of dis- appointment. As the summer comes round, another gnat-gall covers the surface of the leaves of the meadowsweet (Spirea ulmaria) with red and green warts. These are the home of the larve of C. ulmarie, and an abundant progeny may be reared therefrom by closely imitating Nature in her ways and means. The warts of this species are rounded on the obverse, pointed on the reverse, of the leaf. Hach contains a single larva. July is the month in which they appear in the winged state, the first flight appearing about the middle of the month. I must have reared fully a hundred. Tt is well to remember that the Cecids, as a group, are lovers of moisture, so that it is necessary, to succeed in rearing them, to sprinkle the food-plants with water each morning. Professor Loew (of Posen) remarks, in his monograph on the Cecids, that the larvee of these minute forms of insect-life may be resuscitated even when apparently dead and shrivelled. ‘This remark has often helped me, in my investigations, in educing the perfected existences. 38 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Our ash-trees in Yorkshire have this year been affected by a Cecid larva that causes sausage-like swellings in the midribs of the leaflets. Bremi of Zurich figured the galls in his Mono- graph in 1847, though he did not rear the gnats. The reddish larvee lie ensconced in the sausage-like gall, two or three in continuous succession. When full-fed in September and October the gall splits longitudinally, and they drop to the ground, burrowing into the soil. I hope to rear the gnats next year about the time the ash puts forth its leaves. The name of the Cecid is Diplosis betularia. I reared this year, in fair abundance, Cecidomyia veronice from terminal galls of V. serpyllifolia. The economy of the larva is identical, the terminal leaves of the shoots being inspissated, and adapted to the rearing of the offspring. I had some hope that the respective occupants of the nidus might be distinct, but Dr. Meade pronounces them identical. The densely hairy pouch of V. chamedrys resolves itself into a perfectly smooth pouch in V. serpyllifolia, as might naturally be expected. Everyone must have noticed, in his walks in the country, the leafy bosses on the top shoots of our quickset hedges. These contain several larve of the C. crategi. The metamor- phosis is mostly external, though occasionally the larva pupates within the boss itself, as Mr. Fitch remarks. I have not yet reared this Cecid, though recorded years ago by Walker. I hope to be successful in the spring of next year, probably in April. The leaves are thickened by the ovipositing of the gnats, and thus made to supply food and shelter to the reddish- coloured larva, which feeds otherwise unprotected within the leafy tuft. Numbers pupated in my glass-topped box among the soil. Another Cecid I have often tried to rear, but unsuccessfully, is the C. urtice which is so commonly noticed in our lanes and hedgerows in the earlier stage of existence. The metamorphosis again is external, and hence the difficulty of rearing the gnats. The colour of the larva is green, I believe, in all the stages of its growth. I have tried another process of treatment this year, and hope to succeed, as it has not unfrequently been bred in this country, as well as in Europe. I naturally look for it in the spring months. These tiny gall-gnats need constant care in the rearing of them, more especially of those that pupate in the soil. With those that pupate in the gall itself it is mostly otherwise. Fulwith Grange, Harrogate, December, 1884. ORIENTAL ENTOMOLOGY. By THE Rev. F. A. Waker, D.D. (Continued from p. 9.) Durine my first visit to the East I captured 38 species of Coleoptera in Greece, 34 in Asia Minor, 21 in Syria, 18 in Palestine, 15 in Turkey, 7 in Egypt. On my second expedition I only captured 8 species of Coleoptera, 5 in Egypt and 3 in Nubia. The difference in the number of species respectively noticed in the different countries may possibly be attributable, to some extent, to the time of year when the various localities were visited; and there are additional grounds for entertaining this hypothesis in the fact that the later the period the larger the number of species proved: for example, 7 in Egypt (in the month of March), 18 in Palestine (March—April), 21 in Syria (April), 34 in Asia Minor (May), and 38 in Greece (May—June). Only 13, it is true, were noticed in Turkey in the month of May, for the simple reason that a great part of my time was spent in visiting the public buildings, instead of in the open country. The genus Oxythyrea had a wide range, occurring alike in Pales- tine, Syria, Asia Minor, Turkey, and Greece. 'I'wo species of this tribe were found in great abundance, viz., cinctella and hirtella, and for the most part, as was also the case with many of the Cetonias, when tightly ensconced in the middle of a flower. I never saw any kind of beetle anywhere in such countless profusion as the showy orange and black-spotted Mylabris quadripunctata, on the ears of ripe corn, during our return drive from Deceleia on the Ist of June, at the close of a bright and hot day. Some few good sorts were found beneath stones; seven specimens, for example, of the rare Nebria hemprichii, at Aceldama, on April 3rd, and Chlenius spoliatus, C. vestitus, Anchomenus austriacus, and such like metallic Coleoptera on the wet ground in the vicinity of the Great Bend or reservoir of Sultan Selim, that had recently overflowed its boundary on the 25th of May, at Belgrade. Anthia sex-maculata (variegated black and white) is the handsomest, decidedly so, of the very few species I saw in all Egypt, and was taken running about the sand heaps that are silted up by the action of the desert winds, 40 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. around the clumps of tamarisk at El] Ferdane and elsewhere, in the neighbourhood of the Suez Canal. Ateuchus sacer (the Scarabzeus of the ancients) was found also in the Desert, and at the Pyramids of Geezeh, but far more plentifully on the road to Laurium and Marathon, two and a half months later. Of the eight species of Coleoptera that I came across on my second visit to Cairo, and in my voyage up the Nile, one kind only was plentiful, Steraspis squamosa, one of the green metallic Buprestide, and of this bright-coloured beetle there were any amount, as it swarms on the tamarisks (January—March) at Erment, the ancient Hermopolis, a short distance up the river south of Luxor; and at this latter place a large number had been stored since the preceding season, in a terra-cotta gourd, for sale to tourists in December. Respecting Orthoptera there is comparatively little to relate. I discovered the red variety of Cidipoda germanica to be as widely distributed in the East as previous experience had made me acquainted with its occurrence in Switzerland, Italy, and Corsica, for I found it on the banks of the Pharpar on the 19th of April, where it took its short flights amid the corn; and again in the neighbourhood of Alexandretta, in the direction of Issus, on the 28th of the same month, as we toiled up among the myrtles, pomegranates, Portugal laurels, and styrax trees, beneath a very hot sun, to the ruins of the old castle of Merkes, two hundred yards from the shore; and lastly, I noticed it on the road leading to Marathon, on the 5th of June, as also previously at Belgrade, on the 28th of May. Acridium tataricum, a locust with smoky brown wings, likewise a common species in Italy and Corsica, was also found near Alexandretta, on the road to Marathon, and at Beyrout as well. Of Mantis religiosa I obtained a specimen off the orange trees in the Island of Roda, in March, and another clinging to a bough of Ficus elasticus was brought me at Beyrout in April. There are also several grasshoppers that I collected in Palestine, Syria, Asia Minor, Turkey and Greece, chiefly in the last-named country, but which, if differing in kind, do not differ in their light brown or dust-coloured~ hue, as well as general appearance, from our common field grasshoppers at home. They are at present unnamed, as there is little use in taking Orthoptera URTICATING PROPERTIES OT LEPIDOPTERA. A4l for comparison with those in the National Collection. What I take to be mole-crickets were found in the classic regions of the Pnyx. I have two small specimens of the larva of a Mantis belonging possibly to the genus Hremiaphila, and bearing out its title in its natural habitat, as it was scarcely distinguishable in hue from the desert sand of Gebel Hashab, where I discovered it on the 22nd of March. Lastly, the mention of a remarkable-looking insect, Calli- menus oniscus, must not be omitted. It is a wingless locust that keeps up an incessant and shrill chirp, in the underwood of myrtle and cistus, &c., on either side of the roads to Laurium and Marathon. As it hushes its strain when approached, it is not always easy to detect its presence, more particularly as its ground colour is a bright apple-green, traversed by numerous horizontal bars of black across the body. This beautiful colour- ing, however, is turned to brown after its inevitable consignment to a wide-mouthed phial of spirits. It no doubt derives its specific name of évcxos, “the little ass,” in consequence of its similarity, from a dorsal point of view, to that beast of burden. (To be continued.) URTICATING PROPERTIES OF LEPIDOPTERA. I wap hoped that my note of inquiry on this subject (Entom. xvii. 256) would have elicited something more definite as to the cause of urtication than it has done. But at any rate the corres- pondence it has provoked has incontestibly proved one fact, viz., that Porthesia similis and P. chrysorrhea are capable of producing urticaria in all stages of their development. No doubt the same may be said with equal truth of other species which have hairy larve, and I think it is quite as certain that the poisonous property (whatever it is) can reach the face, &c., without the assistance of the hands. In my former communication I purposely refrained from advancing any theory of my own, my purpose being rather to draw forth information from others who I hoped to find had studied the subject. I may now say that my opinion at the ENTOM.—FEB., 1885. G 42 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. time was—and still is—that the dust surrounding the cocoon, and which is wonderfully light, and set floating in the air by the slightest touch, is the medium by which the poison—for poison undoubtedly it is—is conveyed to the skin. I find from an exhaustive and thoughtful paper in ‘ Psyche’ (vol. i11., nos. 101 & 102), the organ of the Cambridge (Mass. U.S.A.) Entomological Club, which the editor, George Dimmock, Esq., has kindly sent me since my note appeared in the ‘Entomologist,’ that both American and Continental scientists appear to be ahead of us in this branch of Entomology. Perhaps I may be excused, considering the paucity of informa- tion which we appear to possess on this subject, for making a few quotations from Mr. Dimmock’s paper ‘‘On some glands which open externally on insects.” Speaking of the larva of Attacus cecropia (and there is a strong presumption that what is true of one hairy larva is true, in a more or less degree, of others), he says:—‘‘ The red tubercles are seen, in sections cut with the microtome, to be divided into compartments, the cavities of each spine opening into a compartment at its basal end. The spines themselves are quite rigid and very brittle, so that they break away at a slight touch and leave a hole in the tubercle, out of which an odorous fluid pours, pushed by internal pressure. This fluid is strongly acid to litmus paper. ‘The odour given out by these glands suggests at once their protective functions. . Glands similar to those of the larva of Attacus cecropia, in that they have no outlet until one is produced by external agency, are not rare in the larve of Bombycide. ‘The severe poisoning pro- duced by the hairs of certain larve of Bombycide, of which the so-called processionary caterpillar of Kurope is an example, is caused by the secretion from a minute gland at the base of each hair. The secretion of these glands fills the hollow central portions of the hairs, and when the sharp, often barbed, hairs are broken in the flesh of attacking animals, the broken parts carry with them the poisonous secretion. ‘This secretion is, perhaps, formic acid, or a formate in solution.” As Mr. South mentions Cnethocampa (Kntom. xviii. 5) I give the following :—‘‘ Goossens regards the spines of the larve of Cnethocampa to be poisonous because of a powder produced by the drying of the secretion given out by the evaginable glands upon the dorsum of these larvee. This view seems unacceptable URTICATING PROPERTIES OF LEPIDOPTERA. 43 after Karsten, Keller and others have so clearly proved the presence of glands at the bases of the spines of these stinging larve.” And very much more, all tending to prove what Mr. South says he has only seen suggested by Mr. Swinton, viz., that under- neath the warts, on the hinder segments, glands are situated which secrete a poisonous fluid, which is forced in minute drops through the spines. Coming to the insects we have lately had under consideration, Mr. Dimmock goes on to say, “ The structure of the evaginable warts and their glands in Leucoma silicis will answer in a general way for the similar warts of Orqyia and of the European Liparis. The wart is protruded by pressure of the fluids within the body, and retracted by muscles; at or near its centre open the ducts of one or two glands which are situated beneath the warts. The position and general structure of these glands, as well as their motion when the larve are disturbed, indicate that they are defensive in function.” Just one more slight extract, which appears to throw a little light upon the mode in which the imago causes urtication :— “ Still another form of gland is that at the anterior end of certain bombycid pup, which breaks when the imago springs the chitinous pupal skin, and leaves its secretion, which has been termed bombycic acid, on the head of the moth.” I trust these few extracts will give a fresh impetus to the investigations of those gentlemen who have the time and means of successfully following up this inquiry. GroreE Barpine. Ruby Street, Wisbech, January, 1884. = TuroucH the courtesy of Mr. Geo. Dimmock I have been favoured with a copy of the American publication ‘ Psyche,’ vol. ili, No. 101, 102, containing a valuable and interesting paper by that gentleman—one of the editors—‘‘on some glands which open externally on insects,’ in which are some observations showing that the urticating properties of certain lepidopterous larvee are due to the glandular hairs, somewhat of the nature of those of the stinging-nettle. For every effect there is a cause, and the irritation produced by some caterpillars is a fact which cannot be gainsaid. It 44 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. therefore would be time profitably employed by any lepidopterist in investigating the subject. Eixperience proves that it is not all hairy larve which possess this painful property; nay, that it is confined to comparatively few of them. Why is this? It seems rather humiliating to entomologists of our own country that, with almost one exception (that of Mr. Swinton), no researches have been made which show any light upon what has too long remained a “ questio vexata,” and that to learn anything respect- ing urtication we must go to our friends in America, or it may be here and there a Continental authority. Mr. Dimmock has evidently bestowed much labour upon the subject himself, and has sought for information from every available source. To show what has been done in America the following short quota- tions may be serviceable to many of the readers of the ‘ Entomologist ’:— ‘“‘ Karsten, in 1848, described theanatomy of the poison-glands at the base of the hairs of an American species of Saturnia. Five illustrations of this kind of gland are to be found in the stinging hairs of the larve of Hyperchiria to and Hemileuca maie, both common insects in parts of the United States. Lintner and Riley have recorded their experiments in the stinging power of these two species of larve, and the latter writer has given a list of the larve of American species of Lepidoptera which are known to sting. Lintner has experimented further upon the stinging power of the larve of Lagoa crispata, and Miss Murtfeldt upon that of the larve of Lagoa opercularis. That the sting of some of these larve can do lasting injury is certain, for my mother, when twenty-seven years old, received so severe a sting in the middle finger of one hand in brushing away a larva from her neck, that the distal joint, healing only after several months, remains somewhat stiffened and slightly deformed, now thirty-seven years. For a time the stinging of these bombycid larve was attributed to the action of the hairs in entering and wandering about in the flesh ; and even as late as 1881, long after the discovery of the glands at the base of the hairs, Goossens advances the idea that the poison of the pro- cessionary caterpillar of Europe comes from other glands. Keller, in 1883, discusses the mode of urtication in the pro- cessionary caterpillar (larvee of Gastropacha), and figures the glands at the bases of the thin hairs.” NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 45 Surely some British Entomologist is capable of verifying these statements, and bringing the question to a definite con- clusion. JOSEPH ANDERSON, JUN. Chichester, January 8th, 1885. ENTOMOLOGICAL NOTES, CAPTURES, &c. Screntiric NOMENCLATURE AND Dr. Lane’s HuROPEAN Burrerriies.—The recent criticisms on the ‘Entomologist’ Synonymic List of British Lepidoptera, as well as the review of Dr. Lang’s beautifully illustrated work on the European Rhopalocera (Entom. xvii. 284), induces me to ask information on a few points of nomenclature, &c. I observe that in Mr. South’s List Hpinephile hyperanthus has become EL. hyperanthes ; and Argynnis lathonia, A. latona. Now, for my own part, in opposition to the criticism in a contemporary, I quite concur in the propriety of altering a mis-spelt name, when it is clear that the error was a sin of ignorance or carelessness on the part of the godfather; but there is, nevertheless, such a thing as being philologically hypercritical, which I am inclined to think the first change is. Now hyperanthus may not be correct as a Greek derivation, for I presume this is what is meant by the suggested emendation; but perhaps the author merely Latinized uzeg avbeos, in which case the termination might stand. With the second correction, however, I quite coincide, as being certain to be eventually adopted, as there can be little doubt that the beautiful goddess stood gossip to this shining insect, although I am puzzled by Dr. Staudinger’s “‘recte Latonia.” In Dr. Lang’s ‘ Rhopalocera Europe’ there are various departures from the recognised ortho- graphy, and, as he has deviated very rarely from Dr. Staudinger’s nomenclature, it would be interesting to know the grounds of these departures. On p. 103 a var. of Lycena @gon is given as “argryrotocus,’ Berg.; and on p. 105 is L. argus ab. ‘‘ argyro- nomon,” Berg. Is not the adjectival prefix the same in both names, seeing that both were given by the same author? And if apyupos be not, what is the adjective intended? The latter name is spelt by most authorities, “argyrognomon.” Is there any indication whether yvwuov, the index of a sundial, or vomos, 46 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. a shepherd, was meant by Bergstrisser? On p. 245 a var. of Hrebia cme, “ psodea,” Frr., is given, while Staudinger substitutes spodea, there being already a psodea, Hb., var. of H. medusa. Surely this is not only admissible but advantageous? On p. 208, Argynnis elisa, Godt., is given as “eliza.” On what grounds? On p. 312, C. typhon var. rothliebi becomes “ rothliebit” ; and, at p- 233, the var. herta, Hb., of Melanargia larissa, ‘‘ hertha.” At p. 354, ab. catena, Stgr., is given as “ catena”; and nostrodamus, F., as “‘ nostradamus,” the latter being, if my memory serves me, the correct spelling. At p. 290, mera becomes “ mera’’—on what proof? and thanaos, Bdv., ‘‘thaunaos.” Not having access to the works of the earlier entomological authors, I am unable to seek out the data upon which Dr. Lang relies. There are also scattered throughout the work various misprints not included in the errata, which, for the benefit of those who possess the volume, I will indicate under correction :—P. 125, ‘‘ Menaclas”’ (Menalcas) ; p. 147, “Trappe” (Trapp); p. 155, “Heyéres” (Hyéres); p. 202, “freya, Thub.” (Thnb.). Query, would it not be better to print this name freiia in an English work, as is done in Deione for Dejone, Aglaia for Aglaja, Iolas for Jolas, &c.? P. 245, * Puy de Saucy” (Sancy); p. 262, “‘livonica” (livonia); and on Pl. LXIITI. is “var. pithio, Hb.” (pitho, Hb.). I notice, too, that Dr. Lang denies the occurrence of C. edusa and EH. epiphron vy. cassiope in Treland. The rarity of Dr. Birchall’s List no doubt accounts for these mis-statements; but I should be interested to know whether Cistus is correctly given as the food-plant of C. myrmidone. In conclusion, perhaps I may be allowed to bear my testimony to the admirable style in which the illustrations have been brought out, their accuracy of tint—even in the Lycenide and other genera difficult to produce satisfactory facsimiles of—exceeding, in my opinion, any that have hitherto appeared in previous works on Kuropean Entomology. In the Hesperiide only I think some characteristic markings have in some instances been omitted ; and no wonder, for some of this family remain a puzzle to the best Lepidopterologists.—W. F. pe V. Kanze; Dec., 1884. Screntriric NomMEeNcLATuRE.—Now that Mr. South has pub- lished his new synonymic list of all Lepidoptera which have hitherto been taken in this country, it is a good opportunity to protest against the habit of naming new species after individuals, which some entomologists have adopted. 'To take, as an example, NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 47 the new Hupithecia described in your columns last October ; Mr. C. S. Gregson (who, by the way, says in his recent book on the subject that ‘anything will do for a name’”’) has called it Hupithecia curzoni. ‘This is not good Latin, and should, of course, have been curzonensis; yet, according to the “inexorable law of priority,” or at least according to Dr. Staudinger’s canon (referred to by Mr. South in his preface), the species must remain # curzoni till the end of time, in spite of the fact that the Latin is bad, and the name about as mean- ingless as a name can possibly be. This is the weakness of the law of priority. A bad name once given can never be changed for a good one. Confusion is thereby certainly avoided, yet it is very doubtful whether science is bettered. But why did Mr. Gregson call the species curzoni at all? He gives us his reason; he named it in honour of his friend Mr. Roper- Curzon, from whom he received a most liberal supply of perfect insects and larve. All honour where honour is due certainly, but it is, all the same, a very bad principle of naming to call a species after an individual. If such a principle were generally adopted, then anything would do for a name so long as it hada Latin termination. Is the name to have any meaning? If not, a system of giving a number or letter to each species, such as is in vogue with astronomers for denoting particular stars, would be the simplest, shortest, and most methodical. But if the specific name is to have any meaning at all, it ought to have as much meaning as possible. Now when an insect is named after an individual, e.g., Pieris spillert, recently described in the ‘ Ento- mologist, we learn nothing about it from its name beyond the mere fact that a certain collector some time or other had the good luck to be the first to capture it. Perhaps to infer even so much as that from the name would be wrong, e.g., when one entomologist, describing a species, gives it a name in honour of a friend. A name should, if possible, serve as a description, as it does roughly in the cases of Vanessa c-albwn, Smerinthus ocellatus, Macroglossa bombyliformis, Plusia gamma, &c. It may be difficult nowadays to find a descriptive epithet for a new species which is not already in use; but this should, whenever possible, be our principle in nomenclature. Failing this, the insects can be called after a marked or peculiar habit, e.4., Odonestis potatoria, or after the usual food-plant, as has been done 48 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. in the case of Thecla pruni, T. quercus, T. rubi, Sphinx con- volvuli, ligustri, &c.; or, again, where the insect’s range is not wide, after the particular locality'in which it is found. But it should only be our very last resource to call a species after an individual. It is true that in what may be described as pre- scientific days names were given which were drawn from ancient mythology, e.g., Argynnis selene, A. latona, Lycena davus, L. corydon, L. arion, &c.; but such names, though apparently meaningless, have, to my ear, at any rate, a classical ring about them which makes them acceptable, but which such names as E. curzoni or P. spilleri altogether lack. Would it not be best, if the discoverer of a new species were denied the absolute right to give the name, but might only suggest it, and the name to be adopted by English entomologists be definitely fixed by some authoritative scientific association, which would take care that improper names were never recognised? Probably the London Society, or the editorial staff of the ‘ Entomologist,’ would be the proper body to regulate all new cases of nomen- clature.—A. Currry; Balliol College, Oxford, and 838, Queen’s- Gate Gardens, 8.W., December, 1884. Excuaneinc.—The Rey. Gilbert H. Raynor, speaking of marked lists, advocates placing a mark against our desiderata, leaving blank those species we do not require. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the British species number 2000, if we adopt the plan of marking off those we are not wanting, by the time our collection is complete, clearly we shall have made 2000 marks. Let us now look at the other side. The Reverend gentleman takes an extreme case when the desiderata are but 2 per cent. I will take the other extreme, and suppose an entomologist possessing full series of 1001 species commences to exchange. To complete his list he will have made 999 marks, and 999 erasures or other marks, a proceeding which would at least be no more speedy than the making of 2000 marks, to say nothing of the appearance of the list. After all, in pre- paring a list for exchange, it is not the mechanical act of marking which takes the time, but the consideration required to mark off the right species, and I have always found the pen to keep pace with the mind in this matter. Some people use a list with the species numbered consecutively, such as Staudinger’s; one’s duplicates or desiderata are then quoted NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 49 by number, an arrangement which answers well enough in certain cases. ‘There is still, however, room for improvement, and anyone who can introduce a plan curtailing the immense labour involved in conducting an active correspondence and exchange will deserve well of his brethren. We must all agree with Mr. Raynor in his remarks upon the great value of time. To the student, the true worker, time is more than money or anything else besides, and it is from a deep conviction of this important truth that I am unable to subscribe to the following sentiment :—“ In the good old days, when ‘ exchanging’ specimens first began, it was comparatively common to see a notice from some prominent collector, offering certain species to be given away to those who would send box and return postage. How rare is such a display of generosity now-a-days!” Quite so! perhaps we are wiser in our generation. ‘The advocates of such promiscuous generosity should give it a full trial. I apprehend there would be little difficulty in disposing of a few ‘‘ Apatura iris,” or any other good thing on those terms. But who is to benefit by the transaction ?—to receive the product of our most precious time? Not our old and valued correspondents, but ‘beginners and outsiders,” we are told. Surely beginners want no encouragement. For them all is novelty and excitement. If they are made of the right stuff they will come to the front in spite of difficulties and disappointments; if they are not, no encouragement will raise them above respectable mediocrity, and of these we always have enough. For “ outsiders” and dabblers I entertain the heartiest contempt. Their knowledge of our science is of the most superficial and elementary character, for which, in itself, they are not to be condemned, but they make no advance; they have attained maturity. Year after year they pursue the same attractive species, which are often hunted to death. Hwupithecia is neglected ; Crambus ignored, and Scoparia unknown. What care they for the wonders of Bucculatrix, the beauties of Nepticula, or the marvels of adaptation exhibited by the endless Coleophore ? Is not Dominula still to be had ? And what a fine picture it makes with the ‘ marbled white” for a border! Of these people we have more than enough. Let them go their way. I will not encourage them; but the tried corres- pondent—the genuine naturalist—is welcome to all I have.— GkEo. CovVERDALE; 24, Fleming Road, Lorrimore Square, S.E. ENTOM.— FEB., 1885. H 50 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Excuaneine.—Until recently my own exchange list was embellished with the prevailing marks against complete series; but one of my correspondents favouring me with his marked list, I was much struck with his method, and at once adopted it. As I think it could hardly be improved upon, I venture to give particulars. Complete series are left unmarked, incomplete have across, and a stroke is put against species unrepresented in the collection, which stroke is crossed when a specimen or specimens are obtained, and when a series is completed the cross is surrounded by a circle. The list thus stands: Complete, no mark or *. Incomplete +. None —. ‘This is a very simple arrangement, and, I think, would meet the approval of your correspondents. With reference to the concluding portion of Mr. Raynor’s paragraph (Entom. xvii. 23), I think the secret hes in the fact of the very large increase in the number of collectors. At the same time I feel sure there are yet many who would feel pleasure in assisting others in the manner described. Will your correspondent lead the way ?—E. Saxinz, 17, The Villas, Erith. Time oF APPEARANCE OF ARGYNNIS PANDORA.—In the last number of the ‘ Entomologist’ (p. 21) a correspondent refers to the time of appearance of Argynnis pandora. Most authors give June and July as the period when this species appears in the imaginal state. Some, however, as Herrich-Schaffer, only mention June. An example from the collection of the late Sir Sidney Saunders is ticketed ‘‘ Yanina, June.” I believe that I have given correctly its normal times of appearance in my work as referred to by Mr. Carrington. But it must be recollected that the evolution of the imagines in this genus is hastened or retarded by the forwardness or lateness of the season. For instance, the normal time of appearance of A. adippe in this district is about the middle of July; yet in forward seasons it will occasionally appear nearly a month earlier; on the other hand, it is sometimes the end of July before it makes its appearance, fresh specimens being obtainable till the middle of August. Almost the same may be said of Argynnis paphia. Again, altitude has a very marked effect. I have taken A. adippe and A. aglaia in a perfectly fresh condition at the beginning of September in rather elevated localities in Switzerland, whereas in the lower-lying places they would by that time have ceased to appear on the wing for a month. I think it is NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 51 most probable, though I have never taken the species, that Argynnis pandora is influenced, in a manner similar to that seen in its immediate congeners of the Palearctic fauna, by temperature and elevation.—Henry C. Lane; Maidenhead, Berks, January 26, 1885. Soaring Haprr or VANESSA ATALANTA.—Whilst coaching from Bettws-y-coed to Capel Curig, N. Wales, in September last, I observed large numbers of this species, which was very common generally, rise from the branches of ashes and oaks as we passed. Every few yards two or three of the insects were disturbed, and soared to a considerable height, like Apatura iris, the resem- blance to whose flight was strikingly similar, a fact I had never previously noted or seen recorded.—Martin J. Harpine ; Old Bank, Shrewsbury, December 21, 1884. ABUNDANCE OF VANESSA ATALANTA AND V. CARDUI.— With regard to Miss Hinchceliff’s note (Entom. xvil. 271) on these species, I may say that both have been particularly numerous in North Kent through the summer of 1884, a circumstance more noteworthy, because it has not, on the whole, been at all a good season for butterflies. Several of the usually abundant species have been excessively scarce; one of the oddest disappearances, not merely in 1884, but for several years past, is that of Vanessa io, Which was so familiar to us amid the cliffs and chalk-pits, delighting in the bloom of thistles and brambles.—J. R. 8. CuirrorD ; Cambrian Grove, Gravesend, December 11, 1884. LEPIDOPTERA IN SOMERSETSHIRE.—It has again been a barren year for collectors in this part of the West of England. Vanessa cardui and V. atalanta were exceptionally common, almost every other species of Lepidoptera especially rare. At sugar, although I persevered until late in October, only one species appeared in any numbers; my old acquaintance Polia flavicincta, even Anchocelis pistacina, Triphena pronuba, Phlogophora meticulosa, and such-like common insects appeared but sparsely. Of course Xylina semibrunnea and X. socia (petrificata) were looked for in vain.—H. W. Liverr; Wells, Somerset, December, 1884. EupPITHECIA LINARIATA AND ACIDALIA VIRGULARIA DOUBLE- BROODED.—The past season, owing to its intense heat, was undoubtedly favourable to the development of second broods of insects which generally appear but once in the year. Yet how ‘22 THK ENTOMOlOGIST. very partial this second appearance must have been is shown by the fact that, although something like a hundred pupex of i. linariata resulted from larve I took at Hazeleigh, in Sep- tember last, only one of these produced an imago. When this emerged I cannot exactly say, as I only found it to-day. It would, no doubt, be before the middle of November, when the cold weather set in. I think the fact worth recording, as the pupz were left in a room where there has been no fire, and my experience with the species is that even when the pups are kept in a warm place they never emerge before their natural time of appearance, in June. Some Eupitheciz may easily be forced, as, for instance, H. albipunctata, which, when subjected to a warmer temperature than usual, emerges regularly in February and March. With regard to Acidalia virgularia (incanata), I took a single specimen at light, at Brentwood, towards the end of October. Many of the Acidalie are partially double-brooded when reared in captivity, but I think this is rarely the case with them in a state of nature.—(Rev.) Ginpert H. Raynor; Hazeleigh Rectory, Maldon, December 26, 1884. KurirHecia curzont.—In vol. xvii. of the ‘ Entomologist’ (p. 230) is a description of this species, which is fully and carefully described throughout the various stages of its life- history, together with some remarks thereon, one remark being that this is probably the insect figured in the ‘ Entomologist’ (vol. xiv. plate 1, figs. 2 and 3, &c.). If, after reading this description and these remarks, and seeing these figures, anyone can “‘ have a strong opinion” that this species “is nothing more or less than a variety of H. nanata” (see Entom xvii. 277), I need only say that it does not follow because he is blind to specific differences that other people cannot see them. As to the writer having sent his specimens of this species ‘‘ to our most eminent entomologists, who all agreed with him in considering it to be a very interesting form of H. nanata,’ I have nothing to say, but that if our most eminent entomologists merely agree with him in “his strong opinion,” but know nothing of the fact that it is a distinct good species, then I may perhaps be allowed to say that I do not esteem very highly the mere opinions of naturalists, however eminent they may be thought to be, if their opinions do not agree with the natural-history facts known to me. In reply to line 17 (Entom., xvii. 277), I may say NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 53 I usually base my conclusions upon my own observations, or upon the observations and conclusions of other careful observers, and not upon mere opinions. The interesting footnote on the page just referred to has but one fault—it is too short. Will the Editor of the ‘Entomologist ”” give us a translation of August Hoffman’s paper on the Lepidoptera of the Shetland Isles in an early ‘Entomologist ?? JI am sure everybody would be delighted. It is hardly fair that your readers should be left in doubt by A. Hoffman, Dr. Staudinger, and E. A. Fitch, all first-rate entomologists, yet are to be bound by the mere opinion of an insect collector who evidently does not know the larva of the common species Hupithecia nanata, which is a long, cylin- drical (tapering to the head), often day-feeding larva, with dorsal lozenges all along its back, and which cuts a round hole into the flowers of Calluna vulgaris to get at the stamens; from an appressed (tapering to head and anus from the central segments) wrinkled larva which feeds at night on the lower branches, eating the leaves and caring little for the flowers of the same plant. I need scarcely call attention to the trivial name of HE. nanata, “the narrow-winged pug;” anyone looking at figs. 2 and 8 of the plate will see that the draughtsman realized that EH. curzoni is not a narrow-winged pug, but exactly the shape of Hupithecia satyrata. When looking over Mr. Curzon’s captures here, he again called my attention, as he had before done by letter, to the fact that hardly two of his long series of Ei. curzoni were alike, and that very often the two upper wings differed in pattern—see the figures named above, where the artist has carefully hit this peculiarity off. Now for EH. nanata, I do not know a more constant pug. I have only seen three varieties of it; they are all in my cabinet, but only one of them is a striking variety; yet I have bred and looked care- fully over many thousands of bred and captured specimens for varieties. Nanata larve can be swept off heather flowers in profusion during afternoons. Mr. Curzon swept for curzoni larvee at Unst day and night, but never obtained one by that process. —C. S. Greason; Rose Bank, Fletcher Grove, Liverpool, December 17, 1884. Nore on THE Larva oF STILBIA ANoMALA.—Although Dr. W. S. Riding obtained his eggs of Stilbia anomala from several moths (Entom. xviii. 1), it is evident he only succeeded in rearing 54 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. one variety of the larva from them. There is another very distinct form, having the ground colour bright pea-green. Descriptions of both may be found in the Ent. Mo. Mag. for February, 1880, p. 210.—Gro. T. Porrirr; Huddersfield, January 3, 1885. LUPERINA GUENEEI AND L. pumerini.—I see L. gueneet is omitted in Mr. South’s list; at least I cannot find it; and we must not have this very distinct species blotted out without showing why. Now here is my proof towards its continuance. In 1860 or 1861 T. Porter (still living) brought me two fine specimens of a moth I did not know. They were ofboth sexes. I purchased them from him, and sent them on to the Rev. H. Burney, who forwarded them to Henry Doubleday. From him they went to Guenée, and he returned them with the remark that he had a specimen in his collection marked as avariety of L. testacea, but he was quite satisfied they represented a good species when he saw both sexes. H. Doubleday then named them after Guenée, as the latter was evidently the original captor. I saw Porter again, and he told me another man, by name H. Stephen- son, had one. They took three in all near the ferry at Rhyl, N. Wales. I sent Porter again, and went myself, but we failed to find more afterwards. I bought the specimen from Stephenson, and sent it on to Miss Sulivan, of Fulham, where, I suppose, it remains. I think it was a female. Now could a better tale be told? By the way, how many L. dumerilit have ever been taken in this country, and where are they, and who were the captors? I think while there are some of the old collectors and entomologists left these things should be brought to the front. Will anyone who has got LZ. dumerilit publish the fact and particulars of its capture ?—J. B. Hopexinson; 15, Spring Bank, Preston, December 15, 1884. MYELOIS CERATONI® AT GREENWICH.—It may be interesting to some of the readers of the ‘ Entomologist’ to know that I took a fine specimen of Myelois ceratonie in my house on the morning of Decembér Ist. ‘This is the third specimen I have found in the same room, at different times. The first two were taken in the month of July—one this year (1884), the other in 1880. I believe the insects I have found came from larve feeding in almonds. I found some larve feeding in almonds some time ago, and, laying them by, I thought no more of them. At any rate, NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 55 this is the only way I can explain their appearance in such a strange locality. I suppose the late date is not at all remark- able for species bred under the circumstances; the temperature of the house would be sufficient to account for it.—J. Turr; Beaconsfield Terrace, Greenwich, S.E., December, 1884. NovreEs on CoLEOPHOR&Z.—In October last I found a few cases of a Coleophora which agree tolerably well with the description of the case of C. vibicigerella which I have had sent me. They are now hybernating, and I hope to give you a good account of them later on. While collecting the cases of C. artemisiella, which have been unusually plentiful this autumn on Artemisia maritima, I found nine cases of a Coleophora which I do not recognize. They are rather paler, but otherwise very similar to the case of C. paripennella, an insect one would hardly expect to meet with on a saltern where there are no bushes, and where the plants are occasionally covered with the tide. Whether these are now full grown or merely hybernating to again feed in the spring, time must decide. I hope some of them may reach the perfect state. —Wm. Macuin ; 29, Carlton Road, Carlton Square, E., Decem- ber 22, 1884. NapPHTHALINE.—In reply to inquiries made by me in Novem- ber, 1883, to Mr. Erastus Corning, of New York City, he very kindly sent me over a box of lump naphthaline, asking that I should give it a fair trial, as he had only found one collector advising the use of it instead of camphor. I had used naph- thaline as sold by English chemists for some years past, and at once placed some of it in a separate box of insects, select- ing those most prone to grease. After a year's trial I find the insects are entirely free from grease and mites. Mr. Corning told me he had found it useless for destroying insect “ pests” already in existence; of this I am unable to speak from per- sonal experience, not having had any to experiment upon. The lump naphthaline has been in great request among my ento- mological friends. I am pleased with it, and would certainly advocate its use, much preferring it to camphor.—R. M. Sornrsy; Eastbourne, December 4, 1884. [Naphthaline has for some time past come into general use amongst entomologists, for the preservation of dried insects. The lump naphthaline, such as described by Miss Sotheby, can be obtained at the shops of those gasfitters who supply the 56 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. albo-carbon light fittings, or direct from the Albo-Carbon Light Company, Horseferry Road, London, S.W.—Ep,| LEPIDOPTERA NEAR BromiEy.—On page 20 there is rather an unfortunate omission: on line 4 from bottom, after “ Leucania lithargyria,” insert “ Pseudoterpna cytisaria ;” the remark “ two— one green and one brown,” refers, of course, to the Pseudoterpna, and not to the Leucania.—T. D. A. CockERELL ; January 9, 1885. OBITUARY. Sipney Smrru, of Walmer, was sufficiently well known as an entomologist to merit an obituary notice. As a scientific collector, an ardent lover of Nature, and indefatigable worker even in his 78th year, few can have exceeded him. A good botanist was he too, whilst his genial happy nature made him a welcome companion. For years he maintained broods of the honeycomb moths, which by his means were broad scattered through the country, and he was one of the first to capture in England Margarodes wnionalis and Hugonia autwmnaria. He was particularly lucky in finding varieties of Lepidoptera. No later than in 1884 a trip to St. Margarets yielded him one imago each of Callimorpha dominula, with pink and yellow hind wings. Of the latter form he had several, and more than one black one fell to his net. To show his vigour and desire never to be left behind in the sports of his country, it may be mentioned that last summer, although getting very stiff in his limbs, he often joined ina game of lawn tennis. To the hot weather of August may be attributed the illness which ultimately caused his death, for becoming very heated through a walk on the sand- hills, he sat down and took a chill which resulted in pneumonia and bronchitis. He died at Walmer, where he had long resided, on the 28th December last, aged nearly 80 years. Any information which he could impart to other entomologists he was glad to afford, and few London collectors ever left his part of the country without calling upon him. As a conchologist he was not to be despised, and he was known as the discoverer of the true var. picta of the common limpet, the form that previously had the credit of being that variety being found to be incorrectly named. © THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Vou. XVIII.) MARCH, 1885. [No. 262. MIME. IN INS CLS: By Roxtanp Trimen, F.R.S., &e. (Concluded from p. 30). I HAVE given various of the more noteworthy instances of protective resemblance to (first) the prevalent general colour of the surroundings; and (secondly) the colour, form, &c., of particular objects, mineral and vegetable. There remains for brief consideration a third and most interesting group of these resemblances, viz., the cases in which other animals are imitated. It is to this class of imitations that the term “ mimicry” was first applied by Mr. H. W. Bates; and, although the word has the defect of implying in ordinary usage conscious or voluntary imitation, it has been generally adopted, in default of any better one, to express the actually deceptive likeness of one animal to another, which in all essentials of structure is quite different. These mimicries necessarily are of a more limited and special kind than those already treated of, seeing that the only animals to imitate which would be of advantage to others are such as can - successfully resist their enemies, or are for some other cause exempt from persecution to a large extent, or can serve as prey if approached under cover of a likeness to themselves. If an unarmed creature can wear the aspect of one widely dreaded for its weapons of offence, or a soft and defenceless animal look as if it were encased in the armour of proof borne by some well- protected neighbour, or some toothsome and eatable being bear to deception the likeness of a malodorous, distasteful, uneatable ENTOM.—MARCH, 18808. a 58 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. one,—it is plain how useful the disguise would prove. And this is exactly what takes place in Nature,—disguise is resorted to by those who lack the armour, or the weapons, or the uneatableness of the more favoured kinds. But few cases of actual “ mimicry” in this restricted sense have been recorded among the vertebrate animals, Mr. Wallace citing only a few cases where harmless snakes (in Tropical America) copy in a very striking manner certain venomous kinds, and a group of orioles (in the Malayan Archipelago) unmistakably imitate the strong and active honey-suckers of the genus T'ropi- dorhynchus. But amongst insects the number of such cases is very large, and the record of them is constantly increasing, as the life-history and habits of the lower animals are more closely observed. Taking first the case of the mimicking of well-armed by unarmed insects, we find that bees and wasps have excellent imitators in the shape of many moths and two-winged flies, of some beetles, and of a few crickets; and that ants have also beetle mimickers. The transparent-winged moths of the groups represented by the genera Sesia, Aigeria, &c., and many species of Glaucopide, imitate so precisely the aspect of various stinging Hymenoptera that no one but an entomologist could distinguish them as Lepidoptera. One of these Adgeriid moths, Melittia ursipes, is not uncommon in Natal; its general aspect and colouring, and densely hairy hind legs, make it exactly like a small bee. Most people must have noticed the drone-flies (Hristalis) which haunt flowers, and not only look like bees, but get up a very fair imitation of an angry buzz, and even affect to possess a sting, when you hold them captive, by curving round the hind body. South Africa abounds in beautiful bee-like flies of the Bombylius type; and it is probable that, as has been shown in Europe and elsewhere, the disguise of these flies (which are in many cases parasitic as larve upon bees) enables them to enter, unsuspected and unharmed, the bees’ nests, and there to lay their eggs. The beetles that find their advantage in resembling bees and wasps are chiefly members of the great wood-eating tribe of Longicorns, and in several cases their elytra are so much reduced as to leave nearly all of the folded wing-surface visible, an arrangement which greatly aids in the deception. Mr. Bates has recorded the wonderful resemblance MIMICRY IN INSECTS. 59 which the crickets of the genus Scaphura in South America bear to different large sand-wasps, which are constantly searching for crickets to provision their nests with! A very remarkable case of the mimicry of a predaceous beetle by a cricket (in the Philippine Islands) is given by Professor Westwood, in which the resemblance is so exact that even that most experienced entomologist was deceived, and placed the cricket among the specimens of the tiger-beetle in question in his collection ! It is among the weevils or ‘‘snout-beetles”’ (Curculionide), and the allied Anthribide, that the best instances of defensive armour occur, many of these insects having such exceedingly hard integuments that no pin will pierce them. Mr. Bates records two, and Mr. Wallace five, cases in which beetles of the Longicorn group closely copy Curculionide inhabiting the same districts; and in one of these Mr. Bates found the hard weevil and the mimicking Long-horn on the same tree. Turning now to those cases where it is to the interest of defenceless forms which are palatable to their enemies to resemble creatures that are habitually rejected or passed by as uneatable owing to their offensive odour or taste, we find some of the most prominent and perfect mimicries known. The phenomenon is most complete and conspicuous among butterflies ; and it is to the distinguished traveller and naturalist, Mr. Henry Walter Bates, F.R.S., that Science owes the first and only rational exposition and explanation of the subject that has been given. His memoir, read to the Linnean Society of London, in 1861, and subsequently published in the ‘Transactions’ (vol. Xxili.) of that body, was entitled “Contributions to an Insect Fauna of the Amazon Valley. Lepidoptera: Heliconide;” and in it he lucidly presented the results of many years’ daily experience and observation of the variation, habits, distribution, and relative numbers of the brilliant slow-flying species free from persecution, and of the accompanying imitative forms of different groups. Mr. Bates showed that, while the models were most abundant and presented the ordinary facies of their family, the mimickers were rare, and departed very widely from the appearance of their nearest allies; that the latter frequented the Same spots as their models, often flying among them; and that the resemblance in Nature was so exact that his own well-practised 60 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. sight did not prevent his being constantly deceived by it when out collecting. He observed that the conspicuous and slow- flying Heliconide were not pursued by any of the ordinary enemies of insects to which they would have fallen easy prey, and suggested the reason for this security in the peculiar smell which they emitted. Demonstrating the identity in kind of these most striking mimicries with the protective resemblances to vegetable and inorganic forms so widely prevalent in Nature, he traced them all to the operation of “natural selection,” the agents being none other than “ insectivorous animals,” which gradually destroy all the individuals of mimicking species least resembling those which are exempt from persecution. Mr. Bates gives a list of no fewer than thirty-six cases of mimicry known to occur among the butterflies and moths of Tropical America. In one of these six species (three butterflies belonging to two families, and three moths belonging to two families) imitate one and the same Heliconide species, viz., Methona psidii ; and in another, four butterflies (of three different families) and a moth all copy Ithomia flora. ‘The imitations of species of Ithomia, Mechanitis, and Methona, Heliconide genera, by species of Leptalis, a genus of Pierine, or “ white” butterflies, are so surprisingly perfect that nobody who has seen the insects concerned, or even the figures of them illustrating Mr. Bates’s paper, can wonder at their deceiving on the wing the most experienced collector. The view propounded by Mr. Bates received most weighty confirmation at the hands of Mr. A. R. Wallace, who, in his interesting paper on the Papilionide of the Malayan Region (read to the Linnean Society in 1864), called attention to the occurrence of a quite similar series of mimicries in India and the Eastern Archipelago, and unreservedly expressed his entire concurrence in the explanation given of the causes at work in the production of them. Mr. Wallace pointed out that, as in America, so in the Old World, it is butterflies of the Danaid group that are most often the objects of imitation by those of other families, and gave a list of fifteen of the best-marked cases known among the Papilionide alone. ‘The first of these may be noted as peculiarly interesting, seeing that the male and female of the mimickers, Papilio paradoxa, differ considerably, and that each mimics the corresponding sex of Huplea midamus. In MIMICRY IN INSECTS. 61 seven of the fifteen cases given only the female is mimetic, and Mr. Wallace suggested that the reason of this is probably that the slower flight of that sex when laden with eggs, and her exposure to attack while ovipositing, render it especially necessary to have a protecting disguise. It was my good fortune to be able to supplement the cases brought forward by these distinguished explorers of South America and the Malayan Archipelago by a similar series of mimetic analogies among African butterflies. From the beginning of my collecting in South Africa I had been familiar with one or two striking instances of mimicry, and a visit to Natal in 1867 made me acquainted with several others. While in England shortly afterwards I had excellent opportunities of working up the subject, and early in 1868 I read to the Linnean Society a paper (subsequently published in the twenty-sixth volume of its ‘Transactions ’), describing in detail the eleven cases of mimicry then known to me. It was interesting to be in a position to fortify the conclusions of Messrs. Bates and Wallace by personal observations made in an entirely different region. I showed how the Danaine and Acreine of Africa, like their allies elsewhere, were provided with offensive odours and secretions, and that several of them were accompanied throughout their geographical range by faithful imitators belonging to quite distinct groups. It was further pointed out (1) that the mimicking butterflies invariably occurred in districts inhabited by the species mimicked, and in six cases (South African) are found in the very same localities ; (2) that in eight cases the mimickers are known to be very much scarcer than the species which they copy; (8) that in five cases, where the Danais or Acrea presents local forms, or merely slight varieties, even these are mimicked by individuals of the imitating species; (4) that in three cases, where the sexes of the insect mimicked differ remarkably from each other, the sexes of the mimicker present corresponding differences; and (5) that, in four cases observed by me in Nature, it was next to impossible to distinguish the lving mimicker from the species which it imitated. It must be remembered that these extraordinary likenesses are not those of general colouring and pattern alone, but include outline and form, extending to minute reproduction of prominent markings however small ; and that the deception is often further borne out by following closely the kind of flight and mode of resting exhibited by the species copied. 62 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Probably Amauris echeria, a Danaide of wide occurrence in wooded localities, is the best-protected butterfly in South Africa, judging from the number of imitators to whom it seems to set the fashion. The most accurate copyist is the female Papilio cenea (type), but the female P. echeriotdes is almost as good; while the males of these species of Papilio are utterly dissimilar both from their respective mates and from each other. Both sexes of P. brasidas present individuals which fairly imitate Hcheria; while among the Nymphaline an almost exact reproduction occurs in both sexes of Huralia mima, and an approximate one in the female of Pseudacrea tarquinia. As the case of Papilio cenea presents perhaps the most remarkable mimetic analogy yet recorded among butterflies, and as it has been worked out in South Africa, and is now widely known and quoted, it may be of interest to offer a few remarks upon it. The male of this species is a very fine conspicuous insect, with a peculiar colouring of very pale creamy yellow, with a broad black border to the fore wings, and a black band across the disk of the hind wings, the latter wings bearing each a long broad process or “tail.” It is the southern representative of the West African Papilio merope, and was formerly known under that name. Five-and-twenty years ago nobody thought of associating with this beautiful butterfly the altogether different Papilio cenea, which is black, with ochre-yellow patches and spots, and has no tails on the hind wings, and, as mentioned above, is so close a mimicker of Amauris echeria. Yet these strikingly dissimilar insects, when closely examined, exhibited so many points in common, that finding only males of one pattern and only females of the other, and knowing that the two haunted the same woods, and that the conspicuous P. merope had been seen in pursuit of the sombre-tinted P. cenea, I was fully persuaded by the year 1867 that the two were sexes of one and the same kind. More than this, I felt next to certain that two other female Papilios, P. trophonius and P. hippéoon, var., one of which mimics Danais chrysippus and the other Amauris dominicanus, were also females of the same pale yellow tailed male. In the paper dealing with mimetic analogies, which I have already mentioned, I, in 1868, explained at some length the grounds upon which my view of the case was founded; and, although few naturalists were then disposed to accept it, the truth of what was MIMICRY IN INSECTS. 63 then advanced as in the highest degree probable has since been incontestably demonstrated by the observations of Mr. Mansel Weale, who, in 1873, reared all the four forms from eggs laid on the white iron-wood (Vepris lanceolata) by a specimen of P. cenea. Mr. Weale’s researches and their result have recently been ‘confirmed by Colonel Bowker’s notes on the sexes in Natal. We have thus the remarkable case of a butterfly, in which the male is of a certain conspicuous and unusual coloration, which varies but little, while the female is of three quite different forms, each of which is entirely unlike the male, but imitates one of the three prevalent species of Danaine inhabiting South Africa! It should be added that numerous intermediate variations of the females exist, which exhibit a series of links between the three prominent forms, and serve to indicate how plastic for further development in any advantageous direction the polymorphic female P. cenea remains. Other circumstances which add to the great interest of the case are (1) that the very closely-allied true Papilio merope of Western Africa also has a polymorphic female, several forms of which have been described as distinct species, and are found imitative of Danaine inhabiting the same region; and (2) that in Madagascar the likewise closely-related Papilio meriones has but one form of female, and that form slightly different from the male! What is even more surprising is the fact, communicated to me by Mr. Ch. Oberthiir in 1882, that the representative of Papilio merope at Lake Tsana, in Abyssinia, also has the sexes almost exactly alike. ‘The inference is obvious that the females in Madagascar and Abyssinia for some reason do not stand in need of the protective disguises so elaborately worked out for them in Southern and Western Africa. Probably some active persecutors of this large pale type of Papilio are absent in those countries, or may there have found some easier or more attractive insect prey. In 8. Africa the handsome flycatcher, Tehitrea cristata, has been seen by Mr. Weale to capture the male P. cenea, and he had reason to suspect a bird of an allied family and quite similar habits, Dicrurus musicus, to be another of this butterfly’s enemies. Insectivorous birds of both these genera are found in Abyssinia— the very same species of Dicrurus is, I believe, a native of that country—and also in Madagascar; but it is possible that circumstances may have led to their leaving Papilio merope and P. meriones unmolested. 64 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. We have seen that there are certain cases in which insects escape by simulating the aspect of the very enemies that persecute their tribe, as, for instance, the Scaphure of South America imitate the sand-wasps, which provision their nests with crickets; but there is a kindred class of mimicries, not very common, in which the advantage is reversed, the rapacious enemy, like the wolf in sheep’s clothing, wearing the appearance of the creatures on which it preys. The Mantis family present some good cases of this description, Mr. Bates recording one occurring on the Amazon River, in which a Mantis exactly resembled the “white ants” (Termes sp.) on which it fed. I suspect that a very slender pale Mantis, which I met with in Natal, and which very closely imitated the appearance of certain Phasmide, was probably so disguised to enable it to prey more easily on the weak Bacilli of the same district. In this Mantis the rapacious fore paws were so formed and held as to hide their real character, and I took it for a Bacillus on first seeing it. Hunting spiders are in some cases very like their prey, as may everywhere be noticed in the case of the species of Salticus, which catch horseflies on sunny walls and fences. The likeness is not in itself more than a general one of size, form, and colouring; but its effect is greatly aided by the actions of the spider, which walks hurriedly for short distances, stopping abruptly, and rapidly moving its falces, in evident mimicry of the well-known movements characteristic of flies. Many spiders exhibit a strong resemblance to ants, and Mr. Wallace states that those of one tropical genus which feed on ants are exactly like their prey. Having now rapidly glanced at some of the more prominent instances of the various descriptions of protective resemblance existing in Nature, it only remains for me to repeat my conviction that upon the theory of “‘ natural selection” alone are they at all explicable. If we assume the independent creation of all species of organic beings precisely as we now behold them, it is impossible to understand why there should have been this system of disguises at all. If from the very first the destined prey of other animals possessed in every case the appearance we now find them possessing, would the resemblances we have been considering have protected them in the least? Can it be supposed that certain species of butterflies were created in great abundance, ON THE CAPTURE AND PRESERVATION OF COLEOPTERA. 65 and that certain other species of widely different structure, but superficially imitating the former, were simultaneously created in very small numbers, in order to maintain a precarious existence for ever afterwards? What is the meaning, on this view, of all the gradations in protective resemblance, the incompleteness or imperfection of some mimicries? ‘To these and many other questions that readily occur to us, no satisfactory reply can be made, if it be insisted on that species are immutable, and that the organic world is now in all respects exactly the same as when it sprang into being. But these problems become intelligible when viewed as the natural consequences of the innate variability of species, and the preservation and develop- ment by inheritance, through all time and under all changes in surrounding conditions, of every successive variation advantageous to the organism originating it.* NOTES ON THE CAPTURE AND PRESERVATION OF COLEOPTERA. By Lyonett Fanshawe. I—APPARATUS. COLLECTING IN WINTER. In offering the following notes upon the capture and preserva- tion of Coleoptera to the readers of the ‘ Entomologist,’ my object is to encourage recruits to the study of this branch of Entomology so much neglected by British insect collectors. The first difficulty found by many who would like to investigate the mysteries of an unknown group of insects, is usually how to commence. The manner of this has to a large extent been already set forth by writers on the subject of Coleoptera, such as Rye, in ‘British Beetles,’ chapters vi. and vii.; Newman, in ‘The Insect Hunter’s Companion’ (8rd edition) ; Fowler, in his series of papers in vols. xv. and xvi. of this Magazine; and other authors elsewhere. Though I may be thought to be treading too closely in the footprints of some of the later writers on this portion of the subject, I venture to think that the following hints on the best ways of finding and preserving * Part of an Address delivered at the Annual Meeting of the South African Philosophical Society. ENTOM.—MARCH, 1885. K 66 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. beetles may be found to be new to some who have not before thought of taking up the subject, or may refresh the flagging interest of others who are wavering between the Coleoptera and their old loves, the Lepidoptera. The instruments required for the capture of Coleoptera are both simple and inexpensive. First of all, two nets will be required of the size of an ordinary butterfly-net, one made of strong material for sweeping herbage, and the other of ‘‘ cheese- cloth,” for water-work. Round the top of the net must be sewn a band of linen or holland, into which the ring will slide. If this is not provided the net itself would wear out almost immediately from continual sweeping. The ordinary iron ring bought at any naturalists’ shop is the most serviceable, as the work is often rather rough, especially among long grass or weeds, and the more elaborate nets soon get worn out. Secondly, a “‘ digger” for ripping off the bark of trees, made according to the following plan. Those sold in naturalists’ shops are utterly useless. It should be ‘‘ something in the shape of a mattock, the blade trowel-shaped and slightly curved, and a broad hammer taking the place of the prongs. The blade must he very strong and sharp-edged, and the handle should be pro- longed into a sort of crowbar with rather a sharp edge, so as to be able to use it as a chisel and lever united.” This is the Rev. J. G. Wood’s description; and, though certainly rather heavy, it will be found a most serviceable tool. Thirdly, a wide-mouthed bottle with close-fitting cork. Bore a hole through the cork, and into this firmly secure a short thick quill, also having a cork in it, and one which can be readily with- drawn with the teeth. By this means the small species can be quickly popped in through the quill, without taking out the larger cork each time. In the bottle, place some well-pounded fresh laurel leaves, covered with a piece of cardboard firmly pressed down and fitting close to the bottle. In the cardboard pierce a number of small holes to let the fumes of the laurel escape into the bottle. Fourthly, a pair of forceps. These should be made of steel, and with a curve in them, so that they can be pushed into corners where straight forceps could not reach. These, with the addition of a few puill-boxes, and a small closely-stoppered bottle of spirits of wine, will be everything a collector will find necessary for a successful season. ON THE CAPTURE AND PRESERVATION OF COLEOPTERA. 67 In the winter months, from J anuary to March, a greater deal more can be done than is generally supposed, more, in fact, than in any other order of insects; and I will try to enumerate most of the best places to find them at this time of the year. Moss is a never-failing harbour for Coleoptera in the winter, and always yields a large quantity of species, especially those minute ones which are difficult to capture otherwise. When in want of employment, go out into a wood or along a hedgerow, and collect into a large bag, taken for the purpose, all the moss that can be found; when this is filled take it home, and pull it apart thoroughly, piece by piece, over a large sheet of white — paper or a sheet. Hach piece must be well beaten and torn about, as some of the occupants are exceedingly difficult to dis- lodge. One of the best store-houses for a coleopterist is a dead or dying tree or log with the bark on, but loose. When out for a stroll always be on the look-out for these, and note their whereabouts in your mind. By far the most productive trees are those having a rough bark; the beetles are very fond of getting up into the cracks and notches on these trees. Having arrived at a likely-looking tree, let us begin operations. It is a good plan to begin at one end and work steadily along it, tearing off every scrap of bark as you go, and examining both the bark and the trunk. If only one be examined, the trunk or the bark, many species will be lost. The before-mentioned digger will be found very useful for this work. When all the bark is off, pull back and examine closely the herbage growing by the sides, and finally, if possible, turn the tree over and examine the ground under it. I have found an old decaying willow literally swarming with Sinodendron cylindricum, male andfemale, and all perfectly torpid. After having broken up and inspected any rotten wood that can be got at, the tree can be fairly left as ‘‘ done for;” and left it should be, with an ample harvest in the bottle of the energetic collector. Whenever a stone is met with, of whatever size, it should be lifted up and examined, with the ground under it; many species of Coleoptera are seldom found except in these places. Bricks and tiles, for some reason, hardly ever harbour anything. The bark on palings and posts, and the crevices about them, should never be passed over. 68 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. A ploughed field also frequently contains a great number of beetles. Turn over all the large loose clods of earth round the edges of the field; it is curious that only very seldom is anything found under the clods towards the centre. Hosts of Staphylimde and others are thus brought to light. In many counties that contain large rivers, floods are not infrequent, and after a heavy flood has just begun to subside is a great day for the beetle-hunter. By means of the water Coleoptera of every family are flooded from their homes, where- ever they may be, and so specimens of each order may be caught. Many species, too, are night-flyers only, and therefore would be almost impossible to capture were it not for this and “light.” In the corners of fields by the hedges, and where there ig no current of wind, quantities of vegetation, sticks, old leaves, and the like, will collect: these are the places where the spoils chiefly lie. This refuse may either be examined on the spot, or, better still, taken home, like moss, and examined at leisure. Another very productive locality, and one that appears to be very little known and hunted, is the remains of hay, dust, seeds, &ec., which are left after the haystack itself has been removed. This, like everything else in beetle-hunting, must be well and closely examined, and not only turned roughly over and then left. All animal and garden-refuse, too, contains its own peculiar genera of Coleoptera, which will be found here and nowhere else ; and, if the collector desires to have series of these, he must seek them in their rather disagreeable haunts. A good and easy way of obtaining them, is to plunge the refuse into water and stir it about; the beetles will all rise to the surface, and can then be captured without trouble. An unfailing attraction to all the Necrophaga is a dead animal, bird, or fish. A great prize is a fine rook or hen some time deceased, and beginning to smell unpleasantly strong. They deserve to be overhauled, and to have their locality marked with as great joy as the Necrophorus himself. Having discovered one of these tempting baits, lift it carefully up by a leg (or get a friend to do so!), and examine the ground whereon it lay. Then spread a cloth or large sheet of white paper on the ground, tap the bait sharply with a stick, and the collector ought to be amply rewarded for his unsavoury task. Dead animals should be visited, if ON ‘THE CAPTURE AND PRESERVATION OF COLEOPTERA. 69 possible, at night, as many of the Necrophaga are night-flyers. I strongly recommend anyone unacquainted with the habits of the Necrophori, not to touch them when alive (but to pick them up .with the forceps), as they often emit a most foetid brown liquid, which smells horribly for days, and even stains the skin. When the dead animal has given up all his tenants, replace it in the same spot, and in a day or two it will be full again. A dead cat or dog by the riverside is very productive, as is decaying sea- weed on the coast. Old bones and skins contain species that are found nowhere else; also sand-pits, salt-marshes, and brackish places. Every pond, stream, and ditch, will be found to be teeming with our friends. Having arrived at a weedy pond, take out the net made of cheese-cloth and slide it on to the iron ring, screw the ring to a corresponding screw fitted on to the stick, and all is ready. The net should only be dragged about among the weeds and vegetation, not down into the mud below, or the work becomes hopeless. Be very careful of handling the Gyrinide, or “Whirligig Beetles,” as they also, like the Necrophori, emit a milky fluid, which smells disgustingly for a long time. Flood-water, which has been spoken of before, may be worked in the same manner as ponds, &c.; but it is only necessary here to skim merely the surface, as almost all the beetles will be land-beetles, and therefore float. Do not net the sticks, &c., mentioned above, but simply draw your net through the clear water, which apparently contains nothing, but which in reality contains many a beetle, though they at first escape your notice. The growing herbage, however, may be scraped, as the insects cling to it. A good pair of Dowie and Marshall’s water-tight boots will be found of great advantage for this sort of work. Under heaps of old sticks and faggots lurk many curious beetles. Shake and rap the bundles well, and examine the ground whereon they stood. Also cut osiers stacked for some time will be found to contain many species; but this belongs to summer hunting, of which I purpose to give an account in a future number of this magazine. I have now, I think, briefly noted the principal localities where Coleoptera may be found in winter, with the exception of light: this is a very great attraction nearly all the year round. Many beetles, as already mentioned, are night-flyers, and can 70 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. only be secured by this means, or by the flood-waters. The method is the same as that employed for attracting moths, viz. : Stand a strong duplex lamp with a reflector behind just inside the window, and another (this without a reflector) further within the room; and then, with the implements of capture and of death ready close by, there is nothing to be done but to await the visits of your guests, whose arrival will begin about dusk and continue until the small hours of the morning. 2, Halkin Street West, Belgrave Square, London, S.W. (To be continued.) LEPIDOPTERA IN KENT. By J. W. Tort. I HAVE noticed that some contributors to the ‘ Entomologist’ complain of the dearth of insects at sugar during the past season. My experience—collecting in North Kent and the neighbourhoods of Sandwich and Deal—has been decidedly contrary to this opinion, Noctuz having been generally abundant; and in the Sandwich district on some evenings not only were they abundant, but other orders of Lepidoptera were frequently represented. One of the most successful night’s work was that on August 6th, and the following summary of the night’s work will show that not only are Noctuse fond of the “rum and treacle,” but that almost all the other families have some members at any rate that share the same taste. The species taken at sugar, arranged in their families, were :— Drurni.— Vanessa urtice. Nocrurni.—Lithosia lutarella v. pygmeola. Nocruz (42).—Bryophila perla, Acronycta rumicis, Leucania impura, L. pallens, Hydreecia nictitans, Xylophasia lithoxylea, X. sublustris, X. monoglypha (polyodon), Cerigo matura (cytherea), Luperina testacea, Mamestra brassice, Apamea leucostigma v. fibrosa, A. didyma (oculea), Miana strigilis, M. literosa, M. bicoloria (furuncula), Caradrina quadri- punctata (cubicularis), Agrotis vestigialis (valligera), A. puta, A. suffusa, A. segetum, A. nigricans, A. tritici, A. aquilina, Triphena ianthina, T. comes (orbona), 'T. pronuba, Noctua plecta, N. c-nigrum, N. rubi, N. umbrosa, N. xanthographa, Orthosia upsilon, Calymnia trapezina, Phlogophora meticulosa, Hadena_ trifolii (chenopodii), H. oleracea, Gonoptera hbatrix, Amphipyra pyramidea, A. tragopogonis, Mania typica, Rivula sericealis ; also one other species, about which I am still uncertain. LEPIDOPTERA IN KENT. Gal Gromerre& (11).—Epione apiciaria, Boarmia gemmaria (rhomboidaria), Acidalia emutaria, A. imitaria, Aspilates ochrearia (citraria), Eupithecia subfulvata, Melanippe fluctuata, Kubolia limitata (mensuraria), EK. virgata (lineolata), Phibalapteryx vittata (lignata), Coremia ferrugata. Pyraipgs (3).—Scoparia crategella, S. pallida, Nemophila noctuella (hybridalis). PrrropHoriIna.—Pterophorus monodactylus (pterodactylus). Atuciripx.—Alucita hexadactyla (polydactyla). CramBip& (4).—Crambus selasellus, C. tristellus, C. geniculeus, Melissoblaptes anellus. Tortrices (10).—Tortrix podana, T. heparana, T. costana, Peronea variegana, Teras contaminana, Dictyopteryx holmiana, Sericoris urticana, Sciaphila subjectana, Bactra lanceolana, Hypermecia cruciana. Tixremna (16).—Swammerdamia oxyacanthella, Depressaria flavella, D. assimilella, D. arenella, D. applana, D. yeatiana, D. pulcherimella, D. badiella, D. discipunctella, Bryotropha desertella, Lita acuminatella, L. marmorea, Teleia vulgella, and three other species not determined. A friend worked the above locality with me, and we made out the above list because the number of species in the different families (except the Noctuz) were exceptional; although on almost every evening we “sugared” there were some members of the other families quite regular in appearance, L. pygmeola, E. limitata (mensuraria), P. vittata (lignata), most of the Tortrices and Tineina named, and P. monodactyla being regular visitors. Some of the species, on the other hand, occurred on no other evening, and therefore their appearance may have been due to chance, as I only took one of each species, although I know most of the insects were occurring freely in the locality: such species were V. urtice, A. ochrearia, EH. apiciaria, M. anellus, and S. pallida. R. sericealis and A. hexadactyla also occurred once, but as I have taken both previously at sugar I believe they are, to a certain extent, regular attendants at the sweets. Insect life was exceedingly abundant, and some of the species of Noctue swarmed. Some of the local forms of the Noctue of the S.E. district are remarkably fine, and differ much from the forms of the same species in other parts of Kent. Among the best species taken at sugar in the district during our stay was Leucania albipuncta, two, both taken by my friend, and a specimen of Nonagria sparganii flying near a ditch, also taken by my more fortunate companion. My friend, not being well up in Entomology, had set these, and they were packed away with our other captures; and it was not until my arrival home that I discovered 72 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. what he had taken. Two Doryphora palustrella were also taken ; a Noctua that I cannot yet determine; a Hupithecia, which still puzzles me, closely resembling H. vulgata in ground colour, but with longer wings (probably larve-fed on mugwort, as I obtained the two specimens from that plant); and a worn specimen of Anerastia farrella also occurred. Lithosia pygme@ola was abundant on the sand-hills; on one evening I collected above sixty in a short time. I did not work for them any other evening, although I picked them up all over the sand-hills when after other species. They were still out the third week of August. My experience in other parts of Kent has been very similar, the great exception being Nola albulalis. This species this season was undoubtedly rare in all stages in its old locality. I could get scarcely a larva, where two years ago I could have taken dozens in a short time had I been so disposed; and although I was several times on the ground when the imago should have been out I netted only three. A friend who was on the ground regularly says that scarcely any could be obtained. The restricted locality of the species, the ease with which the larva can be found, and the systematic way in which the species has been worked since its discovery, has undoubtedly had much to do with this; and unless the species be more leniently treated for the next few years it looks very much like being exterminated in its old haunts. The marshes on the banks of the Thames gave a fine lot of Leucania phragmitidis, with a few of the beautiful red var. rufescens. Leucania straminea was in fine condition during July. I bred this species from larve feeding on the reeds the second week in July, during the time that the imago was on the wing, the pupal state only lasting from nine to twelve days. Other species also occurred freely; and, on the whole, I believe this has been, in North Kent, the best season since I recommenced collecting in 1880, although insects have been fairly abundant the previous years, and no entomological collapse has occurred, as there seems to have been in other parts of the country. In conclusion I may add that Acherontia atropos has occurred freely in the potato-fields of North Kent during the autumn, although but a small percentage of imagines have been bred. Beaconsfield Terrace, East Greenwich, January 3, 1885. (730m ENTOMOLOGICAL NOTES, CAPTURES, ke. Soaring Hapir oF VANESSA ATALANTA.—With regard to Mr. Martin J. Harding’s note (Entom. xviii. 51), my impression, gathered from my own observation, is that V. atalanta is impelled to a more soaring flight during hot seasons than during cooler summers. The first occasion on which I noticed its soaring flight was about the middle of September, 1876, when, as I was taking a ramble through the fields at Ashmore Park, about three miles from Wolverhampton, I saw it in some plenty skimming over the tops of the oak trees, greatly resembling, in flight, Apatura iris. They darted through the air with a rapid motion high above the tops of the trees, and then, darting suddenly down on to the clover flowers in the field below, they rested for a moment, and then took another flight over the tops of the trees. While resting on the flowers was the only chance given for a capture. During August and September of that season it was very hot. Although I have seen V. atalanta in some plenty in more recent seasons, I have not observed such a soaring flight as on that occasion.—Tuos. Hmui; March End, Wednesfield, near Wolverhampton. GONEPTERYX RHAMNI IN DorseTsHirE.—I recommend Mr. Mansfield (Kntom. xvi. 271; xvii. 271) to read Mr. Mansel Pleydell’s ‘ Flora of Dorset,’ and Newman’s ‘ British Butterflies.’ ‘Lhe larva possibly feeds on blackthorn as well as on buckthorn. In the forthcoming ‘ Lepidoptera of Dorset” it will be recorded as one of the commonest butterflies—C. W. Date; Glanvilles Wootton, Sherborne, Dorset, February, 1885. LuprerRInA DUMERILII.—In reply to Mr. Hodgkinson’s enquiry (Entom. xviii. 54), I beg to say that I have a specimen of this moth, which was captured in 1858 in the Isle of Portland, by Mr. William Farren, of Cambridge. In Stainton’s ‘ Manual,’ i. 206 (1857), it is said that “‘ one specimen only has occurred, in the Isle of Arran”; and in Newman’s ‘ British Moths,’ p. 297 (1869), we read that “two specimens of the moth are said to have been taken in the Isle of Portland, by Mr. Seeley; one of them is in Mr. Bond’s collection.” This, doubtless, refers to Mr A. F. Sealy, now in South India, who certainly had the two specimens, as I well remember, though I rather doubt whether ENTOM.—MARCH, 18808. L 74 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. he was himself the captor. Be this as it may, Mr. Sealy and I, in 1858, joined with two or three others, then at Cambridge, in sending Mr. Farren on a collecting expedition to the New Forest, Portland, and elsewhere, which resulted in the capture of a specimen of LZ. dumerilii, which fell to my lot on the division of the spoil. To the best of my recollection it was the only specimen taken in 1858, and it has ever since been in my possession, but unfortunately is in poor condition.—J. W. Dunnine; 12, Old Square, Lincoln's Inn, February, 1885. LupeRINA DUMERILII.—I notice in last month’s ‘ Entomolo- gist’ (Kntom. xviii. 54) that Mr. J. B. Hodgkinson asks for confirmation of the capture of Luperina dumeriu. I am pleased to be able to give him the information that in September, 1858, in company with Mr. A. F. Sealy, I took two specimens in the South of England; one of these was in Mr. Sealy’s collection, the other went to that of Mr. Frederick Bond. The next year I took three more in the same locality; one I gave to my friend Alfred Fryer, which I believe is still in his cabinet; I forget where the other two went to, but I think one went to the Rev. H. Burney. —W. Farren; 14, King’s Parade, Cambridge. LepiporrERA AT LigHt in 1884.—Seeing several letters in your columns on the above subject, I may state that my brother and I took at light last summer, at the under-mentioned address (by simply placing an ordinary lamp on a table next a back window overlooking the garden), seventy-five species of Macro- Lepidoptera, including Smerinthus populi, Nonagria geminipuncta, Dipterygia scabriuscula (pinastri), Neuwronia popularis, Mamestra sordida (anceps), Apamea gemina, A. ophiwgramma, Caradrina morpheus (very abundant), C. alsines, C. taraxaci (blanda), Agrotis tritici, Hadena trifolit (chenopodi), Plusia chrysitis, Catocala nupta, Epione apiciaria, Melanippe rivata, Cidaria truncata (russata) var. comma-notata, &c.—E. B. Bisuop; 38, Primrose Terrace, George Lane, Woodford, Essex, January 24, 1885. Tue Urricatinc Hares oF Lepmorrrra.—As this subject seems to have aroused some interest, I may mention that I have experienced the disagreeable symptoms described by Mr. South from handling empty cocoons of Porthesia similis (chrysorrhwa), which I found on a fence at Beckenham, on September 25th, 1880. Now as these cocoons had probably been empty and exposed to NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 75 the weather for months, I think this militates strongly against the theory of the effects being caused otherwise than by the mechanical properties of the hairs—T. D. A. CockrerEnn; Bedford Park, Chiswick, February, 1885. ON THE VARIATION OF EvupirHectA NANATA.—After Mr. Gregson’s remarkable statements (Entom. xviii. 52) with regard to his own farsightedness in discriminating specific differences which other entomologists fail to see, I must say I am surprised at his statement that he has “only seen three varieties of EH. nanata,” and these are all in his own cabinet. There must have been a general overhauling of the “ many thousands of bred and captured specimens” for varieties before Mr. Gregson’s careful search began, or otherwise the ‘many thousands” must have come from one particular spot where the insect does not vary. This, however, does not satisfactorily prove that the species does not vary, and I can assert that many varieties are taken with the type, every season, in the neighbourhood of Garelochhead, twenty- five miles N.W. of Glasgow, many of which, were they mixed up with the var. cwrzont, could not be separated from it, so far as the actual appearance of the insects is concerned. Further than this, a dull heavy coloured variety is found in the same locality, which, I believe, is the var. obscurata. Mr. Gregson also makes much of the difference in the shape of the wings, but the Garelochhead HE. nanata vary much in this respect (especially the duller form mentioned); many closely resembling the var. callunariva of EH. satyrata, from the same locality, in the shape of the fore wings. Looking, therefore, at the wide range of variation in the species, only as far north as Glasgow, and the undoubted change that the species has undergone towards the establishment of permanent variation there, how much more likely that the species, in its isolated northern localities, should develop into an actual permanent variety ? The only point that can be taken as a satisfactory feature, in determining HL. curzoni as a species, is the distinct larva; but Mr. McArthur states that he bred all forms, varying from “‘the southern form to the dark-banded curzoni;” and I should presume from his remarks (Entom. Xvli. 277) that he noticed no difference in the larve from which he bred all the intermediate and extreme forms. If it can be proved that the larva (so-called) of EH. curzoni is distinct, and that typical nanata cannot be bred from the same peculiar form 76 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. of larve, I think entomologists would accept it as a species with better grace ; but until then entomologists have a perfect right to be cautious in admitting H. curzoni to specific distinction. For myself, I cannot see so great a difference between the nanata type and its var. curzoni as between the typical Noctua glareosa and its Shetland form, and certainly not more than between the type Melanippe montanata and its var. shetlandica; yet no one has attempted to raise them to specific distinction. The genus Eupithecia appears peculiarly unhappy in this respect. Being rather more obscure than the other genera of Macro-Lepidoptera, it seems that certain collectors try experiments on it, which could not perhaps be carried out on other genera with the same chance of success. —J. Turr; 45, Beaconsfield Terrace, Greenwich, 8.K., February 2, 1885. EvupIrHECcIA CURZONI.—The only specimens of the Shetland “pug” I saw at Mr. Capper’s I pronounced at once northern forms of E. satyrata; there is something, to a trained eye, that cannot well be described. As to its being, as Mr. Gregson says, the narrow-winged “pug,” that is out of the question. Some thirty years ago, on the bank at Witherslack, I took what I thought to be a new “pug,” a shining light leaden-coloured “pug.” LI sent them to Doubleday, and he wrote me that they came near to the Norwegian form of H. satyrata (then callunaria). Since then the species, at the same place, partakes more of the characters we get in the woods at Grange; the larva always on the ox-eye daisy flowers. My Scotch E. callunaria have all the characters of the Shetland species, only not so extreme in variation. But consider how different are the Shetland forms of Noctua glareosa,—whilst these are black, ours are lilac- coloured.—J. B. Hopeaxinson ; Preston, July 11, 1885. Scientiric NomEencnature.—Since the publication of my remarks on scientific nomenclature, in the February number of the ‘ Entomologist’ (Entom. xvii. 46), it has been pointed out to me that the form in -ensis is employed, as a rule, only for adjectives derived from names of places, and that gregsoniana is the correct adjectival form in Latin of Mr. Gregson’s name. His recent discovery should therefore be named Hupithecia curzoniana. Having received a letter from Mr. Gregson to the effect that the statement “anything will do for a name” does not occur anywhere NOTES, CAPTURES, ETC. 77 in his recent pamphlet, I should like to say that the quotation in question was taken from a review on the same, which in these words really gave the gist of his arguments.— HERBERT CHITTY ; Balliol College, Oxford, February 13, 1885. EXcHANGING oR Guivinc Away.—I have read with much interest the views of your correspondents as to exchanging or giving away duplicate specimens. Will you kindly spare me space, as one having experience, for a few words on the subject. One of your correspondents laments the ‘‘ good old days,” and the rarity of generosity now-a-days. Another expresses his con- tempt for outsiders and beginners. J am at one with him as to the picture-makers. But how about the beginners? ‘Ten years ago, scarcely “the good old days,” at the conclusion of a little paper, which the then Editor kindly inserted in your useful periodical, I offered some series of a species which I took plentifully, and which I found afterwards was comparatively local. I was surprised, as was the postman, at the number of postal boxes sent for them. Among the applicants many truly were beginners, and may be some were outsiders; but many also were old and well-known entomologists. I have since renewed the offer annually, and have sent the species to more than 250 applicants. I do not say this in self-glorification, but that I may induce others to follow the example, and take the trouble, for trouble it certainly is, to gwe, not merely exchange, any duplicates they may spare. Let not older entomologists forget the time when they, as beginners, were so grateful for the eift and delighted by the beauty of a Thyatira derasa, by the pale loveliness of a Uropteryx sambucata, or the brilliancy of Venilia macularia ; and let them, when able, confer that pleasure on others. And may I add, to take a lower stand-point, “ giving away” brings other rewards; for the acquaintance, and sometimes the friendship, of well-known entomologists I feel myself indebted to my offers of even so small an insect as Polia flavicincta. ‘Small kindnesses sometimes meet with great rewards.’—(Dr.) H. W. Liverr; Wells, Somerset, February 6, 1885. EXcHANGING AND CoxuEectine Insecrs.—Allow me to say that I fully concur with Mr. Coverdale in his statement on exchanging. It does indeed seem as if the good old entomolo- gical spirit was fast fading into nothing but commercial enterprise, 78 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. which, to my mind, only tends to make this truly enlightening science uninteresting. I certainly value a specimen of my own catching far before one purchased, or an exchange either; to say nothing of the contempt with which I view that ambitious feeling of who shall make the most complete collection. If working up the insect fauna in different districts were more encouraged, entomology would be taken up in a far healthier spirit than it is at present; and if I were only possessed of the means of some of my more fortunate brother entomologists, I would certainly offer a prize once a year to each Society for the finest local collection of all orders of insects, proved to be the collector’s own collecting. I think I should then prove the fact that he would have greater pleasure for his pains, and learn more by closer examination of the hunting-grounds of his neighbourhood than by wandering a hundred miles away in search of a hidden treasure he has already probably passed in his daily walks. London entomologists, especially, have, within easy reach, as fine and varied fields of operation as anyone could possibly wish. To prove my argument, with the editor's permission, I will give, in an early number of the ‘ Entomologist,’ a list of Macro- and Micro-Lepidoptera that T have taken within five miles of the Marble Arch.—H. SwHarp; 37, Union Street, Portland Place. [By all means, if accompanied by notes and localities.—Ep.] ‘““By MUTUAL CONFIDENCE AND MUTUAL AID.’—It often happens that when an entomologist visits a strange place for a short holiday he either does not know at all what insects may be expected, or knowing that certain local species do occur in the neighbourhood, he cannot find the locality ; and it is perhaps not until after he has left that he finds that there was a fellow- entomologist living in the district who could have given him the very information he needed. Would it not be possible to publish occasionally in the ‘ Entomologist’ a list of names and addresses of gentlemen who would be willing to render assistance in this way to strangers visiting their district? Of course such a plan is open to the objection that some species would be exterminated if the locality where they occur were generally known. Still each one could use his own judgment as to how much it was wise to disclose in each individual case; and without disclosing any of his ‘‘ pet localities” he might render very valuable and welcome OBITUARY. 7g assistance to occasional visitors. I, for one, should be very pleased to give any information I could to entomologists visiting Bournemouth or neighbourhood.—P. M. Briaur; Roccabruna, Branksome Wood Road, Bournemouth. Locat List or Insrects.—It is proposed, in connection with the Bournemouth Society of Natural History, to publish a list of the Lepidoptera occurring in the Bournemouth district. If any who have been working here or in the neighbourhood at any time would kindly put themselves into communication with me I should feel extremely obliged. Help is especially required in the Micro-Lepidoptera.—P. Briaur; Roccabruna, Branksome Wood Road, Bournemouth. [We hope in this instance a good model for the proposed list may be followed, such as Mr. Porritt’s Yorkshire list. It is with great regret we have recently received more than one local list of insects, which must have cost the compilers much time and trouble, but which are all but useless, being mere lists of names, without the addition of useful notes.—ED. | Erratum.—P. 48, for A. Currry read H. Currry. OBITUARY. Epwarp CALDWELL Rye died February 7th, 1885, in the Stockwell Hospital, after a few days’ illness, from a virulent attack of smallpox. His age was about fifty-three. The late Mr. Rye’s father was a solicitor in Golden Square, London; and the subject of this notice was also intended for the law, being articled to his parent. Having, however, great distaste for that profession he abandoned it before being admitted a solicitor, and studied in surgery, and the knowledge of anatomy, obtained during these latter studies, became most useful to him in his after investigations into insect structure. When about thirteen years of age Mr. Rye was introduced by William Yarrell to Mr. Janson, who rapidly formed his general taste for Entomology into a systematic study of British Coleoptera. This he followed for many years, first coming before the entomological public as an exhibitor of new Coleoptera at the meetings of the Entomolo- gical Society. After Mr. Janson ceased to edit the section 80 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Coleoptera in the ‘Entomologist’s Annual, Mr. Rye (in 1863) took it in charge, and continued its editor until the Annual ceased. In 1866 ‘Rye’s British Beetles’ appeared, as one of Lovell Reeve’s series of Natural-History works. This work is so well-known to coleopterists that comment upon it 1s unneces- sary. Mr. Rye contributed several articles on different orders of insects to the ‘ Encyclopedia Britannica,’ his best probably being on Diptera; and was from its establishment one of the editors of the ‘Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine.’ The subject of our memoir was also editor of the departments of ‘Travel and Entomology of the ‘ Field’ newspaper, and contributed largely to the journal, ‘Home and Colonial Mail;’ but his greatest work was in connection with the ‘ Zoological Record,’ with which he was first associated as editor of the entomological section, but afterwards (in 1873) became editor-in-chief, which post he retained until his death. This position made him thoroughly conversant with Natural-History bibliography; and his un- timely death will in consequence be severely felt among all English speaking Natural-History students. In February, 1874, Mr. Rye was appointed Librarian of the Royal Geographical Society, after which his active attention to Coleoptera waned, and he shortly afterwards disposed of his collection, which was one of the best of his time, to Dr. P. B. Mason, of Burton-on- Trent. He took little interest in exotic Coleoptera, but described about a score species new to Britain, nearly all of which are still recognised as good species; in fact whatever work he took in hand was thorough and trustworthy. Mr. Rye was a very fair artist in entomological subjects, and his clever caricature drawings were well known among his friends. He was fond of athletics, especially walking and rowing, and following the latter pursuit nearly cost his life some four years ago, when he was severely crushed on the River Thames between a steamer and a barge. Mr. Rye married a daughter of Mr. G. R. Waterhouse, then Keeper of the Paleontological Department of the British Museum, who survives him. He leaves four children, the eldest of whom is, we believe, studying electrical engineering with one of the Atlantic Cable Companies. His sister, Miss Rye, is well- known in connection with female emigration to Canada.—J. T. C. THE ENTOMOLOGIST. Vou. XVIII.) APRIL, 1885. [No. 263. ON SOME PROBABLE CAUSES OF A TENDENCY TO MELANIC VARIATION IN LEPIDOPTERA OF HIGH LATITUDES, BY THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD WALSINGHAM, M.A.* Tus address is a most welcome and instructive addition to that branch of entomological literature which deals with variation in the colour of insects. Melanic variation as exhibited in Lepidoptera from high northern latitudes is chiefly dealt with, but similar variations of colour in those from high altitudes are adverted to, and topo- morphic variations are incidentally mentioned. Speaking of the Lepidoptera of the Shetland Islands, Lord Walsingham says :— “The tendency of this variation has in almost all instances been in the direction of melanism (except in the more southern and western island of Arran), exhibiting a preponderance of darkened scales or a suffusion of the markings, in many cases almost obliterating the paler portions of the wing. Among the species exhibiting this tendency in a greater or less degree may be mentioned Hepialus veileda, H. humuli, Noctua festiva, N. wanthographa, Agrotis cursoria, A. porphyrea, A. lucernea, Dianthecia conspersa, E'mme- lesia albulata, Eupithecia venosata, EH. nanata, Melanippe montanata, M. fluctuata, Camptogramma bilineata, &c. This same tendency is ob- servable in the majority of the Lepidoptera, and, I believe, of the Coleoptera of the whole Arctic and sub-Arctic regions when contrasted with their more southern representatives.” * Being the Annual Address of the President to the Members of the Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union, at Doncaster, March 3, 1885. ENTOM.—APRIL, 1885. M 82 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. A similar melanic tendency in the colour of those from moun- tainous districts is thus mentioned :— “Tt is worthy of remark that where the atmospheric conditions in any degree approach to those of the more northern regions, as they do on high mountain ranges, at varying elevations according to the degree of latitude, the same tendency to assume a darker or more suffused colouring is very observable. “Mr. W. A. Forbes remarks,* ‘In looking through Dr. Staudinger’s catalogue I was much struck by the fact that in nearly every case where a local form (whether a variety or aberration) from the Alps is noticed, it is characterised as being obscurior or multo-obscurior, or with some of the markings obsoleta.’ He goes on to notice the number of normally black or dark species in the Alps, e. g., Hrebia, Psodos, aud some Pyralides.” The author then states that various theories have been advanced at different times, and by different authors, to account for variation in animals, birds, and insects, and it has been attempted to apply some of these to the phenomena which he proposes to consider :— «IT. Since Darwin drew attention to this cause, the theory of protective resemblance has been most commonly made use of to account for the varied coloration of insect forms. It has been proved almost to demonstration in many instances, that by more or less gradually developed assimilation to surrounding objects, those varieties best adapted to escape the observation of natural enemies have become perpetuated. “TI. Many instances of varied colouring have been referred to an archaic origin; that is, to the preservation of such varieties by hereditary transmission from an ancestral source. “TIJ. The influence of quality and quantity of food has been brought forward to account for modifications of normal colouring. “TV. Retarded or accelerated development depending upon climatic conditions acting upon insects in their larval or pupal stages has also been quoted as a cause for variation. «V. Insular varieties have been attributed to the effects of long isolation and segregation tending to establish special races. «VI. Atmospheric electricity has also been called into requisition to account for certain changes. «VII. Mr. Geo. Lewis has argued} that exposure to more or less direct action of the sun’s rays may influence colour by acting mechanically upon * «Entomologists’ Monthly Magazine,’ xiv. 16. + ‘Transactions of Entomological Society of London,’ 1882, p. 503. MELANIC VARIATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 83 the tissues of the scales, and so produce an actual modification of their structure, enabling them to absorb and reflect to us certain rays. “VIII. And lastly, the same author suggests—but only to dismiss the idea as ‘probably incorrect’ —‘ That blackness arises from the invigorating energy derived from warmth, as blackness absorbs heat rays; but [he adds] in that case it would not properly be a protective colour, but an incident in 9439) age * another line of evolution. These theories are then examined, with a view to ascertain how far they can be made to account for that particular tendency to melanism under consideration. It will be seen from the following quotation that the topo- morphic variation of such a lepidopteron as Gnophos obscuraria is admitted, irrespective of either altitude or latitude, and also the archaic derivation of one of the forms, in the cases of horeo- morphic or polymorphic variations :— * First, it would I think be open to some doubt whether the dark varieties of the northern or Alpine regions are indebted to their colouring for any appreciable measure of protection. In the north of Scotland, and perhaps in the Shetland Islands, the black peaty soil and some few dark lichens growing on the rocks might serve to conceal an insect approaching them in tint. “It has been observed that Gnophos obscuraria and other insects vary decidedly in colour according to the nature of the soil on which they occur, but if we admit that this cause may have some influence where peaty soil is found, it could not be held to account for the like inclination in the Alpine insects to assume a partial melanism, although it has been called into requisition to explain the melanochroic race of certain Lepidoptera occurring in the manufacturing districts of this country, to which I shall have occasion again to allude. «The only other manner in which such protection might be supposed to arise would be perhaps owing to the strong contrast which would exist between the extreme whiteness of snow and the darker appearance of large or small patches of herbage in its immediate proximity, rendering the latter more nearly black to the perception, at least of human sight, than they would actually be if separated from the shining snow. “Tt may be admitted that this contrast would render a dark object under such circumstances less visible than a lighter one. But the amount of protection afforded by reason of these special conditions would appear inadequate to account for any strong hereditary tendency to strive to obtain it. #