Lo
rt Sacbcosecdvassetoaterscanerashees es
eater teee Thwkegudejwietoy~
= sees See
Lead pe

earthed >
Seseeanttetercegtyeseetss

oor
2 hehe we
sR ccecaceS ere eases eraeseaaeatalse alee n
Ae oe eee eee tet

pert
Sonus

A te andes Aotaacieeestal
Saha gm eeiee
eho ewe

RleceoacuCal Rl oene

SS. bass sean ecpr sess eee Sette areenes
Gee ne
9 = as

33
aca —~
pap net et eed

eave’
{red

ere re ror |
Set cled btn beetle 4

Shee hw eer wry
e@esaohuguae
=e etsy
r)
= 8 Sire ae

= san
tet whee

Re he te Wa Bbw B®
SOO ho Sete Gewese
<8 80 Bo Oe Swhw de be Sete do ww
ee et eae oe rd

no Ge Yow
oe anon t—
IO QC dw Hwhe Froese Rekede F

Go Sweeter gedaseuw
om —9- bedside bet bee eect deel

SESS iitatalal est eeh teers
ee ss ted

oO wth we
a Om me Re ae Ce Be Go Rar

= Be Ww mw Me Bebe Dele hem
ON A BS QU Ger Be Bi Se oo REO Ae

ee

we

eis
vat

;
is

<8 he Ow He tive tra Sear Bi hw Whe
ed eee ee ee oe oe
oe hme ar ho Dy how be er ne

rer errs rr

ee!
eaat
13%
ri

ae
¢

rer pyerr tert rt earaeects
eros 34
<t reat rerel ot aeadals,
220g — Rs Be we
dene se aed esse ae de’
a= — noes
sisi sscncseneecac ke
os aie tal

pirat
auet

Oe Gee aw whe er Om
o> Re ae geen ®
ewe Oe
NS ee Robe ee
ae

fo re aw aeneee ese be dk
. ee ee ae
dating he su use ee Rem . he Be hw GER wo AS Ae
ee Re eh Tee oe ae apie a a mm hg er Gh er at @ ean Q~ ar Ss
Oe pee eee Ree eRe me Om le the

1 it
doo oes ou: ae
Pe RO Oe De GW He & Oe hw Wo a~gw ho saw Forty
Bsivowrge ns = = = Bom S' pre -bh t4
eo8 sale:
a) J
Siem ole
os ae h~a ~
~ Sen ts Pah hae ap Feu 2
Sa ew be Hela Behoee = na ot 5 eed
oe ete a ae
Tretia tetetbo teri tht
2 aw ¥en dee She Gio Gwar Qo guia ie a
a ih ha at ww at

me teen Bm mp er ioe Rime DE ND enw Bete OW ye aA Wy ar ap a> Amer Lr Ht
Lem he ie we

Sek ee BNE hee

eee ee eee eee re eee
Sr eet er et

=
Oe ty a eee
EN QO SY Hm SOW OS DS Mm de Rwe me

Sp dub-ded 4eaeked katte t-teaed
Sue O2 Ir Rewe ess

-“ 7:
@whe Soa SV Awdvae He hodravinss
OP eae here

ee aes

seo hee ne Pe AO > Ae le ire
See hae tn oe OA we te ree he A

1S ao thee
Cree

ROS Cee OH NOUNS ME AD OVRe Ree De dwerens.
Ae Ge Ae HY PFO OU Re He so Pwd LAW he hows ache Nene ie

Gor Se hn BOR SH hae
re awe Sr ebee Ae Creche father fd ah Ee oly Ske

THE BULLETIN
OF
THE AMATEUR
ENTOMOLOGISTS’
SOCIETY

VOLUME 23
1964

Edited by
H. V. DANKS

se

The Amateur Entomologists’ Society

42 Normandy Avenue, Barnet, Herts

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

INDEX

Compiled by H. V. Danks (2907)

CONTRIBUTORS

Airy Shaw, H. K., 36, 55, 88

Allen, R. H., 102

Berman, H. J., 29, 69, 101, 139

Bizley, D.O., 23

Bradbury, K., 35

Caiger, rev. H., 60

Castle, M. E., 57

Caswell, W., 29

Christie, L., 39

Church, S. H., 49, 108

Cole, S. G. L., 29

Coles, B., 83, 102, 115

Collinson, W. E., I 1, 42, 80

Cooper, J. E., 34

Cooter, J., 20, 102

Cribb, H. J., 22, 64

Cribb, P. J., 66

Cribb, P. W., 24, 50, 58, 62, 85, 114, 116, 125

Danks, H. V., I, 2, 13, 14, 32, 37, 73, 87, 105,
109, 141, 142

David, C., 118

Deacon, A. G. W., 143

Dickson, R. J., 108

Dodwell, D. E., 7, 38, 73, 74, 75

Felton, J. C., 10, 79, JH

Feltwell, J. S. E., 52, 72, 119

Fitter, R. S. R., 105

Fletcher, D. H., 136

Gardiner, B. O. C., 124

Gent, P. J., 144

Gettins, T., 102

Gill, J., 29

Goldsmith, D. C., 46

Heath, J., 102

Hilliard, R. D., 4

Holmes, A. M., 84

Howarth, T. G., 75
Hughes, M. O., 105, 141
Hugo, P., 101

Jones, A. W., 54

Knight, T. F., 83, 120
McCormick, R. F., 86, 107, 108
McGeeney, A., 21

Moore, J., 32, 144
Muggleton, J., 35

Noble, M., 19, 102

Noyes, J. S., 67

Ollevant, D., 8, 40, 70, 109
Payne, R. M., 112

Porter, J. M., 128
Robinson, R., 50, 59
Sadler, E. A., 85, 107
Sheen, B., 29

Siggs, L. W., 20, 36
Skinner, B. F., 34, 74
Smith, A., 29

Smith, D. H., 90

Smith, K. G. V., 37
Thomson, G., 118, 122
Trebilcock, G. D., 17, 76, 103
Trought, T., 18

Tuton, A. J., 16, 44, 82
Uffen, R. W. J., 89, 106, 144
Vincent, J., 86
Waddington, L. G. F., 142
Waters, P., 144

Watling, M. C., 96

Watt, J. C., 97, 129
Webb, D. W., 72

Webb, P. E., 72

Williams, C. B., 87
Wright, L. A., 45

SUBJECT
Advisory Panel, Additions to, 79 Apparatus:
Advisory Panel, The AES, 36 facing Collecting kit for Hymenoptera Acu-
AES, The, 57 leata, 10

Alder Moth in Devonshire, The, 34, 105
Alder Moth Larva, Survival of a Parasitised,
144
Alder Moth, More Records of the, 107
Annual Exhibition, 1963, 4
1964, 73, 74
Annual General Meeting, 1964, 2, 74,
Annual Report of the Society’s Represen-
tative on the Nature Conservancy’s
Entomological Liaison Committee for
1963-64, The, 75

Collecting kit for Odonata, 21
Notes on ‘ m.v.’ Traps, 80
Simple moth-trap, 52
Appeals for Information, |
Asparagus Beetle : A few Variations take
in Surrey, 1963, 20
Assembling, 8
Authors, Guidance for, 2
Barnet, Dragonfly Collecting in, 21
Bees, Crop Spraying kills, 7
Bicycle Journey across Northern France, 66)

=}

AES-BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Bordered Sallow Moth in South-West

London, The, 108

_ Breeding of the Purple Emperor Butterfly,

Some Personal Observations on the, 116

_ Breeding Varieties of the Lime Hawkmoth,
45

Brief Note from Egypt, A, 144

Brood of the Iron Prominent Moth, An
Interesting, 36

Bulletin, The, 12

_ By Any Other Name, 58

| Carabus granulatus in Middlesex, 85

Casual Observations on Italian Lepidoptera,
136

Coleoptera observed in the
Pyrenees, July 1962, 22

Coleopterist in Southern France, July 1963

Western

Collecting, 13
Collecting in Europe, 62
Italy, 136
Northern France, 66
Southern France, 24, 64
Spain, 67
Switzerland, 23
Western Pyrenees, 22
_ Collecting Notes :
Hymenoptera Aculeata, 10, 79, II
Smaller Moths, 8, 40, 77, 109
Bombus and Psithyrus, | 11
Lepidopterous larvae on Yarrow, 78
Melitta and Cerceris, 79
Winter work on Aculeates, 10
Collecting on the Continent of Europe, 62
Colour Slides, 2
Conservation, 14
Consider the Flies, 112
_ Continent of Europe, Collecting on the, 62
Convolvulus Hawkmoth, The, 144
Cornwall, Notes on the Lepidoptera of, 17
Council for Nature, Reports of the, 7
Council’s Report for 1963, 75
_ Crop Spraying Kills Bees, 7
Cumulative Effects of Mercury-vapour
Lamps, The, 50
Devonshire, The Alder Moth in, 34, 105
Distribution of the Archer’s Dart and Rosy
Minor Moths, 108
Dot Moth, The, 108
Double-tailed Poplar Hawkmoth Larva, A, 19
Dragonfly Collecting in Barnet, 21
_ Editorial, |, 37, 73, 109
Effect of the Winter of 1962-3 on Butterflies
: in Scotland, The, 122
_ Egypt, A Brief Note from, 144
_ Elephant Hawkmoth, The, 49
| English Names, 12, 58, 89
_ Entomology in New Zealand, 97, 129
Europe, Collecting on the Continent of, 62
Exchange of Foreign Insects, 2
Exhibition, Annual, 1963, 4
1964, 73, 74
Fen, A Weekend in, 125
Fen, Wicken, 72, 124
Field Meeting, AES, 39

Flies, Consider the, 112

Foreign Insects, Exchange of, 2

France, Beetles in South of, 22, 64
Butterflies in North of, 66
Butterflies in South of, 24

From Our Northern Correspondent, II, 42,

Fungal Parasites of Insects, 143

Further Records of the Least Carpet Moth
in South-West London, 108

Gardens, Insect Pests of, 16, 44

Genetics, Study Group in Lepidoptera, 59

Greek Invaders, ? 96

Green-veined White Butterfly, The, 120

Guernsey, The Peacock Butterfly in, 118

Guidance for Authors, 2

Hand-pairing of Lepidoptera, !14

Hertfordshire, The Smali Ranunculus Moth
in : correction, 34

Hybrid: Laothoe populi x
ocellata, 46

Indoor Overwintering,
gences from, 36

Insect Fauna of a Sandy Bank, 128

Insect Pests of Gardens, 16, 44

Insects, Foodplants and Plant-relationships,
55, 88

Interspecific Mating in the Plusiinae, 35

Iron Prominent Moth, An interesting Brood
of, 36

Italian Lepidoptera, Casual Observations on,
136

Junior News Section, 29, 69, 101, 139

Kent, The Pine Hawkmoth in North, 72

Knotgrass, Watch Your, 144

Larvae, Newly Hatched, 83

Leaflets, 73

Least Carpet Moth in South-west London,
Further Records of the, 108

Lepidoptera of the Maidstone District, 1963,
119

Letter to the Editor :
Alder Moth, 105
‘Bughunters,’ 32, 103
Lime-speck Pug Moth, 105
‘Science’, and the Bulletin, 142
Volucella zonaria, |4|

Light Orange Underwing Moth, The, 108

Lime Hawkmoth, Breeding Varieties of the,
a5

Lime-speck Pug Moth during February, 105

Local Meetings, 38

Local Recording, 42

London, Bordered Sallow Moth in, 108

London, Least Carpet Moth in, 108

Loughborough Naturalists’ Club, 72

Lucilia bufonivora, i07

Luck, Sheer, 60

Lying over, 36

Maidstone District, 1963, The Lepidoptera
of the, 119

Mating in the Plusiinae, Interspecific, 35

Meadow Brown Butterfly: subspecies
splendida in Scotland, The, I18

Medical Genetics, Unit of, 39

Smerinthus

Premature Emer-

iv

Meeting, AES Field, 39
Meeting, Annual! General, 1964, 2, 74
Mercury-vapour Lamps, The Cumulative
Effect of, 50
Mercury-vapour Light, The Purple Hair-
streak Butterfly at, 85
Mercury-vapour light-trap, 80
Microgaster alvearia, Observations on the
Braconid, 86
Middlesex, Carabus granulatus in, 85
Month’s Journey by Bicycle across Northern
France, A, 66
More Records of the Alder Moth, 107
Moth-trap, A Simple, 52
Name, By Any Other, 58
Naming of Insect Wing Veins, The, 90
Narcissus Flies, 44
Nature Conservancy’s Entomological Liaison
Committee, 75
Newly Hatched Larvae, 83
New Zealand, Entomology in, 97, 129
Northern Correspondent, From Our, II,
42, 80 :
Notes and Observations, 34, 35, 36, 72, 107,
143, 144
Notes on the Lepidoptera of Cornwall, |7
Obituary : H. E. Hammond, 37
Observations on:
Agrotis vestigialis, 108
Anthocaris cardamines, 115
Apatele alni, 34, 106, 107, 144
Archearis notha, 108
Carabus granulatus, 86
Crioceris asparagi, 20
Deilephila elpenor, 49
Eupithecia centaureata, 104
Hyloicus pinastri, 72
Laothoe populi, 19
Melanchra persicariae, |08
Microgaster alvearia, 86
Mimas tiliae, 45
Mormo maura, 43
Orgyia antiqua, 35
Orgyia recens, 35
Plusia festucae, 35
Plusia pulchrina, 35
Procus literosa, 108
Pyrrhia umbra, 108
Smerinthus hybr. hybridus, 46
Spilosoma lubricipeda, 50
Sterra vulpinaria (=rusticata), 108
Thecla quercus, 85
Vanessa cardui, |44
Volucella zonaria, 54, 141
Observations made near Lake Thun, Switzer-
land, in August 1963, 23
Observations on Butterflies in the South of
France, 1963, 24
Observations on the Braconid Microgaster
alvearia, 86
Old Lady Moth, The, 143
Orange Tip Butterfly, The, 18, 115
Orgyia antiqua and O. recens, Observations
on, 35

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Overwintering, Premature Emergences from
Indoor, 36

Pairing of Lepidoptera, Hand-, 114

Parasites in the White Ermine Moth, 50

Parasitised Alder Moth Larva, Survival of a,
144

Parents and the Young Entomologist, 69

Peacock Butterfly in Guernsey, The, I18

Pest ? —Prodenia litura—a new, 82

Pests of Gardens, Insect, 16, 44

Pine Hawkmoth in North Kent, The, 72

Plant-relationship:, Insects, Foodplants and,

Plant Virus Diseases, Insects as Vectors of, 16 |

Plusiinae, Interspecific Mating in the, 35 |

Poplar Hawkmoth Larva, A Double-tailed, 19

Premature Emergences from Indoor Over- |
wintering, 36

Prodenia litura—A New Pest ?, 82

Publications Order Form, 79

Purple Emperor Butterfly, Some Personal |
Observations on the Breeding of the,
116

Purple Hairstreak Butterfly at ‘m.v.’, The, |
85

Pyrenees, Coleoptera Observed in Western,
22

Queries, 107
Quick Method of Relaxing Lepidoptera, A, |
83
Quiz, Entomological, 69
Rearing Hints :
Anthocaris cardamines, |1|5
Apatura iris, \ 11
Deilephila elpenor, 49
Mimas tiliae, 45
Smerinthus hybr. hybridus, 47
Recording, Local, 42
Relaxing Lepidoptera, 29, 83
Report of Council, 1963, 75
Report of Treasurer, 1963, 76
Report of the Society’s Representative on
the Nature Conservancy’s Entomologi- |
cal Liaison Committee, 75
Reports of the Council for Nature, 7
Request for assistance :
Fungal Parasites of Insects, 143
Lucilia bufonivora, 107
Review :
British Butterflies, 7|
Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera,

SS ee — ee ee. EOS a

——— ee

Life of the Wayside and Woodland, 31!
Report of the Nature Conservancy, 106,
Water Beetles and Other Things, 30
Sandy Bank, Insect Fauna of a, 128 |
Scotland, The Effect of the Winter of 1962-3)
on Butterflies in, 122 IA,
Scotland, The Meadow Brown Butterfly ssp.j j,
splendida in, 118 |
Secretary’s Notes, 38, 73
Setting for Undersides, 84
Sheer Luck, 60
Simple Moth-trap, A, 52
Slides, Colour, 2

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Small Ranunculus Moth in Hertfordshire,
| The : Correction, 34
South of France, Beetles in, 64
Butterflies in, 24
Spain, A visit to, 67
| Study Group in Lepidoptera Genetics, 59
Survival of a Parasitised Alder Moth Larva,
144
Sussex Nature Reserve, 8
| Switzerland, 1963, Some Observations made
near Lake Thun, 23
Techniques :
Hand-pairing of Lepidoptera, | 14
Relaxing, 28, 83
Setting for Undersides, 84
Treasurer’s Notes, 77
Treasurer’s Report for 1963, 76
‘Two Problems’—Possible Answers, 86

Undersides, Setting for, 84
Unit of Medical Genetics, 39
Vapourer and Scarce Vapourer
Observations on, 35
Variations of the Asparagus Beetle, 20
Varieties of the Lime Hawkmoth, Breeding,

Moths,

/ Venation, Wing-, 90

Virus Diseases, Insects as Vectors of Plant, 16

| Visit to Spain, 1963, A, 67

' Volucella zonaria, 54, 141

Warning for Lepidopterists, 20

| Watch Your Knotgrass, 144

‘Weekend in Fen and Broad, A, !25

Western Pyrenees, July 1963, Coleoptera
Observed in, 22

White Ermine Moth, Parasites in the, 50

Wicken Fen, 72, 124

Wing Veins, The naming of Insect, 90

Winter of 1962-3 on Butterflies in Scotland,
Effect of, 122

You Have Been Warned, 20

ARACHNIDA
: ARANEIDA
Dolomedes fimbriatus, 140
CRUSTACEA
ISOPODA

Asellus, 60
| INSECTA
COLEOPTERA
_Acanthoceridae, 131
Aderidae, i01
Agabus, 65
_ Agelastica alni, 23
Agriotes, 31
'Alleculidae, 101
'Alphitobius, 132
_Amarotypus edwardsi, 132
Ambeodontus tristis, 100
_Amphimallus assimilis, 64
solstitialis var. pineticola, 64
_ Anisoplia villosa, 64
_Anisotomidae, 131
Anobium, 130
| punctatum, 132

Anomala aenea, 65
Anthaxia, 65
nitidula, 65

Anthicidae, 101
Anthonomus pomorum, 133
Anthrenus, 132

museorum, 20
Anthribidae (—Platystomidae), 99
Aphodius granarius, 133
Aphthora, 101
Arecopais, 99

spectabilis, 99
Artystona, 101

Asida, |00
Asilis, 130
Athous, 31

Bethelium signiferum, 132
Brachinus explodens, 23
Brontopriscus, !01
Bruchus, 132
Buprestidae, 99, 130
Byrrhidae, 130
Byrrhocryptus urquarti, 130
Cafius, 131
Calandra, 133
Calathosoma, 132
Cantharidae, 130
Carabidae, 132
Carabus granulatus, 85
splendens, 23
Carpophilus, 132
Cerambycidae, 99, 133
Cerambyx scopoli, 66
Ceratognathus, 130
Cerodolus, 101
Cetonia aurata, 65, 66
Chaetosoma scaritides, 129
Chaetosomatidae, 129
Chlaenius spoliatus, 65
vestitus, 65
Chlorochiton, 131
Choerodes, 101
Chrysochloa gloriosa, 66
Chrysolina crassicornis, 56
haemoptera, 56
hyperici, 132
Chrysomelidae, 99, 100
Cicindela, 102, 132
campestris, 23, 128
hybrida, 65
maritima, 67
sylvatica, 140
Cilibe, 100
Cionus, 55, 56
Clambidae, 130
Cleridae, 129
Coccinella leonina, 132
1 1-punctata, 132, 133
Coccinellidae, 32, 101, 132, 141
Colydiidae, 99, 100
Costelytra zealandica, |3|
Creophilus oculatus, 131
Crioceris asparagi, 20

Vi AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Cryptocephalus, 65, 66 Melandryidae (—Serropalpidae), 101
bipustulatus (=biguttatus), Meloidae, 101
66 Melolontha melolontha, 51, 102
Cryptophagidae, 10 Microsilpha, |3|
Ctenognathus, 132 Mitua, 100
Cucujidae, 101 Molorchus major, 66
Curculionidae, 99 umbellatarum, 66
Dascillus cervinus, 65 Mordellidae, 101
Dermestes, 132 Nascioides enysi, 130
Dermestidae, 130 Nebria lafrenayei, 23
Derodontidae, 98 Necrobia, 132
Dorcus, 139 Necrophilus prolongatus, 131
parallelopibedus, 69 Nosodendron, 130
Dryopidae, 1I3| Nothoderodontus gourlayi, 130
Dytiscidae, 131 Nyxetes bidens, 99
Elaphrus, 102 Oberea occulata, 23
Elateridae, 99, 132 Ocypus olens, 141
Elenchus, 132 Odontria, 131
Emus hirtus, 23, 66 Oemona hirta, 100
Enarsus, 100 Omalium, 131
Eucinetidae, 130 Orcus chalybeus, 132
Eucolaspis, 100 Oryctes nasicornis, 65
Exilis, 99 Oryzaephilus surinamensis, 132
Geotrupes, 69 Otiorrhynchus, 133
Geotrupidae, 131 Paropsis, 132
Gnathocerus cornutus, 132 Passalidae, 131
Gnorimus nobilis, 22 Pedilidae, 101
Goliathus regius, 103 Pericoptus truncatus, 130, 131
Gymnetron, 56 Pheloneis, 131
Gyrinus, 131 Phlyctinus callosus, 133
natator, 65 Phoarcantha semipunctata, 132
Helodidae, 99, 130 Phosphunga atrata, 69
Heteronychus sanctae-helenae, 133 Phycosecidae, 130
Hexanodes, 130 Phycosecis discoidea, 130
Histeridae, 131 Phyllotreta nemorum, |7
Holcaspis, 132 Phymatophoea, 129
Hydrophilidae, 131 Potosia affinis, 65
Hylotrupes bajulus, 102 cuprea, 65, 66
Laemostenus complanatus, 132 morio, 64
Lagria, 100 Prionoplus reticulatus, 100
Lagrioida, 100 Proscoporrhinus, 99
Lancetes lanceolatus, 131 Pselaphidae, 99, 131
Larinus jaceae, 65 Pterostichus bicolor, 66
Lasiorhynchus barbicornis, 99 Ptinus, 132
Lathridiidae, 10I speciosus, 130
Leis conformis, 132 Pupuricenus budensis, 66
Leptinotarsa |0-lineata, 23, 58, 65 Pyronata, 131
Leptura, 65 Recyntus, 100
aurulenta, 23 Rhagonycha fulva, 31
quadrifasciata, 23 Rhantus pulverulosus, 131
Lissotes, 130 Rhipiphoridae, 101
reticulatus, 130 Rhizobius, 132
Listroderes obliquus, 133 Rhysodes, 131
Longicornia, 65 Rhysodidae, 131
Loxomerus, 132 Rhytisternus miser, 132
Lucanidae, 130 Rygmodus, !31
Lucanus cervus, 31, 65, 140 Salpingidae, 101
Luperus, 100 Saphobius, 131
vulgaris, 100 Saprosites, 131
Lyctus brunneus, 132 Scarabaeidae, 99
Lytta vesicatoria, 66 Scolopterus, 99
Maoripamborus fairburni, 132 Scraptiidae, 10
Mecinus, 56 Selenopalpus, 101
Mecodema, 132 Silis ruficollis, 128

Megadromus, 132 Silphidae, 131

PES BUEEETIN, VOL. 23

Spondylis buprestoides, 66
Staphylinidae, 99, 131
Staphylinus caesareus, 23
opthalmicus, 23
Sternaulax zealandicus, 13|
Strophosomus faber, 80
Syrphetodes, 100
Techmessa, 100

Tenebrio, 132
Tenebrioides mauritanicus, 132
Tenebrionidae, 99, 100
Tessaromma undatum, |32
Timarcha tenebricosa, 140
Tribolium, 132
Trichodes alvearius, 65
apiarius, 65
Trogidae, 131
Trogoderma, 130
Trogositidae, 130
Trox, 131
Uloma tenebrioides, 101
Vedalia cardinalis, 132
Xantholinus, |3|
Zabrus obesus, 23
Zonabris polymorpha, 65
|2-punctata, 65
DIPTERA
Anabarynchus, 134
bilineatus, 134
Anisopidae, 134
Anthomyiidae, 135
Aprophila, 133
Arachnocampa luminosa, |34
Asilidae, 134
Austrosimulium, 134
Bibionidae, 134
Blepharoceridae, 134
Bombyliidae, 134
Calliphora, 135
erythrocephala, 135
laemica, 135
Calliphoridae, 135
Cecidomyidae, 134
Ceratopogonidae, 134
Cerosmyia, 135
Chironomidae, 134
Chironomus zealandicus, 134
Corethrella novae-zealandiae, |33
Culex fatigans, 133
pervigilans, 133
Culicidae, 133
Cyrtidae, 134
Dasyneura pyri, 134
Dixidae, 134
Dolichopodidae, 135
Empididae, 135
Eristalis, 44
Exsul singularis, 135
Forcipomyia antipodum, 134
Heliophilus, 135
Hippoboscidae, 135
Huttonina, 135
Hylemya, 135
Leptidae, 134

Telephorus (= Cantharis) thoracica, 128

Limnophora, 135
flaviventris, 135
Lucilia bufonivora, 107
sericata, 135
Mayetiola destructor, 134
Melophagus ovinus, 135
Merodon equestris, 44, 45
Mischoderus, 133
Musca domestica, 70, 103, 135
Muscidae, 135
Mycetophilidae, 134
Nemopalpus zelandiae, 133
Oestridae, 135
Opifex fuscus, 133
Ornithomyia opposita, 135
Pericoma, 133
Phlebotomus, 133
Phoridae, 135
Pipunculus, 135
Platypezidae, 135
Protoborborus, 135
Protohystricia alcis, 135
Psychoda, 133
Psychodidae, 133
Scatopsidae, 134
Sciadocera rufomaculata, 135
Simuliidae, 134
Stomoxys calcitrans, 135
Syrphidae, 135
Syrphus, 135
Tabanidae, 134
Tabanus, 140
Tachinidae, 135
Tanyderidae, 133
Teratomyza, 135
Thaumaleidae, 134
Therevidae, 134
Tipulidae, 113, 133
Trichoceridae, 134
Volucella inanis, 54
zonaria, 54, 141, 142
Zaluscodes aucklandicus, 133
HEMIPTERA
Cercopidae, 140

Hyalopteroides humilis (= dactylidis, = pallida),
88

Icerya purchasi, 132
Ilyocoris cimicoides, 61
Jassidae, 132
Macrosiphon gei, 16
Myzus persicae, 16
Rhopalosiphum davisi, 89
HYMENOPTERA
Ammophila, 128
Andrena, 79, 80
Anthophora, 79
Apanteles glomeratus, 103
Apis mellifera, 7, 103, 140
Bombus, 79, |11, 140
muscorum, ||}
smithianus, |1|
Cerceris, 79, 80
arenaria, 80
cunicularia, 80
rybyensis, 80

Vil

a RES bow a Seo

Vill

sabulosa, 80
Chrysididae, 39
Formica fusca, 128
Halictus, 79, 80
Melitta, 79
haemorrhoidalis, 79
leporina, 79
tricincta, 79
Microgaster alvearia, 86
Mimesa, ||
Psithyrus, 111
Vespa crabro, 54
Vespula, 79, 109
germanica, 4, 112, 142
vulgaris, 4, 54, 112, 142
LEPIDOPTERA
Abraxas grossulariata, 139
Acherontia atropos, 13, 61
Acontia luctuosa, 68
Adaina microdactyla, 42
Agapetes, see Melanargia
Aglais urticae, 17, 20, 23, 29, 40, 66, 120, 122,
123, 138
Agonopterix rotundella, 90
Agriades glandon, 59
Agrotis vestigialis, 18, 108
Albulina orbitulus, 59
Alucita galodactyla, 10
spilodactyla, 10
Anacampsis betulinella, 10
populella, 10
Anarsia lineatella, 90
Anthocaris (—Euchloe) cardamines, |8, 40, 68,
114, 119, 137, 139
Antitype flavicincta, 34
Apantesis virgo, 6
Apatele alni, 34, 106, 107, 144
Apatura iris, 26, 71, 116, 117
Aphantopus hyperanthus, 120, 126
Aporia crataegi, 138, 139
Araschnia levana, 107, |15
Archearis notha, 108
Arctia caja, 6, 60
Argynnis aglaia, 59
cydippe (—adippe), 59, 67
euphrosyne, 138
lathonia, 28, 66, 138
paphia, 18, 23, 24, 138
selene, 122, 123
Argyroploce pomedaxana (=porphyrana), 10
Aricia agestis, 24, 40, 59, 137
Attacus atlas, 103
Augasma aeratellum, |44
Biston betularia, 7
Brenthis (=Boloria) pales, 27
Cacoecia operana (=podana), 40
pronubana, 40, 41
Callophrys rubi, 68, 120, 137, 139
Carcharodus alceae, |37
Carterocephalus palaemon, 139
Cataclysta lemnata, 9
Celerio euphorbiae, 25
livornica, 5
Cerura vinula, |9
Chrysoclista linneella, 10

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Chrysophanus dorilis, 67
subalpina, 27
Coenonympha pamphilus, 40, 67, 68, 120
tullia, 63, 118

Coleophora alnifoliae, 90

argentula, 79

tricolor, 7

troglodytella, 79
Colias, 138, 139

croceus (=crocea, =edusa), 59, 66, 68,

hyale, 24, 67, 138
palaeno, 26
Cucullia, 55, 56
Cupido minimus, 27, 139
Cyaniris cyllarus, 138, 139
semiargus, 68, 138
Danaus plexibpus, 6, 144
Deilephila elpenor, 6, 49
Diacrisia sannio, 120
Diataraxia oleracea, 58
Dira, see Pararge
Diurnea fagella, 8, 79
Epichnopteryx pulla, 8
Epiniphele janira, 59
Episema caeruleocephala, 39
Erebia, 26, 27
aethiops, 24, 28, 118, 136
alecto glacialis, 27
epiphron, 24, 118
gorge, 27
Eriogaster lanestris, 40
Erynnis tages, 40, 68, 120, i137
Euchloe, see Anthocaris
Euchloe crameri, 137
Euclemensia woodiella, 90
Euclidimera mi, 40
Eucosma citrana, 79
Euphydryas aurinia, |3, 27, 33, 68
Eupithecia, 79
centaureata, 105
Euplagia quadripunctaria, 24
Euproctis similis, 39
chrysorrhoea, 39
Eurrhypara hortulata, 36
Euxanthis angustana, 79
straminea, 42
Fabriciana adippe, 59
Fumea casta, 8, 9
Gastropacha quercifolia, 5|
Gonepteryx cleopatra, 68, 137
rhamni, 18, 24, 28, 119
Gracillaria cuculipennella, 42
elongella, 42
semifascia, 10
Hadena dysodea, 34 '
Hamearis lucina, 138, 139
Hemistola immaculata, 86
Herse convolvuli, 131, 144
Hesperia comma, 67
Hyloicus pinastri, 51, 72
Idaea lineata, 139
Itame wauaria, 68
Lampides boeticus, 144
Laothoe populi, 19, 35, 46, 47, 48, 49

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Lasiocampa quercus callunae, 13, 8|
Laspeyresia succedana, 8
Leptidea sinapis, 137, 138, 139
Leucania, 135

litoralis, 18
Leucoma salicis, 24

- Limenitis camilla, 24

populi, 26
sybilla (=anonyma), 137, 138
Lithocolletis anderidae, 42
blancardella, 79
lautella, 77, 78
rajella, 42
schreberella, 79
stettinensis, 42, 77, 78
Luperina testacea, |8
Lycaeéna astrarche, 59
dispar, 14, 72, 124, 125
batavus, 125
hippothoe var. eurybia, 136
orbitulus, 59
pheretes, 59
phliaeas, 40, 68, 120, 122, 123, 137
var. coeruleopunctata, 137
Lymantria monacha, |7
Lysandra bellargus, 138
coridon, |20
orion, 138, 139
Macroglossum stellatarum, 68
Macrothylacia rubi, 20
Maculinea arion, 27, 33, 71, 75
unicolor, 27
Malacosoma neustria, 30, 39, 137
Maniola jurtina, 27, 59, 118, 119, 120
splendida, 118, 119
lycaon, 28
tithonus, 120, 126
Melanargia (—Agapetes) galathea, 24, |20
Melanchra, 135
persicariae, 108
137, 138
athalia, 56
celadussa, |37, 139
cinxia, 138
cynthia, 27
didyma, 137, 139
phoebe, 137
Mesoacidalia charlotta, 59
Mimas tiliae, 35, 45
Mnemonica subpurpurella, 8
Mompha terminella, 42
Mormo maura, 143
Nemotois scabiosella, 42
Nepticula betulicola, 42
Nola cucullatella, 39
Notocelia uddmanniana, 9
Notodonta dromedarius, 36
Notodontidae, 5I
Nyctemera, 135
Nymphalidae, 114
Nymphalis antiopa, 6, 7, 68, 138, 139
io, 17, 18, 20, 24, 28, 29, 66, 118,
120, 122

Melitaea,

Nymphula nymphaeata, 9
stagnata, 9
Stratiotata, 9
Ochlodes venata, 24, 40, 137, 138, 139
Oeceticus, 135
Oeneis aello, 26
Operophtera brumata, 83
Orgyia antiqua, 35, 36
recens, 35
Ourapteryx sambucaria, 7
Oxycanus, 135
Pammene argyrana, 8
Pancalia leuwenhoekella, 8, 9
Pandemis corylana, 40, 41
Papilio, 39
machaon, 24, 39, 72, 114, 124
brittanicus, 29, 124,
127
centralis, 125
gorganus, 66, 68, 125, 137,
138,
podalirus (=sinon), 68, 114, 137, 138,
139
Paracystola acroxantha, 90
Pararge aegeria, 17, 137, 138
aegerides, 137
(=Dira) maera, 28, 67, 137, 138
megera, 40, 66, 68, 138
Parectopa ononidis, 42
Parnassius apollo, 28, 138
Phalera bucephala, 29
Phalonia dipoltella, 78
smeathmanniana, 79
Phtheochroa rugosana, 42
Pieris, 18, 70
brassicae, 3, 5, 6, 24, 29, 40, 59, 60, 63,
66, 67, 70, 103, 114, 119, 121,
122, 138
ab. coerula-albinensis, 6
race cheiranthi, 6, 59
napi, 24, 40, 119, 121, 122, 123
‘bryoniae flavescens,’ 121
ab. citronea, 121
ab. hibernica, 121
var. napeae, 121
rapae, 40, 66, 70, 102, I19
Platyedra malvella, 42
vilella, 42
Plusia festucae, 35
pulchrina, 35
Polygonia c-album, 24, 102, 120, 138, 139
Polyommatus damon, 27
donzelii, 27
eumedon, 27
glandon (=orbitulus), 26
hylas, 138
icarus, 18, 24, 40, 66, 68, 120,
122, 123, 137
pheretes, 27
rippertii, 27
Pontia callidice, 26
daplidice, 68
Porina, 135
Procus literosa, 108
Prodenia litura, 82

125,

x

SSS EE RU aM Ie tha en aa

Proteodes, 135
Pterostoma palpina, 17
Pyrausta aurata, 8
cespitalis, 8
burpuralis, 8
verbascalis, 10
Pyrgus malvae, 68, 136
sao, 136, 137, 139
Pyrrhia umbra, 108
Saturnia, 139
pavonia, 40, 8|
Scopula conjugata, 40
immorata, 8
Smerinthus hybr. hybridus, 46, 48, 49
ocellata, 35, 46, 47, 48, 49
Sophronia humerel!a, 90
Spilosoma lubricipeda, 50
Stauropus fagi, 5|
Sterrha vulpinaria (—rusticata), 108
Stomopteryx albipalpella, 10
Telephila schmidiella, 10
Thecla quercus, 18, 85, 120
Thestor ballus, 68
Thetidia (—Euchloris) smaragdaria, 40
Tholera cespitis, 18
Thymelicus actaeon, 137
sylvestris, 85, 120
Tinea palescentella, 8, 9
pellionella, 8
Tischeria marginea, 9
Tortricodes tortricella, 8
Trichiura crataegi, 39
Troides, é
Tyria, 135
Vanessa atalanta, 13, |7, 23, 119, 122, 137,
cardui, 18, 23, 68, 119, 137, 138, 141,
144
Yponomeuta padella, 39
Ypsolophus alpellus, 79
costellus, 109, 110
nemorellus, 9
sequellus, 109, 110
xylostellus, 9
Zygaena filipendulae, 120
ODONATA
Anax imperator, 60, 62
Cordulia aenea, 62
Sympetrum scoticum, 95
ORTHOPTERA
Gryllulus domesticus, 29
Locusta migratoria, |3|
Mecostethus (—Stethophyma) grossus, 140
Nemobius sylvestris, 140
Pholidoptera griseoaptera, 40, 141
PALAEODICTYOPTERA
Paolia vetusta, 93
Stenodictya lobata, 93
PHASMIDA
Carausius (—Dixippus) morosus, 30, 70, 102,
141

THYSANOPTERA
Thrips tabaci, 16

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

MOLLUSCA
Planorbis corneus, 60

NEMATODA
Wuchereria bancrofti, 133

ACTINOPTERYGII
ISOSPONDYLI
Salmo, 67
OSTARIOPHYSI
Cobitis taenia, 126

AMPHIBIA
ANURA
Liopelmc, 98
AVES
RATITAE
Apteryx, 98
CARINATAE

Aquila chrysaetus chrysaetus, 27

Gallus gallus, 39

Oenanthe hispanica hispanica, 27

Passer domesticus domesticus, 52

Pyrrhocorax graculus, 27
pyrrhocorax, 27

Turdus merula merula, 52

MAMMALIA
RODENTIA
Apodemus sylvaticus sylvaticus, 20

REPTILIA
RHYNCHOCEPHALIA
Sphenodon punctatus, 98
SQUAMATA
Coronella austriaca, 140
Vipera berus, 140

SPERMATOPHYTA

Acer campestre, 10, 109
pseudoplatanus, 10, 102, 109
Achillea millefolium, 78
Agathis australis, 98
Alliaria petiolata, 115, 119
Alnus glutinosa, 23, 34, 42, 77, 85, 124
Althea officinalis, 42
rosea, 42

Amaryllidaceae, 44
Amaryllis belladonna, 44
Ammophila arenaria, |8
Angelica sylvestris, 54, 72, 124, 125

)}4ES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

‘Arctium, 10
4rtemisia maritima, 40
Asparagus officinalis, 20
Betula, 10
verrucosa, 42
3icarpellatae, 56
3rassica oleracea, 70

rapa, |7
3ryonia dioica, 42
3uddleja, 23, 24, 55, 88, 141
davidii, 54, 55
globosa, 55
3uddlejaceae, 55
Callitriche, 60
Calluna, 42
Campanula rotundifolia, 79
Cardamine pratensis, 19
Carduus, 79
Carpinus betulus, 109
‘caryophyllaceae, 56
Castanea sativa, 102
Celsia, 56
Centaurea, 65

nigra, 18, 42

Cercidiphyllum japonicum, 106
chenopodiaceae, 56
Chrysanthemum, 82
\Circaea lutetiana, 42
Cirsium arvense, 54
Citrus limonum, 100
Colchicum autumnale, 67
Corylus, 90

avellana, 41
‘Crataegus, 30, 39, 83, 85, 120, 137, 143
ecacan 98, 130
peciens. 88, 89

glomerata, 88
Dahlia, 90
)Daucus, 125, 127
| carota, 72
Dianthus caryophyllus, 82
Digitalis, 56
Elymus, 89
Erica, 42
Euonymus, 40
Eupatorium cannabinum, 42
Euphorbia cyparissias, 25
Fagus, 98
sylvatica, 22, 139
Ficus carica, 65
Filipendula ulmaria, 26
‘Frangula alnus, 28
Fraxinus excelsior, 41, 66
'Galanthus, 44
|Genista anglica, |0
/Gentiana lutea, 66
|Heracleum sphondylium, 54
|Hieracium, 89
\Holcus lanatus, 8
|Hydrocharis morsus-ranae, 60
‘Hypericum, 132
‘Knautia arvensis, 42
iLabiatae, 56
\Larix decidua, 22, 27
|Lavandula spica, 65

xi
Lemna, 126
Ligustrum ovalifolium, 40, 54
vulgare, 108
Lilium, 26
Linaria, 56

Loganiaceae, 55
Lonicera periclymenum, 9
Lycopersicum esculentum, 16, 82
Lycopus europaeus, 54
Lythrum salicaria, 126
Malus sylvestris, 10, 108
Malva sylvestris, 42
Marrubium vulgare, 10
Medicago sativa, 66, 79
Melampyrum, 56
Mentha aquatica, 54
Metrosideros, 98, 130
Narcissus, 44, 45
Nepeta cataria, 79
Nothofagus, 98, 129, 132
Olea europaea, |37
Onobrychis viciifolia, 65
Ononis repens, 42
Origanum vulgare, 10
Peucedanum palustre, 72, 124, 127
Phragmites, 60, 126
communis, 23
Phygelius, 56
Pinus, 100
sylvestris, 97, 127
Plantaginaceae, 56
Plantago, 55, 56, 88
lanceolata, 56
major, 56
Podocarpus, 98
Polygonum aviculare, 144
Populus, 10, 65, 67
nigra var. italica, 19, 47
tremula, 26
Potamogeton, 60
Primula denticulata, 35
Prunus, 102
laurocerasus, 28
spinosa, 39
Pseudotsuga mensiesii, 22
Quercus, 8, 77, 109
robur, 22, 34, 41, 144
Ranunculus arvensis, 39
Rhamnus catharticus, 124
Rhipogonum scandens, 98
Rhopalostylis sapida, 99
Rosa, 82
Rubus, 89, 98, 120, 138
fruticosus, 9, 11, 40, 54, 85
Rumex hvdrolapathum, 126
Ruta graveolens, 125
Salix, 10, 19, 24, 65, 85, 108, 127
caprea, |16
Sambucus nigra, |1, 85

Scrophularia, 55
Scrophulariaceae, 55, 56
Senecio jacobaea, 54
Sisymbrium officinale, 19
Solanum tuberosum, 65
Spartium junceum, 65

Syringa, 120

Teucrium scorodonia, 10

Thelycrania (= Cornus) sanguinea, 41

Tilia, 10

Tragopogon porrifolius, 39
pratensis, 39

Tridens flavus, 88

Trifolium, 42, 66, 139

pratense, 66
Triticum, 134
Tubiflorae, 56

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Ulex, 8

europaeus, 129
Ulmus procera, 79
Urtica dioica, 120
Vaccinium, 26
Vallota speciosa, 44
Verbascum, 55
Verbenaceae, 55
Veronica, 56
Viola, 9

=
,
\

VOL. 23
No. 262

-
on

FEBRUARY, 1964

THE BULLETIN
OF

THE AMATEUR

-_ ENTOMOLOGISTS’

SOCIETY

World List abbreviation ; Bull. amat. Ent. Soc.

s

_ EDITED by H. V. DANKS

An Important Work of Reference new to
the famous

Wayside & Woodland
Series

Beetles of the
British Isles

By E. F. LINSSEN, F.Z.S., F.R.E.S., F.R.P.S.
IN TWO VOLUMES

This two-volume work on one of the
largest Orders of British Insects, the
Beetles, gives a full description of all the
common species found in this country,
as well as most of the rare ones. The
beautifully executed illustrations, in

colour as well as in black and white, add

greatly to the value of the books.

Each volume 30/- net
FROM ALL BOOKSELLERS

Prospectus available from

Frederick Warne & Co. Ltd
1-4 Bedford Court, London, W.C.2

AES NOTICE
WHERE TO WRITE

Membership applications, offers of help,

changes of address, and non-arrival of

Bulletins to: D. E. Dodwell, 28 Sum-
merleaze Park, Yeovil, Somerset.
Yeovil 928.

Advertisers to: R. D. Hilliard, 54 Gyles
Park, Stanmore, Middlesex.
EDGware 1604.

Offers to lead Field Meetings, exhibit, etc.,
to: B. F. Skinner, 85 Elder Road, West
Norwood, London, S.E.27.

GIPsy Hill 0057.

Manuscripts, drawings, and_ books for
review to: H. V. Danks, 7 The Ridge,
Surbiton, Surrey. ELMbridge 4156.

Subscriptions (I5/- per annum, 10/- for
Juniors) to: B. R. Stallwood, /7 Clare-
mont Avenue, Sunbury-on-Thames,
Middlesex. Sunbury 2687.

Youth matters to: H. Berman, St Ivo
School, St Ives, Hunts,

RESERVED
FOR

Worldwide
Limited _

_ Seafields House, Charmouth,
Bridport, Dorset, England ©

HOW TO WRITE
FOR THE BULLETIN —
In good English. —

Preferably typewritten, double-spaced,
with wide margins, and on one side only
of quarto paper. .

Heading in capitals, NOT underlined.
Correct scientific names, consisting of
name of genus (capital initial, and under-
lined), name of species (small initial, and
underlined), authority one peionally.
abbreviated, NOT onde Gees

English names of species, etc., with

capital initials. =

Your name at end, on the right, followed
by your AES Membership Number in
parentheses. —

Date of writing, all in awe (e.g.,
15.8.27.), opposite your name.

Number of words, in pencil and ringed

round, in top right corner of first sheet.

Return proofs promptly. |

Butterflies

ena anciatniaimammmmuealll

einai inset ia i iain: eatin

jiihanecmrnieaeg

sibiaiabiahinaibieieie

si

ee Ce

ss snaanieiteaind heaped head epehamnael ek iummnpiaiates

Entomologist’s Gazette

A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF BRITISH ENTOMOLOGY
Well illustrated

Subscription: £2 per year

Free Sample Copy sent on request

353 Hanworth Road, Hampton, Middlesex, England

Entomological Literature
NEW AND SECONDHAND

Large stocks of Separata and Reprints on all Orders and
Entomological subjects

Catalogues sent free on request

E. W. CLASSEY, F.R.E.S., A.B.A.
Entomological Publisher and Bookseller

353 Hanworth Road, Hampton, Middlesex, England

THE AES PROSPECTUS

CONTAINING FULL DETAILS
will be sent to anyone interested
Please apply, enclosing 24d. stamp, to:
Hon. Advertising Secretary, AES

54 GYLES PARK, STANMORE, MIDDLESEX

ORDNANCE SURVEY MAPS
1” Scale, 7th Series

Paper, flat. 4/6d. each.
Paper, folded. 5/6d. each.
Cloth, folded. 7/6d. each.

Available from:
L. CHRISTIE
Entomologist
137 Gleneldon Road, Streatham,
LONDON, S.W.16

(Postal Business only)

a eet

ons of

WN 3 QQ: OLOGISTs’ SOCIETY

ee
Opel Cazes, 2 figs. Price 3d.
| co! Collecting Sawflies. 12 pages (including 2 plates), 26 figs. Price 6d.
No. 5 Collecting Flies (Diptera). 8 pages, 1 fig., 8 plates. Price 2/6d.

No. 6 Collecting Beetles Associated with Stored Food Products. 9 pages, 6 figs.,
3 plates. Price 1/6d.

No. 7 Some Improved Devices for Rearing Hymenoptera. 7 pages, 3 figs. Price 6d.
No. 8 Collecting Ants. 12 pages, 5 figs. Price 6d.

No. 9 Collecting Caddises. 5 pages, 4 plates. Price 1/-.

No. 10 Experiments with Bees. 12 pages, 3 figs. Price 6d.

No. 12 Collecting Dragonflies. 12 pages (including 2 plates), 12 figs. Price 6d.

No. 13 Collecting Microlepidoptera. 4 pages, 1 fig. Price 3d.

No. 14 Setting Microlepidoptera. 4 pages, 5 figs. Price 3d.

No. 15 Collecting Het-Bugs (Hemiptera-Heteroptera). 12 pages (including 2 plates),
5 figs. Price 6d.

No. 18 Collecting Clearwings. 12 pages (including 2 plates), 4 figs. Price 6d.
No. 20 Preserving Caterpillars. 14 pages (including 6 plates), 9 figs. Price 1/-.
No. 21 Collecting Psocoptera. 4 pages, 10 figs. Price 6d.

No. 22 Collecting Lacewings. 9 pages, 8 figs., 5 plates. Price 1/-.

No. 24 Entomology of Bird Pellets. 8 pages, 4 plates, 1 map. Price 1/6d.

No. 25 Collecting Bumble Bees. 20 pages, 83 figs. Price 2/-.

No. 26 Collecting Collembola. 6 pages, 4 figs. Price 1/-.

No. 27. A Study of the Insects Living on the Wayfaring Tree. 20 pages, 4 figs., 1 dia-
gram. Price 1/6d.

No. 28 Killing, Setting and Storing Butterflies and Moths. 13 pages, 10 figs. Price 9d.

PAMPHLETS
Label List of British Macrolepidoptera. 32 pages. Price 1/- (reduced from 3/6d.)

4
No. 5 Check List of British Macrolepidoptera. 32 pages. Price 3d. (reduced from 1/6d.)
6 Label List of British Butterflies. 2 pages. Price 3d.

7

No.

No. 7a 1st Supplement to the above. 44 pages. Price 2/-.

Directory of Natural History Societies. 155 pages. Price 7/6d.

No. 10 A Glossary for the Young Lepidopterist. 6 pages, 2 figs. Price 6d.

These publications are obtainable from L. Christie, 137 Gleneldon Road, Streatham,
London, S.W.16., England. Do not send remittance with your order as an invoice will
be sent with the publications and will include the correct postal charge.

»material for the May number :
srate of accumulation of material is

ae

EDITORIAL

| must first thank those Members
who have contributed articles for the
Bulletin as a result of my appeals in the
August and November issues. | have
been particularly pleased with the
response from Junior Members and,
especially in view of certain comments

_in the following pages, | find this most

encouraging. The response to my
appeals for copy, in fact, has been
such that | have actually been able to
“carry over’ asmall surplus of

if this

maintained — ‘ closing date’ for May
issue copy being 1st March, as the

|present thirty-six page Bulletins take

a rather long time to print—it should
prove possible from now on to
produce full-sized Bulletins on time.

| must apologise to any Member
who submitted an article during the

/hectic few months while the August

and November issues were being
prepared and who might not have
received proper acknowledgement
from me for his effort. However, |
/am now in a position to be able to
deal relatively quickly with any
correspondence.

In this issue will be found a few

| notes for the guidance of intending

authors, and these include some
changes from earlier notes on these
lines —I| hope that Members will
assist me by reading through them,
noting particularly item (21).

From time to time appeals for
information or assistance on
particular entomological topics are
published in the Bulletin and in the
Wants and Exchanges List. | should
Front cover illustration: The swallowtail butterflies

Papilio machaon britannicus Linn. and P. podalirius
Linn., drawn by Mr A. M. Freebrey (3359).

AES

BULLETIN

No. 262

FEBRUARY, 1964

like to think that our Society is active
in facilitating exchanges of informa-
tion, etc., between entomologists,
and | make a general plea here that
anyone who has information of the
nature required by the author of such
an appeal should make the effort to
send it to that author. Rothamsted
Experimental Station, for instance,
performs a very valuable service in
correlating certain entomological
data, but this service is dependent on
the small individual efforts of amateur
entomologists in sending in informa-
tion. The appeals in Bull. amat. Ent.
Soc., 21: 108 and 22: 81-3 produced
a small response, yet there are
certainly many more entomologists
who could supply the sort of data
required if only they would make the
slight effort required to pass these
data on to the Rothamsted entomol-
ogists, who are very grateful to the
amateurs on whose records they
depend. General migration records,
of course, are always wanted, as well
as the information requested in the
special appeals which have appeared.
Other Members, too, perform
services to entomology in the same
way as the workers at Rothamsted,
and here too there is scope for
friendly co-operation between
Members. Why not read through the
back numbers of the Bulletin and see
if you have any information which
might possibly assist another Member?
Finally, could | just draw your
attention to the fact that subscriptions
for 1964 are now due, and that prompt
payment of these will greatly assist
the Society, as the preparation and
despatch of reminders each year to
Members who forget to pay involves
much extra work for the Society’s

officers.
H. V. Danks (2907).

ANNUAL GENERAL
MEETING

The Annual General Meeting for
1964 will be held at the rooms of the
Linnean Society, Burlington House,
Piccadilly, London W.1, on the after-
noon.of Saturday March 31st.

The programme will begin at
2.30 p.m., and will include a talk —
“The Butterflies of Southern
France ’’ — by Mr P. W. Cribb, who
will show a series of colour slides.

It is hoped that all Members will
take advantage of the opportunity
provided by the A.G.M., both to
meet their fellow Members and to
play their part in the administration
of the Society.

A full notice of the programme and

agenda of the A.G.M. will be cir-—

culated to Members before the
meeting.
H.V.D.

COLOUR SLIDES

As the President indicated in the
May 1963 issue of the Bulletin (Bull.
amat. Ent. Soc., 22: 35), the Society
is starting a collection of colour slides,
for use at lectures organised by the
Society or any of its Members. We
have been fortunate to receive from
Miss Christine McDermott (2488), a
generous gift of slides, which has
given us the basis of such a collection.

It is hoped that a really extensive
set of transparencies can be built up,
and any natural history slides which
Members no longer require and which
might be of use to the Society would
be welcomed by the Hon. General
Secretary. As soon as the collection
has become of a reasonably compre-
hensive nature, details of the material
available for loan will be published in
the Bulletin.

H.V.D.

FEBRUARY, 1964

EXCHANGE OF FOREIGN
INSECTS

Kuninobua Aonuma, 729, Naka-
gosho, Nagano City, Nagano Ken,
Japan, would like to exchange insects
with entomologists in this country,
and it is hoped that the publication
of this note (extracted from his letter
to the British Museum (Natural
History)) will prompt AES Members
to write to him.

He can offer Japanese and some
Formosan Lepidoptera, Carabidae,
Lucanidae, Scarabaeidae, Geo-
trupidae, Cerambycidae, etc., and
livestock (e.g. pupae of Papilionidae
in winter, eggs of Lycaenidae, etc.).
He would like to obtain British
Lepidoptera, Carabidae, Ceram-
bycidae, and books on insects.

H.V.D.

GUIDANCE FOR AUTHORS

The following notes outline the
most important of the methods which
are used by the Editor to ensure that
there is a tidy uniformity in the way
in which material is published in the
Bulletin, and they also indicate how
the Editor would prefer articles to
be presented so that these are
relatively easy to deal with. By
carrying out the requests below,
therefore, you will greatly help the
Editor, although material from Mem-
bers who feel that they cannot carry
out the ideas contained in these notes
is still gratefully received. It is, how-
ever, very much appreciated if
Members act on the information given
and so lighten the Editor’s task.

If any Member would like informa-
tion on specific matters concerned
with writing articles for the Bulletin
and not given in these notes, the
Editor will be pleased to help in any
way he can.

4
4

:

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

(1) If possible, please submit mat-
erial which is typewritten. Please try
to have this double-spaced (i.e., with
a whole line empty between succes-
sive lines of type), with very wide
margins and on one side only of quarto
paper. If handwritten material is sub-

_}mitted, please ensure that there is
_fagain plenty of space between the

lines and that the writing is clear.
It is a good idea to have somebody

‘else read your manuscript, as am-
‘biguities are often shown up in this

way.
(2) The title should be in capital
letters throughout and not underlined.
When choosing a title, always think
‘how it will appear on the Bulletin
'page (is it too long?) and whether

i reference to the subject matter will

be easy when the title has been
carried into the index.
(3) The author’s (authors’) name(s),

\followed by AES Membership Num-
_ber(s) in parentheses, should be placed
at the end of the article, on the right

hand side, on a different line from the
text, and not underlined.

(4) The date of writing should be
placed on the left opposite the
author’s name, in the usual (shortest)
form (e.g., 1.2. 64.).

(5) All species of living things,
where exactly identified, should be
named with their full scientific names,
i.e., full name of genus with capital
initial letter, specific name with small
initial letter, both of these names
underlined ; name of author, not
underlined but conventionally abbre-

| viated if well-known (note that Linn.

and Fab. are used for Linnaeus and

_ Fabricius respectively, not L. and F.).

(6) If there is a well-known English
name, this should be added in

parentheses after the scientific name,
_ each word of the former having a
| capital initial letter, e.g., Pieris bras-
| sicae Linn. (Large White Butterfly).

“The Large White Butterfly (Pieris

brassicae Linn.) ”’ is also permissible.

(7) lf you do not know any item of

this information, please leave a good-
sized space where it should occur, so
that the Editor can fill it in for you.
(Make sure, of course, that you have
supplied enough information for him
to be able to identify the species to
which you are referring !)

(8) Once you have given the full
names of a species you may, if you
wish, refer to it later in the same
article by its English name alone or
by its scientific name alone. If the
latter you may, if no ambiguity can
possibly arise by doing so, omit the
author’s name and/or abbreviate the
generic name to its initial letter
followed by a full point (.).

(9) If the name of a genus is used
on its own it should be underlined,
and if it is followed by ‘ sp. ’ (singular)
or ‘spp.’ (plural) meaning ‘ species ’,
this should not be underlined, e.g.,
Pieris sp.

(10) The scientific names of groups
above the rank of genus should have
capital initial letters but not be under-
lined. Adjectives formed from one
of these names (e.g., coleopterous),
or nouns derived similarly and refer-
ring to students of the group con-
cerned (e.g., coleopterist) should,
however, have small initial letters.
If, however, an adjective derived in
this way (as in “‘a cerambycid beetle’)
is used as a noun (“a Cerambycid ’’)
it should be given a capital initial
letter.

(11) English vernacular words
which do not apply to any particular
species of animal or plant (e.g., grass,
butterfly, rose, etc.) should be given
small initial letters.

(12) Abbreviations should be fol-
lowed by a full point (.) only if the
last letter of the word is missing.
Thus Linn. should be used for
Linnaeus, but Mr for Mister. The
abbreviation AES will be treated as
a cipher, with the points omitted.

(13) References to articles in the
Bulletin should be indicated by the
World List abbreviation (Bull. amat.

4

Ent. Soc.) underlined, followed by a
comma, then the number of the
volume, a full colon (:), and the
number(s) of the page(s) occupied by
the article(s). Indication of the bold
type used for the volume numbers
should be left tothe Editor. Examples:
Bullkcamates Ents7Soci23 21h, (Bull.
amat. Ent. Soc., 23 : 1, 3-4, and 14-15.
Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 22: 69-70; 23:
ls

(14) Where reference to an issue
of the Bulletin is necessary (and no
more exact reference is possible) this
should be made by giving first the
number of the volume and then the
number of the issue concerned, the
latter being placed in parentheses,
e.g., Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 23 (262).

(15) A reference, in the text of an
article, to a book or paper, should be
made by giving the author, and then
the date in parentheses, of the paper.
The full details of the paper should be
given at the end of the article (under
the heading, in capital letters,
‘ reference(s) ’) and should take the
form exampled below :

FORD, E. B. (1955). Moths. New

Naturalist Series. Collins, London.

YARROW, I. H. H. (1955). Entomo-

logist, 87: 5-9. Some Ways of

Distinguishing between the Two

Common Wasps Vespula germanica

Fab. and Vespula vulgaris Linn.
Further examples can be found in
the following pages.

(16) Strict rules of grammar will
be applied to material before publica-
tion, e.g., every sentence must have a
finite verb ; ambiguities (as of the
subjects of subordinate clauses) will
be removed.

(17) Some of the above notes may
not be applied if a contribution is
considered to be primarily of a
‘literary’, rather than of a factual,
nature.

(18) Please count the actual number
of words in your contribution and
write this in pencil, and ringed round,
in the top right hand corner of the

FEBRUARY, 1964

first sheet of each article.

(19) If illustrations are required to
clarify the article, and you feel like
submitting your own drawings for
publication, these should be twice as
big, in both height and width, as they

are to be printed, and must be drawn

clearly in black Indian ink on white
Bristol board, which may be obtained
from any good stationer. Otherwise
they will not reproduce properly, and
printing blocks are expensive! (Don’t
forget that any writing will come out
half-size too.) If you feel unable to
make your own drawings for publica-
tion, send the best you can and we
shall forward them to one of several
Members who have very kindly
offered their services as artists.

(20) Major or factual alterations
which appear to be necessary will be
agreed with authors before material
is sent to the printer. However, the
above notes will be used automatic-
ally to make any minor changes
necessary to render articles suitable
for publication in the Bulletin.

(21) In order to save the Society
unnecessary expense, proofs will not
be sent to authors unless they are
requested.

(22) Please read through your
finished article and check that you
are prepared to see its contents pub-
lished over your name in the Bulletin,
as later alterations or additions are
likely to prove very expensive.

H. V. Danks (2907), Bulletin Editor.

ANNUAL EXHIBITION —
5th OCTOBER 1963

A pleasant morning encouraged a
large gathering of Members and
friends to attend the Annual Exhibi-
tion at the Hugh Myddelton Second-
ary School, London E.C.1._ This was
particularly pleasing, as our printer
had concentrated his efforts on

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

bringing the Bulletin up to date but in
the process the advertisements and
notices for the Exhibition had been
curtailed.

Besides the usual ‘type’ collections,
several detailed locality reviews were
of special interest and exhibits of live
material were most attractive. !t was
rather surprising that after the coldest
winter in living memory, followed by
a very late spring and dull summer,
there was little accent on unusual
dates of appearance or on the general
effect of the extraordinary weather
on insect life. Possibly this informa-
tion will become available later in the

ear.

| feel that Members who have not
visited an Exhibition cannot be aware
of the comprehensive coverage, of all

-entomological requirements,

provided by the dealers, fifteen of
whom were represented. A surpris-
ing feature of this commercial age is
the virtual disappearance of
naturalists’ shops from the large
towns, to be replaced by a relatively
small number in the provinces pro-
viding a mainly postal service. Here,
in one hall, was displayed a complete
range of new and second-hand books,
of equipment and of living and set
British and exotic insects.

As usual, the tables reserved for
the disposal of Members’ surplus
material were very popular, and our
publications were well displayed. Mr

| T. S. Robertson performed the
difficult task of demonstrating the

_ setting of Lepidoptera, to a large and

i
|

appreciative audience, and Mr B. O. C.
Gardiner, whose exhibit of live
butterflies was so effective, gave a
most informative talk on the genetics
of the various races of Pieris brassicae
Linn. (Large White Butterfly). Good
parking facilities for cars, sufficient
seating, and a refreshment buffet

_ added to the general amenities.
| Lastly, the Council would like to

express their appreciation to Mr B. F.

Skinner and all helpers for the

organisation of another very success-
ful Exhibition.

Continuing our practice of previous
years, we made a brief review of
exhibits. It was disappointing, how-
ever, that a number of items were
apparently exhibited anonymously.
Ashdown, P. D. A. (2823))

A collection of Coleoptera.
Bizley, D. O. (2860/)

A detailed study of the butterflies
of the Leatherhead area, illustrated
with photographs and set specimens.
Bradford, E. S. (3068)

Microlepidoptera, and colour
photographs of insects.

Bruce, C. (1746)

A selection of Lepidoptera taken
in Kent, Sussex and Norfolk in 1963.
Button, R. D. (3233))

Insects and other groups from
Jugoslavia and the British Isles.
Castle, M. E. (2490)

Transit packs (especially useful for
transit by air-mail). Breeding-cages,
initially designed for mygal [American
bird-eating] spiders, with typical
specimens of these spiders from
California. Also jellied sugaring-
mixture, intended to lessen wastage
when used on absorbent surfaces.
Coleridge, W. L. (2194)

A selection of insects taken during
a trip to the southern Alps.
Cooter, J. (3290/)

Coleoptera from Sussex.

Cowell, T. (3593/)

The more common noctuid larvae
feeding in late autumn.
Cribb, H. J. (2044)

Coleoptera and other orders of
insects collected in southern France.
Cribb, P. W. (2270)

A comprehensive collection of
butterflies, made during visits to
southern France.

Department of Scientific and Industrial
Research

A wide range of insects occurring
as economic pests in the British Isles,
with examples of damaged com-
modities.

Dillon, T. J. (2665) and Skinner, B.F.
(2470)

Local species of Lepidoptera taken
in 1963 from north Devon and Corn-
wall.

Dodwell, D. E. (3482)

Lepidoptera from the Yeovil
district. Also varieties of British
butterflies, and of the continental
Camberwell Beauty (Nymphalis
antiopa Linn.).

Ford, M. L. (3031)

A survey of the Lepidoptera of
Lavington Park, Sussex, illustrated
with maps and specimens.

Freebrey, A. M. (3359)

A striking display of the large

tropical birdwing butterflies (Troides

Spp.).
Gardiner, B. O. C. (225)

A large muslin display cage con-
taining living Milkweed Butterflies
(Danaus plexippus Linn.) and Large
White Butterflies (Pieris brassicae
Linn. race cheiranthi Huebn., and
double-recessive aberration
coerula-albinensis Gardiner), with
set series to illustrate the genetics.
Also a fine display of set silkmoths
(Saturniidae).

Harman, A. J. E. (2721)

Coleoptera collected in Spain and
Jugoslavia.

Harrison-Gray, M. (1806)

A representative collection of bred
silkmoths.
Hilliard, R. D. (99)

The British species of pyralid moths
(Pyralidae, subfamily Pyraustinae).
Hodgson, D.

Examples of British and exotic
lepidopterous larvae.

Hough, M. J. (3354)

Lepidoptera noted at a mercury-
vapour light-trap in the Harrow dis-
trict during 1963.

Jarman, R. A. (2706)

Large-size photographic studies
of larvae of British Lepidoptera.
Keen, D. H. R. (3309)

A collection of British dragon-
flies (Odonata).

FEBRUARY, 1964

King, lan

Selected examples of British
Lepidoptera and Odonata.
McGeeney, A. P. (3283/)

Typical butterflies from Nyasa-
land.

McCormick, R. F. (3375)

Pupae of British Lepidoptera to
illustrate the range of form. Also
Lepidoptera taken in 1963.

Myall, M. G. (3503)

A technique of insect photo-
graphy. Photographs were taken with
an Asahi Pentax S. V. single-lens reflex
camera, with extension tubes, on
F.P.3 film. Film was developed in
‘ Microphen ’.

Ollevant, D. (1514)

Smaller moths (‘Microlepidoptera’)
of the London area.
Osborne, R. J. (2437/)

Larvae of the American Virgin
Tiger Moth (Apantesis virgo Linn.), and
the British Garden Tiger Moth (Arctia
caja Linn.) for comparison.

Osland, R. C. (3459)

A collection of Indian hawk-
moths (Sphingidae).

Plester, L. S. (2968) and Gould, W. H. P.
(2464)

Butterflies taken during an
expedition across France into Corsica,
from July to September 1962.
Pope, W. W. (3299), Corke, D. (2962/)
and Scott, D. R. (Essex Field Club)

Colour transparencies of insects
and a detailed study of the green form
of the larva of the Elephant Hawk-
moth (Deilephila elpenor Linn.).
Robertson, T. S. (2417) and Robertson,
ADS:

Variation in British Lepidoptera,
and types of butterfly larvae.
Robinson, R. (3201)

Specimens and charts to illustrate
the breeding of varieties of the Garden
Tiger Moth (Arctia caja Linn.). Also
information about the latest AES
Study Group—Lepidoptera Genetics:
enquiries to 12 The Crossway, Ealing,
London W.13.

Rothamsted Experimental Station,

_ bulbs.

~AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Harpenden

The Station’s new suction trap was
shewn. This was designed to be used
on the ground or in the air. Using no
light but only fans, air is drawn
through filters which retain all insects,
etc. Up to 60,000 cu. ft of air can be
filtered in one night, with the special
advantage that—unlike the light
trap —this apparatus only catches
the resident species and not those
attracted from neighbouring localities.

The initial work using the suction
trap was carried out on aphids. Air
currents carry the aphids upwards in
the daytime, often to a height of sev-
eral thousand feet (where the density
may amount to millions of specimens
over a few square miles), and return
them to ground level in the evening.

Also a new type of covered

_ horizontal light-trap with a flat top,

and using only normal household light
The light was superior to
mercury-vapour light for attracting

/ some families of insects, the trap was

cheaper to equip, and the catch was
protected from the weather.

St Ivo Entomology and Natural History
Society (2941 A)

A veritable exhibition by itself
of living creatures of many orders,
housed and shewn with great in-
genuity. Not least of interest was
the enthusiasm of the large band of
scholars who handled their captives
with such confidence.

Skinner, B. F. (2470)
Lepidoptera taken in 1963, in-

_ cluding a unique banded specimen

of the Swallowtailed Moth (Ourap-
teryx sambucaria Linn.)
Smith, Arthur

A preview of the drawings show-
ing the larval feeding habits of the
British Tortricids, prepared for the
coming Ray Society publication.
Also large-scale paintings and illus-
trations of insects.
Smith, A. E. (2136)

‘Collecting round the World in
the R.A.F.’ —a collection of butter-

flies made from the many countries
visited during a Service career.
Taylor, P. G. (3571)

Variation in the Camberwell
Beauty Butterfly (Nymphalis antiopa
Linn.). Also a method of making
insect setting-boards and a case to
house these.

Uffen, R. W. J. (1660)

Colour prints of Coleophora tricolor
Walsingham from Norfolk, and of
endemic spiders from Madeira.
Watkinson, |. A. (3130/)

Long series of the Peppered Moth
(Biston betularia Linn.), to illustrate
the various forms.

Wright, L. A. (3434)

Types of all Lepidoptera taken in
1963.

Zoological Gardens

By courtesy of the London
Zoological Gardens, G. J. Ashby
(2252), curator of the Insect House,
showed an interesting selection
of living insects and representatives
of many other groups and, as usual,
answered the many queries presented
to him.

R. D. Hilliard (99).

REPORTS OF THE COUNCIL
FOR NATURE

Extracts from the Monthly Press
Bulletin, No. 43, September 1963,
published by the Intelligence Unit of
the Council For Nature, read :

“CROP-SPRAYING KILLS BEES
The Lincolnshire County Bee-
keepers’ Association fears that honey
yields will be affected if farmers do
not take more care with their crop-
spraying, which is killing off hundreds
of thousands of bees in the county.
Already bees have had to be imported
from the United States to replace
those killed off in the hard winter.”’

FEBRUARY, 1964

“SUSSEX NATURE RESERVE
The owners of the sole site in
Britain of the Lewes Wave Moth
(Scopula immorata [Linn.]) are to make
more land available to the Sussex
Naturalists’ Trust to enlarge the
existing small reserve, which has been
managed under the auspices of the
Royal Entomological Society. The
Trust will endeavour to maintain the
essential grass-heath conditions by
controlling the scrub.”
D. E. Dodwell (3482),
112.9563: Hon. General Secretary.

COLLECTING NOTES
— Spring, 1964

The Smaller Moths

Mr Bradford’s notes on Fumea casta
Pallas are: “ forewings and hindwings
blackish brown, uniform in colour all
over. Head, thorax and body darker
black. The larva feeds on grasses and
makes a case of bits of grass spun
together’. | have found the larva
feeding on Yorkshire Fog Grass
(Holcus lanatus Linn.).

F. casta is one of the Psychidae, a
family the members of which are quite
distinct from other Lepidoptera.
Most of the females are apterous
and some are parthenogenetic. The
larvae live in portable cases and are
known in other countries as ‘ bag-
worms’. F. casta is quite a common
moth and the larva is mostly seen in
May, when it leaves its foodplant to
crawl up the nearest tree, fence or
wall in order to pupate within the
larval case. This case consists of
longitudinally placed pieces of
grass, and these are splayed out at the
posterior end of the case. If cases are
found with the straw-like pieces con-
stricted at the posterior end then the
larvae within are almost certain to be
those of the more local species Epi-
chnopteryx pulla Esp. | have found
larvae of E. pulla on grass which was

growing in the shelter of Gorse
bushes (Ulex spp.).

On Tinea pallescentella Staint.
Mr Bradford writes: ‘‘ Head yellow-
ish-orange. Forewings dark bronzy
brown with a conspicuous pale dot
near middle. Hindwings brown grey.
The larva feeds on grain, skins,
feathers, wool, etc. | have bred
specimens from the same chair as
Tinea pellionella Linn. both feeding on
horse-hair and sacking or hessian.
The imago can be found from June
to October ’’. | have also taken it in
May. Meyrick (1928) gives this moth
as ‘local’.

Spring can be a very busy time and
the beginner has to take care that he
doesn’t collect too much, and so lose
larvae through neglect or lose moths
through having too many to set at
once. Almost any container can be
used for rearing leaf-eating larvae
providing that it provides the right
humidity. | find small plastic boxes
suitable, as anything larger than is
necessary would make the search for
the larvae more difficult when chang-
ing foodplant.

In early spring the beginner with
the net should visit oak (Quercus spp.)
woods for Tortricodes tortricella
Huebn., which flies during the day-
time, and later in the year any woods
may be visited to examine the tree-
trunks for such moths as Diurnea
fagella Schiff., Pammene argyrana
Huebn., and Mnemonica subpurpurella
Haw.

During May (and in July and August)
almost every Gorse bush has imagines
of Laspeyresia succedana Schiff. flying
around it.

In May and June the chalk downs
may be visited for such species as
Pyrausta purpuralis Linn., P. aurata
Scop., P. cespitalis Schiff., and
Pancalia leuwenhoekella Linn. Moths
of these species are not easy to follow
when they are in flight, and careful
concentration is needed to watch
them when they are not very com-

“AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

it
f

Yi
TTT LM

‘
‘

4

ANE a

im

ES BRADFORD.

Fumea casta Pallas

\ ES BRADFORD

Tinea pallescentella Staint.

mon, especially for Pancalia loewen-
hoekella, the larvae of which feed on
the roots of violets (Viola spp.).
Larvae are plentiful in spring, and
Honeysuckle (Lonicera periclymenum
Linn.) may be examined then for the
larvae of Ypsolophus nemorellus Linn.
and Y. xylostellus Linn. Bramble
(Rubus fruticosus Linn.) may be
examined in early spring for the mines
of the larvae of Tischeria marginea
Haw., and later the Bramble shoots

are fastened together by such larvae
as those of Notocelia uddmanniana
Linn.

Here are some notes for late
May and June: disturbing the herb-
age around ponds should stir up
specimens of Cataclysta lemnata Linn.,
Nymphula stagnata Don., N. stratiotata
Linn. and N. nymphaeata Linn., though
all four species may not occur at the
same pond. | have taken N. stratiotata
at light in my garden here at Morden;

10

presumably it had bred in a garden
pond nearby and had flown away at
night from the confines of the pond.

Keep a look-out on the trunks of
lime trees (Tilia spp.) for the local
speciesChrysoclista linneella Clerck.
This pretty moth is reputed to occur
especially in towns and it certainly
occurs in London.

One moth which is considered local
turns up regularly in my garden,
though | must admit that | haven’t
yet found the larva. This moth is
Pyrausta verbascalis Schiff. The
larvae feed on Wood Sage (Teucrium
scorodonia Linn.) which, according to
Kent and Lousley (1951-7) in “A Hand
List of the Plants of the London Area’,
is common throughout the area. |
should be interested to hear of any
other Member’s experiences with this
moth.

The larvae of Anacampsis populella
Clerck may be found rolling the leaves
of Poplars and Aspens (Populus spp.),
and of Willows and Sallows (Salix
spp.), whilst the larvae of A. betulin-
ella Vari roll the leaves of Birch
(Betula spp.). The moths are very
similar, indeed, the two species were
only separated in 1941.

The larvae of the following local
species may be found: Telephila
schmidiella von Heyd. in the rolled
leaves of Marjoram (Origanum vulgare
Linn.), Stomopteryx albipalpella
Herrich-Schaeff. in the shoot-tips
of Petty Whin (Genista anglica Linn.),
Gracillaria semifascia Haw. in
conically rolled leaves of Maple (Acer
campestre Linn.) and occasionally of
Sycamore (A. pseudoplatanus Linn.),
Argyroploce pomedaxana Pierce and
Metcalfe (=porphyrana Huebn.) in
rolled leaves of Crab Apple (Malus
sylvestris Mill.) — | know of A. pome-
daxana in Surrey, Devon, Glamorgan
and Huntingdon, but are there any
other records? — Alucita spilodactyla
Curt. on the leaves of White Hore-
hound (Marrubium vulgare Linn.), and
A. galactodactyla Schiff. on the leaves

FEBRUARY, 1964

_—————

of Burdock (Arctium spp.).
D. Ollevant (1514).

REFERENCES
KENT, D. E. and LOUSLEY, J. E. (1951-7). A Hand List
of the Plants of the London Area. Reprinted from the
London Naturalist. London Natural History Society,
London.
MEYRICK, E. (1928). A revised Handbook of British
Lepidoptera. Watkins and Doncaster, London.

The Hymenoptera Aculeata

For those specialising in the ants,
bees and wasps the winter provides
little chance of fieldwork. While
winter collecting is important for the
coleopterist, and even the hemipter-
ist, it is only for those hymenopterists
who extend their interests to the
Parasitica that winter collecting of
adult insects is practicable. Many of
the ‘ classic’ sites hunted through by
the coleopterist, such as grass tus-
socks, under bark, etc., can yield
parasites, including some of the fine,
larger Ichneumoninae, solitary para-
sites of lepidopterous larvae.

Although there is little to be done
in the field, there are many matters
to be pursued in the study. Mounting,
identifying, recording, all are an in-
tegral part of the work which is begun
in the field and which should be
carried through to completion, and
there is always the planning of future
fieldwork to be done. | want here to
deal with just two aspects of field-
work, namely, the collecting-kit, and
the labelling of specimens.

Time in the field is valuable, par-
ticularly with aculeates, which are so
dependent on fine weather. Thus the
object is to design a field-kit that can
cope with numbers of specimens
quickly and easily and yet allow the
correlation of specimens to any
observations that may have been made
during the capture of the insects.
My own system is based on metal
carrying-tins holding eighteen 14” x
3" glass tubes and available from
dealers. | stick paper over the metal
partitions and can then write brief

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

details directly over each tube. Al-
ternatively, each tube position can be
given a number, and details of the
captures entered into a field notebook
against the appropriate numbers. |
find the first method better for
general collecting and surveying in an
area, while the second is more ap-
propriate when detailed studies are
being undertaken.

The rest of my field-kit follows from
this. My main items in addition to the
carrying-tins are: a simple light-
weight net, for catching flying insects
and beating; a trowel, mainly for
hunting ants, but also for digging
around other nesting-sites ; a simple
pooter, using a 3”1” tube, for re-
moving insects from the net after
general beating ; a second pooter,
using the 14” 2” tubes, particularly
useful for taking nest samples of ants;
two or three 3” x1” tubes with a pad
of cotton wool soaked (not too
liberally) in ethyl acetate for killing
the captures ; a few tubes of various
sizes ; a field notebook; and a one-
inch-to-the-mile ordnance survey map
of the area to be visited. This basic
kit can be adapted to any special
needs. For instance, those entomolo-
gists collecting bumble bees would
need tubes of a larger size than 14” x
2”, and a cyanide-bottle may be pre-
ferred for killing the captures.

The correlation of the specimen
with associated observations must be
carried through to the final mounted
specimen, and so | would just like to
spend a little time writing on label-
ling. Every specimen should be pro-
vided with a label giving the place and
date of capture and the name of the
collector. A four-figure map-refer-
ence and/or a number reference to an
entry in a field notebook can be
added, but do not replace the basic
data. If comparatively few specimens
are taken, and these are mounted
soon after capture, it is probably
adequate to put the tube number of
the specimen on the data label. If

11

larger numbers are involved, the final
labelling may be deferred, and an
‘interim ’ label bearing only the tube
number and date may be used. Al-
ternatively a continuous number se-
quence can be used, the first specimen
of the year (1964) being numbered
64001 or 640001, and so on. If a
simple number-label is used, a full
data label should be added as soon as
time permits. When anumber system
is used, the same number can of course
apply to several specimens provided
that the data and observations are
common to all. | use number se-
quences for bred Parasitica, and find
them convenient for relating different
species bred from the same host. |
use the 64100 series for parasites bred
from aphids, the 64200 series for those
bred from leaf-miners, and so on.
But | have written enough about
indoor work, for there is one job
which can be done in the field. Many
aculeates nest in hollow stems, those
of Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus Linn.)
and Elderberry (Sambucus nigra Linn.)
being particularly popular. Hollow
stems can be collected now, and then
kept for the occupants to emerge.
In this way several species that are
rarely taken on the wing can be
found, for example, certain of the
black species of Mimesa as mentioned
by Spooner (1948). It is important
to keep any stems under normal out-
door conditions, not in artificial
warmth.
J. C. Felton.

REFERENCE

SPOONER, G. M. (1948). Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond.,
99 : 129-172. The British species of Psenine Wasps
(Hymenoptera: Sphecidae).

FROM OUR NORTHERN
CORRESPONDENT

This article is being written on a
grey December day. It is the season

12

when we have a little time to remem-
ber the exciting moments of the year
that is past, and to prepare for fur-
ther, and we hope even happier, times
ahead. There is time too for us to
ponder a little on the progress we
make and the value of the work we
do. It is in this mood that | have
requested our Editor to allow my
article to take the form of general
comment, rather than the specific
comments which usually make up my
contribution to the Bulletin. These
comments have a bearing on our
Society, of which | have been happy
to hold Membership since its very
early days.

The Bulletin

Those of our Members who are
fortunate enough to live in the South
of England are able to enjoy not only
much more favourable conditions for
the pursuit of entomology but also
to share fellowship with many of our
Members. For many other Members,
however, bughunting is a lonely road,
and often for such Members the only
link with people of like mind is
through the printed word. This is
the great value of our Bulletin. |
wonder sometimes whether we make
the most of it. Having done a little
towards the items printed, for a large
number of years, | am more than
aware of the terrific amount of volun-
tary work which goes into producing
our journal, but no Editor can pro-
duce the best result without a con-
stant supply of interesting contribu-
tions, and more often than not these
have not been forthcoming. Now
why is this so? | believe it is for two
reasons. Firstly, Members are often
reluctant to share their knowledge,
for all sorts of reasons. Speaking as
one who has received all manner of
replies to the published word, let me
say that the friendships formed over
the years and the pleasant corres-
pondence received, have always far

FEBRUARY, 1964

outweighed the occasional unpleasant
jibe or criticism which always seems
to follow one’s efforts. Speaking too
as one who gives more than a little
time in lecturing, particularly to
young folk, let me add that there is
unlimited satisfaction in getting
people started on the long and very
pleasant trail of nature study. The
second reason why contributions have
not been forthcoming is, | believe,
that we have tended, as a Society, to
strive for perfection, and have some-
times lost the brightness of early
endeavour. Long rules of Editorship
regarding style, names and expression
are all very well but not if they stifle
the early efforts of the young Member
who has found out something that is
exciting and perhaps quite new. To
my mind, and here | give simply my
own opinion, it would be much better
to have a dozen early efforts, however
imperfect they may be, from young
Members, so long as these efforts
carried the true marks of the young
enthusiast, than to have the Bulletin
filled with articles from senior Mem-
bers only. Other journals may require
the mark of perfection in every re-
gard but one of the main objects of
our Society has always been to foster
and encourage beginners, and a ready
acceptance of articles by young Mem-
bers would add to this worthwhile
aim. This point leads naturally on to
the next one.

Use of English Names

It would serve no good purpose to
enter into the sterile arguments as to
whether one should use English
names for insects or not, but | do
feel that some comment should be
made in view of the very forthright
article on the matter, which recently
appeared in our Bulletin (Bull. amat.
Ent. Soc., 22: 87-8). Surely the
correct answer is to use whichever
name is most suitable for the oc-
casion. When | go to lecture at a

collecting, etc.

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Rotary Club, the members of the
club would consider me, quite rightly,
an absolute ‘egg-head’, if | made
reference to Acherontia atropos Linn.
| talk to them about the Death’s
Head Hawkmoth and show them why
it is so called — and jolly interesting
they find it too. Or again, when
visiting the junior scientific society at
a local school, do we stir up excite-
ment over Vanessa atalanta Linn.? We

_ certainly do not, for we have a‘ whale

of a time’ talking about the ‘ smash-
ing’ Red Admirals we saw (or failed
to see) last summer. Many of the
English names are a sheer delight and
add greatly to the interest of a talk
to the folk on the fringe of the subject
of entomology. On the other hand,

when giving my annual report as

Local Recorder to our learned
Society, naturally | refer to V. atal-

anta. There is a time and a place for

both names, and this is only one of
the many points on which | take issue
with Mr P. G. Taylor (719). Being
able to trot out an endless number of
Latin names is by no means the sign
of a good naturalist. Give me the
man who knows the insects because
he is a true field naturalist—and
whether he calls them by one name
or another will not matter very much.

Collecting

Here again | feel constrained to say
a few things, particularly as other
Members have taken up the matter
with me. There have been many
articles recently in our Bulletin and
in other publications which have quite
rightly emphasised the need for nature
conservation. We have received
many warnings with regard to over-
Now these may be
both necessary and desirable, but |
feel it would be quite wrong to make
the term ‘collector’ into a dirty
word. Of course we are collectors—
and almost all the finest naturalists
have always been. The only real way

of learning about most species of

13

insects is to collect them [initially—
Ed.]. The butterfly-net, the mercury-
vapour light-trap, the beating-tray—
these and many other recognised
means of collecting are perfectly de-
sirable and useful assets. The thing
we must guard against is over-col-
lecting, particularly of local species.
| would question whether collecting
has really damaged many British
species. A case in point is the well-
known and quite splendid colony of
the Marsh Fritillary Butterfly (Euphy-
dryas aurinia Rott.) near Reading.
This very small colony was visited
constantly by many of our own Mem-
bers and other collectors, all of whom
had an eye for the varieties which
were present. The numbers rose and
fell over the years but there was
never any danger to the colony until
a new housing scheme swallowed up
the field at one fell swoop. In my
own district we had a moor which
was noted for a splendid variety of
Lasiocampa quercus Linn. var. callunae
Palmer (Northern Eggar Moth). It
was visited by collectors for half a
century without any apparent effect
until one day a moorland fire wiped
out the entire colony for ever. Now
these remarks are not intended to
convey that haphazard collecting is
either desirable or necessary. | do
intend to stress that reasonable and
careful collecting adds greatly to our
knowledge, gives us great pleasure
and does no harm to the balance of
nature.

In closing let me add that there is,
in my opinion, a real place for a
Society such as ours. We have had
many shortcomings over the years,
but with a lead from our present
Editor | feel sure we shall go into the
New Year with added zeal. | wish
Members a Happy New Year and
good hunting.

5.12.63. W.E. Collinson, F.R.E.S.
(247).

In view of various comments re-

14

ceived by me, | have taken the
opportunity in this Bulletin of sum-
marising my views on the Editor’s
task. These will be found (a) in the
introductory paragraph of © Guidance
For Authors’ on page 2, and (b) in
the Editorial reply to ‘ Letter to the
Editor’ on page 33. These views are
relevant to some of the comments in
Mr Collinson’s article, as is the first
paragraph of the Editorial on page 1.
| will just add here that | hope, when
| have time, to write an article
mentioning those species (such as the
Large Copper Butterfly (Lycaena dis-
par Haw.)) whose end in Britain has
certainly been caused, or at least
greatly hastened, by over-collecting.
—Editor.

CONSERVATION

5. CONSERVATION IN PRACTICE:
THE FUTURE

We have already seen some of the
problems with which conservation-
ists—particularly ordinary amateur
entomologists—are concerned. |
hope in this, the final contribution of
the series, to give a very brief sum-
mary of more general principles, and,
perhaps, to predict the results which
the future efforts of conservationists
might produce.

It is clear, of course, that many of
these efforts must come from the
ordinary amateur entomologists re-
ferred to above: for by exercising a
proper measure of responsibility and
by taking care to explain the concept
of conservation to those less familiar
with the principles of preservation
of wild life, a body of entomologists
can create a ‘climate of opinion’
which furthers the pursuit of know-
ledge by observation rather than the
building-up of large collections for
their own sake.

That such efforts are fully worth-

FEBRUARY, 1964

while is evident from every point of
view. Although aesthetic feelings
chiefly lead us to apply ourselves
vigorously to furthering the practice
of conservation—and who, indeed,
would wish to lose unnecessarily a
single member of our beautiful and
interesting fauna or flora—there are
other considerations of more practical
importance. It has been indicated
in previous articles that an examina-
tion of the slow decline of a species
from natural causes yields information
of great value which cannot be ob-
tained if rapid extermination of that
species occurs artificially. Observa-
tional study does not involve destruc-
tion of its subject, whereas collecting
does. There is, too, a possibility
that any particular species may prove
to be potentially useful, and its
elimination may therefore rob man-
kind of a valuable method of manipula-
ting his environment to his own
practical (as well as aesthetic) advant-
age. Although this possibility may
seem relatively remote, the increasing
use of methods of biological control
(which each involve, as balancing in-
fluences in the scheme of control,
very many animals and plants in ad-
dition to the actual primary control-
ling organism) renders this not so
obscure a consideration.

To those who would suggest that
such manipulation of the environment
is contrary to the principles of con-
servation, | would comment that such
manipulation—which would occur
only where necessary—should lead to
an increase of knowledge which, in
turn, would allow the minimum al-
teration in any ecological balance to
be carried out whilst still permitting
the change necessary to modify the
habitat or its inhabitants to the
satisfaction of the human population.
Since this sort of manipulation would
be applied only to habitats where
change was necessary anyway, it
would be by far the best compromise.
Modern conservation takes into

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

account, then, the changes which
must occur in a habitat, andthe older
idea, although commendable, of never
disturbing any habitat, is now out-
dated under the pressure of present-
day industrialisation and human
population expansion. In any case,
the introduction of a single organism
into a habitat and the virtual elimina-
tion of another—the primary effects
of successful biological control—are
far preferable to wholesale slaughter
of most of the inhabitants of a
habitat, a slaughter which is all too
frequent where insecticides are em-
ployed.

We have seen that a ‘climate of
opinion’ amongst entomologists,
once formed, will serve to protect
rarities from the detrimental effects
of overcollecting. With such a climate
of opinion in existence, too, it will
be possible much more easily to in-
fluence non-entomologists to pre-
serve our fauna, and so to lead up
the creation of a practical, functional
and influential body for the conserva-
tion of our wild life. Such a body, you
may say, already exists as the Nature
Conservancy and its various allied
organisations. Would it be too much
to hope for an extension of the
Nature Conservancy, with very
strong financial and legal support
from the Government?

The Nature Conservancy at present
cannot influence the Government
sufficiently because it lacks data on
specific industrial outrages against
our wild life: anyone can help by
sending information about the effects
of toxic chemicals, etc., to the Con-
servancy, and in particular, AES
Members can write about such mat-
ters to the Society’s Representative
one th Nature Conservancy’s Ento-
mological Liaison Committee, Mr
T. G. Howarth (196).

It will be clear, however, that
ultimately conservation can only be
successful if a sufficiently large nucleus
of knowledge is built up to further its

15

aims. This is the knowledge of insect
lives and inter-relationships which,
in giving a full appreciation of the
factors which influence insect popula-
tions, forms part of that synthesis
of ideas which we call ecology. In
these articles | have tried to stress
that observation will yield a reward
more exciting than will simply the
acquisition of animals for a collection:
a reward, indeed, of knowledge of the
habits and fiabitats of our wild life.

There is too, of course, much which
must be done to ensure that adequate
tests are carried out before insecti-
cides are released for general use; that
chemical and biological effluents are
not allowed to pollute water either
directly or after washing through soil;
that building creates the minimum
amount of havoc in the countryside;
or in short, that these and other
industrial schemes are carefully ex-
amined and their possible biological
repercussions fully worked out so
that adjustments necessary to con-
serve animal populations can be made
accordingly in the schemes before
they start.

All of these factors can and must be
co-ordinated to ensure that conserva-
tion of our wild life is carried out.
The efforts towards this co-ordinat-
tion (which ultimately, we hope, will
be performed by the sort of body—
a Nature Conservancy with much ex-
tended powers—that | have outlined
above) must, initially at least, come
from entomologists like ourselves,
who constitute one of the sections of
the community which is most evident-
ly affected in these matters by the
expansion of this country. We must
further the aims of conservation in as
active a way as we are able—for by
so doing we can help to save our-
selves from a sterilised industrial
wilderness, can hand on to the next
generation an unruined countryside,
and can produce, in fact, a balanced
march of progress.

5.10.63. H. V. Danks (2907).

16

INSECT PESTS OF GARDENS
— Vi

Insects as Vectors of Plant Virus Diseases

Although many agencies, including
man, various nematodes and certain
mites, can be responsible for the dis-
semination of virus diseases of plants,
by far the greatest spreading of these
diseases is carried out by various
members of the Insecta.

Amongst the insect vectors of
viruses, species of the Order Hemip-
tera must be regarded as being prime
vectors, as they are responsible for
spreading the greatest number of
insect-borne viruses. Insects of other
Orders, i.e., Orthoptera, Coleoptera
and Thysanoptera, are responsible to
a far smaller degree, and in the case
of Coleoptera the virus is transmitted
mechanically on the biting, chewing
mouthparts of the beetles.

The relationship between viruses
and the hemipterous vectors, i.e.,
aphids, leaf-hoppers and white-flies,
and between viruses and the thysan-
opterous insects, thrips, is interesting
though rather obscure. There is some
evidence, however, that the trans-
mission of viruses by these insects is
essential for the spread of the diseases,
and that the diseases cannot be spread
by any other natural means. (All
viruses are transmissible by grafting.)

There is a direct connection
between an insect’s feeding habits
and the kind of virus it is able to
transmit. Any virus which is confined
to attacking the parenchyma cells of
the leaves or stem of the host plant,
produces symptoms called ‘‘ spotted
wilt’. (Virus names usually refer to
the host plant and describe the symp-
toms which the virus produces on
that plant. One type of virus may
produce different symptoms on
different plants or on different parts
of the same plant.) The vector of
spotted wilt of Tomatoes (Lycopersi-
cum esculentum Mill.) is a thrip,
Thrips tabaci.Lind. Since the thrip’s

FEBRUARY, 1964

feeding habits involve a _ rasping-
sucking action which damages only
the epidermal and underlying paren-
chyma cells of the host, the virus is
only transmitted to these cells. The
structure of the mouthparts of T.
tabaci makes it impossible for the
insect to transmit a virus to the
phloem. Therefore T. tabaci is of no
importance as a vector of viruses
which are localised in the phloem.

The Hemiptera have piercing-suck-
ing mouthparts, and their system of
feeding is very efficient in the trans-
mission of virus diseases. The long
narrow ‘ beaks’ of the bugs inject
their inoculum deep into the tissues
of the plant, without wholesale de-
struction of the surrounding cells.
This is very important, because viruses
can only multiply in living cells.
Insects such as large biting species
that, by their feeding habits, kill
large areas of cells, are poor vectors
of virus diseases. Many hemipterous
insects which cause little obvious
damage to the plant must be regarded
as serious pests because of their role
intransmitting viruses. Theaphidsare
perhaps the most important members
of this group, and more than twenty
different species have been shown to
be vectors of a considerably larger
number of viruses. Certain species,
such as Myzus persicae Sulz. and
Macrosiphon gei Linn. are known vec-
tors for a dozen or more different
types of viruses.

It will be seen from the above that
virus transmission by insects can be
divided into two types :

(a) Mechanical distribution on the
mouthparts of the vector, as in
beetles.

(b) ‘ Biological’ transmission, as in
aphids, etc.

However, there are complications,
because an aphid like Myzus persicae
may be able to transmit one type of
virus biologically, and another mech-
anically on its mouthparts. The full
nature of biological transmission is

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

not fully understood, and the term
is used rather loosely. Biological
transmission of a plant virus by an
insect usually has one or more of the
following attributes :

(1) An apparent multiplication of
the virus within the insect’s
body.

(2) An incubation period in the
body of the insect, that is, a
period which elapses after the
insect has fed on infected plants
before it becomes infective or
viruliferous.

(3) A degree of specificity between
the insect and the virus it trans-
mits.

(4) An obligatory relationship of
the virus with the vector.

(5) A relationship between the age
or life stage of the insect, and
its ability to transmit a virus.

(6) Congenital transmission of the
virus from one generation of the
vector to the next.

Examples showing one or more of
the above requisites for biological
transmission are too numerous to
attempt to mention them all, but one
good example is found in the case of
T. tabaci (the vector of tomato spotted
wilt) which must contract the disease
in the nymphal stage in order to
transmit it subsequently. If an adult
feeds on an infected plant, the insect
does not become infected, thus fulfil-
ling obligation (5) above.

Vectors may be infective for a
short period only after feeding on a
diseased plant, or the insect, having
once fed upon an infected plant in the
nymphal stage, may become infective

| for the rest of its life.

|

The apparent relationship between

certain groups of insects and groups

of viruses that produce similar symp-

| toms, has led to the use of such insect
relationships in the classification of
_ Viruses.
_in © Textbook of Plant Virus Diseases ’,
_ there are four more or less distinct

According to Smith (1937)

groups of plant viruses, as follows :

17

(1) The mosaic group transmitted
by aphids.

(2) The yellow group transmitted
by leaf-hoppers.

(3) The group characterised by the
formation of spots with con-
centric rings on the leaves of
the host, and transmitted by
thrips.

(4) Those transmitted by white-
flies, and causing a thickening
of the veins and abnormal leafy
outgrowths on the lower side
of the leaves of the host
(‘ enation ’).

Research on yellow mosaic virus of
Turnips (Brassica rapa Linn.) has
shown it to be transmitted mech-
anically by the Turnip Flea Beetle
(Phyllotreta nemorum Linn.), and by
certain other beetles and their larvae.
28.3.63. A. J. Tuton (2639).

REFERENCE
SMITH, K. M. (1937). Textbook of Plant Virus Diseases,
J. and A. Churchill, London.

NOTES ON THE
LEPIDOPTERA
OF CORNWALL

For the fourth time in five years
| have spent my summer holiday on
the north coast of Cornwall during
early August. This year | could not
help noticing the much lower num-
bers of those moths and butterflies
which in previous years were numer-
ous. For example, specimens of
Pterostoma palpina Clerck (Pale Prom-
inent) and Lymantria monacha Linn.
(Black Arches) were very few indeed.
Aglais urticae Linn. (Small Tortoise-
shell) and Vanessa atalanta Linn. (Red
Admiral) were extremely scarce. Even
the numbers of Pararge aegeria Linn.
(Speckled Wood)—a butterfly which
in previous years was extremely com-
mon—were much reduced. How-
ever, numbers of Nymphalis io Linn.
(Peacock) had increased fantastically.
Mr C. Brind (3140) and | on two oc-

18

casions visited a sloping meadow
bordering a wood. Here we estimated
that there were at least 200 specimens
of N. io on the wing. They were all
to be found round extensive patches
of Lesser Knapweed (Centaurea nigra
Linn.). In the same meadow Argynnis
paphia Linn. (Silver-washed Fritillary)
was flying. Polyommatus icarus Rott.
(Common Blue) and the ‘ whites ’
(Pieris spp.) were numerous. The
occasional specimen of Vanessa cardui
Linn. (Painted Lady) and one of Gonep-
teryx rhamni Linn. (Brimstone) were
observed.

During my stay in St Mawgan, Mr
Dodwell (3482) and | weab eleo tr
have an afternoon’s collecting to-
gether. This proved to be one of the
highlights of the holiday. We were
fortunate with the weather, and in
the course of the afternoon observed
fourteen species of butterfly, and
seven species of moth, in flight. Since
Mr Dodwell had his car with him we
were able to travel away from the
north coast and visit an entirely
different area. By pure chance we
found a colony of Thecla quercus Linn.
(Purple Hairstreak) and we estimated
seeing about fifty specimens of this
species in flight. Later in the after-
noon we found two smaller colonies
of T. quercus. We came back having
taken four specimens of this species
each. We were surprised at their
perfect condition and it is possible
that we arrived very soon after their
emergence.

Towards the end of my stay | went
out with Mr H. Brind and Mr C.
Brind. We visited an area with
extensive sand dunes and Marram
Grass (Ammophila arenaria Link). We
used a very successful light, a car
head-light operated from the car
battery. However, by early morning
we were not as keen to carry the
battery as we had been when we
started out the previous evening.
The night was miserable, for there
was a clear sky and the weather was

FEBRUARY, 1964

cold with squalls of misty driving
rain. However, we were successful
in obtaining Agrotis vestigialis Hufn.
(Archer’s Dart), which was numerous,
Tholera cespitis Schiff. (Hedge Rustic),
Luperina testacea Schiff. (Flounced
Rustic) and Leucania litoralis Curt.
(Shore Wainscot).

Because of the weather conditions
moths were none too eager to fly.
We observed that the moths were to
be found resting on the flowering-
heads of the Marram Grass. We were
surprised at the large numbers of
moths to be found in this way. In
connection with collecting on un-
promising nights, | might mention
that | have recorded captures from
the flowering-heads of a number of
species of plant, and | find it a good
practice always to examine any
clumps of blossom which | notice.

“ Looking back on this holiday, |
consider that it was marred by bad
weather. | had hoped to obtain
specimens of species restricted to
the coastal areas and to some extent
| was successful, but at the time |
bemoaned the weather and everything
else which seemed to interfere with
my activities. Perhaps | had built up
my hopes too high before the holiday.

G. D. Trebilcock (2976).

ORANGE TIPS

In the January 1962 number of the
Bulletin (Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 24: 9)
Mr N. W. Archer (2975J) describes a
stout walk he did the previous Easter.
Theidentification of the female Orange
Tip Butterfly (Anthocaris cardamines
Linn.) in flight is decidedly difficult.
There is, however, a way by which
one might have a reasonable chance
of catching a specimen. This is to
take a stand ona line where the males
are flying in reasonable numbers, to

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

net every white butterfly of the right
size, and to examine it. The first time
I tried this, by an odd coincidence the
very first smallish white butterfly |
caught happened to beafemale Orange
Tip! One is not always so lucky, but
a little patience will bring its reward.
Of course, breeding is the best way
of all to secure specimens. Eggs can
be found with fair ease (if they are
there at all) on the flower stems and
young seed pods of the Lady’s Smock
(Cardamine pratensis Linn.) or Hedge
Mustard (Sisymbrium officinale Linn.),
but don’t forget that the caterpillars
are cannibals and must be kept
separated from each other.
3.11.63. Trevor Trought (1373).

A DOUBLE-TAILED POPLAR
HAWKMOTH LARVA

On 23rd September 1962 | found
seven almost fully grown Poplar
Hawkmoth caterpillars (Laothoe populi
Linn.) on a small clump of sallow
bushes (Salix sp.) in Charlton, South
London. | took them home and fed
them, together with some Puss Moth
caterpillars (Cerura vinula Linn.) ob-
tained from the same bushes, on
Lombardy Poplar (Populus nigra Linn.
var. italica Duroi). At the end of
three weeks all of the Poplar Hawk-
moth larvae had pupated in glass jars
below dead grass, and | left them out
of doors until February 1963. | then
removed one of the pupae and placed
it in atin. After a fortnight of being

19

kept warm and moist over the fire-
place, the pupa gave rise to a dark
grey male moth.

Four more imagines emerged in
the second week of April (three males
and one female) and from these |
obtained a pairing. During the next
week the female laid a total of 207
eggs, from which | had reared eight-
een pupae by the beginning of July.
These pupae produced ten male and
six female moths from which three
pairings were obtained, and | soon
had 325 eggs. Earlier | had given my
brother a few caterpillars and from
these he had obtained a female moth
which had extensive red patches on
its forewings.

| then had 325 eggs but unfortun-
ately | was about to leave on holiday,
so | gave some to a friend and fellow-
entomologist to rear for me while |
was away, and the remaining eggs
(295 of them) | stuck with rubber
solution on to the branches of the
sallow bushes from which | had col-
lected the caterpillars the year before.

When I returned from holiday on
August 17th, my friend gave me five
large caterpillars reared from the eggs
which | had given him earlier. These
larvae, | thought, were not enough
for me to be sure of eventually ob-
taining pairings between the moths
which should result from them, so |
returned to the sallow in the hope
of finding some caterpillars which
had hatched from the eggs which |
had left there. | did, in fact, find seven
caterpillars in various instars, but the
four largest were of an extremely
pale blue-green colour, and when |

20

saw them on the sallow leaves they
appeared to be white. The largest of
the larvae was about to shed its
second to last skin and was very pale,
but its most striking characteristic
was that it had TWO tails (see Fig.).
At first | thought that one of the tails
was only a piece of skin, but closer
inspection showed that skin was
being shed from both tails.

Unfortunately | accidently killed
this larva when | left it overnight in
a pill-box in which | had once kept
some preserving crystals, for the
fumes remaining from these crystals
proved fatal to the larva.

Of course, it is impossible to be
sure of the cause for the development
of this ‘ double tail’, but | think that
this larva was the result of inbreeding.
| would like to know if there is any
other record of a double-tailed Poplar

Hawkmoth larva, and if so what
variation was apparent in the result-
ing imago.

1.9.63. Michael Noble (3539J).

®
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

The lepidopterist may feel at times
that the forces of Nature are arrayed
against him.

His larvae and pupae are attacked
and destroyed by parasitic Diptera
and Hymenoptera, and by ants, ear-
wigs, viruses and moulds.

The mercury-vapour light-trap at-
tracts cats which eat the moths
around the trap. Bats take their
share of these moths. Sometimes the
trap is watched by owls, and this year
on several occasions | have seen a
toad watching, but | have no evidence
that either reduced the catch. The
trap is invaded by titmice who enjoy
a free breakfast : | have had three of
these birds at one time! On one
occasion | found a beetle devouring
the abdomen and eggs of a female
Fox Moth (Macrothylacia rubi Linn.).

FEBRUARY, 1964

In the collection one has to contend
with the larvae of the Museum Beetle
(Anthrenus museorum Linn.), etc., and
with mould.

But this year | sustained my first
attack from another quarter. | have
been in the habit of keeping my
setting-boards in a cupboard while
the specimens on them dry. Imagine
my consternation on 22nd July when
| went to set some more specimens
and discovered that a mouse had
passed up all the boards between the
setting-strips and had eaten the
bodies of almost all the moths | had
set during the past month, some 100
specimens. Till then | had been de-
ceived by the charm of the Long-
tailed Field-mouse (Apodemus sylvati-
cus sylvaticus Linn.) but now, | confess,
| have been at work with mouse-traps.
| also keep my setting-boards in a
metal meat-safe !
19.11.63. L. W. Siggs (243).

THE ASPARAGUS BEETLE:
A FEW VARIATIONS TAKEN
IN SURREY, 1963

During June this year, | captured
some specimens of Crioceris asparagi
Linn. (Asparagus Beetle). They were
found on Asparagus (Asparagus officin-
alis Linn.), and also on the same plant
were a few larvae of C. asparagi, all
of which were in different stages of
development. When the larvae were
picked off the plant they emitted a
dark coloured liquid (as do the larvae
of the Small Tortoiseshell Butterfly
(Aglais urticae Linn.) and Peacock
Butterfly (Nymphalis io Linn.)). The
beetles preferred a plant that was
growing in the sun, and did not go
near a plant growing in the shade.
The latter plant had a good crop of
berries in the autumn whilst the
former bore only a few berries. Could
this have anything to do with the fact
that the beetles were only found on

| AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Typical

one plant?) Or was it caused by the
positions in which the plants were
growing?

The beetles varied greatly and out
of the few that | managed to capture
| only got one typical specimen. My
diagrams shew the difference between
the specimens. | wonder if any
Member has a banded specimen in
his or her collection? | would like
to know if you have come across any
kind of variation in this species.
18.11.63. J. Cooter (3290J).

DRAGONFLY COLLECTING
IN BARNET

My methods of collecting Odonata
are very simple because | find that,

ona hot August day, when | am beside

a pond or ankle deep in a marsh, as
little ‘ clutter ’ as possible is the most
comfortable. The most essential piece
of equipment is a net. | myself use a
folding nylon net, which is light in
weight, and | find that a captured

Geom eae

21

specimen is easier to see through the
mesh of a nylon net than through that
of a cotton one. | used to carry a
ten-foot long bamboo pole to which
| could attach my net-handle, but |
now find that better control and
manoeuvrability of the net can be
obtained with the latter only two
feet or less away from the user.

When a dragonfly is caught and
identified, | transfer it to a light-
weight container—not to a killing-
bottle as | find these heavy to carry
and breakable. 1! use pill-boxes for
damselflies and tobacco tins lined with
paper for the larger Aeshnids. That
is all | carry except possibly a few
polythene bags for unexpected larvae
| might come across by the water’s
edge, and a bottle of drinking water,
as dragonfly collecting and chasing is
very hot work.

When | arrive home, | kill one
specimen at a time but not until |am
ready to set it. Carbon tetrachloride,
the poison | use, acts very quickly
and does not discolour or leave stains
on dragonflies.

22

Most species lose their colour very
quickly after death, possibly in less
than a day, and as | haven’t the money
for expensive equipment | have to
degut my specimens as soon as pos-
sible. This, after a bit of experience,
is quite simple: one just cuts down
the underside of the abdomen as far
as the eighth segment and pulls out
the gut. A dried stem of grass or a
thin sliver of wood is inserted into
the back of the thorax, and the sides
of the abdomen fold round it. This
method is not the most efficient one
but it does sometimes retain the
colours and specimens preserved in
this way give an idea of the dark and
light colours which make up their
patterns. The same method of pre-
servation can be used for the larvae.
For damselflies | use a horse’s hair or
a broom’s bristle inside the abdomen.

The few exuviae | have either were
found by accident while | was walking
through reeds or are from emerged
specimens bred in the aquarium.

| have tried collecting various orders
of insects including the Lepidoptera,
but to me dragonflies are the most
interesting because they are so diffi-
cult to catch and because they have
such a fascinating life-history. Another
reason for my interest in the Odonata
is that most amateur entomologists
know about butterflies and moths
{?- Ed.] whereas there is plenty of
information still to be found out
about dragonflies.

Andrew McGeeney (3283)).
®

COLEOPTERA OBSERVED IN
THE WESTERN PYRENEES
JULY 1963

Readers will recall the account by
Mr P. W. Cribb of the expedition
made by Messrs Coleridge, Cribb,
Kennard and myself to the Western
Pyrenees (Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 21:

FEBRUARY, 1964

95-7), in which account the areas
which we covered are described. One
spot not referred to in that article
is a large forest near the village of
Villars Cotterets (Aisne) which we
visited on our way to Paris. In the
glades of this forest | netted several
specimens of the chafer Gnorimus
nobilis Linn. which were flying about
clumps of umbelliferous plants. This
beetle is fairly common and wide-
spread in France but is local and rare
in England, being almost confined to
the New Forest.

Collecting in the Pyrenees is ex-
citing for the coleopterist as little
work has been done there; the more
remote areas are today still not
surveyed or properly explored.
While in the village of Bareges,
Hautes Pyrenees, we met two stud-
ents from the Sorbonne who were
collecting Coleoptera. They had, in
the previous year, been members of
a party which had collected seven
species of Coleoptera new to science,
around the high lakes of the east-
central Pyrenees. Owing to the heavy
grazing which occurs on the French
side of the Pyrenees, flower-frequent-
ing beetles are few in comparison
with those of the Alps, but this is
compensated for by the numbers of
ground-beetles and wood-boring
beetles. The lower slopes are heavily
wooded with Beech (Fagus sylvatica
Linn.), Oak (Quercus robur Linn.),
Larch (Larix decidua Mill.) and Douglas
Fir (Pseudotsuga mensiesii Franco).
Dead rotting logs are plentiful and
each produced several beetles.
Just below the snow line and around
the high mountain lakes the ground
is strewn with stones and boulders
and these sheltered hosts of Carabids.
Often one boulder would harbour as
many as twenty beetles. The stony
beds of the upland and lowland
streams produced many species new
to me, and some which are only found
in the Pyrenean mountains. The areas
fringing the melting snow (7,000 ft

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

and above) yielded very little for the

lepidopterists but provided the best

collecting for me. It was perhaps
fortunate from my point of view that
we had several periods of very heavy
mist so that | received ample help
from my colleagues, in turning over
rocks and searching for beetles.

| set out below a few general com-
ments on some of the species taken :

Emus hirtus Linn. Not common. Found
on fresh cow-pats.

Leptura aurulenta Fab. and L. quadri-
fasciata Linn. Fairly common in old
logs. Present in all stages.

Oberea occulata Linn. Taken at Heas
(inside car). It had probably flown
from the reed-beds (Phragmites
communis Trin.) by the stream
below Heas. In England it is a rare
fenland insect.

Agelastica alni Linn. Very common in
all stages on the Alder trees (Alnus
glutinosa Gaertn.) alongside the tor-
rent of the Gave de Pau. The leaves
of these trees were heavily eaten
by the larvae of this beetle.

Zabrus obesus Dej. and Nebria lafren-
ayei Dej. Both common under
stones at high altitude.

Carabus splendens Olivier. Taken at
night in the hotel garden at
Bareges.

_ Staphylinus caesareus Cederh. Com-

mon in valley bottoms near
streams.

S. ophthalmicus Scop. One found on a
stone wall near Bareges.

Brachinus explodens Dufts. Found in-
frequently under stones by the
roadside near Lourdes.

Cicindela campestris Linn. Common on
all mountain paths and among the
rocks.

Leptinotarsa |0-lineata Say (Colorado
Beetle). Three specimens, presum-
ably migrating, were taken at
7,000ft on the edge of the snow
beside a lake. These captures give
an indication of the vigour and
range of the insect.

As we visited the Pyrenees late in

23

July, the sweep-net was of little use
and most of the beetles were captured
by picking them off the flower-heads.
The water-net produced very little,
but any coleopterist visiting the
Pyrenees should equip himself with
a strong carpenter’s chisel, as the
heavily wooded slopes are covered
with dead trees which have been
attacked by longicorn beetles. Many
of these Longicorns can be taken
on the wing in the hot sunshine.

H. J. Cribb (2044).

SOME OBSERVATIONS

MADE NEAR LAKE THUN,

SWITZERLAND, IN AUGUST
1963

During the last week of August of
this year, | stayed in a small village
called Merligen, on the banks of Lake
Thun, not far from Interlaken in
Switzerland. A week had already
been spent touring through Germany,
but, because of rain, no collecting had
been possible there. Merligen lies
where a small river named the Justis-
tal enters Lake Thun. Behind it rise
two mountains, the Gemmenalp Horn
(6,748ft) to the east of the Justistal,
and the Sigriswiler Rothorn (6,713ft)
to the west of the Justistal. The lower
slopes of these mountains are covered
by forest. Between the forest and the
houses of the village lies a belt of
pasture-land.

| found that the Buddleja trees,
which were to be found in many of
the gardens in the village, attracted
a large variety of butterflies. The
most common species was Argynnis
paphia Linn. (Silver-washed Fritillary).
| counted up to eight of these insects
on one tree at the same time, and as
many as four on a single flower-head.
There were also large numbers of
Vanessa cardui Linn. (Painted Lady),
Vanessa atalanta Linn. (Red Admiral),
Aglais urticae Linn. (Small Tortoise-

24

shell), Nymphalis io Linn. (Peacock),
Polygonia c-album Linn. (Comma) and
Pieris brassicae Linn. (Large White).
By far the most interesting species of
butterfly to be found on the Buddleja
trees, however, was Papilio machaon
Linn. (Swallowtail). Although it was
not as common as the other species
already mentioned, | saw well over
a dozen specimens during my stay
of a week.

On the third day of my stay | went
for a walk up the path that follows
the valley of the Justistal. Within
half a mile of the edge of the lake the
village ended and the belt of pasture
began. Just as suddenly as the scenery
changed, the species of butterfly
present also changed. The only
species that | had already seen in the
village and which was found in the
pastureland too was Pieris brassicae.
Here, Agapetes galathea Linn. (Marbled
White), Pieris napi Linn. (Green-
veined White), Aricia agestis Schiff.
(Brown Argus) and Polyommatus icarus
Rott. (Common Blue) were all numer-
ous. Again there was a great change,
in the species of butterfly present,
when | came into the forest. There
were still many specimens of Pieris
napi to be seen, and once again
Argynnis paphia was fairly common,
though not as common as it had been
nearer to the lake. Where the path
ran close to the river, there were
large numbers of specimens of Erebia
aethiops Esp. (Scotch Argus), although
the species was in evidence to a
certain extent throughout the forest.
Large Skipper Butterflies (Ochlodes
venata Br. and Grey), settled on the
heads of flowers, were seen occasion-
ally, as were specimens of Gonepteryx
rhamni Linn. (Brimstone) and Limenitis
camilla Linn. (White Admiral). On
the return journey, just before reach-
ing the village, | saw one individual
of Colias hyale Linn. (Pale Clouded
Yellow). | had hoped to find Erebia
epiphron Knoch (Small Mountain Ring-
let) but it was not until the day

FEBRUARY, 1964

before my return home that | found
several specimens near the summit of
the Stanserhorn (6,215ft).

| had little opportunity to do much
moth-hunting. | did see, however, a
large number of Jersey Tiger Moths
(Euplagia quadripunctaria Poda) which
were settled on the flowers of the
Buddleja trees.

It was altogether a very enjoyable
and interesting week in which | saw
eighteen different species of butterfly.
9.10.63. D. O. Bizley (2860J).

OBSERVATIONS ON
BUTTERFLIES IN THE
SOUTH OF FRANCE, 1963

(Messrs P. W. Cribb, H. J. Cribb and
W. L. Coleridge have motored from
Lyons to Digne via Grenoble, and
stayed for a time in the region around
Fayence, Frejus and Grasse, eventually
making their way northwards along
the Col d’Allos to Barcelonnette. After
a return trip across the Italian border
through the Col de Larche, they move
away from Barcelonnette. The story
of their entomological trip in the
Maritime and Eastern French Alps
continues from Bull. amat. Ent. Soc.,
22.133.)

The next day we drove off north-
wards through the mountains via the
Col de Vars to Briangon. On the way
we made a stop, and discovered by
the roadside swarms of Leucoma
salicis Linn. (White Satin Moth)
emerging from their cocoons which
were scattered all over the Sallows
(Salix spp.) which edged the roadway.
The moths were flying about the
trees, or were already in copulation
on the branches. We collected several
pairs and these later produced large
batches of eggs. The moth seems
fairly safe from predation in this
habitat as there are very few birds
to be seen, although the moths are

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23 25
&*
Xs
r
KS
ros a
WVONS=4= =o) = TS 5, Senamseny
Se WL
~ 74
~ 4
~a ft
Ss a LA GRAVE_y oF
as GGRENOBLES — -== 3%
Ae ‘ Pies A x eo
3 L
e 4 Hautes Alpes Roeanngor
g 4 Cor dears
n : \ i ae Larche
=x _ : ce ~at
2 GAP
2 t ARCELONNETTE
KS ay Croix (ha pre
Cor dt Ales A
Y \vVu& %, x = - =
\ ) g fe =—_
N Basses Alpes \ es y:
\. cre e , he Pe
ig £.STERON ~~ ™DIGNE Ny ee
=~ @ AVIGNON DS A 1, E
< : R pcos e Ss
\
o PROVENCE ee ae
& © _ IFREDUS) 1”
DRAGUIGNAAH Ie
4
o°
arserlles

MEDITERRANEAN SEA

very conspicuous and day-flying.
The Col de Vars proved to be a
very winding pass but not so difficult

as the Col d’Allos. The slopes are
_ green and full of flowers but we did

jj
|
|
|
|
|
!
|
|
i

not linger as we intended to reach
La Grave in the Hautes Alpes in time
to secure hotel rooms for the night.
We made a brief stop at Briangon to
refuel and then climbed up the Col
du Lautaret. Stopping by the roadside
for lunch, we found ten larvae of the
Spurge Hawkmoth (Celerio euphorbiae
Linn.) feeding on the Cypress Spurge
(Euphorbia cyparissias Linn.) which
was growing on the edge of the road-

way. The larvae were nearly fully
grown and easily identified by their
very showy colouring. We found the
road up to the Col very bad, as most
of the tunnels had collapsed and new
roadways were in the course of being
constructed to bypass them. Here
the road was made up of timbers,
and rubble blasted out of the mount-
ainside, and we had to go very
carefully.

The village of La Grave is at about
4,000ft and lies in the shadow of the
Massif of La Meije which is second
only to Mont Blanc in height and
rises to a highest point of some

26

14,000ft. Huge glaciers hang on its
slopes and the view from the village
is breath-taking. The whole area is
a collector’s paradise as over 3,000
species of wild flowers have been
named from the valley and slopes,
and there is a flora and fauna in the
whole of the area stretching from the
valley below La Grave up to the
glaciers of La Meije.

We were greeted like members of
the family at the hotel as we had been
there on two previous occasions.
After unloading all our equipment
in our rooms we went down into the
valley for an hour or so before the
evening meal and there met a whole
group of people with nets. There
were boys and girls and a man and
woman. | asked if they belonged to
a society but got the laughing reply
“C’est ma famille’? from the man.
Both parents were lecturers in
agricultural schools and one daughter
was a member of a biology research
unit in Paris. Later they visited us at
our hotel and we were surprised at
the primitive methods which they
used both for collecting insects and
for setting them. A cyanide jar is
carried at the ready and insects are
killed as captured, and are papered,
or pinned into a cork-lined box. Long
continental pins are used to pin
specimens, and the setting-boards are
made with the sides pitched upwards
so that the wings of the insects on
them are elevated from the horizontal
by an angle of several degrees. The
setting-pins have large coloured heads,
and setting is done without forceps.
The family seemed to have no know-
ledge of pill-boxes, killing-agents other
than cyanide, or relaxing. We also
met another collector staying at our
hotel who used similar methods and
spent his evenings collecting under
the street-lights of the village.

After we left the family, we walked
up through a wood of deciduous trees
through which flowed small rivulets
rom the mountainside. A group of

FEBRUARY, 1964

scouts who had passed us on our
way up the path sent a member back
with a large butterfly in his hand.
It was a damaged female of Limenitis
populi Linn., a large species which we
had not expected to find here. There
were several Aspen trees (Populus
tremula Linn.) growing on the edges
of the wood and | waited in a glade
thick with lilies (Lilium sp(p).) and
Meadow-sweet (Filipendula ulmaria
Maxim.) for only a short while before
a male of Limenitis populi made its
appearance, circling down within
range of my net. On the wing this
butterfly is reminiscent of the Purple
Emperor (Apatura iris Linn.) and the
female of L. populi is as large as that
species. | took a further female early
next morning in almost the same spot
as she sailed down to sip at the dew
upon the bushes. | do not believe
that this species is usually taken so
far south.

Our collector friend in the hotel
accompanied us in the morning to
the top of the Col du Lautaret in
search of Erebia spp. and the high-
mountain butterflies Colias palaeno
Linn., Pontia callidice Esp. and Oeneis
aello Huebn. This last-named butter-
fly is said to have a bi-annual life-
cycle and as | had taken it in 1960
| did not expect that we should see
it this year. My surmise was correct
but we were able to find the breed-
ing-quarters of C. palaeno on the
slopes of the Lautaret where large
clumps of dwarf Vaccinium sp. grew
amongst the short grass. Vaccinium
spp. are the foodplants of C. palaeno,
the butterfly being found in the high
Alps and in the north of Europe
(Prussia and Pomerania). The males
are a soft yellow and the females
white, and the black costal markings
have a pink fringe. Higher up the
slopes where there were large rock-
falls | took the fast-flying Pontia
callidice and a specimen of the ‘ blue’
Polyommatus glandon Prun. (=orbitulus
Esp.). These rocks are the stronghold

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

of some of the scarcer Erebia spp.,
and conditions make it almost im-
possible to run after them and the
only way of making captures is to
take up a stand and hope that they
will fly within net-range. As soon as
the sun goes behind a cloud the
butterflies drop down amongst the
rocks, and hide. The grassland
species behave similarly, dropping
into the grasses if the sun disappears.
Right up by the permanent snow flies
the largest of the species of Erebia
found in this area, Erebia alecto
glacialis Esp. This butterfly is about
the size of Maniola jurtinag Linn. and
is totally black on the upperside,
with warm brown on the underside
of the forewings. When disturbed it

flies very fast and one’s first swipe

| 7,000ft) is

with the net at any specimen is
usually the last. A butterfly which is
common at this altitude (about
the fritillary Brenthis
(=Boloria) pales Schiff.

Among the birds seen at this alti-
tude the commonest is the Alpine
Chough (Pyrrhocorax graculus Linn.),
distinguished from the Chough (Pyr-
rhocorax pyrrhocorax Linn.) by _ its
yellow beak. These birds fill the air
with their cries of alarm as one
climbs up to the snow. We saw
Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetus
chrysaetus Linn.), and among the rocks
were several Black-eared Wheatears
(Oenanthe hispanica hispanica Linn.).
Generally birds were noticeable for
their absence in these alpine areas,
which is probably very fortunate for
the insects. The specimens of Macul-
inea arion which were flying here
were newly emerged and several
were of the form unicolor Hormuzaki,

_ which has only a single (discoidal)
| spot on the upperside. The imagines
| are also smaller than those of the
| lowland form.

On the day after our trip to the

| Lautaret my father and | climbed the

slopes of the Meije while Mr Cole-
ridge spent the day in the valley.

2,

The climb takes about two hours and
we reached a height of about 9,000 ft
where we could look down on to the
permanent snow and the Glacier de
la Meije. The meadows below the
glacier are rich in flowers and butter-
flies and several species occurred here
which we had not met elsewhere :
the ‘blues’, Polyommatus pheretes
Huebn., P. eumedon Esp. and P.
rippertii Frey. ; the apollo Parnassius
mnemosyne Linn. ; and the ‘ copper’
Chrysophanus dorilis subalpina Spey.
We had hoped to find the high-
mountain fritillary Melitaea cynthia
Huebn., which is very similar to
Euphydryas aurinia Rott. (Marsh Fritil-
lary) but the male of the former has
white markings on the upperside of
the forewings. We were not success-
ful in obtaining M. cynthia but we did
take another species of Erebia, E.
gorge Esp., high up among the rocks.
Climbing here is dangerous as the
rock and shale often move under-
foot, and we observed considerable
recent falls which had ripped trees
from the ground below, and there
had also been a large fall of ice from
the glacier. Everywhere springs and
streams gush out of the rocks and
soil, and below the ice a river roars,
to burst out and pour in a raging
torrent down the mountainside to
the river at La Grave. The view and
the place itself are the most ex-
hilarating that | have encountered in
our travels and are more than a
reward for the long climb.

We had our meal on the slope
above the snow and then climbed
down to cross the torrent by means
of a rickety bridge of logs. On the
far slope was a large plantation of
Larch (Larix decidua Mill.) split up
by small grassy valleys in which there
were flowers and their accompanying
butterflies. Another ° blue’ occurred
here, Polyommatus donzelii Boisd. This
is like a small P. damon Schiff. but has
the flying and resting habits of our
native Small Blue (Cupido minimus

28

Fuessl.). My father, searching amongst
the rotted stumps of the Larches in
the wood for beetles and their larvae,
was quite successful here. Parnassius
apollo Linn. was very common, and
we again found the ‘ brown ’, Maniola
lycaon Rott. The Large Wall (Pararge
maera Linn.) was also flying along the
pathways and settling on the rocks as
we walked down to recross the
stream. A storm was forming over
the Galibier and we made a hasty
descent to the hotel and our evening
meal. Torrential rain and a thunder-
storm brought early darkness, and
we packed in preparation for an early
departure in the morning.

The drive down from La Grave to
Grenoble was uneventful and we were
able to enjoy our last views of the
high mountains. We left Grenoble
on the road to Chambery and just
south of there we stopped to have
our midday meal, and explore some
of the wooded hillside bordering the
road. It was the hottest day we had
had since we arrived in France and
in the sun it was almost unbearable,
with the heat rising from the rock
walls along the pathways. There were
quite a few butterflies on the wing
and a large number of newly emerged
Peacocks (Nymphalis io Linn.) were
feeding on the pathside flowers. A
new species to us here was Erebia
aethiops Esp. (Scotch Argus) the
specimens of which were newly
emerged.

The slopes were heavily wooded
in places and there were large
quantities of Alder Buckthorn (Fran-
gula alnus Mill.) and the commonest
butterflies on the wing were Brim-
stones (Gonepteryx rhamni Linn.), also
newly emerged. | took one female
Queen of Spain Fritillary (Argynnis
lathonia Linn.) but the heat was
becoming oppressive and we decided
to start to make our way back to
Lyons in time to catch the train which
was to carry us back to Boulogne,
the boat and home.

FEBRUARY, 1964

It had been a full and memorable
trip in which we had covered about
1,000 miles while collecting. The
‘ Rapier ’ car had behaved impeccably
and everything had gone without a
hitch. The daily cost in hotel charges
and food, etc. (this includes wine)
was about 25 NF (37/-), and we had
made our hotel bookings and food
purchases as we went. It is advisable
to carry food sufficient for the
journeys out and back as the cost of
food at the French ports is very high
and one should always avoid centres
of tourisme if high costs are to be
avoided. The journey would not have
been possible without the car —
which is, of course, the heaviest item
of expenditure for its transport to
France and back and for its petrol
requirements.

Clothing can be kept to a minimum
but a light raincoat is essential in
view of the sudden storms which
occur, and at least two pairs of good
strong boots, shoes or ‘ bumpers’
are needed. | ‘ put paid’ to two pairs
in the fortnight. Our collecting equip-
ment consisted of two butterfly-nets
apiece (my father had a sweep-net
and water-net also); a plentiful
supply of glass-topped boxes; and
Mr Coleridge and | had two boxes of
setting-boards each. We set speci-
mens each evening and any surplus
specimens | papered in small cello-
phane envelopes and packed these
into ‘ Oxo’ tins. | tried packing some
specimens in polythene envelopes but
found that the plastic was so air-
tight that condensation caused the
specimens to become mouldy. My
father packed the beetles of each
day’s haul into a separate tube with
crushed leaves of Laurel (Prunus
laurocerasus Linn.) to keep the speci-
mens relaxed. Specimens of Hymen-
optera and Orthoptera | placed
between layers of cotton wool in
‘Oxo’ tins and sprinkled a few
crystals of menthol over the top
layer before sealing. The only losses

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

were in the case of the mantids, in

which the bodies decomposed, due
| believe to the contents of the
abdomens. All papered specimens
were relaxed satisfactorily on my
return by placing them into a poly-
thene sandwich-box half filled with
wet sand. The sand was covered with
perforated zinc and a sheet of thin
card, and some menthol crystals were
inserted to prevent moulds. In forty-
eight hours the specimens were ready
to set.
28.8.63. P. W. Cribb (2270).
®

JUNIOR NEWS SECTION

| have received four letters from

_ boys for this News Section, but none

from girls.
Both Brian Sheen (2596J) of
“ Croft’, Luxulyan, Bodmin, Corn-

| wall, and Wesley Caswell (3133J) of

46 Lewgars Avenue, Kingsbury, Lon-
don N.W.9, have sent me their
records for common butterflies seen

last spring and summer. Wesley

reports seeing Large Whites (Pieris
brassicae Linn.), Peacocks (Nymphalis
jo Linn.) and Small Tortoiseshells
(Aglais urticae Linn.) in fairly large
numbers, but like Brian his ‘ first
sightings’ were in very very late
spring. This is not surprising !
Fifteen-year-old J. Gill (3566J) of
372 Devonshire Road, North Shore,
Blackpool, Lancashire, is a new
Member who is particularly inter-
ested in swallowtail butterflies (Papil-
ionidae). He tells me he is anxious to

obtain larvae and pupae of Papilio
_machaon brittanicus Linn. — the Brit-
_ish Swallowtail Butterfly — and sug-
gests that someone may like to offer
| some to him in exchange for other
_ material. J. (1 do not know his
| Christian name) would also like to
| correspond with his fellow lepid-
_ opterists.

S. G. L. Cole (2934J) of 22 High

29

Street, Putney, London, S.W.15, may
have overcome the problem of
‘sweating ’ in caterpillars carried in
tins, and, as we know, moist air does
kill larvae. He solders perforated
zinc over a hole cut in the lid of the
tin, using solder paste as he finds this
easier to use than solder rod. Tins
thus treated have ample ventilation,
and will let the moist air out. | think
a little damp sponge will prevent
dehydration (drying out).

Wesley Caswell had great success
catching the larvae of the Buff Tip
Moth (Phalera bucephala Linn.) last
September. His apparatus is simple
but ingenious. A long piece of string
is tied to a door-knob (not still
attached to a door) and the knob is
thrown up into the tree Wesley
wishes to collect from. A few sharp
tugs bring down a torrent of insects.
| feel, however, that this method is
open to some criticism. It could lead
to over-collecting and also to a great
deal of damage to the trees : but its
greatest drawback is that it will most
certainly annoy parents, who are al-
ready suspicious of your collecting
activities, and who will not like living
in a house without door-knobs! |
am certainly going to try Wesley’s
‘door-knob’ collecting method. |
only hope | can get my door-knob
back again !

One of our Members asks whether
it is usual to catch House Crickets
(Gryllulus domesticus Linn.) away from
buildings. The answer is ‘ some-
times ’’. This insect is supposed to be
a native of the sunny lands of the
Middle East, but it has certainly
settled down in England. The insect
is usually found in heated cellars,
boiler-rooms and such places, but
there are colonies living out of doors
in Corporation rubbish-dumps near
Cambridge.

Andrew Smith of the St Ivo School
Entomology and Natural History
Society (2941A) had a caterpillar
brought back by his father, with

30

loving care, all the way from Moscow.
It turned out to be a larva of the
Lackey Moth (Malacosoma neustria
Linn.), and took to British Hawthorn
(Crataegus sp.) straight away. At least
it will not have to face another Russian
winter.

The club | am associated with —
St Ivo Ent. and Nat. Hist. Soc. as it
is affectionately known — is found in
St Ivo school at St Ives, Huntingdon-
shire. It is very lucky in having an
electrically heated store, which has
easily been changed into a ‘ tropical
room’. This was originally meant
only for insects, but | am afraid that
occasional spiders, snakes, turtles and
other creatures are now to be found
there. Various species of locusts and
cockroaches, as well as House Crick-
ets and stick insects, are bred there
quite successfully. Any surplus speci-
mens are distributed — gratis — to
naturalists. Before you race for your
pen and paper to ask for some of our
surplus, | must warn you that there
is a long waiting-list for specimens,
and it may be several months before
your little parcel from us arrives
(usually after you have forgotten what
you asked for). | know that House
Crickets (which ‘sing’ better than
beetles) and stick insects (of the usual
species Carausius (—Dixippus) morosus
Br.) are in good supply.

For the last few years, expeditions
by the St Ivo Society have been made
during the summer holidays, both in
this country and abroad, in order to
add specimens to members’ private
collections and to the Society’s live
collection. St lvo’s expedition to
Luxembourg last August was a modi-
fied Youth Hostel Association tour,
and such a tour can be recommended.
Our expeditions are successful in that
many wonderful creatures are seen.
A few amphibians and reptiles are
brought back alive, but very few
live insects ever reach St Ives.

The Society is earnestly seeking a
new insect to culture (i.e., with which

FEBRUARY, 1964

to form a breeding stock) — but this
will not be a member of the Lepid-
optera. | don’t suppose next summer’s
visit to the Isle of Wight and the
New Forest will solve our problem,
but a good time should be had by all.

Do let me know about your school
societies’ activities, no matter how
ordinary they may seem: and any
new ideas for collecting, setting or
study will be doubly welcome.

| wish you good hunting.
8.12.63. H. J. Berman (2941A).

REVIEWS

Water Beetles and Other Things,
by Frank Balfour-Browne. Pp. 219.
Illus. Blacklock, Farries and Sons, Ltd,
Dumfries, 1962. Price 25/-.

Professor Balfour-Browne needs no
introduction to the coleopterist as
his published books on the British
water beetles are well-known and he
is the recognised authority on the
group: but this, his latest book,
should be read by all serious ento-
mologists as he has set down his
experiences, methods, problems and
conclusions based on half a century
of fieldwork. His unique records,
maintained over such a long period
and described in Chapter Ill, of the
occurrence of water beetles, have
enabled him to discuss problems of
distribution and ecology of import-
ance to all students of the British
insect fauna.

After setting down the history of
the list of British water beetles and
the additions to and subtractions from
the list since 1802, Professor Balfour-
Browne describes his method of
recording on the county and vice-
county system. The writer of this
review has had the pleasure of dis-
cussing this system with him and has
learned many important rules all too
often overlooked by less experienced

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

collectors. Professor Balfour-Browne
has always recommended a uniform
method of recording captures which,
if more universally adopted, could do
so much to assist future workers.
A further chapter divides the water

_ beetles into groups according to their

habitats, and the characteristics of
the various types of habitat are
examined in detail.

From the general entomologist’s
point of view the most important
chapters are the last two, which deal
with the origin of the water beetle
fauna in the British Isles, and with
many unsolved problems connected
with insect ecology in general.

| Theories regarding the reappearance
_of species after many years’ absence,
_and the ability of winged insects to re-

inhabit suitable areas, are fascinating
to any entomologist, although Profes-
sor Balfour-Browne soon dismisses any

| theory with which he is not in

agreement !

In Chapter VIII under the heading
‘Problems’ it is characteristic that
one of the problems discussed is the
International Commission on Zoo-

_ logical Nomenclature, an organisation

| which has caused the Professor to
| put pen to paper on a number of

Se

occasions.

In addition to a short bibliography
at the end of each chapter, the book
concludes with a massive list of
references taking up no less than 64

_ pages. For the coleopterist, whether

he be particularly interested in water
beetles or in other groups, this list
is of the greatest value.

This book is, in the reviewer's

- opinion, a most important contribu-
- tion to the

literature of British
entomology. Many of Professor Bal-
four-Browne’s observations, and the
lessons learned from his systematic
collecting over such a long period,
can be ‘ read across ’ to Orders other
than the Coleoptera, and he has
supplied future workers with a
critical appreciation of fifty years of

31

specialised fieldwork, as well as a
most readable book into the bargain.
L. S. W.

Life of the Wayside and Wood-
land, by T. R. E. Southwood, Ph.D.,
BSc, A: RiGS” E.R-E.S., FES. (Based
on original volume by T. A. Coward,
M.Sc., M.B.O.U.) Pp. 290. PI.XXXIl
in colour and XXXII in black and
white. Over 300 text Figs. Freder-
ick Warne and Co. Ltd., London,
1963. Price 30/- net.

The original volume was published
in 1923 and the seventh impression in
1948 and there can be few senior
naturalists who have not, at some
time in their career, read this book
with pleasure and profit. The pub-
lishers understandably state that the
large increase in knowledge in the
last thirty years makes a complete
review desirable. Dr Southwood has
completely rewritten the text though
adhering to the framework of the
original volume. A definite approach
to modern problems is always near
the surface, and such references as
“in localities that have escaped treat-
ment with herbicides” frequently
occur.

For convenience, the calendar year
is divided into six two-monthly
periods. Each period has a section
devoted to the main animal and plant
groups, dominant species for that
period being described. Thus, the
July-August period contains sections
on mammals, birds, reptiles, fish,
Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Hymenopt-
era, Neuroptera, Diptera, Hemiptera,
Odonata, Orthoptera, Thysanoptera,
Arachnida, Crustacea, flowers, ferns,
mosses, fungi and algae. A typical
section, Coleoptera, describes the
appearance, behaviour and habitats of
the more conspicuous species, the
Stag Beetle (Lucanus cervus Linn.), the
click-beetles (Athous and Agriotes spec-
ies), the Coral-brown Soldier-beetle
(Rhagonycha fulva Scop.) and the lady-

32

FEBRUARY, 1964

bird beetles (Coccinellidae). Distinct
line-drawings show the extreme pat-
tern variation in three species of the
last family.

In a volume which is intended as a
general introduction to the natural
history of the British Isles, ample
illustrations are very desirable. |
thought this book (with thirty-two
plates in colour, thirty-two in black
and white and over 300 text figures)
was very good, though obviously it
can only touch the fringe of the sub-
ject. Nevertheless it should assist the
amateur to determine the Class and
Order of many creatures and plants
discovered in the field. For a fuller
determination, the specialised works
of this series are essential and, of
course, this volume serves as a gen-
eral introduction to those works.

As can be expected, the Lepidopt-
era, as a showy and popular group,
receives good attention. For the
youngster and beginner, the text is
most interesting, especially as it lays
stress on field work. It introduces the
beginner to pupa-digging in January,
early species and hibernating larvae
in March, the commons and downs in
May, the chalk hills in July, larva-
hunting and migrants in September
and the winter moths in November;
a full calendar and not just a sum-
mer’s hobby. Also it is pleasing to
see the smaller species (‘Microlepid-
optera’) well mentioned.

Four useful appendices are includ-
ed. Appendix 1 deals with leaf-dam-
age caused by galls, leaf-miners, etc.,
and is illustrated by twenty clear line-
drawings. Appendix 2 describes the
Berlese-Tullgren funnel for the ex-
traction of animals from soil, plant
debris and dung. Appendix 3 is a
small directory of Natural History
Societies: our Society receives an
honourable mention. Appendix 4
is a useful list of reference books for
further study.

In conclusion, | can say that this is
a fascinating volume for the naturalist

and layman alike. It introduces the
entomologist to the other occupants
of our countryside and is most read-
able even to anyone not particularly
interested in natural history. It
should be on the bookshelf of every
amateur naturalist and in the libraries
of those clubs and organisations con-
nected with our countryside.
R.D.H.

tJ
LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Sir,— There was a time when the
word ‘bughunter’ appeared quite
often in the Bulletin. It .was rather
endearing, with its suggestion of light-
heartedness and its recognition of the
catholicity of our membership.

| fear we shall not see it again in
the Bulletin’s prim pages; unless it
is used as a term of abuse, like
‘foxhunter ’’ when employed by the
League Against Cruel Sports.

Honestly, must we be so priggish
and puritanical in our attitude to
‘collecting for the fun of it’? After
all, most of us began that way ; even
the most scientific of entomological
research-workers were probably bug-
hunters once. Their young counter-
parts today won't feel very much at
home in the AES if we are really going
to take the line that collecting (except
for ‘serious scientific purposes’) is
something to be ashamed of. | must
say, if | were a boy, or a beginner,
the current issue of the Bulletin (Vol.
21, No 257) would fill me with gloom.
The Editorial, taken in conjunction
with the Editorial comments in the
correspondence columns, has a daunt-
ing and ‘ Praisegod Barebones’ air.
Of course we should deplore greedy
and wasteful collection, e.g., the use
of ‘m.v.’ traps when the unwanted
catch is not carefully released and
protected from the birds, taking long
series of scarce species, and so on.
But the damage done by collecting

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

is surely so very small — judged
scientifically and not emotionally |
should have thought it was minute—
that it is inconsiderable by comparison
with the effect of insecticides, weed-
killing sprays which kill foodplants,
tree-felling and urbanisation. And in
_my experience at any rate it just
isn’t true that the majority of col-
_ lectors are ‘immature ’, ‘ selfish ’ and
stupid. Most of the ones | know are
good field naturalists, and are quite
as much concerned about conserva-
tion as our Editor is. (| know colonies
of Maculinea arion Linn. and Euphy-
dryas aurinia Rott. which have been
saved from destruction by the activit-
_ies of collectors who nevertheless
| were not so conscientiously high-
minded that they were unwilling to
_ describe themselves as ‘ bughunters ’,
nor so concerned with the ‘ Import-
ance of Being Earnest’ that they
| would not admit that they collected
“for fun ’.)
| can’t help feeling that the Editor
is opposed to them less on account
of any conceivable damage they may
- do to the fauna than for their light-
_ hearted approach to a pursuit which
he thinks should be gravely scientific.
“The puritans’, said Macaulay,
“hated bear-baiting not because it
gave pain to the bear, but because it
gave pleasure to the spectators.”
John Moore (146).

The above letter was apparently
mislaid, and omitted from the cor-
respondence columns of an earlier
issue, and therefore refers to the
previous Editor and to his comments.
Mr Moore still wishes to see the
letter published, and apologies are
extended to him for its late appear-
ance.
| However, the present Editor would
_ like to take this opportunity of stating
_ his own Editorial Policy and of com-
| menting on the above item as far as
the latter concerns this policy.

33

The Editor is necessarily impartial,
but this does not mean that he is
neutral. While, therefore, he _ is
bound—space permitting—to publish
articles submitted, provided that
these might be of interest to Members
and can conform to the standards of
the Bulletin, it is his duty to see that
no article (however well-intentioned)
which could be used as an excuse to
justify actions to the detriment of the
Society or of entomology in general
is published without suitable com-
ment. Perhaps | could be forgiven,
therefore, for making a short com-
ment on the above letter.

First of all, the fact that the Bulletin
conforms to some sort of scientific
standard does not mean that non-
scientists will be inconvenienced by
this standard. | know that most
Members welcome the present con-
formity in what, after all, isa magazine
—and indeed, this conformity renders
our Bulletin of use to more entomolo-
gists, not to fewer.

The fact that our hobby is scientific
adds to its interest, but this does not
mean that it must be pursued scien-
tifically (although, of course, con-
servation is based on scientific prin-
ciples) : any entomologist may col-
lect, etc., as he wishes provided that
the interests of his fellow naturalists,
or those of a future generation of
naturalists, can be definitely shown
to be not detrimentally affected. Our
present Juniors, who are part of this
future generation, will derive much
pleasure from their hobby as they
study the lives of the insects around
them, and as they realise that it is
on their future efforts, and on their
outlook towards entomology, that
the conservation of our wild life will
largely depend.

To reiterate briefly what has already
been explained in Bull. amat. Ent. Soc.,
22: 84-5, three of the most import-
ant reasons why a restraint on col-
lecting is necessary are that collectors
can and do damage insect populations

34

directly (this is fact); that these
populations are chiefly those of rare
species ; and that insecticides, weed-
killing sprays and the like are used by
people who, quite naturally, are not
prepared to be guided, let alone
criticised, by entomologists some of
whom are themselves busy killing
rare insects.

We cannot, then, afford to lull
ourselves into believing that the
damage done by collecting is negli-
gible. Macaulay, it has been said, owes
his popularity partly to the conviction
with which he twists fact to prove
the justness of his opinions: | hope
that we will not be guilty of attempt-
ing to justify harmful collecting by
the same sort of ploy.—Editor.

NOTES AND
OBSERVATIONS

THE ALDER MOTH IN
DEVONSHIRE

It may be of interest to Members
to know that | captured a fully grown
larva of the Alder Moth (Apatele alni
Linn.) at Tavistock, Devon, on August
18th of this year (1963). The larva
was on a wooden gatepost which
stood with a mixed deciduous wood
on one side and a very damp meadow
on the other. The gate was some one
hundred yards from the banks of the
River Tavy. The larva appeared as
representatives of this species are
typically depicted in the books —a
little over one inch in length, black
with yellow bands. It had character-
istic long clubbed hairs which were
shiny black in colour.

| inferred that the larva was soon
to pupate, but in case it was not
fully fed | supplied leaves of Alder
(Alnus glutinosa Gaertn.) and Oak
(Quercus robur Linn.). The insect was
housed together with a matchbox-

FEBRUARY, 1964

ful of dry wood chips (mainly Oak).
Within twenty-four hours it was
spinning a cocoon in this wood, a
definite ‘cell’ being formed on the
side of the box. All seemed well until
the 20th, when the larva appeared
rather shrivelled. On the 21st it was
dead, still enclosed in the flimsy
cocoon. | have been unable to find
any references to the rearing of this
species and should welcome any in-
formation Members could supply on
the subject. | should be particularly
pleased to hear of suggestions as to
the cause of death of this larva. As
far as | could tell, it had no parasites.

Despite further searching in the
locality where | discovered this
specimen, | found no more Alder
Moth larvae. Nevertheless, the area
was well-wooded and yielded some
other interesting species on sugaring.
20.9.63. John E. Cooper (2343).

THE SMALL RANUNCULUS
MOTH (HADENA DYSODEA
SCHIFF.) IN HERTFORDSHIRE:
CORRECTION

In last May’s edition of the Bulletin
(Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 22: 67-8) Mr
M. D. Reed (3438J) of Baldock, Hert-
fordshire, recorded the discovery of
Hadena dysodea. Unfortunately his
specimen turned out to be a rather
small example of Antitype flavicincta
Schiff. (Large Ranunculus). | must
admit that Mr Reed’s small banded
specimen certainly closely resembled
the illustration of H. dysodea on the
plate in Dr E. B. Ford’s book, ‘ Moths’.
However, it must be remembered
that this illustration depicts an insect
which must be about forty years old,
and not a freshly bred specimen. Had
it done so Mr Reed would at once
have noticed his error.

| hope this note will serve as a
warning to Members not to publish
records without being satisfied as to

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

the positive identification of their
captures. Those in doubt should con-
sult the recently revised AES Advisory
Panel.

4.11.63. Bernard F. Skinner (2470).

REFERENCE
FORD, E. B. (1955). Moths. New Naturalist Series.
Collins, London. Plate 32.

‘INTERSPECIFIC MATING IN
THE PLUSIINAE

While employing myself with tidy-
-ing-up a bed of Primula denticulata
Smith, on 20th June this year, |
discovered two freshly-emerged
moths on the underside of a leaf. A
_second glance demonstrated them
to be members of the Plusiinae in cop.
Their markings, while having the
features of this sub-family, were
nevertheless very different from each
| other. My first thought was that they
represented a particularly striking
example of sexual dimorphism, but
this was something | had never as-
sociated with the Plusiinae. My cap-
_ tures proved to be a female specimen
_ of Plusia festucae Linn. (Gold Spot),
and a male specimen of Plusia pul-
chrina Haw. (Beautiful Golden Y).

My mind was immediately filled
with an image of drawers full of
P. festucae x P. pulchrina hybrids.
| was inspired by all those tenacious
breeders who have presented the
world with Mimas tiliae Linn. x
Laothoe populi Linn., and L. populi x
Smerinthus ocellata Linn. hybrids (to
mention only some of the permuta-
/tions which have occurred). My
specimens were placed in a cage, and
[lavished flowers and sugar solutions
on them. After several days they had
| not parted, the genitalia having be-
| come distended and damaged, and
both moths eventually died.
_ These specimens now grace my
collection, but my appetite is whetted
and | am looking for further examples
of interspecific matings in the Plu-

35

siinae. Incidentally, during a search
through back numbers of several
entomological magazines including
the Bulletin, | have not been able to
find any reference to such matings in
the Plusiinae, although | am certain
| have seen such reports in the past —
can any Members help in this respect?
21.10.63. K. Bradbury (2627).

OBSERVATIONS ON
ORGYIA ANTIQUA LINN. AND
ORGYIA RECENS HUEBN.

For several years | have been
breeding Orgyia antiqua Linn.
(Vapour Moth) and O. recens Huebn.

(Scarce Vapourer). | have noticed
several interesting things about these
two species.

On looking back to an old Bulletin,
| found an article by Mr R. G. Haynes
(1545) (Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 20: 34).
In this article Mr Haynes says of O.
antiqua that he noticed that females
paired more than once. In my ex-
perience, | have found that this is
not true for O. antiqua, but it is true
for O. recens. Most females of O.
recens pair twice and sometimes they
will pair again after they have com-
menced egg-laying.

This year imagines of the two
species emerged from the pupa at
the same time, and | noticed that
males of O. antiqua were attracted to
females of O. recens and attempted to
pair with them: one male appeared
to pair with a female, but the result-
ing ova were infertile.

Also this year | have had a partial
second brood of O. antiqua. Six males
of this brood were very light-coloured
specimens, almost yellow, and another
was a dark specimen without the
typical white marks on its forewings.
The other ten males which emerged
were quite normal. Is it usual for the
second brood of O. antiqua to contain
light-coloured specimens ?

| have noticed that in the natural

36

FEBRUARY, 1964

state some of the larvae of O. antiqua
appear to be unwilling to leave their
eggshells after hatching, but they can
be dislodged by the wind or by being
blown on. When dislodged in this
manner they fall off the eggs on the
end of long silk threads, and are in
this way moved to other parts of their
bush or to different bushes. Could
this be a method of dispersal of the
larvae ?

17.11.63. J. Muggleton (32534).
e
AN INTERESTING BROOD

OF THE IRON PROMINENT
MOTH

In July 1961, | took a typical female
specimen of Notodonta dromedarius
Linn. (Iron Prominent Moth) in my
mercury-vapour light-trap, and pro-
cured a number of eggs from her
which duly hatched and the resulting
larvae fed up and pupated.

Between 17th May and 23rd July
1962, eleven imagines emerged, five
typical and six (three males and three
females) of a lighter suffused form.

Between 18th April and 2nd June
1963, eleven more imagines emerged,
six typical and five (three males and
two females) of the suffused form.

In each of the two years, | paired a
male and female of the suffused form,
but on both occasions the resulting
eggs were infertile.

Apart from the interest of the
suffused form, which is quite striking,
the fact that ‘lying over’ occurs in
this species is noteworthy.

Stainton (1857), Meyrick (1895) and
Newman (1869) show the moth as
single brooded. Kirby (1882) shows it
as double brooded, but this may refer
to continental specimens and not to
British ones. Newman and Leeds
(1913) show it as double brooded,
but single brooded in the North.
South (1961) says that in some seasons
and in some localities the moth

appears twice in a year. My ‘ m.v.’

trap records for the past three years
show a fairly regular appearance of
N. dromedarius from May to August.
Has anyone recorded that N. dromed-

arius may ‘lie over’ ?
19.11.63. L. W. Siggs (243).
REFERENCES

KIRBY, W. F. (1882). European Butterflies and Moths.
Cassell, Petter and Galpin, London.

MEYRICK, E. (18>). Handbook of British Lepidoptera.
Macmillan, Londo

NEWMAN, E. (1869). The Natural History of British
Moths. Hardwicke and Bogue, London.

NEWMAN, L. W. and LEEDS, H. A. (1913). Textbook
off Ales Butterflies and Moths. Gibbs and Bamforth,
t Alb

SOUTH, R. (1961). The Moths of the British Isles. 4th
edn. Frederick Warne, London

STAINTON, H. T. (1857). A Manual of British Butterflies
and Moths. John van Voorst, London.

PREMATURE EMERGENCES
FROM
INDOOR OVERWINTERING

In reply to Mr P. J. S. Miles’ enquiry
(Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 22: 103-4) the
following may be of interest. On 29th
March 1947, a colleague of mine found
a living specimen of the common
Small Magpie Moth, Eurrhypara hortul-
ata Linn. (Pyralidae), in the Herb-
arium of the Royal Botanic Gardens,
Kew. The normal time of appearance
of this species is, of course, June and
July, and in fact a further specimen
was found in the Herbarium on 13th
June of the same year. The Herbarium
is a large, centrally heated building,
and the only explanation of the March
appearance of E. hortulata would seem
to be that a larva found its way into
the building through an open door
or window and pupated inside, and
was stimulated to this very early
emergence by the constant warmth
of the atmosphere. This record was
originally published in Kew Bulletin
for 1949.
22 1NEGS: H. K. Airy Shaw (545).

REFERENCE

SHAW, H. K. AIRY, ed. (1949). Kew Bulletin, 4: 234.
Additions to the Wild Fauna and Flora of the Royal
Botanic Gardens, Kew : XXI. (Lepidoptera, Pyrausti-
dae).

Printed by Ellis & Phillips Led., East Side Press, Spellbrook, Bishop’s Stortford, and published by the Amateur

Entomologists’ Society, 42..Notmandy Avenue,

Barnet, Herts. 1963.

THE AES ADVISORY PANEL

New Members have not been
receiving the list of AES advisers
for some time and have been writing
to the Society’s officers to locate
/ sources of information on various
- groups. These enquiries have made
_ it clear that some additional Advisers
/ would be welcomed. The Panel has
therefore been extended, as detailed
below, to provide for Members a
service of advice on and identification
of most groups of British insects.
A few other topics are covered, too.

How and when to consult the
Panel

Members of the Panel will advise
you on the study of their special
groups and will identify small num-
bers of British specimens which are
of particular interest to you. Large
collections should be taken to a
museum for identification. Try to
use a copy of the relevant standard
work if you know of one, before
approaching the Panel.

Always mention that you are
approaching the Adviser as he is a
member of the Panel and give your
own Membership number. You
must enclose postage stamps to
cover the cost of a reply or return
of specimens. Members of the
Panel are busy people, so try to
send dead material to them during
the winter when their own time is
less likely to be taken up with field
work. You are recommended to
send a stamped addressed en-
velope for acknowledgement of the
receipt of material which may have
to await time for its identification.
Labelling — with details of locality,
foodplant, date, time and mode of
capture, etc. — often greatly simpli-
fies identification. Every specimen
should be fully labelled on the same
pin as bears the specimen or its
mount. Details of locality will be

treated as confidential if this is
desired.

The Society is most grateful to

the many specialists who serve on
this Panel, without any remunera-
tion other than the occasional speci-
men taken, with permission, from
an interesting series that has been
sent in. It is hoped that Advisers
on those groups that are noticed
incidentally or as pests will be
sought after as frequently as members
of the Panel willing to identify
commonly collected Orders.
New advisers on appropriate sub-
jects not covered below are always
welcomed by the Hon. General
Secretary.

ADVISORY PANEL

Coleoptera (Beetles)

_ General advice and identification
D. TOZER (36), 98 Copdale
Road, Leicester.

Staphylinidae
H. R. LAST (117), 12 Winck-
worth Road, Banstead, Surrey.
Water-beetles

Prof. J. W. A. F. BALFOUR-
BROWNE, M.A., c/o British
Museum (Natural History),
Cromwell Road, London,
S.W.7.

Diptera (Two-winged Flies)

General advice
L. PARMENTER (895), 94 Fair-
lands Avenue, Thornton Heath,
Surrey.

Larvae (approximate identification)
K. G. V. SMITH, c/o British
Museum (Natural History),
Cromwell Road, London, S.W.7.

Tachinidae (Parasitic Flies) and Musci-
dae

E. C. M. FONSECA, 58 Wood-

stock Road, Redland, Bristol 6.

Tipulidae (Crane-flies)

R. M. PAYNE (2982), 8 Hill Top,
Loughton, Essex.

Ephemeroptera (Mayflies)
General advice and_ identification

of larvae and adults

T. T. MACAN, M.A., Ph.D.,
Stevney, Outgate, Ambleside,
Westmorland.

Heteroptera (Het-bugs)

General advice and identification
T. R. E. SOUTHWOOD, B.Sc.,
Ph.D., Imperial College Field
Station, Silwood Park, Sunning-
hill, Berkshire.

Aquatic species
T. T. MACAN, address above.

tlomoptera

Aphidoidea (Greenflies, Blackflies)
H. L. G. STROYAN, M.A., c/o
Insect Pathology Laboratory,
Hatching Green, Harpenden,
Hertfordshire.

Auchenorhyncha (Leaf-hoppers, etc.)
Dr W. J. LE QUESNE, Anne
Cottage, Lye Green Road, Ches-
ham, Buckinghamshire.

Hymenoptera

Aculeata (Bees and Wasps)
J. C. FELTON, 16 Park Drive,
Sittingbourne, Kent.

Formicoidea (Ants)
C. A. COLLINGWOOD, B.Sc.,
c/o National Agricultural Ad-
visory | Service,” Coley ‘Hill,
Reading, Berkshire.

Parasitica (Chalcids, Ichneumons,

etc.)
G. J. KERRICH, M.A., c/o British
Museum (Naturai History),
Cromwell Road, London, S.W.7.
Symphyta (Sawflies)
Dr V. H. CHAMBERS, 12 Doug-
las Road, Harpenden, Hertford-
shire.

Lepidoptera (Butterflies and Moths)
* Microlepidoptera ’ — identification
S. WAKELY (1860), 26 Finsen
Road, London, S.E.5.
ditto — general advice
D. OLLEVANT (1514), 3 Sal-
combe Drive, Morden, Surrey.
Noctuidae and their larvae
B. F. SKINNER (2470), 85 Elder

Road, West Norwood, London
S.E.272

Saturniidae (Silkmoths)

O. C. GARDINER (225),

18 Chesterton Hall Crescent,
Cambridge.

European Butterflies
P. W. CRIBB (2270), 355 Houns-
low Road, Hanworth, Nr Felt-
ham, Middlesex.

Odonata (Dragonflies)
General advice and identification
A. E. GARDNER, 29 Glenfield
Road, Banstead, Surrey.

Orthopteroids (Cockroaches,Grass-
hoppers, Mantids, Earwigs, etc.)
General advice and identification of
British and imported species

A. E. GARDNER, address above.

Plecoptera (Stoneflies)
General advice and identification of
larvae and adults
T.. TE. —MACAN,. M.A., .Ph.D.,
Stevney, Outgate, Ambleside,
Westmorland.

Thysanoptera (Thrips)

General advice and identification
T” --LEWIS)) Bsc Ph.D:
c/o Rothamsted Experimental
Station, Harpenden, Hertford-
shire.

Trichoptera (Caddisflies)
General advice and identification
T. T. MACAN, address above.

Insect Migration
Recorder and Adviser
R. A.” ERENCH, B:Se-, (2129),
Rothamsted Experimental Sta-
tion, Harpenden, Hertfordshire.

Botany

Identification of foodplants
H. K. AIRY SHAW (545), Royal
Botanic Gardens, Kew, Surrey.

Selection, propagation and cultivation

of foodplants and floral attractions
R. C. DYSON (91), 112 Holling-
bury Park Avenue, Brighton 6,
Sussex.

Plant Galls
D. LEATHERDALE, Eastfield
Lodge, Whitchurch, Nr Pang- A a S
bourne, Berkshire. |

| Apparatus and Techniques (except | Members can help the Society in
| microscopy) _ several ways:—

| General advice

_M. E. CASTLE (2490), ‘Avellana’, | (a) By dealing with advertisers and

| 172 Greenfield Crescent, Hazel- mentioning the Bulletin.

ton Gardens, Horndean, Hamp- :
shire. (b) By bringing in new Members.
Photography , (Subscription, 15/- per annum.

35mm. still and general advice Juniors, 10/- per annum).

R. W. J. UFFEN (1660), 4

Vaughan Avenue, Stamford (c) By buying AES publications and
Brook, London, W.6. suggesting Public Libraries sroule
t buy them.

(d) By friendly co-operation with other
Members.

(e) By taking just that extra bit of
trouble required to record happen-
ings of note for the Bulletin.

BEE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION
cue THE FOLLOWING AND OTHER FACILITIES TO
~ ENTOMOLOGISTS:

* nt eine library of books, journals and scientific reprints on bees.
Use of library of English translations of important foreign publications.

~* Loan of Exhibitions for shows and meetings, including Exhibition of photo-
graphs and pueldehaliets) are of bees.

Publications include:

* * Dictionary of peekecniag terms, English - French - German - Dutch (1 2/6 board;
ate —16/- cloth). This gives the equivalents in the four languages of 1500
beekeeping and entomological terms.

—* Bee World — international scientific journal about bees.

! Apicultural Abstracts — summaries of all important publications about bees
and alee subjects.

Membership, £1 a year —

. Write for details to the Director:
Dr EVA CRANE, Woodside House, Chalfont Heights,
GERRARDS CROSS, Bucks.

— Volume 12

Publications of

THE AMATEUR ENTOMOLOGISTS’ ‘SOCIETY i

The Amateur Entomologist : : :
Volumes in print are :— _ fi : } a ) 7 Ag
Volume 5 : ey : > |
Contains articles on Some British Moths Reviewed by W. Fe T. Taner ; Habits of coe
British Moths by Dr E. A. Cockayne ; Setting aan! and other papers. 64 a
pages, 84 figures, 4 plates. .
(Only a few copies left.) Fat ane | ee Price : 4s. éd. iN
Volume 8 ie 4
Contains illustrated “pices on Collecting Didzonflies : ; Collecting * Micrés’ ; Sweep- ;
nets ; Collecting Mosquitoes ; an eight-page list of standard books on Eneomolane
etc. 48 pages, 32 figures, 6 plates. | ree ‘Price : qe — :

Volume 9;
Practical Methods and Hints for Lepidopterists. Contains illustrated instructions for
making many types of breeding- and other cages; articles on rearing and collecting 9 4
larvae ; and illustrated instructions for making DeAtOS ies 42 pages, 48 figures, —
6 plates. 3 ‘ Blac. ace Ss. Od.

Volume 10 : Gast : i
Contains illustrated articles on Collecting locewiness: : Drawing Insects ; Collecting
Caddises ; Photography of Caterpillars ; etc. 40 Pagese: 10 fi path 12 plates. . i
(Not many left). ee: és. Mel »

Volume If Bec Ne Ty ae =
A Coleopterist’s Handbook. Describes the toate apparatus and methods for collecting i
British beetles ; their habitats, commensals and pre-adult stages ; how to record, a
photograph, make a personal collection, and conduct a local Se pee i

120 pages, 50 figures, 20 plates. . ‘Price : “15s. Od.

A Silkmoth Rearer’s Handbook (2nd edition): Gives descriptions « ofa apparatus, athadss e
for breeding, and life-cycles of over 120 species ; references to some 1400 species ©
and subspecies. A eae reference book on the subject. 165 pages, 26 figures, —
26 plates (2 coloured). | La Brice —«(s. er

The Bulletin of the Arnaceur Entometogists’ Society
| (World List abbreviation : Bull. amat. Ent.Soc.)

Back Volumes contain many interesting and valuable articles. Some of che one
Volumes are in short supply, so now is the time to complete your set. A stock of separa
numbers is also kept, so that you can complete individual Volumes ¢ or r obtain a : particul
article that you require without having to buy the whole Yelumes, Sl eee
: Volumes in print are:— =“? ay aoe

Volume 7 (1946-8)... Price: 2Is. Od. Volume 14 (1955) CER Price : 12s. 6d.
Volume 8 (1949) ... Price: 10s. 6d. Volume 15 (1956) ... Price: 12s. 6d.
Volume 9 (1950) ... Price: 10s. 6d. Volume 16 (1957) ... Price: 12s. 6d.
Volume 10 (1951) ... Price: 10s. 6d. Volume 17 (1958) ... Price: 12s. 6d.
Volume 11 (1952) ... Price: 12s. 6d. Volume 18 (1959) ... Price : 12s. 6d.

Volume 12 (1953) ... Price: 12s. 6d. Volume 19 (1960) ... Price: I2s. 6d.
Volume !3 (1954) . Price: 12s. 6d. Volume 20 eh sn Price : I5s. - Od.
Each Volume is ecmplecs with cover and index. ef

tee back numbers are priced at Is. 3d. per copy, except for the spbchlS Silver Jubile < ; ;
Number, of 18 pages, which is priced at 2s. 6d. —

&
oe

r
Sec veers oe

EUR

5
}

ri
har

0)
MO

4
fs

le
4

Sy
Dank

LE
(= NE

BUL
O
THE AMAT

THE

ENTOMOLOGISTS’

SOCIETY

World List abbrevi

Ent. Soc.

Bull. amat.

lation

Titles in the

OBSERVER’S POCKET SERIES
for the Entomologist
BUTTERFLIES

Compiled by W. F. STOKOE

70 Butterflies are described with 68

coloured illustrations and 86 in black-
and-white. 192 pp.

THE LARGER MOTHS

By R. L. E. FORD, F.R.E.S., F.Z.S.
Describes 104 species, all illustrated in
colour. 224 pp.

POND LIFE

By JOHN CLEGG

Contains information concerning all
types of life to be found in freshwater
ponds, with 32 colour plates. 128 pp.

COMMON INSECTS AND
SPIDERS

Outlines 21 orders of insects found in

Britain, also over 300 more common

species, 64 plates, 128 pp. |
Each 5/- net

From all Booksellers
FREDERICK WARNE & CO. LTD
1-4 Bedford Court, London, W.C.2.

AES

Members can help the Society in
several ways:—

(a) By dealing with advertisers and
mentioning the Builetin.

By bringing in new Members.
(Subscription, 15/—- per annum.
Juniors, 10/— per annum).

(b)

(c) By buying AES publications and
suggesting Public Libraries should
buy them.

(d) By friendly co-operation with other

Members.

By taking just that extra bit of
trouble required to record happen-
ings of note for the Bulletin.

(e)

Manuscripts,

AES NOTICE
WHERE TO WRITE
Membership applications, offers of help,

changes of address, and non-arrival of |

Bulletins to: D. E. Dodwell, 28 Sum-
merleaze Park, Yeovil, Somerset. —
Yeovil 928.

Advertisers to: R. D. Hilliard, 54 Gyles i

Park, Stanmore, Middlesex.
EDGware 1604.

Offers to lead Field Meetings, exhibit, etc., —

to: B. F. Skinner, 85 Elder Road, West
Norwood, eedeh, S.E.27.

drawings, and books for
review to: H. V. Danks, 7 The Ridge.
Surbiton, Surrey.

Subscriptions (15/- per annum, 1!0/- for

Juniors) to: B. R. Stallwood, 17 Clare- | —

mont Avenue, Sunbury-on-Thames,
Middlesex.

Youth matters to: H. Berman,

St Ivo
School, St Ives, Hunts.

HOW TO WRITE |
FOR THE BULLETIN

In Be English.

Preferably typewritten, double-spaced,
with wide margins, and on one side only
of quarto papers

Heading in apie NOT ididertined:
Correct scientific names, consisting of
name of genus (capital initial, and under-

lined), name of species (small initial, and | — j

underlined), authority (conventionally
abbreviated, NOT undenaned):\.

English names oi species, etc., with ta
capital initials.

Your name at end, ae the Bane followed
by your AES ogee Number in
parentheses.

Date of writing, all in figures (e:2.;
15.8.27.), opposite ro name. —

Number of words, in pencil and ringed

bd J

scans saul ieitnsnaaiiae aiid

ELMbridge 4156. _

Sunbury 2687.

= rei a ah Wiese 165 ean
Ne a ee

GIPsy Hill 0057. | 1

round, in top right corner of first sheet. a dq

Retu rn proofs promptly.

The Amateur Entomologist

(Illustrated with photographs and line drawings)

Volume 9:
‘* Practical Methods and Hints for Lepidopterists ”

CONTAINS ARTICLES ON—
Collecting Caterpillars
Breeding Cages for Macrolepidoptera

(describing 38 ways of making a cage)
Making a Beating Tray
(describing six different kinds of tray)

Price 5s. (postage extra)

from:
-ES Official Publications Agent, 137 Gleneldon Road, Streatham, London S.W.16,
)ngland. Do not send remittance with your order as an invoice will be sent with
the publications and will include the correct postal charge.

THE LONDON NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY

This Society has sections covering all aspects of natural
history and in particular, entomology. Lectures and
field meetings are arranged and research work carried
out. Papers on entomological subjects are prepared
by members and published in the Society’s journal
“The London Naturalist’. The Society has a library

housed at Ealing Public Library.

Further details may be obtained from:

The General Secretary, Mrs L. M. P. SMALL,
13 Woodfield Crescent, Ealing, W.5.

Silkmoth Rearer’s Handbook

A complete reference book for those who embark upon the fascinating adventure
of rearing the largest and most colourful moths in the world.

Part | records practical experience in breeding Silkmoths from all over the world
during the past decade. It illustrates bought and home-made apparatus and gives
hints on everything the beginner needs to learn about the life-cycle of the insects,

Part Il, for the first time in one book and one language, gives complete or nearly
complete descriptions of all stages of the life-cycle of over 120 species. Some
1,400 species and subspecies can be looked-up under 138 generic names.

Part Ill is a reference section, covering cross-pairing, the major reference works
and an index of species and subspecies.

The Handbook comprises 165 pp. with full colour cover, 2 colour plates, 63 mono-
chrome photos and 24 line drawings or charts.

Price 17s. 6d. (plus postage)

A Coleopterist’s Handbook

A symposium by various authors edited by
G. B. WALSH, B.Sc., M.R.S.T., and J. R. DIBB, F.R.E.S.
The Handbook describes the tools and apparatus and methods of collecting British

Beetles; their habitats, commensals and pre-adult stages: how to record, photo-
graph, make a personal collection and conduct a local survey.

Twenty full-page plates illustrative mainly of pre-adult stages (including seven
reproductions of rare engravings) and fifty line-drawings and diagrams. 112 pp.
and index.

Price 15s. Od. (plus postage)

from

Amateur Entomologists’ Society

OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS AGENT
137 Gleneidon Road, Streatham,
LONDON, S.W.16

(Please do not send money with order: an invoice will be sent)

ag

EDITORIAL

ajicle, and confirm that our Society,
aliough largely a ‘ publications ’
o}2, was also created to facilitate
céitact between fellow-entomolo-
gis. The means of such contact —
th: Membership List, the Bulletin, the
Vints and Exchanges List, and
th: Society’s various meetings —
a) already established. It only re-
ins for Members to take full
avfantage of the opportunities pro-
vied.
n this issue, too, begins a series
‘*Secretary’s Notes’, which will
|p to create a better liaison,
tlough the Hon. General Secretary,
bi:;ween Members.
it will be noticed that the annual
rports of the Society, which are
mrmally published in May, are not
itluded in this number. This is
Izause copy for this issue was sent
ttpress well before the A.G.M. took
Ace and these reports will there-
f¢e appear instead in the August
‘letin.
Finally, | must express my thanks
t) all contributors, particularly the
chors who write serial articles and
viose sustained efforts do much to
ifprove the continuity between
s}:cessive Bulletins, and to the proof-
iders (Mr P. W. Cribb, Mr W. H.
Tams and Mr R. W. J. Uffen),

Fit cover illustration: Larva of the High Brown
Fiillary Butterfly (Argynnis cydippe Linn.) on Dog
f (Viola canina Linn.), drawn by Mr P. J. Edwards
(3/1).

AES

BULLETIN

No. 263

MAY, 1964

whose valuable though unspectacular
efforts go unrecognised by the major-
ity of Members.

H. V. Danks (2907).

OBITUARY

H. E. Hammond, F.R.E.S. (423)
died on December 15th 1963 after
a long illness. His main interest was
in the larvae of Lepidoptera and he
became an authority on their pre-
servation by the inflation and heat-
drying technique. He had published
several papers on this subject the
last of which appeared in 1960
(J. Lepidopterist’s Society, 14: 67-
78). He had also published on
the foodplants of larvae and, jointly
with K. G. V. Smith, a series of papers
on the parasites of British Lepidop-
tera, /(1952,- 61|,. Ent. -Gaz.). Ae
preserved larvae for the collections
of several Institutions including Man-
chester Museum, Oxford University
Museum, Birmingham Museum, and
Yale University in the U.S.A. Many
Members of this Society will be
grateful for the kindness and help
shown to them, particularly as young
beginners, by him. It is typical of
his warm generosity that he has left
his fine collection of over 700 species
of larvae of British Lepidoptera to
another specialist on the subject,
Mr G. M. Haggett, whose fine series
of papers in the ‘South London’
proceedings will be known to Mem-
bers. He is survived by his widow
and a daughter, to whom we offer
our condolences. A fuller obituary
notice will appear in the Entomologist.

K. G. V. Smith.

38

SECRETARY’S NOTES

| have noticed quite plainly since
joining the Amateur Entomologists’
Society that the only field meetings
held are in the London area. This
disturbs me somewhat, because they
exist only in that area, out of reach
of the majority of our Members.

| would like to suggest that other
areas have field meetings and lecture
meetings organised and led by our
older Members for the purpose of
helping and encouraging our younger
Members. | would like to see,
throughout the country, centres
where our Members can get together
in those areas once a month for
lectures, films, discussions and exhi-
bitions during the ‘ off-season’ and
for outside walks and field meetings
during the ‘season ’.

Each area would be self-organised,
with its own local secretary and
committee to arrange the pro-
grammes, etc., and Members of the
Society, according to the localities
in which they reside, would each be
‘allocated’ to one of these areas.
| have seen this sort of system work
extremely well in other societies
and it would give Members outside
the London area a chance to do
something active within the Society.

Please give this some careful
thought, and | will be very pleased
to hear from any of you who are
interested in this idea, with any
suggestions that you may have.

Whilst on the subject of sugges-
tions, | would also like to say that |
shall be glad to hear from Members
who have any other useful ideas for
improving the facilities of our Society.

Advisory Panel

| would like to take this oppor-
tunity of reminding all Members, of
the list of Advisers on the AES
Advisory Panel that was published on

MAY, 1964

the final pages of the February 1964 —

issue of the Bulletin. Please make

use of the Panel for your queries on ©

identification of specimens and for
general advice. The facilities offered
are yours for the asking, and all

help in furthering the objectives of —

the Society.

There are, however, still one or
two gaps to be filled on the Panel,

and if there are any Members who
feel that they would like to help,

please do not hesitate to write to |

me.

| have in my possession, a series
of books written by Henri Fabre,
translated by Alexander T. De Mattos,
F.Z.S., and also a large number of

slides (34” x 34”) on the Order |

Araneida. These have been given

by another Member of the Society |

to pass on to any other Member to
whom these items may be of interest.

The titles of the books are:—
The Life of the Caterpillar
The Mason Bees
Bramble Bees and Others
The Hunting Wasps
More Hunting Wasps
The Mason Wasps
The Life of the Grasshopper
The Sacred Beetle and Others

The Glow-worm and Other Beetles

The Life of the Weevil

More Beetles

The Life and Love of the Insect
Insect Life

Fabre’s Book of Insects

The only charge for these books
would be the postage incurred.

| would like to add, as a final word —

in my notes for this issue, that |

shall always be pleased to meet any
Members who may be visiting my
area (Somerset) or passing through >
at any time. | convey to all Members —
best wishes for the coming season,

and wish you good hunting.

D. E. Dodwell (3482),

P1264. Hon. General Secretary.

-

years.

‘the Nuffield Foundation.

-AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

UNIT OF MEDICAL GENETICS

It will interest Members to learn
that a new unit of medical genetics
is to be set up at Liverpool Uni-
versity with a grant of £350,000 from
The new
unit will be under the direction of
Dr C. A. Clarke (1569) who will
work with, among others, Professor
P. M. Sheppard and Professor E. B.

| Ford.

The unit will primarily study the
association between hereditary char-

acters and liability to certain com-

mon diseases, for earlier work has

shown that certain hereditary traits
in man can result in increased sus-

_ceptibility to particular disorders.

Dr Clarke and Professor Sheppard
have used swallowtail butterflies
(Papilio spp.) widely in their work
as these butterflies and their larvae

are convenient animals with which
_ to study certain aspects of genetics.

Dr C. A. Clarke comments:
“ Readers of the Bulletin may be

H interested to know that the forma-
~ tion of the new Nuffield Medical
_ Genetics Unit in Liverpool stems

directly from the studies of Papilio
butterflies which P. M. Sheppard and
| have carried out over the last ten
The work began when the
technique of hand-pairing was learnt
(1952). Ent. Rec., 64: 98. Hand-

_ pairing of Papilio machaon in Feb-
_ ruary.), and the meeting with Dr
_ Sheppard a short time afterwards

was a most fortunate occurrence,

_ the result of my answering his ad-
_vertisement in your columns for

pupae of P. machaon Linn. Since
that time we have been led into
some not altogether unproductive
fields of enquiry both in butterflies
and man. Always behind us has been
the stimulating influence of Professor
E. B. Ford who has so ably put forward
the hypothesis of selection operating
through polymorphism and whose

39

work is so well-known to the
majority of your readers.”’
ev.

AES FIELD MEETING
Benfleet, Sunday 9th June 1963.

Five Members met the leader at
Benfleet Station. The weather was
very hot and dry so the party agreed
to refresh themselves before starting
the serious business of the day.

An area on Canvey Island was
worked first and on the way there
the party found the local plant Salsify
(Tragopogon porrifolius Linn.) growing
in company with its common relative
Goat’s-beard (T. pratensis Linn.). At
this point we were met by another
Member and his friend. We then
turned left up by the farm, where
everybody searched and beat the
Blackthorn (Prunus spinosa Linn.)
and Hawthorn (Crataegus sp(p).) for
larvae. The following species of
moths were noted:— Gold-tail (Eu-
proctis similis Fuessl.), Brown-tail
(E. chrysorrhoea Linn.), common Lack-
ey (Malacosoma neustria Linn.), Pale
Oak Eggar (Trichiura crataegi Linn.)
Short-cloaked (Nola cucullatella Linn.),
Figure of Eight (Episema caeruleo-
cephala Linn.) and ‘Common Haw-
thorn Ermel’ (Yponomeuta padella
Linn.).

In a field further up the lane the
Corn Crowfoot (Ranunculus arvensis
Linn.) was growing. More larvae
were taken from other bushes at
the top end of the lane. A ruby-
tailed wasp (Chrysididae) was noted
on a fence-post. Lunch was taken,
and the occasional mosquito joined
in!

We retraced our steps to the
station, finding on the way back a
batch of eggs of the Domestic Hen
(Gallus gallus Linn.). By this time

40

a member of the party was feeling
‘under the weather ’ from the effects
of hayfever. Another had the itch
from the Brown-tail larvae and a
third had lost his purse complete
with return ticket.

After a second call at the café Mr
R. Payne and Mr R. W. J. Uffen left
the party to work the area of rough
ground above the railway. Here
the grasshopper Pholidoptera griseo-
aptera Deg. was taken. The remain-
der of the group made their way
past the church to the banks of
Great Haven Creek. An unsuccessful
search was made for the larvae of
the Small Eggar Moth (Eriogaster
lanestris Linn.). A batch of larvae
of the Emperor Moth (Saturnia
pavonia Linn.) were taken on a spray
of Bramble (Rubus fruticosus Linn.).
Species of butterfly noted on the
wing in this area were:— Wall (Dira
(=Pararge) megera Linn.), Small
Heath (Coenonympha — pamphilus
Linn.), Small Tortoiseshell (Aglais
urticae Linn.), Common Blue (Poly-
ommatus icarus Rott.), Brown Argus
(Aricia agestis Schiff.), Large Skipper
(Ochlodes venata Br. and Grey), Small
White (Pieris rapae Linn.), Green-
veined White (P. napi Linn.), Large
White (P. brassicae Linn.), Orange-
tip (Anthocaris (=Euchloe) cardamines
Linn.), Small Copper (Lycaena phlaeas
Linn.) and Dingy Skipper (Erynnis
tages Linn.). Moths on the wing
were the Mullein Wave (Scopula
conjugata Borkh.) and the Mother
Shipton (Euclidimera mi Clerck).

A search was then made for the
larvae of the Essex Emerald Moth
(Thetidia (=Euchloris) smaragdaria
Fab.) on Sea Wormwood (Artemisia
maritima Linn.) which grows on the
edge of the creek and the sea-wall
to the east of Canvey Island bridge.
At this stage we were rejoined by
Messrs Payne and Uffen. Five nearly
full-grown larvae of the Essex Emer-
ald were found, giving the impression
that we were a fraction too late for

MAY, 1964

this species.

After further refreshments were |
taken we made our way to the railway |
station having had a very satisfactory

day.
22.12.63.

COLLECTING NOTES
— Summer, 1964

The Smaller Moths

Cacoecia pronubanad Huebn. Mr
Bradford’s notes read:—‘ The fore-
wings are chocolatey-brown with
richer dark brown markings. The
hindwings are a yellowish-orange or

tangerine colour and the amount of ©

black around the edges varies a
great deal, being very pronounced on
some and covering a large area of
the wing, and almost absent from
others. (Another feature is the line
of yellowish scales along each seg-
ment of the abdomen.) ”’.

The only other moth which bears
any similarity to C. pronubana is C.
oporana Linn. (=podana Scop.), the
termen of the forewing of which is
more sinuate.

Cacoecia pronubana was first
noticed in Britain in 1905, since when
it has spread rapidly, although |
suspect that it is commonest in
suburban areas. It is double brooded,
the larva of the summer brood
feeding on many bushes and plants.
The larva of the winter brood, how-
ever, feeds slowly throughout the
winter and so is restricted to ever-
green foodplants. | think that its
chief foodplants in winter are Garden
Privet (Ligustrum ovalifolium Hassk.)
and garden Euonymus spp. The larva
spins leaves together, and the moth
flies most frequently early in the
morning.

Pandemis corylana Fab. Mr
Bradford reports:— ‘‘ The specimen

L. Christie (710), —
Leader. —

a

|
|

-AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

41

, if |

ESB.

Pandemis corylana Fab.

illustrated is clearly marked on the
forewings, but in other specimens
| have there are darker patches and
the lines are much more diffuse.
The basic colour of both forewings
and hindwings is a yellowish buff,
tending towards orange. The lines
and markings on the forewings are
a darker brown in colour, and the
amount of grey-brown on the hind-
Wings varies quite a bit. I’ve had
numbers in my garden, and they

were most likely breeding in the
oak trees at the end of it”’.

The pale patch at the apex of the
hindwings is the feature usually used
to differentiate this species by wing
characteristics. It is a common moth,
the larva feeding on the leaves of
such trees as Hazel (Corylus avellana
Linn.), Ash (Fraxinus excelsior Linn.),
Dogwood (Thelycrania (=Cornus)
sanguinea (Linn.) Fourr.), and Oak
(Quercus robur Linn.).

42

Here are some brief collecting

notes arranged in chronological
order.
June-July: The larva of Platyedra

vilella Zell. may be found on the
flowers and seeds of Common Mal-
low (Malva sylvestris Linn.). It is
a very local insect found in the
southern counties — be careful that
collected seed-heads do not go
mouldy. Galls in Hemp Agrimony
(Eupatorium cannabinum Linn.) will
produce specimens of Adaina micre-
dactyla Huebn., a fairly common
moth throughout England. The moth
also occurs again in September.
The imago of Nemotois scabiosella
Scop. can be found locally on the
flower-heads of Field Scabious
(Knautia arvensis (Linn.) Coult.). |

have found it on the North Downs.

July-August: Look for the larva of
Phtheochroa rugosana Huebn. which
feeds on the berries, stems and
leaves of White Bryony (Bryonia
dioica Jacq.), by spinning a portion
of a leaf to a berry or stem. It is
local in the southern counties of
England.

Another local moth is Euxanthis
straminea Haw., the larva of which
feeds in the seed-heads of Black
Knapweed (Centaurea nigra Linn.).
It pupates in the heads and the moth
emerges towards the end of August.

Larvae of the very local species
Gracillaria cuculipennella Huebn. feed
on Privet, rolling a leaf into a cone.

Rolled leaves of Alder (Alnus
glutinosa (Linn.) Gaertn.) may pro-
duce the larva of Gracillaria elongella
Linn.

Leaves of common Enchanter’s
Nightshade (Circaea lutetiana Linn.)
if examined carefully may reveal the
greenish mines of Mompha terminella
Westwood. The mine starts as a
spiral and there may be several mines
in one leaf. The larva will transfer
to a fresh leaf if one is placed against
it. The larva pupates in the soil.
This is a local insect.

MAY, 1964

September: Look for white blotches |
in the leaves of Restharrow (Ononis |
repens Linn.) and Clover (Trifolium —
Spp.), aS they may have been made |
by the larva of Parectopa ononidis —

Zell. It pupates in a white cocoon

under the turned-down edge of the |

leaf.

Here are some notes on
miners.
colletis stettinensis von Nicelli in
the underside of leaves of Alder,

and on the underside for those of |

L. rajella Linn. The mines of L.

anderidae Fletch. may be found on —

the lower leaves of young seedling
Birches (Betula verrucosa Ehrhart)

which are growing amongst heather |

(Erica and Calluna spp.) and generally
hidden by the heather. In the same
leaves may be found the mines of
Nepticula betulicola Staint.

Finally, collect the seeds of Holly-
hock (Althea rosea (Linn.) Cav.) and
Marsh Mallow (A. officinalis Linn.) for
the larvae of Platyedra malvella Huebn.

D. Olfevant (1514).

The Hymenoptera Aculeata

As Mr Felton was abroad at the |

time that this issue was sent to press,
it is regretted that the series of notes
on the Aculeata must be temporarily
discontinued.
series will appear in
numbers of the Bulletin.

subsequent

FROM OUR NORTHERN
CORRESPONDENT

Local Recording

In the course of a recent article
in the Bulletin (Bull. amat. Ent. Soc.,
22: 77-8) | made reference to a
method of recording the various
captures made at a mercury-vapour
light-trap. The interest shown by

leaf- —
Look for the mines of Litho- |

It is hoped that the |

|
i
|

|
|
|
|
|
|
|

_ AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Members prompts me to say a little
more on the interesting and very

useful aspect of our fieldwork —
accurate and consistent recording of
_ Species.

Area: It is convenient to confine
one’s attention to a specific area,
-and obviously one’s own neighbour-
hood lends itself to such a plan.
_ Usually it is found that a local natura-
_ list or scientific society already covers
the area or has done so in former
days. Every AES Member would be
_well-advised to contact his local
_ society, for, in my opinion, ‘lone wolf’
activity serves little purpose. It will
_ be found that existing records are
of inestimable value and interest. If
| it proves that the society records
have lapsed there will be the added
| zest of bringing them up to date,
_ adding new records, noting changes
in insect population, etc. The re-
_ cording should continue to cover
the area which has been previously
covered so as to ensure continuity
_ of records and to avoid overlapping
of other territory. It will perhaps
_ serve admirably if | give brief details
of my own area.

Halifax Parish: The old parish of
Halifax was in fact the largest in
England and covered something like
200 square miles. In the early days
of the parish all local records and most
other matters of importance were
maintained by the Church Wardens.
They were probably amongst the
very few people who could write
anyway. They must have been
learned men of wide interests for
they duly recorded weather, local
events and natural history with
great detail and accuracy. At the
beginning of the last century many
local affairs passed into more speci-
alist hands and natural history matters
became the concern of small but
efficient local societies. These oper-
ated for about fifty years or so until
the main scientific society was formed

43

about a century ago. Natural history
recording became one of the main
objects of this learned society, which
naturally carried on recording for
the area which originally formed the
ancient parish. When | became res-
ponsible for the records for Lepi-
doptera, some twenty years ago, |
was fortunate enough to find splen-
did details going back to about 1830.
They had been maintained with very
few gaps from 1861 onwards, and
needed only to be kept in good order.

Present System: The local society
appoints Recorders for the various
Orders and once a year a report is
given of species noted. These records
are added to the existing details and
anything of special interest is also
reported to the Yorkshire Naturalist
Union, our county society. | note
any points of interest from the local
press, and constantly receive infor-
mation from many interested people.
If something of unusual rarity is
reported | take steps to confirm
that the report is accurate, and make
a point of never adding to the local
list anything which is considered
doubtful. This practice sometimes
causes one to come into conflict
with other parties but | believe that
the great value in local records,
particularly for future use, is in
their being accepted with absolute
confidence. On this point too |
have insisted that vague records are
of no use. We have all heard such
comments as ‘‘ Oh yes, | saw one of
those a few years ago”’, to which
one should counter “ Well did you
properly report it?”’. From a Re-
corder’s point of view, if a creature
was not properly reported it didn’t
exist!

Trends and results: If you are suffici-
ently fortunate to take over existing
records and to add to them for a
reasonable period, a most interesting
picture begins to take shape. In
my own records one can trace the

44

MAY, 1964

sad decline in local species which
coincided with the building of mills
and the onset of smoke pollution
in the middle of the last century.
During recent years — dare one say
it—-the very slight but welcome
return of some species has coincided
with the beginning of the efforts to
reduce the evil effects of smoke and
soot. Another interesting side-light
on local species is to be able to
compare the numbers reported with
the variation in weather over long
periods — the results of seasons fol-
lowing very severe winters or wet
summers, for instance, may be ex-
amined. Perhaps the most interesting
feature of the records is the rise
and fall of insect populations over
the years which they show, particu-

larly with regard to the commoner

species. Another fascinating aspect
of recording is the following up of
old records. | have been delighted
on many occasions to prove that the
Recorders of former days were
quite correct when they reported
a certain moth as being present at
a particular place. Once | followed
up an old record of a moth which
was reported for a single field in
Brighouse. It had not been seen in
the district for over fifty years. It
was very interesting to find that it
was there exactly as the old Recorder
had stated. Of course mistakes have
taken place on occasions, or, again,
a species which was present once
may no longer be in the area, but in
general it is amazing how often old
records have proved to be correct
in every detail.

It remains only to add that the
actual methods of keeping records,
such as card-index systems or annual
books, vary from place to place and
according to the inclinations of those
responsible. The main endeavour
must at all times be to maintain a
clear, simple and accurate record.

W. E. Collinson, F.R.E.S. (247).

INSECT PESTS OF GARDENS
— Vil

Narcissus Flies

It is, perhaps, only correct to
discuss Narcissus flies during what
is, to the horticulturist, the bulb
season. These flies are pests of bulbs,
especially Narcissus bulbs, and are
the most injurious of such pests that
are found in England, with the pos-
sible exception of certain Nematoda
(eelworms).

There are three species of flies
which attack both indigenous and
cultivated bulbs. All three species
are more common where large con-
centrations of bulbs are to be found,
and so are usually common in nur-
series, especially if bulbs are forced
there during the winter and the
spent bulbs left lying about for the
rest of the summer.

The most injurious of the three
species is the Large Bulb Fly (Merodon
equestris Fab.), which occurs in most
districts in England and Wales and
much of Scotland. The small bulb
flies, Eumerus tuberculatus Rondani
and E. strigatus Fall. are also very
common, but tend to confine their
attentions to Narcissus spp. only.

Merodon equestris attacks several
species of bulbs, including Amaryllis
belladonna Linn. (Belladonna Lily),
Galanthus spp. (Snowdrops) and Val-
lota speciosa (Linn.) Dur. et Sch.
(Scarborough Lily), but mainly Nar-
cissus spp. (Daffodils). It will be noted
that the species attacked ail belong
to the same family as the Daffodil,
the Amaryllidaceae.

The adult fly resembles a small,
hairy bumble bee, and is about half
an inch in length. The colour varies
a lot, being whitish, yellow, brown
or reddish, with or without darker
bands. The unbanded forms closely
resemble drone-flies (Eristalis spp.).

The larva is a typical dipterous
form, being a dirty white in colour,

4

|
iH
i}

f
i]

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

legless, and about half to three-

‘quarters of an inch in length.

The

larvae may become stained brown
owing to the decomposition of the
_ bulb tissue in which they live. The

| projection.

last segment has a dark-coloured
The puparium is hard

and dark-coloured, with the terminal

=

econ

projection visible.

The flies may be seen flying over

‘beds of Narcissus spp., and even

visiting the blossoms of shrubs and
trees, during May and June. After
pairing, the female lays her eggs
singly, at the base of the foliage above
the bulb, or in the soil near it, and

‘on hatching the larva passes down
_ into the bulb, where it feeds on the
inner scale leaves until the centre
| of the bulb is destroyed. The shrink-
ing of the dying foliage which is
_caused leaves an easy channel of
_ entry to the bulb. An attacked bulb
will be found to be filled with a
dark brown, liquid mass, composed
_ of frass and decomposed bulb tissue.
_ Such bulbs may be capable of pro-
ducing growth, but this growth is
spindly, and usually lacks the dark
_ green “ bloom ’ associated with Daffo-
| dils.
_ damaged ones should be sorted out

When bulbs are being lifted,

and destroyed by burning.

The small narcissus flies are very
much smaller than the Large Bulb
Fly, being only a quarter of an inch
long, and resembling hover-flies.
The ground-colour of the body is
black, with a series of white marks
along the side of the abdomen. The
thorax is metallic green.

The larva is again typical of the
Order, but has a reddish projection
at the end of the body. Several
maggots are always found in one
bulb, and sometimes in the same
bulb as the larvae of Merodon. The
puparium is whitish.

There may be up to three genera-
tions per year, and both (all) species
overwinter as larvae.

The best control of maggots in

45

the bulbs is by immersing the bulbs
in water at 110°F for one hour. The
temperature of the water must not
fluctuate. A heavy dusting of D.D.T.
on the soil in June will kill most of
the young maggots and egg-laying
females, and incidentally every other
insect, pest or predator, that comes
into contact with it—food for
thought!

8.12.63. A. J. Tuton (2639).

BREEDING VARIETIES OF THE
LIME HAWKMOTH

Last year | found several larvae of
Mimas tiliae Linn. (Lime Hawkmoth)
at St Albans, Hertfordshire, and
decided to breed some _ imaginal
varieties from them, as | had heard
that this could be done by subjecting
the larvae to suitable temperature
and humidity changes. Half of the
larvae | put in a warm, dry cupboard,
and the remainder | put in a wooden
breeding-cage which was placed out
of doors so that the occupants were
in full sunshine for half of the day
and in shade for the rest.

As many Members will know, this
species is particularly vulnerable to
‘waterlogging ’, so | had to place
fresh leaves on the bottom of the
cages every day. The larvae grew
to a fair size and then pupated.

The larvae in the cage out of doors
had endured all the wind and rain
of the summer of 1962, but those
reared indoors had been warm and
dry. After three weeks | dug the
pupae up and placed the ones reared
outside in the above-mentioned cup-
board, and those bred inside | put
on a cold, draughty window-sill.

| had been rather fortunate with
the larvae, losing only one of those
reared outside and two of those
reared inside the house. | was not
so lucky with the pupae, however,

46

MAY, 1964 |

and four that were kept on the
window-sill and three kept in the
cupboard died. The remainder,
twenty-seven in all, “ hatched’ the
following April.

The specimens kept on the
window-sill as pupae and in the
cupboard as larvae emerged as very
dark moths. The hindwings were
black, and the forewings a slatey-
grey instead of the normal buff
colour. The dots were normal size
and a deep shade of brown. The out-
er parts of the forewings, instead of
being a pastel shade of green, were
deep olive all over. The body had
the normal colouring. These moths
were indeed quite striking. Unfor-
tunately, the black colour fades after

a few months if exposed to light, and

becomes a deep chocolate-brown.
Two of the above-described speci-
mens | exhibited at the last AES
Exhibition. | have now got a second
brood, from pairings between speci-
mens of this dark form, the members
of which are in the pupal stage at
the time that | write this article.
The larvae which had been reared
out of doors gave rise to moths
which were near opposites of the
above variety, being of a very light
shade. The hindwings were an ex-
tremely delicate shade of cream with
the veins outlined in the normal
colour. The forewings were also
light in colour, but their tone was
not so vivid. The dots were small
and a very light shade of brown. The
dot nearest the inner margin was
minute —in fact, some specimens
lacked it altogether! The outer part
of the forewing was of the normal
colour, but this appeared cloudy
and, on examination under a micro-
scope, the wing showed a liberal
scattering of buff scales, buff being
the normal background colour. These
specimens | also exhibited at the
1963 AES Exhibition, but | failed to
obtain fertile eggs from them even
though four pairs mated. Several

specimens from each ‘section’ of |
the experiment emerged as normal |
moths with no variation whatsoever. —

| hope that this article will tempt —
other Members to try this type of —

experiment for themselves. | hope
they will be as successful as | was,

and | would be pleased to hear of —

their results.

4.12.63. L. A. Wright (3434J).

HYBRID: LAOTHOE POPULI
LINN. X SMERINTHUS
OCELLATA LINN.

This year | have succeeded in
rearing this rewarding cross which
was first named Smerinthus hybr.
hybridus by Stephens.

To conduct this experiment | had
equipped myself with thirty pupae
of Laothoe populi Linn. (Poplar Hawk-
moth) and thirty pupae of Smerinthus
ocellata Linn. (Eyed Hawkmoth). For
cross-pairing these two species, a

male of S. ocellata is placed with a —

female of L. populi in the same cage.
It is also necessary to confine a female
of S. ocellata in a separate cage placed
nearby. This female stimulates the
male of her own species, but he can
only gain access to the female of the
other species. One difficulty is that
the moths of L. populi usually emerge
slightly before those of S. ocellata.
To prevent the two species * missing ’
each other | artificially heated the
pupae of S. ocellata to bring them
on about one week ahead. This was
successful in bringing both species
out at the same time, so that no
chances were lost in trying to cross
them. Between 1st and 8th June
1963, Mr Peter Ashdown (2823J) —
whom | thank for his assistance with
the pairing —and | succeeded in

|

i

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

_ obtaining four pairings between males
of S. ocellata and females of L. populi
‘(and also two vice-versa, but such

separately in

pairings are always infertile). After

pairing, the females were transferred

from the cages to_ laying-boxes,
where each laid about 150 ova. The
four batches of eggs were kept
plastic boxes, and

within a week or so three batches

had dried up, leaving the remaining

batch of 113 ova which continued

to develop, and the larvae com-
menced to hatch on 13th June and
continued to do so right up till the

20th.

Foodplant was another problem
as none of the text-books gave the

\foodplant to use for the hybrid

larvae, but | decided on Lombardy
_ Poplar (Populus nigra Linn. var. italica

Duroi), which the larvae took to
at once and continued to thrive upon
throughout their growth, which took
thirty-four days. The appearance of
the hybrid larvae is as follows:

| First stadium

In overall appearance they re-
semble larvae of L. populi but in their
attitude thay are like those of S.
ocellata, although it is evident that
their characteristics are a mixture
from both parent species. One
noticeable feature is tha caudal horn
which is the same as that of larvae
of L. populi, being pale pink, whereas
in S. ocellata larvae it is almost black.
My specimens made skin-changing
preparations on 718th to 2ist June.

Second stadium

After their first skin-change they
are more like the larvae of L. populi
but their bodies are pale and are
never so rough or as green as in
Poplar Hawkmoth larvae. The first
abdominal stripe is never more
prominent than the others, which

_ are white, not yellow. The head is
_ like that of larvae of L. populi, being
| rounded at the top.

47

Third stadium

In the third stadium their appear-
ance is intermediate between that
of larvae of S. ocellata and of L. populi,
although they do seem to be rather
more like the latter.

Fourth stadium

The appearance of the larvae is
still intermediate between that of
the two parent species. They are
not as heavy-looking as L. populi
larvae and are slightly whitish.

Fifth stadium

By July most of my larvae were
in their last stage. Their appearance,
however, is now more like that of
larvae of S. ocellata and becomes
more so as they increase in size.
The caudal horn also changes to
bluish as in that species. When fully
fed they are hardly distinguishable
from true S. ocellata larvae.

To sum up their appearance
throughout their growth, it could
be said that they look at first rather
like the corresponding stage of L.
populi, then become intermediate
between the larvae of the parent
species, and finally look like larvae
of S. ocellata.

The first two larvae went down
into soil on 15th July. From the one
hundred larvae that | had started
off with, | now had thirty-one pupae.
The larvae varied in size, although
the main group grew normally and
finally pupated, but this still left me
with about twenty other larvae that
were very poorly and were in the
second or third stadium. These
unfortunately died, as they did not
make any headway. One unusual
thing happened in the fourth stadium.
This was the occurrence of five white
larvae, and these might be described
as ‘ ghostly ’. Four of these pupated
and | still have these four pupae as
they have departed from the usual
habits of the hybrids and are over-
wintering: they are far more glossy

48

than the normal hybrid pupae, and
chestnut in colour. They are very
wrinkled, but it is just possible to
tell that two are males and two
females.

The pupae of the typical hybrids
are very much like those of L. populi,
but are not so rough. They have
not the glossy finish which those of
S. ocellata possess, although they
are somewhat greasy. Their colour
is very dark and in shape they
resemble the pupae of S. ocellata
especially in the wing-cases. The
chitin is thin, this being shown by
the very many scars and wrinkled
‘skin’ of several pupae. One of
my hybrid pupae was still soft and
green even a week after pupation.
This remarkable pupa died, however,
but if it had lived it would have been
very interesting to observe the
development under the transparent
‘skin’.

The first moths emerged on 11th

MAY, 1964

August 1963. They ‘hatch’ during
the night as do the imagines of S.
ocellata, and their resting position
is like that of L. populi, with the costa
of the hindwings protruding beyond
the costa of the forewings. The
imagines easily lose their foothold
and fall to the floor.

| had some imagines of the second
brood of L. populi emerging at the
same time as the hybrids, and one
morning, on 15th August, | was
surprised to find one of the hybrids
pairing with a female specimen of
L. populi, but unfortunately the re-
sulting ova were infertile.

The hybrid imagines, from a non-
scientific view, have the forewing
markings of L. populi although the
markings are dark. The hindwings
have the rust-red patch of L. populi
and the blue eyespot of S. ocellata.
The eyespot is, however, not centred
with black. The area surrounding
the eyespot is suffused with black,

D.C. GOLDSMITH

Smerinthus hybr. hybridus Steph.

-and

f
_ AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

which merges into the red patch
into the brownish ground-
colour. The top of the hindwing
from the outer margin and along
the costa is grey marked with a few
wavy bands. This is characteristic of

‘true S. ocellata imagines. The under-

side has the markings of S. ocellata

-and the colouring of L. populi. Wing
‘outline is more like that of L. populi
‘that that of S. ocellata, but is never
«so notched. In my collection | have
‘four specimens which are very pink,

and these might be classed as pink
varieties. The body has the grey fur

of L. populi and there is a dark band
-on the thorax as in S. ocellata, al-

though this band is somewhat weaker.
There seems to be some argument

as regards the sex of the hybrid

_ imagines.

In Tutt’s ° British Lepidop-
volume 3, under Smerinthus
hybridus there are several

tera’
hybr.

accounts of the hybrids being gynan-

_ dromorphous.

| have also heard

_ accounts of the hybrids being normal

males and females, with the latter

very uncommon. My hybrids appear

to be males as did the pupae from

which they emerged.
On the setting-boards the hybrids

| present a new problem. This is the
amount of grease in their bodies

and on their wings, even at this stage.
They seem to contain a large amount
of fat in their abdomens, which is
not removed until the moths are
treated with carbon tetrachloride or
another suitable degreasing-agent.
All the grease left my setting-boards

_ in a proper mess.

This article is one of a number

_ that | hope to write about hybrids
_ between species of the Sphingidae.
| hope this article will encourage
and assist other Junior Members
- who are thinking of rearing Smerin-

| thus hybr. hybridus.

23.10.63. D.C. Goldsmith (3483)).

REFERENCE

TUTT, J. W. (1902). A Natural History of the British
Lepidoptera, Vol. Ill. Swan Sonnenschein, London.

49

THE ELEPHANT HAWKMOTH

This large and showy species
(Deilephila elpenor Linn.) has now
firmly established a colony in Poyn-
ton, Cheshire, due to my efforts to
introduce it.

It was February when | buried
some pupae where the foodplant,
Rose-bay Willow-herb (Chamaener-
ion angustifolium Linn.), had been
growing the previous year. In May
the moths emerged and paired. The
following notes might be useful to
any Member who is thinking of
breeding Elephant Hawkmoths.
Ovum

The pearly green egg hatches any
time from ten to eighteen days after
it has been laid.

Larva
The tiny greenish-grey newly
hatched larva has a ‘tail’ longer

than its body and must be handled
with great care, as it clings tenacious-
ly to the first thing with which it
comes into contact. After the second
moult the eyespots show clearly on
the green, rough skin. The third
moult proves extremely interesting
as some larvae stay green and some
change to dark brown. I would
welcome any explanations for this.
After the fourth moult, which is
sometimes the final one, the larva
is black, and is velvety to the touch.
Just before pupating the larva be-
comes extremely restless. | once
found a larva upstairs and another
going out of the back door, both
larvae being some twenty yards
from their cage. The larva constructs
a flimsy cocoon from silk and bits
of rubbish, which is attached to
lumps of soil and to moss growing
on the surface of the ground.
Pupa

This is black and cream and is
very rough to the touch. The pupa
likes moisture so it should be placed
between two layers of moss in an
airtight jar, which should be kept

50

in an outhouse or shed.
Imago

When freshly emerged the Ele-
phant Hawk is one of the most
beautiful British moths, being deep
pink with olive green and black, and
trimmed with white. It emerges in
the early morning and is not ‘dry’
till about 5.30 p.m.

During the first three stages the
species likes moisture, but has a
tendency to drown, especially in the
larval stage.

121..64. S. H. Church (3626J).

[Mr Church’s address is: ‘‘ West-
bury Hotel’, London Road South,
Poynton, Cheshire — Ed.]

PARASITES IN THE WHITE
ERMINE MOTH

Of thirty-five caterpillars of the
presumptive species Spilosoma lubri-
cipeda Linn. (White Ermine Moth),
collected in two localities in Ealing,
twenty-four were subsequently found
to be parasitised. The caterpillars
fed normally until the final instar,
when they ceased to feed, became
very restless and eventually either
spun a typical cocoon or collapsed
in a flaccid condition. The parasitic
larvae could usually be seen moving
within the limp bodies of the col-
lapsed caterpillars. In each case, the
parasitic larvae left their host within
a few days. The emergence of these
from each individual caterpillar was
observed to be as shown in Table |.

Number of

parasites per
caterpillar
1

Number of caterpillars
producing
Large pupae Small pupae

3 2

2 2 2

3 4 7

4 — 2

5 — iD
Average 2 3.0

Table |: Emergence of parasites from larvae
of Spilosoma lubricipeda

MAY, 1964

Two types of parasite pupae were
distinguished (a large and a small
type) with possibly different charac-
teristics; although it is appreciated
that the number of different para-
sitic species which may be involved
is unknown at present. It is not easy
to ascertain if the difference in pupal
size has any special significance, such
as might arise from variation in size
of the host (this was not apparent —
all the caterpillars were large) or
from number of parasites per host
(it is interesting to note that none
of the large pupae were derived
from a host with more than three
emerging parasites).

The pupae may be had by anyone
interested in identifying the species

involved or in the phenomenon of |

parasitism.

5.10.63. Roy Robinson (3201).

THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT
OF MERCURY-VAPOUR
LAMPS

The alarm that was felt by many
entomologists and conservationists at
the introduction of the mercury-
vapour lamp as a means of attracting
and trapping night-flying moths was,
in my opinion, well merited. In the
observations and comments which

follow | want to reiterate some of the |
objections and fears already voiced ©

and to add some other points which
may have been overlooked.

My first introduction to the ‘ m.v.’
lamp was immediately after the last
war when my father-in-law, who lived
in Haywards Heath, Sussex, began to
produce large numbers of moths
which he had taken at the street-
lights outside his home on a new
housing estate. He was aware of my
interest in this and made a habit of
picking up moths which settled on or

:
|
|
|

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

near the lamps outside his front gate.
_ | was puzzled by the numbers and by
the fact that many of these moths
- were ones which | had always con-
sidered to be uncommon or rare.
They included such species as the
_ Lappet (Gastropacha quercifolia Linn.),

the Pine Hawkmoth (Hyloicus pinastri

Linn.), the Lobster (Stauropus fagi
Linn.), the Striped Hawkmoth (Celerio
livornica Esp.) and most of the ‘ prom-
inents ‘(Notodontidae) and the ‘foot-
men ’ (Lithosiinae). | then discovered
that the lamps were of the mercury-
vapour type and spent several even-
ings myself patrolling the street and
examining the moths which were at-
tracted to the lamps in hundreds. |
was not the only predator. A small
army of bats swept in amongst the
swirling moths, reaping an indiscrim-
inate toll, much larger than my own
sampling. Those moths that struck
the ground were in considerable
danger of being crushed by passing
traffic or feet but an even greater
danger was the small group of local
felines whose members prowled
about the bases of the lamp-standards
pouncing upon and eating the larger
moths as these landed. | was witnes-
sing what was little short of a whole-
sale massacre of the local moth
population. The old street-lamps
probably caused some loss of moth
life in earlier years but this huge
concentration of moths had attracted
more than human interest, and de-
struction on a vast scale was in pro-
gress. A further consideration was
that these moths, a large majority of
which were males, were spending
those hours during which they should
have been about their matrimonial
duties in gallivanting about the bright
lights.

My fears in regard to these street
lights were correct, for the moth
population declined very quickly over
the years and now one seldom sees
other than the odd moth at these
lights. The same observation holds

51

good for the Cockchafers (Melolontha
melolontha Linn.) which were so num-
erous when the lamps were installed.
| would deduce that mercury-vapour
street-lighting is almost fatal for the
local moth population — something
which should be pointed out to local
authorities when they are planning to
install street-lights in rural areas.
The light-trap

The first use of the “ m.v.’ lamp by
an entomologist which came to my
notice was that by an AES member
at Brighton, Mr R. Dyson (91), who
had adapted a high-powered ‘ m.yv.’
street-lamp so that it could be opera-
ated from his bedroom window looking
out over Hollingbury Hill. He was
able to attract swarms of moths with
this apparatus and later he procured
a smaller unit which made it possible
for him to carry the lamp and run it
from A.C. mains supplies at various
spots, such as outlying farms on the
South Downs, where the lamp was
stood in the centre of a large white
sheet and moths were boxed or
netted as they came to the light.
Later | purchased an 80 watt ‘ m.y.’
lamp for my own use and operated
this in my garden at Brighton, only
using it when | could stand nearby to
net or box specimens. | noticed that
both cats and bats began to associate
the lamp with the moths and were
present very shortly after the light
came on. Alice (in Wonderland) posed
the question “ Do Cats eat Bats?”—
| do not know the answer to this,
but it is certain that both of them
eat moths. My attempts at attracting
moths at Brighton were fairly spor-
adic and | was not able to observe any
fall in the moth population there.

In 1956 | moved to Middlesex and
in 1959 became the owner of a stand-
ard ‘Robinson’ mercury-vapour light-
trap with a 120 watt bulb. | began
to use this systematically in the back
garden as a means of assessing the
density and nature of the moth
population. There seemed to be very

52

few bats in the area and cats were not
common as my house is fairly remote
from others. The chief predators on
the attracted moths here were House
Sparrows (Passer domesticus domesti-
cus Linn.), and at times, Blackbirds
(Turdus merula merula Linn.). Very
quickly they became aware of the
lamp and its association with the
moths. On several mornings | found
that one of these birds had entered
the trap and | was faced with a fright-
ened Sparrow and a pile of moth
wings when | opened the trap. An
open wire mesh, large enough for
moths to pass through and sufficiently
fine to prevent Sparrows from enter-
ing, was placed over the lamp and
trap entrance, but by rising early |
observed that the Sparrows and

Blackbirds still congregated round

the trap, taking all those moths
which had settled in the vicinity of
the trap, and waiting, too, for others
to escape into their waiting beaks.
Further, as soon as | opened the trap
they seized any moth which flew, and
it became impossible to release any
moths until the next evening when
the birds had gone to roost. It
became obvious to me both that |
was ensuring that a large number of
the local moths were being devoured
unnecessarily by the birds and that |
was interrupting the normal mating
arrangements of these night-flying
species. A decline in numbers and
species became apparent and in 1962
| found that the numbers of moths
taken were less than half of those
caught in the first year’s trapping in
that area. This year (1963) | have only
used the trap for one night in each
fortnight and this has ensured that
| do not interrupt the lives of the
moths (or those of my family!) too
much, and the birds have not got into
the habit of waiting for a free meal
each morning.

| feel it would be safe to say that
the only proper way in which one
should use the ‘ m.yv.’ trap is to see

MAY, 1964

that the time intervals between
nights on which the trap is used are
long enough to ensure that predators
do not form a habit of visiting the
light. This only applies to a trap
operated in a fixed situation. | can
see no objection to the nomadic or
peripatetic trapper, provided that he
does not take more than a sample of
any local or rare species. The danger
of several collectors light-trapping in
known localities for rare species dur-
ing the peak periods of emergence of
those species cannot be ignored and
in such circumstances the ‘ m.v.’ lamp
can be the cause of the extinction of
such species. The portable generator
has made this a very real danger and
one can only hope for restraint and
common sense amongst nocturnal
lepidopterists.

1.9.63 P. W. Cribb (2270).

A SIMPLE MOTH-TRAP

The construction of this moth-
trap is very easy and can be readily
accomplished within an hour pro-
viding the necessary articles are to
hand.

The necessities are: a large card-
board box and another large piece
of cardboard, a tripod, a piece of
wire gauze, a length of flex, a 100
or 200 watt bulb, and a bulb-socket.

Firstly take any suitable cardboard
box for the main body of the trap
(| used a ‘Corn Flakes’ carton
measuring 18” x 11” x 13”, and
cut off the four flaps on top). Sec-
ondly construct a lid, from another
piece of cardboard, that fits tightly
on to the box. In the middle of the
lid cut away a circle of diameter
seven inches. To fit this make a
paper or cardboard cone that ends
in a diameter of two inches and

floor of the box.

_AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

to mains.

———— =

VIEW

about one or two inches above the
Fixing the larger

end of the cone is done by over-
lapping it round the rim of the cut

|

]

}

circle and then stapling. All round
the top inside edge of the box a flap
of one inch in width may be fixed
to prevent moths crawling up the
sides and out at this point. This is
optional and is quite unnecessary if
the box has a tightly fitting lid.
Now paste white paper all over
the lid and down the cone so that
extra reflection is given off. A
tripod has to be obtained and on to
the top of this a piece of wire gauze,
with a hole in the middle wide
enough for the flex to pass through,
is fitted. This gauze is used merely
to centralise the bulb over the cone.

53

SECTION.

EXPLODED

Some broken-up pieces of egg-trays
are placed in the bottom of the box
so that the moths will not fly madly
around in the morning. The last
thing to do is to put the flex through
the tripod, after once winding it
round a tripod leg to prevent slip-
ping, fit the bulb into the socket
and turn on the electricity.

It will be found that after a year
or so, depending on how many
rainstorms there are, the cardboard
box will become flimsy and will
eventually collapse. It is easy to
construct another in an hour.

The disadvantages of the trap are:
a bulb of 200 watts will get hot and
any rain on it will break it. | have
used a 100 watt bulb and although
this has been in countless rainstorms

54

it is none the worse. The only other
disadvantage is that the trap may
be blown over in very high wind
but this can be mastered by anchoring
the trap down with bricks inside.

The trap is very efficient. It is
designed for the younger generation
or the beginner but ultimately a
mercury-vapour light-trap is de-
sirable.

The light will attract most of the
commoner moths. The usual haul
for one good night in the summer
months may be between 50 and 80
specimens, with better results from
a 200 watt bulb. Many different
species have been caught in the trap.
7.1.64. John S. E. Feltwell (3618)).

VOLUCELLA ZONARIA PODA

| was interested to see in the
November 1963 Bulletin (Bull. amat.
Ent: ‘Soc., 22: 140): that Mr AsV.
Danks finds Volucella zonaria Poda
common in his part of N.E. Surrey.
| have never been fortunate enough
to see this handsome insect very
often. | have seen it in Surrey on
Wimbledon Common (in 1948 and
1951) and. it is probably well-estab-
lished on that common as other
observers have also recorded it there.
Several specimens also turned up
in my small garden in a built-up part
of South Norwood in 1955. Else-
where | have only taken it in East
Kent, at Lower Halstow, Upchurch
and Hartlip, in 1960.

While rambling over the East
Surrey chalk hills during past years
(admittedly more ‘ botanising ’ than
insect collecting) | have not noticed
this fly and | wonder whether it has,
in some indirect way, a dislike for
the chalk. Colyer and Hammond
(1951) state that it has been bred
out of the nests of the Common

MAY, 1964

Wasp (Vespula vulgaris Linn.). |
wondered whether it occurred on
Wimbledon Common in the nests
of the Hornet (Vespa crabro Linn.),
which was somewhat frequent there
and which Volucella zonaria closely
resembles. Colyer and Hammond
state that Vespa crabro is the host
for Volucella inanis Linn., a similar
but smaller fly. (Macquart (1834)
gives V. inanis as a variety of V.
zonaria.) V. inanis | certainly meet
with a little more frequently than
V. zonaria. V. inanis is usually only
seen during one fortnight each year
(my records extend from 22nd July
to 30th August) whereas my few
records of V. zonaria extend from
5th July to 27th August. I have
recorded V. zonaria as visiting the
flowers of Field Thistle (Cirsium —
arvense (Linn.) Scop.), Bramble (Rubus
fruticosus Linn.), Buddleja davidii
Franch., and garden Privet (Ligustrum
ovalifolium Hassk.) and have recorded
V. inanis on the flowers of Field
Thistle, Bramble, common Ragwort
(Senecio jacobaea Linn.), Wild Angel-
ica (Angelica sylvestris Linn.), Hog- |
weed (Heracleum sphondylium Linn.),
hairy Water Mint (Mentha aquatica |
Linn.) and Gypsy-wort (Lycopus euro- |
paeus Linn.).

For those Members who are not |
familiar with these two drone-flies |
an excellent colour photograph of |
V. zonaria appearing in Byerley (1962), |
and a colour drawing of V. inanis in
Colyer and Hammond might be |
mentioned.

|
|
|
|

When | first started collecting in
1947 the only reference | could find
to V. zonaria was that of Verrall
(1901) where, under the heading
‘““Reputed British Syrphidae’’, he
says ‘‘Volucella zonaria Poda was
included in the Entomological Club
collection by two specimens said to
have been captured in the New |
Forest, but | noted in the Entomo- |
logist of February 1870 that the |
specimens have been removed from |

4

i
AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

the British collection.” |

wonder
whether the collector was ever
vindicated!
1.1.64. A. W. Jones (1061).

“BYERLEY, B. L. J. (1962).
COLYER,

REFERENCES

London Naturalist, 41: 70.
Entomology with a Lens.
C. N. and HAMMOND, C. O. (1951).

Flies of the British Isles. Frederick Warne, London.

pe Mie2=
»~MACQUART, M. (1834). Histoire Naturelle des Insectes

Vol. I.
p. 492.

— Diptéres,
Roret, Paris.

Librairie Encyclopédique de

/VERRALL, G. H. (1901). British Flies, Vol. VIII. Gurney

and Jackson, London. p. 671.

INSECTS, FOODPLANTS,
AND

PLANT-RELATIONSHIPS

A few years ago, in the Jubilee

‘Number of this Bulletin (Airy Shaw,
1960),

made some remarks upon
certain aspects of the foodplant-

pattern found amongst British butter-
flies,
“might be possible to discuss examples
‘from other groups.
-and succeeding notes | shall hope to

and indicated that later it
In the present

do this, and regret that these pro-

jected sequels have been unduly
delayed.

‘1. Buddleja and Plantago

| am putting these two genera

together because the food-habits of
certain insects suggest that both
_ genera are probably related to the
_ same well-known plant family, though
as it were from different directions.

Almost every garden-lover must

be familiar with the showy Buddlejas
so beloved of vanessid butterflies in
. the

late summer. (By the way,
don’t worry about the spelling: the
‘j’ is correct, as originally used by

_Linnaeus, but the word can still be

are Buddleja globosa Hope

pronounced
by him.)

‘Buddleya’, as it was
The best-known species
(intro-
duced from Peru about 1775), with
its golden-yellow balls of flowers,

and B. davidii Franch. (introduced

from western China more than a

55

century later), with its handsome
purple spikes. The genus is one of
several that used to be consigned
by botanists to a ‘ rubbish-heap ’
family known as the Loganiaceae.
Recently (see Hutchinson, 1959, pp.
370-7) this family has undergone a
much overdue dismemberment, but
already been segregated fifty years
Buddleja and some related genera had
previously by some workers as the
separate family Buddlejaceae. Even
so, however, the true affinities of
the genus Buddleja have remained
far from clear, and no botanist has
yet ventured to remove the Budd-
lejaceae from the immediate neigh-
bourhood of the fragmented Logani-
aceae, with which it still forms an
ill-assorted conglomeration.
Following the introduction of the
Buddlejas to our gardens, certain
members of our native insect fauna
were not long in discovering that
a diet of these plants was quite to
their liking. These insects were
moths of the genus Cucullia and
weevils of the genus Cionus. (cf.,
Daltry, 1944; Scott, 1944; Airy Shaw,
1944-56-58; Woollatt, 1944.). Now,
the native foodplants of these insects
are, of course, Scrophularia spp.
(figwort) and Verbascum spp. (mul-
lein), which belong to the large and
well-known family Scropnulariaceae.
(We have no native Loganiaceae in
Britain; the nearest relatives of this
family here would perhaps be the
gentians and bedstraws.) There
would therefore seem to be a prima
facie case for assuming that some
real relationship must exist between
Buddleja and the Scrophulariaceae.
| myself have not yet been able to
go more fully into this question.
Outwardly Buddleja resembles some
of the Verbenaceae — another large
and widespread family — but | have
every expectation that it will be
found that the insects have given
us the clue to its true affinity. This
is especially probable, since the

56

attachment of the Cucullia and Cionus
species to Scrophularia and Verbascum
in this country is apparently a rigid
one, without alternatives, though
Scott (1944) notes instances in which
cultivated members of the genera
Phygelius and Celsia, of the same
family, have been attacked.

The plantains (Plantaginaceae) con-
stitute another group whose precise
affinities have caused botanists a
good deal of perplexity. They have
usually been placed, as a kind of
appendage, right at the end of the
big block of gamopetalous families
(Tubiflorae, Bicarpellatae, etc.), often
following the Labiatae, to which
they bear remarkably little resem-
blance.

Readers of the Bulletin will remem-

ber some notes published a few years

ago by Mr P. W. Cribb (Cribb, 1956,
1957; also Airy Shaw, 1956), in which
he discussed the foodplants of the
fritillary Melitaea athalia Rott.
(Heath Fritillary). These notes in-
terested me very much. The food-
plants were species of the genera
Melampyrum (cow-wheat), Digitalis
(foxglove) and Veronica (speedwell)
—all belonging to the Scrophulari-
aceae — and species of Plantago (P.
lanceolata Linn., P. major Linn.).

At about the same period, an
interesting note appeared in the
Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine,
(Drummond, 1956; see also Airy
Shaw, 1958), in which it was reported
that certain beetles of the family
Chrysomelidae — Chrysolina crassi-
cornis Hell. and C. haemoptera Linn.
—had been found to feed upon
species of Linaria (toadflax) (Scro-
phulariaceae) and of Plantago.

More recently, Mr A. A. Allen
(1960) has drawn attention to the
fact that weevils of the genera
Gymnetron and Mecinus are attached
to Veronica spp. (Scrophulariaceae)
and — again —to Plantago spp.

The botanical significance of all
this evidence is inescapable: the

MAY, 1964

closest relationships of the plantains
are evidently with the Scrophulari-
aceae. To me this is especially inter-
esting, in that it confirms a conviction
that | had reached independently
many years ago, simply on the ground
of external facies, in the course of
routine herbarium work at Kew.
The general appearance of a plantain
inflorescence, with its small tetra-
merous corollas and exserted
stamens, is often very reminiscent
of a spicate inflorescence of Veronica
— one of the very genera mentioned
in the above notes. The possibility

of simultaneous relationships in
other directions is, however, not
excluded; for the well-known paly-

nologist Erdtman (1952, p. 324) has
found that the pollen of Plantago
spp. ditfers from that of most Scro-
phulariaceae and shows resemblances
to that of certain centrospermous
families (Caryophyllaceae, Chenopo-
diaceae, etc.) — itself a fact full of
far-reaching consequences for the
botanist — but that is another story.
The complexity of the inter-relation-
ships of living things is a part of their
endless fascination.

27.12.63. H. K. Airy Shaw (545).

REFERENCES

ALLEN, A. A. (1960).
plants of Gymnetrini (Col., Curculionidae), etc.,
as an indication of botanical affinities.

CRIBB, P. W. (1956). Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 15:39. Some
Observations on Melitaea athalia Rott. (Heath
Fritillary).

— ——_——_- ——._ (1957). Op. cit., 16: 3.
of Melitaea athalia Rott.

DALTRY, H. W. (1944). Ent. mon. Mag., 80: 42.
Insects, normally ecacnes to Scrophulariaceae,
feeding on Buddlej

DRUMMOND, D. c. (1956). Ent. mon. Mag., 92: 368.
Foodplants of Chrysolina spp. (Col., Chrysomelidae).

ERDTMAN, G. (1952). Pollen Morphology and Plant
Taxonomy: Angiosperms. Printed in Stockholm for
Chronica Botanica, Waltham, Mass., U.S.A.

HUTCHINSON, J. (1959). The Families of Flowering
Plants, Vol. |, Dicotyledons. 2nd edn. Macmillan,

Foodplants

London.

SCOTT, H. (1944). Ent. mon. Mag., 80: 161.
scrophulariae L. attacking foreign plants.

SHAW, H. K. AIRY (1944). Ent. mon. Mag., 80: 66.
Insects, normally attached to Scrophulariaceae,
feeding on Buddleja.

—————. (1956). Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 15: 74.

Foodplants of Melitaea athalia Rott.

———_———— ._ (1958). Ent. mon. Mag., 94: 232.
“Unrelated ’ foodplants?

——_—————— ._ (1960). Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 19: 62-5.
Butterfly botany

WOOLLATT, L. Pr. (1944). Ent. mon. Mag., 80: 139.
Larvae of Cucullia verbasci L. (Lep., Agrotidae) on
Buddleja.

Cionus

Ent. mon. Mag., 96: 48. Food- |

a

! SO on.

|
J
:
interest came more correspondence

_ The Exhibitions
effect as the correspondence, and

“AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

57

THE AES

In 1954 | decided to join the AES,
as from it | expected to be able to
obtain more information than |
otherwise could in the space of
time | then had available.

Shortly after | had joined the
Society, Mr D. Ollevant started the
‘Micro Group’, and as my interests
lay in this direction | joined at Mr
‘Ollevant’s invitation. All Members
will be familiar with the circular
bulletin idea, and it was when | first
~received mine in the normal circu-
lation, and made my first notes in
it, that my horizons widened. For
the first time | was in contact with

really keen Members whose exper-

‘ience far out-weighed mine.

_ The notes | made in the Bulletin
‘brought in letters and | soon had a
«small but continuous flow of corres-
-pondence to reply to. Once | was
in contact with other Members,
entomology became more exciting
and interesting, and with increased

in a ‘snowball effect’. From then
on | really found life interesting.

had the same
‘the two or three introductions
made during the first Exhibition
were old friends at the second, and
It is now my privilege to
know a fair number of Members.
_ Some | have never met and probably

never will but they are counted as
friends just the same.

The simplicity with which contact
can be made, the fact that the more
, you put in the more you get out,
_ and that indefinable feeling of belong-
ing to a large extent spell AES and
lam proud to be part of the Society.

The Society has now been running
for over twenty-five years with re-
markable smoothness, and that this
has been possible is no small accom-

plishment on the part of successive
Councillors and helpers. In addition
to this the Society has published
meaty, scientifically accurate leaflets
and handbooks at very low cost.
The ‘cost to quality and quantity ’
of these represents the best value
for money in Britain today. Indeed,
the bibliography in many books
refers readers to AES literature;
solid evidence of quality in AES
publications.

Unfortunately it is not possible
for any organisation to run indefi-
nitely without some kind of major
trouble sooner or later, and |
personally feel that this time has
now come. We seem to have diffi-
culty with the ‘Bulletin’, ‘ Wants
and Exchanges List’, and in finding
suitable people in the right geo-
graphical areas to do those jobs
which must be done. | also believe
that there is no ‘instant answer ’ to
our problems.

It is to be expected that, at times
like these, the ‘faint hearts’ and
‘| for me only’ types will drop out
and our Membership will decrease.
This does not bother me personally
and the only effect on the Society
will be to reduce income from an-
nual subscriptions. What does
bother me is that potentially good
Members who can’t see any way of
helping may leave from sheer des-
peration, and it seems that if this
happens then we are in trouble.

To the latter group may | make
one or two suggestions:

(1) Pick up your Membership List,
select three Members and write
a letter to each of them. Give
details of your collection, your
pet ideas, your interesting ex-
periences and quote me by way
of introduction.

Write for the Bulletin a list of
three articles which you would
like to see and send in a con-
tribution of your own. A note,

(2)

58

a comment on your collecting,
or a short article on an idea
you have tried out ( be it a
success or failure), will be
welcome.

Do not worry about your spel-
ling, as mine is awful, just ask
the Editor!

If you dare to do as | suggest you
will be well on the way to a realisa-
tion of what the AES can do for you.

In summarising, I, as an ordinary
AES Member, ask you as a fellow
Member to support the Society and
help see it through this period of
re-adjustment. Don’t give up be-
cause things are not as smooth as
we all would like them to be. Sit
and think and you will realise that
running the AES is no small task.

| believe we have a unique Society
which has helped a lot of people, is
helping people and can help a lot
more.

From an entomological viewpoint,
the AES is the best thing that ever
happened to me. It can be the same
for you if you let it.

2012765. M. E. Castle (2490).

(3)

[Mr Castle has recently moved. His
address now is: 1/2 Greenfield Cres-
cent, Hazelton Gardens, Horndean,
Hants. — Ed.]

BY ANY OTHER NAME...

The reprinting of past articles on
the subject of correct nomenclature,
together with the comments of Mr
P. G. Taylor (719) on the inability
of entomologists to ‘grow up’ and
use scientific names for insects and
other living things (Bull. amat. Ent.
Soc., 22: 87-8) must draw some
response. | would like to add my
own observations.

Scientists are not the only people

MAY, 1964

interested in our country’s natural
history, and the people who have a
fringe interest are a majority. Such
persons are able to identify the com-
moner and more easily-identified

members of the flora and fauna of —

the countryside, and these objects
have earned a name in the vernacular.
Those who are led or drift into the
study of natural history start off with

a vocabulary of names, and the early —

naturalists extended the use of the
vernacular to the less well-known
species. It is, in my opinion, essential
to retain common names for the
better-known species, not only in
order to communicate with inter-
ested laymen but in order to attract
the uninitiated into the realm of
natural things. For these two ends,

|, for one, will never “grow up’. !

The attempt of some to extend the
use of common names by making
up names in the vernacular for those
species which at present have none
is to be frowned upon unless the
purpose for so doing is to bring such
species to the notice of the public at
large or to the people with fringe
interests. The naming of ‘The
Colorado Beetle’ was essential to
successful propaganda and its scien-
tific name (Leptinotarsa decemlineata
Say) would have been too big a
mouthful for the purpose. When
we have to coin names for such a
reason, let the name be instructive
and easy on the tongue. | agree that
such names as the ‘ Bright-line
Brown-eye’ are linguistically ugly
and are little help in identification,
and with such an insignificant insect
the scientific name (Diataraxia olera-
cea Linn.) is sufficient for our pur-
poses.

The arguments in favour of the
use of the scientific name of a species
have been explained before in the
Bulletin but the confusion which
exists in the field of nomenclature is

a discredit to those responsible for |
the naming systems, and certainly it

=

——— SSS aq

\ES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

ieems that the vernacular names have
nore stability than the names of
the scientist. | will quote a few
axamples of the difficulties that lie
thead for the person who wishes to
ise only scientific names when speak-
ng of insects. | realise that there are
-easons for the alteration of names
put there seem to be very much
etter ones why a name which has
been satisfactory for a quarter of a
century should not suddenly be
found to be inadequate [see footnote].
‘Amongst our native species, many
alternative names for the same species
are in use in different text-books
while the reference books dealing
with continental and foreign species
are so confusing that in the field,
while collecting, we have resorted
to coining names ourselves to be
sure that we are speaking about the
same species — the reverse of what
was intended. Let us consider the
names of some of the Lycaenidae
(‘blues’). Our Brown Argus But-
terfly, the name of which | learned
as Lycaena astrarche Bergstr. has now
‘become Aricia agestis Schiff. This
change of the name of genus and
species becomes more confusing
‘when we find that some names have
‘been switched from one species to
another. In the ‘ blues’ which in-
habit the very high ground of the
Alps (7,000 ft) there are two species
which | learned as Lycaena pheretes
_ Hoffmansegg and L. orbitulys Esp., but
_ | now find that the latest text-book
_ (Forster and Wohlfahrt, 1955) calls
them respectively Albulina orbitulus
_ Prun. and Agriades glandon Prun. so
that the specific name of one has
become that of the other. Turning
to other groups, we find in the Saty-
_ridae a completely new list of generic
Names so that our Meadow Brown
- Butterfly which was Epinephele janira
Linn. has now become Maniola jurtina
_Linn., while in the Nymphalidae did
“you ‘know that the Dark Green
| Fritillary should no longer be called

59

Argynnis aglaia Linn., but it should be
Mesoacidalia charlotta Haw., and that
the name of the High Brown Fritillary
has been changed from Argynnis cyd-
ippe Linn. to Fabriciana adippe Rott?
Can you wonder that some of us
prefer to speak of the Clouded Yellow
Butterfly instead of Colias croceus (or
is it crocea?) Fourcr. which when it
first flew into my net was called
Colias edusa Fab?

Pa: Cribb(2270):

REFERENCE
FORSTER, W. and WOHLFAHRT, T. A. (1955). Die
Schmetterlinge Mitteleuropas, Vol. Il, Tagfalter. W.

Keller, Stuttgart.

[It seems ironic that the retention of
long-used names in preference to
older ones which are strictly valid
according to the Law of Priority,
should on the one hand be welcomed
by many because this preserves the
names which are familar, yet on the
other makes it so much more diffi-
cult for a stable taxonomy (of ‘oldest’
names) ever to be established —
Editor. |

STUDY GROUP IN
LEPIDOPTERA GENETICS

A meeting of the Group was held
during the afternoon of the Annual
Exhibition 1963. About fourteen
Members and visitors attended. A
short account was contributed, by
Mr B. O. C. Gardiner, on the result
of crosses betwen Pieris brassicae
Linn. type x race cheiranthi Huebn.
—F, and F, generations and a
backcross to P. b. cheiranthi. The
variation of wing colour and markings
appeared to be polygenic in nature.
This variation appeared to be paral-
leled by the characteristics of the
larvae. Mr Gardiner’s results were
then discussed by several Members.

60

The meeting was subsequently
thrown open for general discussion.
Several principles of genetics were
raised and their application to Lepi-
doptera genetics provoked serious
discussion. The sort of work which
the Group could undertake also
came in for consideration and the
need for mutual assistance was
stressed. Two species (namely, Pieris
brassicae Linn. and Arctia caja Linn.)
appeared to attract attention as
offering scope for genetic investi-

gation. Members interested in
genetics are invited to join the
Group.

9.10.63. Roy Robinson (3201).

SHEER LUCK!

How often has a collector felt that
the day’s high spot had depended
not on skill, experience, or patient
search, but on some happy chance
—the luck that, for no particular
reason, one happened to look over
a hedge; to choose a certain tree
under which to have a snack; or
to make some other casual but
fortunate decision?

There were two ponds, one on
each side of the road. The one was
small, dismal-looking, tree-girt; the
other was fairly large, its surface
graced with Frogbit, (Hydrocharis
morsus-ranae Linn.), Starwort (Cal-
litriche sp(p).), and Potamogeton sp(p).,
the bank readily accessible all round
save for some clumps of reed (Phrag-
mites sp.). Naturally, | chose the
open, weedy pond, and a glorious
piece of water it proved. Water
beetles were what | was seeking,
and their variety of species and their
population density were a joy to
behold, although | took nothing of
particular note. But the pond was
rich in all kinds of life, including

MAY, 1964

molluscs, among which | was pleased |

to find Planorbis corneus Linn.
Having fished this pond thoroughly

| was feeling pretty tired; and any-

how, it was time to pack up and

start for home, so | decided not to —
| knew ©
its type of old, and was in no mood ©
for heavy netfuls of black mud, rot- —
ting leaves, and crawling masses of |
specimens of Asellus sp(p). (Fresh- —
On second |

bother with the other one.

water Louse). But no!
thoughts | would just have one dip,
just to prove how useless it was.

So, not even troubling to leave the ©
verge of the road, | dipped my net —

near the bank, drew it through the
water for no more than a foot or
so, and gazed gloomily at its contents.
Crawling up the side was the largest
nymph | have ever seen, of our
largest dragonfly! It was obviously
near transformation, so | took it
home, and two days later it climbed
its stick and emerged —a magnifi-
cent specimen of Anax imperator
Leach!

Now for another bit of luck re-
sulting from a mere afterthought.
Staying at Crewe for a few days on
business, | took the opportunity of
driving about the district looking
for fishable ponds. My one inch to
the mile maps mark sizeable waters,
but not those insignificant little

ponds and ditches which sometimes |

prove so rich in bugs. In unfamiliar
country one finds these, broadly
speaking, by just roaming about and
trusting to luck.

For my purposes, the area round
Crewe seemed poor. Still, | did find

several ponds of a sort, and duti- |
fully fished the lot. None produced |

anything but the commonest of the
common, and eventually, far from
cheerful, | began trying to find my
way back to the hotel. After several
miles the road forked, and the map
showed that either route would do.
For no particular reason | bore right,
and had not gone half a mile before

SS TT TS

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

seeing the most promising-looking
sond of the day! Should | leave it?
After all, it had been a heavy day,
with two bananas my only food since
sreakfast, and there were still an-
other twelve miles to go. Fortunately
acted on the old saying ‘ There’s
10 time like the present’’; got
sermission from the farmer; and set
co work while | had the chance.
Some fifty yards of the perimeter
were fished, and nothing of interest
taken. Then it happened —the
‘catch that made the day. In my net
was a specimen of Ilyocoris cimicoides
Linn! | thought it must be a stray,
but in the immediate vicinity | soon
caught another five, so there was
‘evidently a nice little colony. This
insect is common enough in Kent,
where | used to live, and in some
ponds there | have taken it by the
dozen; but | did not know that it
was found so far north. On returning
home | consulted Southwood and
tLeston’s ‘Land and Water Bugs of
the British Isles’, and learnt that al-
though |. cimicoides is found in
‘Cheshire, my pond near Nantwich
“must indeed have been close to the
extreme northern limit of the species.
Here, then, we have two chance
jdecisions which made the day. But
‘they were not sheer, unadulterated
, luck. They might be called ‘ induced
luck’, for if you go out one day and
“fish every pond you see, you at least
put yourself in the way of catching
J anything good that happens to be
‘in one of them! Any bug-hunter,
“whatever his main interest, could
cite scores of similar happy chances
from his own experience.
Looking back, however, | can
recall two instances of sheer, com-
"pletely un-induced good luck.
_ The first occurred when I| was
\living on the outskirts of Bedford,
‘and concerns a moth. Our dog used
to sleep in an old stable some fifteen
yards from the kitchen door. One
mild night in early November | took

61

it across to this stable as usual, and
on the ground in the yard saw a
particularly dark patch, noticeable
even in the general darkness. Not
pausing to investigate, | made the
dog comfortable for the night and
hurried back to the house. As |
hung up my hat | began to wonder
what that black patch could be, so
after finding a torch | went out again
to see. No sooner did the beam
light up the dark object than | rushed
back to the house, siezed the first
thing handy — a pudding-basin —
dashed out again, and covered the
object with the basin. Then, armed
with my butterfly-net so as to re-
duce risks to a minimum, | prepared
to deal with it. The dark patch in
the yard was a specimen of Acherontia
atropos Linn. (Death’s Head Hawk-
moth)!

In the event, however, there had
been no need for precautions, for
the moth could hardly move. | left
it in the kitchen overnight, hoping
that the warmth would cheer it up;
but on coming down next morning
| found it was dead. Examination
showed it to be a magnificent speci-
men, definitely on the large side,
and so fresh that | could only suppose
that it had emerged close by, taken
wing, and almost immediately crash-
landed in the yard. | had been
astonishingly lucky in that both
myself and the dog, which had run
and bounced about all round me on
our way to the stable, had avoided
treading on the moth, for it had
lain only a foot or so to the left of
our direct path.

| sent it to Messrs Watkins and
Doncaster for setting, not having a
large enough board myself, and they
wrote later to say that of the fifty
or so Death’s Head Hawkmoths on
their boards, mine was one of the
best; so it can be accepted that |
have not exaggerated the excellence
of its condition. In due course the
moth was returned to me _ beauti-

62

fully mounted in a glass-topped box,
and | gave it to the museum of the
Manchester High School for Girls.
Why on earth...? Merely because
my sister-in-law was headmistress
of the biology department. How
dull the truth can be!

Alas, my beautiful moth is no more.
It was destroyed in an air-raid on
Manchester during the last war.

My second instance of sheer good
luck happened when | was living
near Orpington, Kent, and concerns
a dragonfly.

During a bout of influenza | was
told, one day, that there was a big
dragonfly on the bedroom wall.
Next day it was still in the same
position, and was found to be dead.
As soon as possible | examined it,
and it appeared to be a specimen of
Cordulia aenea Linn. but as that
species was not recorded for Kent,
| assumed that | was mistaken.

Some weeks later | took it to the
British Museum (Natural History) to
be properly identified. At the office
| was handed over to an attendant,
who conducted me along what seem-
ed miles of dimly-lit corridors, my
spirits sinking a little more with
every step. What an ass | should
feel when at last | was presented to
the Chief Dragonfly-identifier! |
should be told, of course, that my
dragonfly was as common as mud,
and had first been recorded for Kent
by William the Conqueror!

Suddenly my guide flung open a
door, ushered me into a large, well-
lit room, and left me to it. Ata
table near a window stood a lady,
pasting papers into a book. Glancing
in my direction she said, “ Just wait
a minute till I’ve finished this ’’, and
the informality and kindly tone at
once set me at ease. A few moments
later she examined my specimen,
and the nymphal skin of the speci-
men of Anax imperator Leach men-
tioned above, which | had also
brought. Then followed an unforget-

MAY, 1964

table twenty minutes or so of talk
about dragonflies. What a privilege
this was, for the un-terrifying au-
thority on dragonflies was Miss ,
Cynthia Longfield, authoress of —
‘ Dragonflies of the British Isles’.
Miss Longfield was delighted with
my nymphal skin of A. imperator, for
it was certainly very large even for
that species; and she determined my
dragonfly as being a specimen of
Cordulia aenea Linn., so that was all
right; but it was not new to Kent.
It had first been recorded there
some two or three seasons previously.
Printing was so slow, | was told, that
by the time records were published
they were already out-of-date. That
was soon after the last war, however;
perhaps things are better now.
28.12.63. H. Caiger (2908).

REFERENCES

LONGFIELD, C. (1937). The Dragonflies of the British
Isles. Frederick Warne, London.

SOUTHWOOD, T. R. E. and LESTON, D. (1959).
Land and Water Bugs of the British Isles. Frederick
Warne, London.

COLLECTING ON THE
CONTINENT OF EUROPE

The steady decrease in the areas
suitable for collecting and study of
wild life in our Islands, and the dim-

inution in the numbers of individuals |

and species of our native flora and jf
fauna due to the inroads of civilisa- |
tion, ‘sprays’, the Forestry Com-
mission, the War Office, etc., have |
made many naturalists look to the |
Continent for some relief. Our
execrable summers in past years
have made the planning of ventures |
Lo the less well-known parts of our
Islands a very doubtful undertaking,
and a fortnight spent in Scotland, |
lreland or the West Country has |
often contained only one or two |
days of collecting weather in the |
fortnight. While bird-watchers, |
botanists and the like are not com- |

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

pletely immobilised by bad weather,
the entomologists, particularly those
who seek insects that love the sun,
must have good weather if the suc-
cess of their hard-earned holidays
is not to be jeopardised. This makes
collecting in central and southern
‘Europe a very attractive proposition.
‘Modern transport, and the camping
and hotel facilities which are so
readily available over the greater
‘part of the Continent, make the
naturalist’s task easier there than
‘in this country and the cost is the
‘only factor which would make one
‘hesitate. This cost need not be too
heavy if one is prepared to camp out
‘and has a car with suitable accom-
‘modation for collecting and camping
-gear. Even ‘ Youth Hostelling ’ with
va bicycle gives quite a scope and my
“son, Philip, was able to cover some
1,000 miles across France and into
Germany by this means during the
“last summer.

The wealth of insect and plant life
‘to be found on the continent is
“sufficient enticement and reward for

any effort which is involved in col-

‘lecting there. Instead of those four
‘Cabbage White Butterflies (Pieris
‘brassicae Linn.) and the rubbed
/ Large Heath Butterfly (Coenonympha

/tullia Muell.) which you got on the

fortnight’s trip to Scotland last year,
you will have enough material to

set and name to keep you busy into

!

the winter months, plus an exciting
holiday and a wider picture of where

our own meagre insect community

-and Italian Alps,
_ German Black Forest and the Pyren-

i

it
|
i
)

finds its place amongst the insects of
the European Continent. What has

_ been in the past a luxury for the few

who could afford it, has now become
a possibility for many. The French
Switzerland, the

ees are now only a few hours away,
and if you travel by air such places
‘as Spain, Jugoslavia and the Balearic
Isles seem almost on your doorstep.
Education has given the opportunity

63

to many of us to have a working
knowledge of some of the European
languages, and a further barrier is
thus surmounted.

In his book ‘ The Naturalist’s
Riviera’, Mr A. N. Brangham points
out that much of the spade-work in
the study of the natural history of
southern France was carried out by
visitors or exiles from this country,
and there is no reason why this
tradition should not be continued.
In a recent Bulletin (Bull. amat. Ent.
Soc., 22: 60-3), Mr Brangham invited
Members to take an interest in the
National Park of the Cévennes. |
hope that some of our Members will
respond to this invitation. | am not
advocating the abandonment of the
cause of preserving the relicts of
our own fauna and flora, for there is
very much research and study still
to be done in this country. The
amount of work to be done with
regard to the insects of Europe,
however, is Gargantuan.

Having made these comments, |
now make the request that Members
who have some experience of col-
lecting on the Continent should
write to me in order that | may
begin the collation of information
for the use of other Members who
may be contemplating a trip abroad.
| envisage the preparation of a pos-
sible publication which would deal
with European Rhopalocera, giving
information about areas in which
various species may be expected to
be found, the season that these
species are on the wing and (I hope)
pictures and descriptions of the
species. The text-books which are
at present available in English are
over half a century old and require
correction in nomenclature, and
improvement in description and in-
formation on habitat. The books by
Kane (1885), Kirby (1882), Lang (1881)
and Wheeler (1903) have information
which needs synthesising, while more

64

recent text-books in German and
French, which require a fair know-
ledge of the language, | still find to
be sketchy in information and hazy
as to nomenclature. The mono-
graphs which are available on certain
groups can be used if one visits the
British Museum (Natural History)
but what is really required is a
handy book which can accompany
one on any trip abroad. In pro-
ducing such a book | should welcome
information under the _ following
counts:

1. Areas visited. (This need not
mean the exact locality.)

2. Time of year. (Day and month
if possible or an indication of
time of month). .

3. Species of butterfly observed
or taken (but only if identity
is certain).

4. Occurrence. (Rare, locally com-
mon, etc.)

5. Altitude if known—this applies
particularly to mountain species.

| am trying to build up a repre-
sentative collection of European
butterflies in order that | may photo-
graph them, and any help in this
field would be greatly appreciated.
If any Member has surplus specimens
of European species | should be
pleased to exchange for other insects
any which | require. | am also willing
to name any doubtful species, either
by myself or with the assistance of
the representative collections at the
British Museum (Natural History).

In the pursuit of Continental
species, it is often desirable that two
or more collectors should join forces.
Not only does such a liaison help
to reduce the overall costs in many
cases but it provides company and
is a safeguard against illness and
accident. It is dangerous and fool-
hardy to attempt to collect by one-
self in some areas (even in_ this
country) if these are remote from
human habitation and subject to

MAY, 1964

mist, rock-falls, etc. Outings to
such places should be made by a
minimum number of two people.
It is sometimes difficult for Members
to contact other Members who
would be willing and able to share
in a collecting trip abroad. In view
of this it has been suggested to me
that | should act in bringing such
Members together. This could be
done if those wishing to travel in
search of Continental species of insect
(of all Orders) would write to me
indicating their wishes, and | could
then bring two parties into contact
with each other so that arrangements
mutually agreeable to both could be
made. My gain in the transaction
would be a comprehensive report
on the results of the outing from
those Members concerned, and |
hope that the Editor would gain a
very interestingaartiche tog
the Bulletin.

23.10.63. P. W. Cribb (2270).

REFERENCES

BRANGHAM, A. N. (1962).
Phoenix, London.

KANE, W. F. (1885). European Butterflies.
London.

KIRBY, W. F. (1882).
Europe. Cassell, Petter and Galpin, London.

LANG, H. C. (1881).
cribed and figured. L. Reeve, London.

WHEELER, G. (1903). The Butterflies of Switzerland
and the Alps of Central Europe. Elliot Stock, London.

The Naturalist’s Riviera.

Macmillan,

A COLEOPTERIST IN
SOUTHERN FRANCE,
JULY 1963

Our fourth expedition to the
south of France produced a number
of species not taken on our previous
expeditions. At Digne, Basses Alpes,
which was our first stop, the chafers
Amphimallus _ solstitialis Linn. var.
pineticola Graells, A. assimilis Herbst
and Anisoplia villosa Goeze were
scarce owing to the lateness of the
season. Potosia morio Fab. was still
common on the flower-heads of

The Butterflies and Moths of |
The Butterflies of Europe des- |

}

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

thistle and of knapweed (Centaurea
sp(p).), and Cetonia aurata Linn. was
found commonly on the massed
flower-heads which were growing
in the alpine meadows. Here there
were also many Leptura spp. The
phytophagous beetles were scarce
and sweeping with a net produced
very little. On our first visit to
Digne in 1959 these beetles were
very common, especially the many
species of Cryptocephalus. That visit
was in late June when the flower-
covered fields and grassy valleys teem
with life. By July things are beginning
‘to parch a little. Running on the
“mud and silt patches of the river
“bed above the Thermal were many
»specimens of Cicindela hybrida Gebler.
“One female specimen of Lucanus
-cervus Linn. was found on the trunk
of a poplar tree (Populus sp.) near
the stream, and in the potato (Solan-
_um tuberosum Linn.) fields nearby,
‘the Colorado Beetle (Leptinotarsa
/10-lineata Say) was swarming in all
its stages. Three species of Anthaxia
were taken off flower-heads, inclu-
ding A. nitidula Linn.
_ Our next hunting ground was the
sarea around Fayence, Department
‘Var. The beautiful beetles Trichodes
apiarius Linn. and T. alvearius Fab.
_were here on the heads of the umbel-
liferous flowers. A few specimens of
Cetonia aurata were seen on thistle
heads, together with specimens of
Zonabris polymorpha Pall. and Z.
_ |2-punctata Olivier. Two large fig
_ trees (Ficus carica Linn.) by the road-
side, heavy with ripe and over-ripe
fruit, produced a great number of
individuals of Cetonia aurata and
Potosia cuprea Fab.

_ Gyrinus natator Linn. was swimming
_ on the surface of the small stream
_ flowing through the valley, and here
1 also took a species of Agabus (still
_un-named) and one specimen of
' Chiaenius spoliatus Rossi. This last-
/ named is a handsome beetle very

65

like our C. vestitus Payk. but much
larger.

In the square at Fayence near our
hotel, | picked up a dead specimen
of the giant beetle Oryctes nasicornis
Linn. — it was a male and had prob-
ably been on the wing in the late
evening and been knocked down
and killed.

The fields of Lavender (Lavandula
spica Linn.) in this area which have
been described by Mr P. W. Cribb
in a previous article (Bull. amat. Ent.
Soc., 22: 128-33) were swarming
with butterflies but produced few
Coleoptera. The flower-heads of the
yellow knapweed growing along the
edges of the fields were covered by
specimens of Potosia cuprea, Cetonia
aurata and many Longicornia spp.
One specimen of Potosia affinis And-
ersch in Hoppe was taken here. It
is a very beautiful beetle of a brilliant
green colour. The woodland rides
above the Lavender, rich in butter-
flies and redolent with the scent of
the Spanish Broom (Spartium junceum
Linn.) were very disappointing in
beetles, due almost certainly to the
time of the year. Sweeping the
Spanish Broom produced stick insects
and mantids, while searching under
stones only revealed numbers of
scorpions.

We left the lowlands, and our
next place of call was Barcelonette.
On the slopes of the Col de Larche
| found the large weevil Larinus
jaceae Fab., together with the omni-
present C. qurata. Sweeping the
fields of Sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia
Scop.) at the top of the Col just over
the Italian border produced only
specimens of the beetle Dasciilus
cervinus Linn., a very common beetle
on our own South Downs.

In the valley on the flats beside
the River Urbaye we again found
Cicindela hybrida, and the chafer
Anomala aenea Deg., which was
fairly common on the dwarf sallow
(Salix sp.). The chafers varied much

66

in colour from the normal greenish-
brown to black. The very fine long-
horn Purpuricenus budensis Goeze
was taken on the wing and also by
sweeping —this beetle was just
emerging. One specimen of Spon-
dylis buprestoides Linn. was taken and
Cerambyx scopoli _Fuessl. _— also
appeared. On the Spanish Broom |
took two fine specimens of Mol-
orchus major Linn. This is a fine
insect like a giant specimen of our
M. umbellatarum Schreb. and can
easily be mistaken for a large hunting-
wasp at first sight. A few of the
Cryptocephalus spp. were swept off
flowers, including C. bipustulatus
Fab. (= biguttatus Herbst). A speci-
men of Pterostichus bicolor Arago was
found under a stone. :

At La Grave, Hautes Alpes, where
we ended our trip, | found most of
the species taken in 1959, with the
exception of Emus hirtus Linn., which
was apparently ‘over’. The very
beautiful Chrysochloa gloriosa Fab.
was quite common and | found
Cetonia aurata and Potosia cuprea,
mostly on the tall yellow Gentian
(Gentiana lutea Linn.). On our pre-
vious visit here | took a single speci-
men of the Spanish Fly (Lytta vesi-
catoria Linn.), which settled on the
top of the car parked outside the
hotel beneath Ash trees (Fraxinus
excelsior Linn.). | hoped to find it
again but it was not until our last
day of collecting that my son, Peter,
found it flying round the tops of the
small Ash trees in some numbers,
on the mountain slopes above the
river. With the aid of a long Ash
plant to which we secured the butter-
fly-net, we were able to net a dozen
specimens of this handsome beetle.

A very enjoyable fortnight came
to an end all too soon and we arrived
home with a lot of setting to be
done, a considerable sun-tan and a
little more knowledge of the ento-
mological fauna of southern France.
110.68. H. J. Cribb (2044).

MAY, 1964.

A MONTH’S JOURNEY |
BY BICYCLE
ACROSS NORTH FRANCE

| crossed from Folkestone to |}
Calais after the long ride from Lon-
don to the Coast, and in intermittent
rain made my way from one Youth |}
Hostel to the next as quickly as jj
possible between the downpours. | |
landed at Calais on 17th August, |
and after riding through Arras and |
St Quentin | came to Laon, where
a break in the weather permitted
some collecting. Laon lies to the
south of Arras and to the north of |}
Rheims and is a most picturesque |
town. The area to the north consists
of wooded hills. | only stayed here |}
for a short while and cannot comment |
on the area as a whole, but my brief
glimpse of the roadside areas re- |
vealed meadows with a luxuriant |
growth of flowers, mainly Lucerne |
(Medicago sativa Linn.) and Red |
Clover (Trifolium pratense Linn.). It |)
was here that | saw the first butter-
flies of my journey. Large and Small |
Whites (Pieris brassicae Linn. and |
P. rapae Linn.) were abundant, and |
| also saw the Peacock (Nymphalis io |
Linn.) and the Small Tortoiseshell |
(Aglais urticae Linn.). The Wall
(Pararge (=Dira) megera Linn.) and |
the Common Blue (Polyommatus icarus
Rott.) were also fairly common and |
so were males and females of the |
Clouded Yellow (Colias croceus |
Fourcr.). | captured a_ battered |
specimen of the Swallowtail (Papilio |
machaon Linn. ssp. gorganus Fruhst.).
The whole of this area and the region
south of it to St Dizier is gently |;
undulating country with abundant |
clovers (Trifolium spp.) and Lucerne. —
It is an area which would bear closer |
investigation by someone with better —
weather and more time than I had. |
| took a Queen of Spain Fritillary |
(Argynnis lathonia Linn.) near Chalons.

| entered the Ardennes near Ligny

“AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

i
ven Barrois on the River Meuse. This
‘town lies in a hollow between high
own Ih hills. It rained almost con-
tinuously as | rode, and it was not
possible to do any collecting, although
}much of the countryside looked
|} promising. The countryside is fairly
well cultivated, with fruit trees and
vines. | crossed into the Saar
(Germany) at a spot east of Nancy
and stopped at St Ingbert, where |
found good weather at last. It was
sunny for three days, and | went
collecting in the valleys near the
‘Mannheim Autobahn. In addition to
| the species already mentioned, | took
the Pale Clouded Yellow (Colias hyale
(Linn.), the ‘copper’ Chrysophanus
dorilis Hufn. and the Large Wall
(Pararge (=Dira) maera Linn.). | also
| took some very large specimens of
the Common Blue. On some poplars
(Populus sp.) | found Coleoptera of
the family Chrysomelidae, and nearby
some beetles of a species of Cicindela,
‘which turned out to be Cicindela
imaritima Latr. et Dej., were running
on the sandy footpaths and not near
any water. In the forest | saw speci-
pet: of the High Brown Fritillary
(Argynnis cydippe Linn. (= adippe
Rott.)) and some deer. The meadow
Saffron (Colchicum autumnale Linn.)
-was also in flower in this area.
| After my stay in the Saar, | rode
“on towards Luxembourg. The coun-
tryside is wonderful but very hilly,
gradients of 13% [about 1 in 8] for
up to three kilometres being quite
common. The views of the Moselle
valley are wonderful, and the hills
on the German side are very wild
with no roads. This is another area
which would be worth exploring.
The River Moselle is as wide here
as the River Thames at London and
full of fish. South of Champlon | saw
the most beautiful country of my
trip: valleys with small streams,
/meadows of Lucerne and Meadow
Saffron, butterflies all along the
_roadside and trout (Salmo sp(p.) in

67

the streams; in short, something
everywhere of interest to the natur-
alist. 1 took specimens of the Silver-
spotted Skipper (Hesperia comma
Linn.) and a small dark form of the
Small Heath (Coenonympha pamphilus
Linn.).

After the beauty of Luxembourg
and the Ardennes, the road into
Brussels and on to Gent and Dun-
kerque seemed to have little of
interest. The country is flat and
cultivated, offering none of the scope
for the entomologist that can be
found in eastern France, in the Saar
and in Luxembourg. The only hin-
drance to a fine collecting holiday
was the continuing unreliability of
the weather.

Astil:63: Philip J. Cribb.

A VISIT TO SPAIN, 1963

On 4th April last year | and a party
of pupils from my school left for the
Costa Brava, Spain.

We reached our destination on
6th April, and found that our hotel
was only about two hundred yards
from the beach.

Soon after lunch on the first day
| and a friend of mine who was also
interested in Lepidoptera went for
a short walk behind the hotel. We
did not expect to see anything much
except perhaps an occasional Large
White Butterfly (Pieris brassicae
Linn.). We returned to the hotel
empty-handed but for a few examples
of Spanish Coleoptera, a group which
| had only just started to collect.
Unfortunately beetle-hunting was not
pursued vigorously because | soon
forgot about it after seeing the large
number of Lepidoptera in the area.

The next morning the two of us

68

went out in a different direction to
that of the day before. About two
hundred yards up the road we found
a field which was inhabited by many
butterflies. We had not expected
to find such a profusion of butterflies
at this time of year. In the first few
minutes | had caught many butterflies
such as Clouded Yellows (Colias
croceus Fourcr.) and Bath Whites
(Pontia daplidice Linn.). In this same
field we found some larvae of the
Marsh Fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia
Rott.) which later died on the return
trip to England. Unfortunately we
were later sent off this field by the
owner, although, because there were
no fences, we had had no idea that
it was private land. We continued
to walk up the road until we came
to a lane which led up to a small
hill. This is where | saw the first
Camberwell Beauty (Nymphalis
antiopa Linn.), a magnificent flyer,
flying at about thirty feet. Hoping
it would come lower, | chased it,
but | had to give up because it flew
off over the tops of some trees.
After a few minutes we continued
up the lane where we caught some
Green Underwing Coppers (Thestor
ballus Fab.), which are rather like
Green Hairstreaks (Callophrys rubi
Linn.) but the uppersides are orange
with brown borders.

Further up the lane we came to a
small wood where | caught more
Clouded Yellows and one more Bath
White. We also saw many Humming-
bird Hawkmoths (Macroglossum stel-
latarum Linn.). In the afternoon we
returned to the wood, where there
were more Clouded Yellows and
Green Underwing Coppers.

The next day we returned to the
wood again and upon entering it
saw a Humming-bird Hawkmoth
hovering above a flower. Later in
the day | caught some Common
Blues (Polyommatus icarus Rott.),
Green Hairstreaks, Green Underwing

MAY, 1964 |

Coppers, Bath Whites and Clouded |

Yellows. On the way back to our |
hotel | caught a moth rather like |
a Four-spotted (Acontia luctuosa |
Schiff.).

On the following day | returned
by myself to the same wood yet |
again. The same species as the day
before were in evidence together
with a few different species such as |
a Grizzled Skipper (Pyrgus malvae
Linn.), Painted Ladies (Vanessa cardui
Linn.) a male Orange Tip (Anthocaris }
cardamines Linn.), a V-moth (Itame |)
wauaria Linn.) and a Continental
Brimstone (Gonepteryx cleopatra
Linn.). |

11th April was to be my best day,
however, for in the wood | caught
the usual species and a few others
such as a Mazarine Blue (Cyaniris
semiargus Rott.), many Humming-
bird Hawkmoths and a Swallowtail
Butterfly (Papilio machaon Linn. ssp.
gorganus Fruhst.). We found the
Humming-bird Hawkmoths hovering
above a bank on the side of a lane
in the sun. The only way | could
catch specimens was to place the |
net under each one and then make |
a quick stroke upwards, twisting the |
net to trap the moth.

After | caught the Swallowtail |
saw several more species including
the Scarce Swallowtail (Papilio podal- |
irius Linn.), but | was unable to catch |
any specimens of P. podalirius because |
of their rapid flight. | also saw
several Camberwell Beauties but |
these too were rapid fliers.

On my seventh and final day in |
Spain, | again failed to catch a Cam-
berwell Beauty, but did take a butter- —
fly rather like a Dingy Skipper (Eryn- |
nis tages Linn.), a Small Copper |
(Lycaena phiaeas Linn.), a Wall (Par- |
arge (=Dira) megera Linn.) and a |
Small Heath (Coenonympha pamphilus |
Linn.). |

| returned to England with far
more species than | had expected

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

to get, and | am hoping to return
to Spain in the future. Perhaps then
| can catch that Camberwell Beauty!
#21.1.64. J. S. Noyes (3523)).

@
JUNIOR NEWS SECTION

| suppose now is the time to
Bercathe a sigh of relief after a back-
-to-normal English winter, and a time
‘to prepare for the coming summer.
+You should by now have sewn up
“the ‘moth’ holes in your nets, re-
“charged your killing-bottles, scrubbed
“out your pooters and de-rusted all
your other equipment. Talking of
-equipment, | would like to add that
‘if you have any bright ideas on this
“please let us know. It is surprising
‘how few of the clever pieces of
“equipment you think of ever come
into general use, because you think
‘they are too simple. It is often the
obvious things which are overlooked.
‘Most other people also have limited
-pocket-money, you know, and cannot
afford to buy expensive equipment.
St Ivo Entomology and Natural His-
‘tory Society are still seeking suitable
portable cages for carrying live
grasshoppers and other insects; ways
to carry spirit for pickling insects;
strong and light dual-purpose nets;
and pooters which are cheaply made
_ but which do not break in the hand
or need a wheelbarrow to carry them.
All our expeditions are made by
using rucksacs, Youth Hostels and
_ public transport. | should imagine
_that very few of you are in the
‘Land Rover’ class of hunters, so
that you must also have the problem
of finding gear which is easy to carry.
PY the way, we use Youth Hostels
because of the wonderful fellowship
_to be found in them, because of their
| cheapness and because we have found
_ that we have been unable to do
| camping and natural history together
successfully.

ate:

|

69

How to persuade parents to stop perse-
cuting the young entomologist

Most people do not like being
blinded by science. They are not
filled with joy by being told that the
creature they have given you is a
specimen of Dorcus parallelopipedus
Linn. ‘Lesser Stag Beetle’ is really
much more suitable. Dad feels much
happier bringing you a Black Snail
Eater than a specimen of Phosphuga
atrata Linn. Do not be afraid to
make up a suitable English name for
an insect for the benefit of non-
entomologists if you only. know a
scientific name. Such an ‘English’
name gives your parents something
to tell their friends and also makes
them feel it would be possible to
understand your hobby if they wanted
to (which | am afraid is doubtful).
Another thing which annoys parents
is to be told, by their bug-hunter
son or daughter, that whatever speci-
men they have caught is the common
something-or-other. They confuse
‘common’ meaning found every-
where with ‘common’ meaning to
have little worth: so never use com-
mon or, for that matter, ordinary,
in any name you Say to a non-ento-
mologist adult. Substitute House or
Field or British for Common. | know
of one boy who always gave English
names for all his insects and never
called anything common—and he
was allowed to keep larvae of the
Dor Beetle (Geotrupes sp.) in his
mother’s fruit bowl. He also never
refused a specimen. | know many
of you find it hard to give things
away, and you will also find it hard
to accept things. Try to do both
graciously.

If you really wish to show how
clever you are, try these questions
(answers in next issue):

(1) How many wings has a damsel

fly?

(2) Give three insects which be-
long to the Order Orthoptera.

70

(3)
(4)

Name the three segments of an

insect’s thorax.

What is the main difference

between the Coleoptera and

other Orders?

How does the scorpion fly get

its name?

Namethe world’s largest moth,

and largest beetle.

Isoptera are sometimes called

‘white ants’. What are they

really?

(8) What are British social wasps’
nests made of?

(9) What is the scientific name
of the Honey Bee?

(10) What is the function of an
insect’s Malpighian tubules?

(11) Why have motor cars made
the House Fly (Musca domestica
Linn.) a rare animal?

(12) How many species of British
bumble bees are there?

(13) What are the tiny yellow
cocoons often found on the
body of a dead caterpillar of
the Cabbage White Butterfly
(Pieris brassicae Linn.)?

(14) Why is the robber fly so
called?

(15) What is the function of an
insect’s tracheae?

(16) Where are the ears of a
shorthorn grasshopper situ-
ated?

(17) What do most ladybird beetles
feed on?

(18) The stick insect Carausius (=
Dixippus) morosus Br. repro-
duces by a process called
parthenogenesis. What does
this mean?

(19) What do we mean by ‘ social ’
insects?

(20) In which form do House Flies
spend the winter?

Please send in records of your first

(9)
(6)
(7)

sightings for this year of butterflies

and moths.

Records of the first

bumble bee queens seen (description,
please) and tiny grasshopper nymphs

se

en (specimens, please), would also

MAY, 1964

—<$<___.

help to add a little to our knowledge |
of insects.
Do remember that conservation |
of nature is very important, so that
if you do find a colony of rare butter- |
flies in the middle of Manchester do |
keep it to yourself and only take |

one specimen.
| wish you good hunting. |
H. J. Berman (294 1A)}

REVIEWS

The Journal of Research on the |
Lepidoptera, edited by William |
Hovanitz, published at 1140 W. |
Orange Grove Avenue, Arcadia, !
California, U.S.A. Price 8.00 dollars |
(57/6).

The first volume of this journal is |
now to hand and its inception is to
be welcomed for it helps to satisfy |
the long-felt need for an outlet, in
one source, for the increasing num- |
ber of illustrated papers on the}
Lepidoptera.

The first number was issued late |
in 1962 and it is expected that the |
first two volumes will be completed }
by the end of 1963. Thereafter it is |
expected that there will be one
volume, issued in quarterly parts,
per year. |

Among the contents of this first |
volume there are a number of papers |
on the genus Pieris which could be!
read with great profit on this side)
of the Atlantic. Pieris rapae Linn.
(Small White Butterfly), for instance,
is shown to thrive best on kale |
(certain of the cultivated varieties |
of Brassica oleracea Linn.). Is this}
true for British representatives of!
P. rapae? Why do larvae prefer the |
type of foodplant their mother fed |
on? These are questions that couid
well be answered by Members of —
our Society. 4

While the majority of the papers

TE

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

deal with American butterflies, the
fact that biology is stressed and
taxonomy kept to a minimum makes
these papers interesting reading, and
the principles and methods used can
well be applied to other species.
It is certainly not the intention

of this new journal to confine itself to

the American scene, and papers on

‘Lepidoptera from anywhere in the

world will doubtless appear in later
issues as the journal becomes known

‘to lepidopterists.

A subscription price of nearly £3

is not unreasonable for a volume of
-300 pages which is not only well-
“printed on paper of excellent quality,

_ but is also profusely illustrated with
line diagrams, half-tones and eight

“_-

|

.

‘#

j
i

coloured plates.

I
fi
mi

}

B.O.C.G.

‘British Butterflies, illustrated and
described by Richard Ward. Brooke
‘Bond Tea Ltd, London. Price 6d.

The cigarette card, treasure of my

_youth, died with the last war but has
been resurrected in another form by
‘the introduction of the tea-packet
‘card. Brooke Bond Tea Ltd have over
‘the last few years produced several
‘series of such cards on natural history
-which compare very favourably with
/ pre-war cigarette cards, and have
‘taken the interest of collectors of
these cards a stage further by supply-
ing excellent little booklets designed
to receive the cards as they are
collected. The latest issue deals with
"the British butterflies. At a cost of

sixpence it is real value for money
and the tea consumption in my own
household has risen phenomenally in
order to secure the cards to fill the

- booklet.

| find it hard to fault the colour

_ reproduction and the drawings are
/ of a high standard. Fifty species are

j

¢
i

|

depicted on the cards, each with a
description (the descriptions are re-
peated in the booklet, below the

71

spaces for the cards), and notes on
the other species and migrant or
extinct species are included in the
text of the booklet. Several pages are
devoted to drawings of varieties,
larvae and ova and there are notes
on collecting and on the structure
of insects.

| would disagree with some of the
text where some comments are very
misleading and there are several
minor inaccuracies. There is the
statement that “varieties or aber-
rations usually occur owing to some
great temperature difference during
the pupa stage of the insect, though
with certain butterflies there is the
possibility that aberrations occur due
to hereditary reasons ’’. | would con-
sider that the reverse of this state-
ment is nearer the truth. There is
another note which states that “ with
two exceptions, butterfly wings meet
vertically over the back when at rest,
but moths usually are folded nearly
flat’. This discounts the fact that a
large number of butterflies at rest in
sunlight drop their wings flat, and
ignores that large mass of moths that
rest with their wings closed vertically.
There are, copied from standard text
books, one or two minor errors about
particular foodplants. In view of the
great interest of the relationship of
the Large Blue (Maculinea arion Linn.)
with the ants it is a pity that it is not
mentioned. The description of some
caterpillars is also misleading, e.g.,
“the caterpillars are blue green
marked with thin white stripes and
flat in shape”’ is hardly a correct
description of the larvae of the Purple
Emperor (Apatura iris Linn.).

However, the excellence of the
whole offsets the minor aberrations,
and Mr Ward and Brooke Bond Tea
Ltd are to be congratulated on pro-
ducing a booklet well worth filling
and keeping. Let us hope for cards
from the same sources on further
entomological subjects.

PoWeG,

72

LOUGHBOROUGH
NATURALISTS’ CLUB

Hon. Secretary: Mrs P. A. Candlish,
B.A., ‘ Rockside ’, The Dawe, Wood-
house Eaves, Nr Loughborough, Leic-
estershire.

The Annual Report of the Lough-
borough Naturalists’ Club (which is
affiliated to the AES) has just been
published (Feb. 1st 1964). The most
impressive aspect of this report is
the number of activities undertaken
by the Club. During 1963 there
were five Committee meetings, one
A.G.M., five ordinary meetings, five
special meetings and six outings or
field trips. As well as this, the Club
started or continued eleven surveys.
All except two of these have shown
very satisfactory progress. The key
to the Club’s success is undoubtedly
the keen support of its members,
for 88 per cent of them participated
in or attended the above-mentioned
activities.

Support for the many branches of
natural history studied by the Club
has remained as strong as in previous
years. The predominant interest
appears to be the study of bird life,
but plenty of stimulus was provided
for those with other interests.

This Club must be among the most
successful in the Country and is an
excellent example to those who may
be interested in forming a local or
county organisation. | am sure that
all AES Members wish the Club every
success for 1964.

G.D.T.
NOTES AND
OBSERVATIONS

THE PINE HAWKMOTH
IN NORTH KENT
On the night of July 8th 1963 a
male specimen of Hyloicus pinastri
Linn. (Pine Hawkmoth) was taken at

MAY, 1964 |

our moth-trap in Orpington. The |
moth appeared in the trap quite ©
early, at about 11 p.m.
We do not know of any recent

records from Kent of this insect. —
However, with the recent extension —
of its range across Surrey and with |
the post-war conifer plantations near- |
by, it is quite possible that it is now —
breeding in this area.

D. W. Webb (3000).

8.2.64. P. E. Webb (3526J).

THE WICKEN SEDGE FEN

Readers might be interested in
some facts (if they do not know them
already) which | unearthed from a
gardener when | visited the Fen in
August 1963.

The Large Copper Butterfly (Lyca-
ena dispar Haw.), which was reason-
ably common before 1940, was ex-
terminated by the cutting down
and claiming from the wild of the
majority of the acreage of the Fen.
Thus it was not able to maintain
itself (against excessive collecting)
in the small acreage it had been left.

Today one must sign the visitor’s
book to look round the Fen, but to
take any specimens of the Swallow-
tail Butterfly (Papilio machaon Linn.)
one must obtain a special permit
from the National Trust. The Swal-
lowtail Butterfly also occurs at the
Hickling Broads. As well as feeding

on Milk Parsley (Peucedanum palustre +

(Linn.) Moench) and Carrot tops
(Daucus carota Linn.), the larva will
also eat Angelica (Angelica sylvestris
Linn.). |
When feeding on Milk Parsley,
the Swallowtail larva strips off only
one side of the leaf, in its own par- |
ticular manner, thus giving its posit-
ion away. From what | had read
before | had gained the impression
that Papilio machaon was rare, but
now | know that it is “ hanging on’
in a very very precarious position.
7.1.64. John S. E. Feltwell (3618J).

Printed by Ellis & Phillips Ltd., East Side Press, Rye Street, Bishop’s Stortford, and pop isned by the Amateur
Entomologists’ Society, 42 Normandy Avenue, Barnet, Herts. 1964

APPARATUS

If you are thinking of re-arranging or enlarging your collection, consult
my price-lists. Amongst other entomological items you will find listed:

CABINETS, STORE-BOXES, CORK SHEETING,
LINING PAPER, and LABEL LISTS

Write for a copy to:

L. CHRISTIE, 137 Gleneldon Road, Streatham, London, S.W.16, England
(Postal Business only)

THE AES PROSPECTUS

CONTAINING FULL DETAILS
will be sent to anyone interested

Please apply, enclosing 4d. stamp, to:

Hon. Advertising Secretary, AES

54 GYLES PARK, STANMORE, MIDDLESEX

ADVERTISEMENTS
LIVESTOCK displayed in these pages cost very little
We expect to have ova, larvae and
: pupae of many species of British and Whole page £3
_ European Lepidoptera, also a great
_ many from tropical countries which Half page £1 - 10s.

_ can be easily reared in this country.

We also list cages, many useful rear- Quarter page £1

_ ing containers, sleeves, netting, etc.

Send for a copy of our free |2-page

illustrated catalogue—now 2
write to
54 Gyles Park,
° ° St , Middlesex.
Worldwide Butterflies Uo ae ene
The Advertising Secretary
Limited will be pleased to supply you with
Seaficids House, Charmouth; further ae eee advertising
in the

Bridport, Dorset, England
AES BULLETIN

Entomologist’s Gazette

A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF BRITISH ENTOMOLOGY
Well illustrated
Subscription: £2 per year

Free Sample Copy sent on request

353 Hanworth Road, Hampton, Middlesex, England

Entomological Literature
NEW AND SECONDHAND

Large stocks of Separata and Reprints on all Orders and
Entomological subjects

Catalogues sent free on request

E. W. CLASSEY, F.R.E.S., A.B.A.
Entomological Publisher and Bookseller

353 Hanworth Road, Hampton, Middlesex, England

BEE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

OFFERS THE FOLLOWING AND OTHER FACILITIES TO
ENTOMOLOGISTS:

* Use of lending library of books, journals and scientific reprints on bees.
Use of library of English translations of important foreign publications.

* Loan of Exhibitions for shows and meetings, including Exhibition of photo-
graphs and photomicrographs of bees.

Publications include:

* Dictionary of beekeeping terms, English - French - German - Dutch (12/6 board;
16/- cloth). This gives the equivalents in the four languages of 1500
beekeeping and entomological terms.

* Bee World — international scientific journal about bees.

Apicultural Abstracts — summaries of all important publications about bees
and allied subjects.

Membership, £1 a year

Write for details to the Director:
Dr EVA CRANE, Woodside House, Chalfont Heights,
GERRARDS CROSS, Bucks.

Piblicitions of e

THE AMATEUR ENTOMOLOGISTS’ SOCIETY

LEAFLETS
la Severn 4 pages, 2 figs. Price 3d.
Collecting Sawflies. 12 pages (including 2 plates), 26 figs. Price 6d.
‘Collecting Flies (Diptera). 8 pages, 1 fig., 8 plates. Price 2/6d.

Zz
(eo)
non wn A WwW

a ; Collecting Beetles Associated with Stored Food Products. 9 pages, 6 figs.,
_ . 3 plates. Price 1/6d.

Some Improved Devices for Rearing Hymenoptera. 7 pages, 3 figs. Price 6d.

2
)
N

; No. 8 Collecting Ants. 12 pages, 5 figs. Price 6d.
: No. 9 pong Caddises. 5 pages, 4 plates. Price 1/-.
| . Experiments with Bees. 12 pages, 3 figs. Price éd.

Collecting Dragonflies. 12 pages (including 2 plates), 12 figs. Price 6d.
¥ Collecting Microlepidoptera. 4 pages, 1 fig. Price 3d.
Setting Microlepidoptera. 4 pages, 5 figs. Price 3d.

Collecting Het-Bugs (Hemiptera-Heteroptera). 49 pages (including 2 plates)
5 figs. Price 6d.

Collecting Clearwings. 12 ees (including 2 plates), 4 figs. Price 6d.
Preserving Caterpillars. 14 pages (including 6 plates), 9 figs. Price 1/-..
22 - Collecting Psocoptera. 4 pages, 10 figs. Price 6d. |
Collecting Lacewings. 9 pages, 8 figs., 5 plates. Price 1/-.

4 Entomology of Bird Pellets. 8 pages, 4 plates, 1 map. Price 1/6d.
Collecting Bumble Bees. 20 pages, 83 figs. Price 2/-. |

B26 Collecting Collembola. 6 pages, 4 figs. Price 1/-.

oA Study of the Insects Living on the oe Tree. 20 pages, 4 figs., 1 dia-
gram. Price 1/6d.

ap % Killing, eine ae Storing Butterflies and Moths. 13 pages, 10 figs. Price 9d

= PAMPHLETS
°. 4 Diaber List of British Macrolepidoptera. 32 pages. Price 1 L (reduced from 3/6d. )
sae | Check List of British Macrolepidoptera. 32 pages. Price 3d. (reduced from WS )
PNo.. | , Label | List of British Butterflies. 2 pages. Price 3d.
lo. vie Directory of Natural History Societies. 155 ee Price 7/6d.
ae : ; Supplement to the above. 44 pages. Price 2y-.
Glossary for the Young Lepidopterist. 6 pages, 2 figs. Price éd.

ications are obtainable from L. Christie, 137 Gleneldon Road, Streatham,
-16., England. Do not send remittance with your order as an invoice will
the publications eine will include the correct postal Snatee,

Publications of

THE AMATEUR ENTOMOLOGISTS’ SOCIETY

The Amateur Entomologist
Volumes in print are :—

Volume 5 ey 2 tale a ;

Contains articles on Some British Moths Reviewed by W. H. T. Tams ; Habits of Some
British Moths by Dr E. A. Cockayne ; Setting mune e and other papers. 64 —
pages, 84 figures, 4 plates. a
(Only a few copies left. ae . Pr ie a "Price : 4s. 6d.

Volume 8 Ra i i
Contains illustrated ericles on Collecting Braconflicst: Collecting “Micros” \ Sidepe dl
nets ; Collecting Mosquitoes ; an eight-page Te au standard books on Entomology, c
etc. 48 pages, 32 figures, 6 plates. | Price : | 5S. Od.

Volume 9 . 3
‘Practical Methods ‘and Hints for Lepidopterists. Contains illustrated instructions fan a
making many types of breeding- and other cages; articles on rearing and collecting oe
larvae ; and illustrated instructions for making Beste cals 42 pages, 48 figures,
6 plates. | : Price: 5s. Od. ;

Volume 10 3 ies
Contains illustrated articles on Collecting lacewineor: 3 “Drawiae insects: : Collecting :
Caddises ; Photography of maine? ; ete. 40 pages, 10 fi eles 12 plates. :
(Not many left). — oa Price : 6s. Od

Volume II ei 4
A Coleopterist’s Handbook. Déscribes the tools, apparatus and macho for i callestine 4
British beetles ; their habitats, commensals and pre-adult stages ; how to record, |
photograph, make a personal collection, and conduct’ a local Sure ae ey

20 pages, 50 figures, 20 plates. bby Price : 15s. Od.

Volume 12 tec fe :
A Silkmoth Rearer’s Handbook (2nd edition). Gives descriptions oF apparatus, methods —
for breeding, and life-cycles of over 120 species ; references to some 1400 species —
and subspecies. A per aca reference Decl on the eee 165 pages, 26 figures,
26 plates (2 coloured). seat Ree 1 Price : | «Us. 6d.

The Bulletin of the Amateur Entomolagicest Society
(World List abbreviation ; Bull. amat. Ent. Soc.)

Back Volumes contain many interesting and valuable articles. Some an the early ;
Volumes are in short supply, so now is the time to complete | your set. A on of pleases :

—

article that you require without having to buy the whole Volume. Bae

~ Volumes in print are :— Pct acir ts sae EG ;

Volume 7 (1946-8)... Price: 2s. Od. Volume 14 (1955) ... Price: 12s. 6d. |
Volume 8 (1949) ... Price: 10s. 6d. Volume 15 (1956) ... Price: I2s. 6d.
Volume 9 (1950) ... Price: 10s. 6d. Volume 16 (1957) ... Price: 12s. 6d.
Volume 10 (1951) ... Price: 10s. 6d. Volume 17 (1958) ... Price: 12s. 6d.
Volume 11 (1952)... Price : 12s. 6d. Volume 18 (1959) ... Price: 12s. 6d.
Volume 12 (1953) ... Price: 12s. 6d. Volume 19 (1960) ... Price: 12s. 6d.
Volume 13 (1954) ... Price: 12s. 6d. Volume 20 (1961) ... Price : Is. Od.
Each Volume is complete with cover and index. — q

Single back numbers are priced at Is. 3d. per copy, except for the special Silver Jubilee q
Number, of 18 pages, which is priced at 2s.6d. mM a

These publications are obtainable from L. Christie, 137 Gleneldon Road, ‘Streachama
London S.W.16, England. Do not send remittance with your order as an invoice will PS
be sent with the publications and will include the correct ass charge. ae

THE BULLET

un OF
THE AMATEUR

ENTOMOLOG!

STS’

ERY

°

lation

.

5

World ‘List abbrev

Bull. amat. Ent. Soc. |

EDITED by H. V. DANKS

WILD ANIMALS

of the British Isles
by Maurice Burton, D.Sc.

One of the most fascinating aspects of
a walk in the country is the unexpected
encounter with wild animals, rare and
common; to know for certain what you
have seen and how and where they live
will add greatly to your enjoyment. In
this really fascinating book Maurice Bur-

ton describes in detail all you will want |

to know about British Wild Animals. The
book is fully illustrated with 48 colour
plates and 63 black-and-white plates.
There are also many drawings in “n=

17s. éd. net

From all Booksellers

| Frederick Warne & Co. Ltd

1-4 Bedford Court, London, WC2 |

“AMATEUR ENTOMOLOGISTS
SOCIETY

SILVER JUBILEE
NUMBER
1935-1960
Published August 1960
Price 2s. 6d.

ORDERS TO:
_L. CHRISTIE,
- 137 Gleneldon Road, Streatham,
S.WA16 0

(Please do not send money with order—an
invoice will be sent)

Manuscripts,

further information about advertising

AES NOTICE
WHERE TO WRITE >

"Membership applications, offers of help, a

changes of address, and non-arrival of —

Bulletins to: D. E. Dodwell, 28 ie

merleaze Park, Yeovil, Somerset.
Yeovil 928.

Aivericcree to: R. D. Hilliard, 54 Gyles. a

Park, Stanmore, Middlesex.

1,

Offers to lead Field Meenas exhibit, etc., =|
to: B. F. Skinner, 85 Elder Road, West | —

Norwood, London, S. E. Dh:

“awones. and baaleo
review to: H. V. Danks, 7 The Ridge. —
Surbiton, pas

Subscriptions (15/- per annum, 10/- for’

Juniors) to: B. R. Stallwood, 17 Clare-—

mont Avenue, eS -Op -Thames,
_ Middlesex. eye eee

vouth matterse wep (EE Berman,
_ School, St pegs Hunts. :

| Whole bee £3 ~
‘Half Page f1- 105,

Quarter page £1

oe Hie to
54 Gyles Park,
‘Stanmore, Middlesex.
~The Advertising Secretary
will be pleased to supply you with |

in the feos ae a

AES” BULLETIN |

‘
mx)! es

re ~~,
Be eee i ee

“EDGware 1604. 1

“GIPsy Hill 0057. |
for
-ELMbridge 4156. |

i

EDITORIAL

| am glad to say that the amount
of copy which has been forthcoming
during winter and spring has been
‘quite satisfactory, so that | will
Ykeep this Editorial short in order
to make room for as many articles
from Members as possible.

It might just be added that | shall
be abroad for a fair period this sum-
mer, and perhaps Members would
bear with me if replies to corres-
pondence seem unduly slow. Please
do send in your material, however,
as copy is generally most scarce in
the summer, yet edited copy for
the November issue must be sent to
the printer before the end of August.
H. V. Danks (2907).

SECRETARY’S NOTES

| have just received my copy of
jthe May Bulletin, and it is very
pleasing and encouraging indeed to
|see some fresh names among the
| contributors. | hope it has made
| interesting reading to you all, and
| that in consequence you will make
| your own contribution to the con-
tents of the Bulletin. Do not despair
if any material that you submit does
not appear in the first Bulletin
afterwards, for the Editor will fit
it in as soon as he can.

Another point that was pleasing
to see was the number of Members
_making use of the facilities of the
Wants and Exchanges List. Somewhere

| Front cover illustration: Larva and imago (pupa inset)

of the White-letter Hairstreak Butterfly (Strymonidia
w-album Knoch) on Wych Elm (Ulmus glabra Huds.),
| drawn by Mr J. Cooter (3290J).

AES

BULLETIN

No. 264

AUGUST, 1964

there is a fellow Member who would
be pleased to take your surplus stock,
whether it be livestock, set speci-
mens, books or equipment, either
by exchange or purchase, so please
send all details to Mr R. W. J. Uffen,
4 Vaughan Avenue, Stamford Brook,
London, W.6.

The article by M. E. Castle (Bull.
amats (Ent: Soc., 23: S73), is an
excellent example of how to get the
best out of the Society and how you
can help someone else get something
out of the Society by putting a little
back in yourself.

Leaflets

| would be interested to hear from
any Member who has an idea for a
new leaflet or pamphlet. A sub-
committee of the Council is at
present undertaking the task of
going through the existing range of
leaflets and pamphlets, revising them
as necessary and writing up one or
two new ones, and any new ideas
for this purpose would be welcomed.

Annual Exhibition
The Annual Exhibition will again
be held in October (the date has not
yet been finally fixed [but see the
following item]) and now is the time
to start thinking about your exhibit.
A very good exhibition was held last
year, but let us make this year’s one
the best ever. This is the big oppor-
tunity for Members to meet other
Members, and many a good friend-
ship has started here. A_ notice
giving the details will be sent to
you in due course.
| still have the following books by

J. Henri Fabre available:—

The Life of the Caterpillar

The Life of the Grasshopper

The Glow-worm and Other Beetles

The Life of the Weevil

74

No charge other than postage is
being made for these books, and
anyone interested should contact me.

| send best wishes to all Members.

Douglas E. Dodwell (3482),
Hon. General Secretary.

THE ANNUAL EXHIBITION
1964

The Annual Exhibition for 1964
will, subject to confirmation, be held
on Saturday 24th October at the
Hugh Myddleton Secondary School,
Corporation Row, London, E.C.1,
beginning at 2 p.m.

When the date has been finalised,
notice of it will be sent to Members.
However, now is the time to prepare
your exhibits, and it is hoped that a
really extensive display of equipment,
specimens and livestock will be pro-
duced. | would emphasise that good
labelling of exhibits is most import-
ant, and perhaps we could make a
special effort over this for the 1964
Exhibition.

The entomological traders will
again be present, and the Exhibition
provides a unique opportunity for
viewing the wares of most of the
dealers in this country.

This opportunity, and the chance
to meet other Members—and the
members of the Advisory Panel, who
will be freely available—to pass on
your own ideas, and to gain others
through the exhibits and demonstra-
tions, is too good to miss. Make sure
that you and your friends do not
miss it.

B. F. Skinner (2470),
Hon. Meetings Secretary.

®
ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

The Annual General Meeting was
held in the Linnean Society’s rooms

AUGUST, 1964 |
at Burlington House, London W.1., |
on Saturday 21st March 1964.

The meeting was preceeded by a
conversazione and a very interesting |
talk on ‘‘ The Butterflies of Southern
France’ by the retiring President |
Mr P. W. Cribb. The talk was illus |
trated by colour slides, and Mr Cribb |
brought along several exhibits.

————

Following the meeting, a Special
Meeting was held to amend Rule |
No. 5 of the Society’s Constitution |
and Rules. The amendment was
carried unanimously.

The AES Council for 1964 is now |
constituted as follows :— |
Hon. President
D. Ollevant
Hon. General Secretary
D. E. Dodwell
Hon. Treasurer
G. D. Trebilcock
Hon. Assistant Treasurer
B. R. Stallwood
Hon. Bulletin Editor
H. V. Danks
Hon. General Editor
R. W. J. Uffen
Hon. Advertising Secretary
R. D. Hilliard
Hon. Youth Secretary
H. J. Berman
Hon. Meetings Secretary
B. F. Skinner
Councillors
B. F. Betts, P. W. Cribb,
A. F. McGeeney,
A. R. Middleton, C. B. Pratt,
V. Shearer, P. Taylor,
L. S. Whicher, N. Wilding

One vacancy remains on the Coun-
cil, to be filled by the Council. This
has occurred owing to a last-minute |
resignation of Mr T. F. Knight who |
has had to move away from the
London area.

A total of 33 Members and friends |
signed the Attendance Book.

D. E. Dodwell (3482),

Hon. General Secretary.

‘

“AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

THE ANNUAL REPORT OF
THE SOCIETY’S
REPRESENTATIVE ON THE
NATURE CONSERVANCY’S
ENTOMOLOGICAL LIAISON

_ COMMITTEE FOR 1963-64

_ This committee has met twice
during the last twelve months and
several subjects were discussed which
might be mentioned here. An interim
‘report was given on the survey which
‘is being carried out by the Nature
Conservancy’s investigator into the
‘status of the Large Blue Butterfly
(Maculinea arion Linn.), and it is
obvious from the results obtained
so far that 1963 was an exceptionally
poor year for the insect and that the
fears expressed for the future of this
- are very well founded. In spite
of intensive observations and marking
experiments made by the investiga-
tor, who stayed in the distribution
area over the whole of the emergence
period, and by a number of experi-
_ enced helpers, only about 80 speci-
mens were recorded. The investiga-
tion is still proceeding and naturally
it is hoped that 1964 will be a better
_ year for both weather and butterfly
and that a more favourable picture
will be apparent after this season.
j It is pleasing to report that the land-
owners concerned are sympathetic
_'and co-operative and it now seems
possible that at last something posit-
ive will be accomplished.
The matter of collecting in nature
reserves was brought up at the last
_ meeting and it was generally agreed
that unless entomologists individu-
ally, and particularly lepidopterists,
| Were prepared to help the Conserv-
/ancy by submitting reports on their
| activities within the reserves some
}form of limitation might be made,

|
i

jie. the future issuing of permits.
It must be pointed out that the
j Conservancy does not wish to hinder
f scientific investigations by this means
|

but it is only seeking to preserve

|

VS

the faunae of its reserves, and, the
majority of our Members will agree,
to maintain these faunae is one of
the main reasons for the Conserv-
ancy’s existence.

The question was raised of the
introduction of foreign species and
specimens into this country, and of
British endemic species into one
locality from another. This thought-
less practice has become more fre-
quent recently and if done deliber-
ately is certainly to be deplored
scientifically as it makes nonsense
of records and genetical studies, etc.
If any of our Members are intent on
introducing aliens then at least they
should have the good sense to report
the details in strictest confidence to
the Royal Entomological Society of
London. Our Members are asked to
co-operate in this matter and your
representative will be very pleased
to discuss it in greater detail than is
possible here if interested Members
will contact him.

2153-64. T. G. Howarth (196).

@
COUNCIL’S REPORT FOR 1963

The number of subscriptions paid
for 1963 was 706, and together with
those Members joining since 1st
September 1963, whose subscriptions
cover 1964, the final Membership for
the year was 747. This comprised
560 Ordinary and Affiliate, 179
Junior, 2 Life and 6 Honorary
Members.

With the new quarterly publication
of the Bulletin, Members received a
full quota of Bulletins for 1963,
although these came out later than
the dates proposed. It is, however, a
much brighter picture than in the
past, and with this in mind, we can
once more look forward to the
Bulletin being published on time.

The Annual General Meeting was
held in the Rooms of the Linnean

76

Society at Burlington House, London
W.1. on Saturday March 30th. A
fair attendance was recorded, and
the Meeting was preceeded by a
conversazione and two films, ‘ Evolu-
tion in Progress ’ and ‘ The Melanism
Of Northern Lepidoptera’. Both
films were by Dr H. B. D. Kettlewell,
MEA, cf R-E:S-

A successful Annual Exhibition was
held on 5th October 1963 at the
Hugh Myddelton Secondary School.
A full report appears in the February
1964 issue of the Bulletin.

Some changes in the Council took
place during 1963. Resignations were
received from Mr P. G. Taylor, Bulle-
tin Editor, and from Mr M. C. Birch,
Youth Secretary. Mr H. V. Danks
took over the office of Bulletin
Editor from Mr Taylor, whom he had
been assisting in the past. Mr H. J.
Berman of St lvo School was co-opted
as Honorary Youth Secretary. The
Council strength was made up by
the co-option of Messrs B. F. Betts,
V. Shearer, and P. Taylor.

Once again, the Council wishes to
show appreciation of the facilities
afforded to Members of the Amateur
Entomologists’ Society to join other
societies on their field meetings.
Several field meetings of our own
were also arranged.

A revised edition of the Advisory
Panel was published in the August
edition of the Bulletin, and the first
Supplement to the 1962 Membership
List and Geographical Key appeared
in the November issue as a ‘ pull-
Out.

Many Members of the Society took
an active part in the National Nature
Week held in 1963. This included
exhibitions, walks, etc.

The Council met six times during
the year, for the first quarter under
the chairmanship of Mr G. D.
Trebilcock, and for the rest of the
year under Mr P. W. Cribb.

One of the main obstacles con-
fronting the Society in the past, the

{
AUGUST, 1964 |

publication of the Bulletin, has now |
been overcome and the Society can |
look forward to a refreshed life in ©
the future.

Douglas E. Dodwell (3482), |

241 .3:64: Hon. General Secretary. |

TREASURER’S REPORT |
FOR 1963 |
|

| have to report that the Society
sustained a loss of £282. Os. 6d. during
the past year. At first sight this |
appears to be critical. However, |
would like to analyse the cause of this | |
deficit.

For some years the Society has been
going through a period of extreme
difficulties. It is owing to these|
difficulties that the present deficit |
has accumulated. During the past)
three years the Society has employed
four different printers, two of which’
proved to be unsuitabie and their)
prices too high. The continual delay)
in the Bulletins incurred the Society |
with increased postal charges be-|
cause of the need for Council mem-|
bers to write personal letters to,
Members explaining the position and
because separate notices of events)
had to be sent out. In 1963 it was
necessary to replenish stocks of,
Society stationery and to _ repay!
Mr Walz of Argentina substantial
sums of money that had been credited)
to him.

The Society has been able in the)
past to have a credit balance because,
the delays have made it impossible.
for commitments undertaken in one|
year to be paid in the same year.
During 1963 the Council has made}
a great effort to place the Society
back on a sound footing and thus the,
accumulation of outstanding bills has —
had to be met during 1963. Un-
fortunately, the past three years have —
reflected unfavourably upon Member-
ship, and there has been a steady

i

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

UM

SS Ce

decline in subscriptions received.
In 1961 our subscriptions amounted
to £587 whilst this year they amount
Hto £474.
_ Having outlined the causes of the
present deficit | will now proceed to
give my estimation of the future. It
_is probable that the income expected
_ for 1964 will be sufficient to meet the
majority of expenses to be incurred.
_ Also, | am confident that the Society
will be able to reduce the deficit by
at least half. With the Bulletin issues
_now back to normal there will be a
decrease in postal charges for two
‘reasons : the postal expenses of vari-
‘ous Council members should de-
- crease, and a saving will result from
posting Bulletins four times a year
‘instead of eleven. This will be the
_ first year that the effect of this will
‘show. The Society has adequate
| stationery supplies, and demands for
funds for this should be small. We
'.can now expect that the Society be
once more back on a solid foundation
-and the number of subscriptions
‘|should at least remain stable, and
/we can hope for an increased Mem-
bership. | would also like to point
}out that although the Society has
had increased commitments our re-
serve at the Halifax Building Society
_has remained untouched and has in
‘fact increased by £41. 8s. 11d. to
_ bring the reserve to £741. 8s. 11d.
| am confident that the present
financial position is only a temporary
reflection of the past difficulties of
the Society, and that within a short
_ period of time | shall be able to report
that our deficit has been removed
_and that the Society is once more in
_ a strong financial position.
| G. D. Trebilcock (2976),
| 21.3.64. Hon. Treasurer.

Facet

~

a

| TREASURER’S NOTES

| The attention of Members is drawn
| to the following.

(1) Owing to a typing error there
is a mistake on the Income and
Expenditure Account for 1963 which
was sent out to Members with the
February Bulletin. Annual Exhibition
Expenses should read :

£19. 14. 11.
Less Receipts £17. 10. 0.
£2) 40 47-

(2) The Treasurer would be grate-
ful if those Members who arranged
to pay their subscription by banker’s
order before the increase of the
subscription would make arrange-
ments to ensure that the banker’s
order has been amended to 15/-.

G.D.T.

COLLECTING NOTES
— August, 1964

The Smaller Moths
Lithocolletis lautella Zell. Mr Brad-
ford’s notes read :—‘‘ This moth is

drawn from specimens bred from
mines in the undersides of the leaves
of oak (Quercus spp.). The head is
black, the thorax a shiny greyish
colour.

“ The forewings are a rich orangey
brown with black edgings to the
white areas which are a_ shining
metallic silver. The hindwings and
cilia are a greyish brown.

“It is a local insect found through-
out Britain and is on the wing in May
and in August. | obtained my speci-
mens by enveloping the twigs or
leaves in a fine chiffon or a silk

stocking.”
L. stettinensis von Nicelli. Mr Brad-
ford’s notes are :—‘‘ The drawing is

from specimens bred from the leaves
of Alder (Alnus glutinosa (Linn.)
Gaertn.), the larva feeding in the
upperside of the leaf, making a
brownish fuciform mine. The whole
moth has a greyish brown look about

78

Lithocolletis lautella Zell.

Lithocolletis stettinensis von Nicelli

it but like many of the Lithocolletids
when seen in sunshine or bright light
has a metallic shimmer. The bands
and markings on the forewings are
dark brownish grey interrupted by
silver white bands and wedges. The
apex of the wing seems to change
in markings as you view it from
different angles. They, as well as
others of this genus, always remind
me of peacock feathers. It is on the
wing in May and August.”

¥ as -
| \\
i \\\\AV\

AUGUST, 1964

\ a
\\\\ \\
\\i\\\a\

\
\\\\

\\ 0
\\\ \\\ \\\\ AQ
ak \ ‘\ \\ \\ \\\ AY \
a \\\

ESB.

ESB.

An easy plant to look out for in
the autumn is Yarrow (Achillea
millefolium Linn.), and quite a number |
of larvae feed on its leaves, flowers,
seeds and roots. | have left the roots
—for these can be collected later in |
the year (or early in the next year)—
and will give some idea on what can |
be found by looking at the plants or |
gathering the seed-heads. On the |
flowers and seeds there are :—
larvae of Phalonia dipoltella Huebn.,

“AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

a local moth in the southern and
south-eastern counties of England
only ; P. smeathmanniana Fab., an-
other local moth in England ; Eux-
anthis angustana Huebn., a common
moth ; Eucosma citrana Huebn., a
local moth in England ; but probably
the commonest and most conspicuous
insect will be the case-bearing species
Coleophora argentula Zell., whose
browny-white case sticks up above
the seed-heads ; on the leaves there
can also be found the case of C.
troglodytelia Dup., although | have
found this more commonly on thistle
leaves (Carduus spp.).

The leaves of Elm (Ulmus procera
Salis.) may be searched for blotches,
cand these may be caused by the larva
‘of Lithocolletis schreberella Fab. Also
when you are gathering your apples
‘look out for the blotches in the
leaves caused by the larva of L.
blancardella Fab.

Probably the commonest larva
‘found on trees in the autumn is that
‘of Diurnea fagella Schiff., a rather
jugly looking caterpillar with a large
head.

_ As the season progresses collect
/ your seed-heads, nuts and fruits and
‘store them up in the best way for
‘the winter. Any notes, especially on
life-histories, would be very much
appreciated either by myself or the
Bulletin Editor. Another point of
| interest to those whose main hobby
_is the Macrolepidoptera is that larvae
_of the Pugs (Eupithecia spp.) will also
be found on the seed-heads, and this
is another group of moths on which

menty of work needs to be done.
D. Ollevant (1514).

| The Hymenoptera Aculeata

__| must first apologise that the
| May Bulletin did not contain any notes
/on the Aculeate Hymenoptera: a
-sudden commitment abroad is my
-only excuse. However, | hope the
natural stimulus of spring was suffici-

79

went to encourage collectors, and it

is perhaps now, after the surfeit of
the spring and early summer forms,
that a further stimulus is needed.

The dominant features of the spring
Aculeate fauna are the emergence of
the hibernating queens of social
wasps and bees (Vespula spp. and
Bombus spp.), and the early species
of Halictus, Andrena and Anthophora.
By July the majority of species are
out, and | find a distinct effort is
needed to continue with collecting.
But there are several late emerging
species which are most profitably
searched for in August, and | would
like to consider two groups here.

Firstly, from among the bees, |
will take the genus Melitta. Although
M. leporina Panz. can appear as early
as June, the three British species are
all on the wing in August. | know of
one locality in Kent where all three
species occur, though they have never
all been taken on the same day.
M. leporina is the commonest species
and is particularly associated with
Lucerne or Alfalfa (Medicago sativa
Linn.). | have also taken it in my gar-
den at Cat-mint (Nepeta cataria Linn.).
M. tricincta Kirby was added to the
British list in 1897 by F. W. L. Sladen,
from E. Kent. It is readily distin-
guished from M. leporina by the black
claw segments of the tarsi. It has
proved fairly widespread in Kent.
M. haemorrhoidalis Fab. is a much
larger insect, and is associated with
Harebell(CampanularotundifoliaLinn.),
usually on the chalk downs.

The second autumn group | would
like to consider is the sphecid genus
Cerceris. These bright, beautifully
sculptured wasps usually nest in
dense colonies, though how much
this is due to sub-social behaviour
and how much to the limited avail-
ability of suitable ground to burrow
into is uncertain. Certainly the in-
dividual females dig and stock their
burrows alone. The six British species
can be separated using Saunders’ key

80

(1896) and their habits have been des-
cribed by Hammand Richards (1930).
Three species are reasonably common
in sandy or light gravel areas. C.
rybyensis Linn. and C. arenaria Linn.
are the commonest and often occur
in the same locality. They differ in
the type of prey with which they
stock their burrows, and this differ-
ence is reflected in their hunting
habits. For instance, in Bushy Park,
Middlesex, C. rybyensis can be seen
flying around clumps of thistles and
other flowers, searching for bees of
the genera Halictus and Andrena.
In the same area C. arenaria will be
found hunting over the general grassy
areas and pouncing on the flowering
spikes of grasses in the search for its
prey, the weevil Strophosomus faber
Huebn. An easy way to get a good
series of the weevil is to capture
the laden females of C. arenaria as
they return to their burrows in the
hard-trodden paths running through
the area. C. cunicularia Schrank is the
other reasonably common species,
also preying on weevils. The remain-
ing three species are much _ less
common, not to say rare, and the
capture of any would be the high-
light in any collector’s day. In fact
there is only one British record of
C. sabulosa Panz., so | wish the best
of luck to anyone searching for
Cerceris spp. this August.
JoCsFelton.

REFERENCES

HAMM, A. H. and RICHARDS, O. W. (1930). Trans.
Ent. Soc. Lond., 78: 95-131. The biology of the
British fossorial wasps of the families Mellinidae-
Genmidec, Philanthidae, Oxybelidae and Trypoxyl-
idae.

SAUNDERS, E. (1896). The Hymenoptera Aculeata of
the British Islands. L. Reeve, London.

FROM OUR NORTHERN
CORRESPONDENT

‘In reply to yours...’

Recent articles | have contributed
to the Bulletin have brought forth

AUGUST, 1964

from Members many interesting and |
helpful letters, together with com- |
several |
matters. | have written personally |

ments and questions on
in reply to each letter but in view of
the interest shown have requested
the Editor to allow me to give a
general and enlarged answer to two

of the main subjects raised.

More about the mercury-vapour light-

trap
It has been rather surprising how

many Members have felt that their |
use of the ‘ m.v.’ trap has left much |

to be desired. One rather comical
comment was from a friend in the
South who remarked that he ‘‘ had

more broken bulbs than moths to |

show for his efforts ’’. On this point

of broken bulbs be it said that most |

of us learn the hard way. Ideally, of
course, the bulb would prove most
effective if entirely unscreened and
allowed to shine forth unhindered.
Very unfortunately our climate simply
will not permit such a proceeding.
In some way the bulb must be pro-
tected even from light rain, and
moreover, the unexpected gust of
wind which may drive in just a few
heavy drops must be equally feared.
It has been suggested that a trans-
parent basin placed over the bulb
is very useful. Personally | have found
that whilst this method keeps off the
rain very well indeed, the heat builds
up inside the cover and cracked

bulbs are the net result anyway. |

| therefore return to the method out-
lined in my previous article. A piece
of clear Perspex or similar material
is used. It should be of roughly the
same area as the trap itself. It is
screwed on to four upright legs which
rise from the four corners of the trap,
and is sixteen inches from the actual
bulb and slightly sloping to allow
rain to run down and over the back
of the trap.

A second query about the trap
concerns the danger of moths crawl-
ing out of the chamber before morn-

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

ing. | have never found this to be
really serious. Provided that an
adequate supply of hiding places is
provided in the shape of egg-trays,
the moths are quite happy to enjoy
the light (if they do enjoy it, that is)
until daylight, and then to take
shelter under the trays. A far more
important consideration, in my opin-
ion, is the question of the moths
which never actually enter the trap.
It is an unfortunate fact that many
of the choicer species simply ‘ hang
around ’ or at best settle on or near
the trap. So far as garden recording
‘is concerned | make a point of taking
sout a strong torch and examining
the traps and immediate surrounding
area before going to bed. In this way
‘some at least of the species which
»would otherwise be missed complete-
ly are obtained. Looking back at my
bown records | note that of the
‘twenty species | have recorded as
‘new to my district two were found
‘resting outside the trap and another
ispecies, taken only three times, was
‘on every occasion found resting in
‘the radius of the light but on a wall
_close by.
Finally, before leaving this subject
| might add that the question of
timing devices has been raised. | use
a very helpful device for my ‘hot
cupboard ’ and am aware how useful

i)

\such timing mechanisms can be, but

|
{

| do not favour them for the ‘ m.v.’
trap. Two main objections, amongst
-many others, will serve to illustrate
why they are not suitable. We have
_already mentioned cracked bulbs.
‘It is a fact that from time to time,
and in some summers far too often,
we have nights when ‘lighting up ’
is simply out of the question. No
“matter how the bulb was protected
\it would be shattered in no time.
It need hardly be added that you
might overlook the fact or be away
‘from home for the odd hour — and
/on comes your light and ‘ pop’ goes
your bulb. The other obvious point

i)

81

is that you may well be away from
home unexpectedly for one or more
nights. A timing device, unless duly
switched off beforehand, will result
in a useless and wasteful mess of
insects, which would help nobody.
More about assembling

| turn to these queries with extra
interest because only an hour ago
| was on the moors with a couple of
females (moths of course!) but re-
turned without success. It seems that
this has been the unfortunate experi-
ence over and over again of many of
our Members, and they would like to
know what they are doing wrong.
| would suggest that they are doing
nothing wrong. More often than not
conditions are against successful as-
sembling. My office is less than a mile
from fine heather moors and every
year | have frequent opportunities to
take Emperor Moth (Saturnia pavonia
Linn.) females (surely they should be
called ““ Empresses ’’!), Eggars (Lasio-
campa quercus callunae Palmer), sev-
eral of the ‘tigers’ and other
suitable species for assembling, and
be it said that very often they fail
to produce results. | think two very
important points should be realised.
First, it depends what we mean by
successful results. It must be re-
membered that in nature only one
suitable male is required and provided
this duly appears within, say, the ten
days after the female has emerged,
then all is well. On the other hand
we make a hasty trip to the area,
impatiently spend an hour or so
waiting and then return empty-
handed. The other consideration is
that most species mate at special
times and when conditions are just
right. We can make the first pro-
vision through experience (for very
few of the text-books give us any
guidance on the matter), but as for
conditions you just have to hope for
the best. A few pointers may help.
Undoubtedly the great enemy is
wind. Today my reason for lack of

82

success was a gusty wind which
rendered the calling of the females
quite ineffective. Similarly a cold
wind will prevent any mating flight
of most species. Bright sunshine is
not essential, indeed, | have always
found a still, cloudy day to be best —
the calm before a thunderstorm is
ideal and on two occasions | witnessed
fantastic sights on such days. Females
are at their best in many species
about twenty-four hours after emerg-
ence but | have found them effective
up to a fortnight later. If the weather
is unsuitable it is wise to keep the
females in a cool, fairly dark place
until they are required.

Finally a point which need hardly
be raised but does cause some fail-
ures.
indoors, or in garden sheds, depend-
ing how long-suffering our women-
folk happen to be. This often results
in the captive females being forced
a few days before their wild relatives
on the moors and hills. It is wise to
delay the emergences of your moths
by keeping the pupae in a cellar or
similar suitable place until it becomes
fairly certain that emergences in the
wild can reasonably be expected to
be taking place.

W. E. Collinson, F.R.E.S. (247).

)

PRODENIA LITURA FAB.
—A NEW PEST?

The horticultural trade press has
recently been reporting the appear-
ance of Prodenia litura Fab., the
Mediterranean Brocade or (as the
National Agricultural Advisory
Service will have it) the Mediter-
ranean Climbing Cutworm, in in-
creasing numbers. That it has already
reached the level of a pest is shown
by the fact that one grower recently
reported removing over one hundred
larvae by hand from a house —
measuring 150 by 30 ft — of chrysan-

Many of us keep our pupae

AUGUST, 1964

themums (Chrysanthemum
These larvae he destroyed.
The larvae have been reported

from several counties during the |

past year, especially from Norfolk,
Kent and Surrey, though it is likely
that the insect may be much more

widespread than these reports indi- |

cate. Most horticulturists, however,

tend to lump all larvae together as |

‘cutworms ’ and leave it at that, so
that many larvae may have been
found but not identified.

There is some speculation amongst
growers as to the origin of P. litura
in this country. South (1961) states
that the adult has been reared from
larvae found in imported Tomatoes
(Lycopersicum esculentum Mill.), and
many growers use empty, imported,
tomato-trays for packing their own
produce. However, when one re-
members that a great deal of horti-
cultural material is produced on the
Continent, rooted plants of Carnat-
ions (Dianthus caryophyilus Linn.)
from Sweden, roses (Rosa spp.) from
Holland, chrysanthemums from Malta
and the Canary Islands, and geraniums
from Portugal being imported espe-
cially, and at very regular intervals,
the chances of introducing an alien
insect seem not so very remote.

It may be of interest to note that
the insect is proving difficult to
destroy and a new insecticide has

had to be used. This is ‘D.D.V.P. ’,
a product of Cl.B.A. laboratories
of Basle, Switzerland. Even this

insecticide will only kill young larvae
up to one inch in length.

For further information on this
pest, may | suggest that an article
in the ‘Grower and Prepacker’ for
December 14th 1963, which is ac-
companied by an excellent photo-
graph of the fully grown larva, may

be of help?

20.12.63. A. J. Tuton (2639).
REFERENCES

hes (1963). Grower and Prepacker, 60: 1013,

w Spray stops Prodenia build up.
SOUTH, R. (1961). Moths of the British Isles. 4th edn.
Frederick Warne, London. Series I, p. 298.

sp(p).)..

Mes BULLETIN, VOL. 23

A QUICK METHOD OF
RELAXING LEPIDOPTERA

During the last few years reference
has been made in various publications
to the use of a syringe filled with
warm water for relaxing stiff or
papered butterflies and moths. A
few days ago a friend bought me a
5 c.c. syringe and as | had a number
of large tropical butterflies waiting

_. to be set | decided to try this method
-of relaxing and was
amazed at how quickly it worked.

very much

| injected ten butterflies with

, warm water and by the time | had
‘finished injecting the last one the
' first one was ready to set! All of
' them set very easily. My only hope
is that they don’t ‘spring’, but the
-answer to that will be found in a
‘few weeks’ time. Providing they are

|

i|

|
|

|
|

|
|

i
1)
i
|

t

'| sincerely

left on the setting-boards long enough
| don’t see why they should * spring ’.
recommend all lepid-
opterists to try this easy method of

/ relaxing. There is no long waiting
| period and no fear of mould forming.
‘The needle of the syringe causes no
| damage to the insect’s body.

As some readers probably know,

/the syringe can also be used with
| oxalic acid for killing hawkmoths and

large silkmoths. | have not tried this
myself, and would be interested to
hear how effective this method is.

27.2.64. Terence F. Knight (3190).

‘NEWLY HATCHED LARVAE

When dealing with newly hatched
‘lepidopterous larvae, | find that when
iplastic or metal boxes, etc. — in

which the foodplant is not supplied
with water and consequently dries
‘up — are used, many larvae are lost
due to their disappearing in the
curled leaves. There is also the bother
of having to supply fresh food, which

|
i

83

is laborious to say the least.

| find that the best plan is therefore
to rear the caterpillars inside a kind
of sleeve. A celluloid cylinder cage,
using a tobacco tin bottom and a
nylon stocking top, a hole being
bored through the tin to admit the
foodplant (see The Amateur Entomolo-
gist Vol. 9, Practical Methods and
Hints for Lepidopterists, fig. 12), is
ideal. The types of apparatus shown
in figs 4, 5, 9 and 10 of the afore-
mentioned publication have been
used with success by me. Ordinary
sleeves can of course be used, but
inspection is then hindered.

The top of the celluloid cage is
best stuck on to a cardboard ring,
as the use of an elastic band tends to
cause all the contents to fly about
when the lid is removed. A cellophane
sleeve is also useful and can be made
as given in ‘Practical Methods’.
When using it | reinforce the top
with a further cardboard ring, and
make a slip-on lid as above, for the
same reason. An extremely simple
cage on the basis of the lampglass
cage and using an inverted tumbler
is again useful.

With these cages it is easy to
introduce more larvae. The young
caterpillar is picked up on a fine,
damp brush, the complete body of
the cage is lifted from its base, or in
the case of the cellophane sleeve the
lid is slipped off to admit the larva,
and the larva is placed on a leaf of
the foodplant.

| find this method convenient for
forcing ova, when the cages must be
kept indoors, and using it | have been
able to get ova of the Winter Moth
(Operophtera brumata Linn.) to hatch
a month earlier than usual and to
have the larvae, feeding on hawthorn
(Crataegus sp.), a fair size before the
eggs are hatching in the wild. The
method is in fact particularly useful
for this species, as the caterpillars
bore into the buds or spin together a
few leaves and are very difficult to

84

find when the leaves have dried up.
(Such a difficulty can be avoided by
ordinary sleeving, but this is not
always convenient.)

2.4.64. Brian Coles (3533J).

SETTING FOR UNDERSIDES

Showing one’s collection to friends
and well-meaning acquaintances
usually provokes comment on the
relative beauty of differing species.
Two specimens next to each other
excite the opinion that one is much
prettier than the other, and when
it is pointed out that one shows

only the underside of the same species

as the other the result is often an
expression of disbelief. | have always
found this disbelief to be faintly
irritating. | myself always know which
side is which and with the single-
mindedness of the collector feel it
should be obvious to everyone else.
After all, do not the legs sticking
out from the body make it obvious?
Apparently they do not.

| suppose it has been a well-
established convention for a con-
siderable time to set butterflies
upside down to show the underside.
Certainly no other way ever oc-
curred to me until | happened to
be looking over the collection in
the Royal Ontario Museum in Toron-
to. Here | noticed that a number
of specimens had been set with the
pins passing laterally through the
bodies and the wings had been
folded over the back, and thus to
one side. Of course, it was obvious
that what could be seen in insects
set in this fashion could only be the
underside. This way of setting |
found attractive and | have experi-
mented widely with it recently.
Some details are passed on in case
anyone might be interested.

Apart from obviously showing the

AUGUST, 1964

underside in what is perhaps a more
natural way than the normal one,
this style of setting takes up only
half the space of the more conven-
tional way —a blessing for those
like myself who find storage an ever
increasing problem — and if one sex
is set with the left side uppermost,
and the other sex the opposite way,
males and females may conveniently
be arranged side by side. On doing
this for the first time | was surprised
to see the extent of the difference
in wing size and shape between males
and females, that | had not realized
before. One obvious disadvantage
of course is that with the wings
folded the uppersides are obscured
and lifting a specimen set in this way
out of its drawer will not show
anything different. This might be
overcome by removing the wings
from the one side but unless the
specimen is something unusual the
upperside pattern can be seen in
other specimens. Unusual ones
would more than likely be set to
show the upperside anyway.

The actual technique of setting
this way is a little different from the
conventional one but not any more
difficult. The usual considerations
are important, having a vertical pin
being doubly so, and strict attention
has to be paid to the position of the
wings. Care must be exercised in
placing the pin in the thorax, for
it is very easy to put it too close to
the gap between the first two pairs
of legs. In pinning the specimen on
the setting-board a wide groove will
be found useful, since with larger
specimens space must be allowed for
the wings to meet naturally above
the body otherwise difficulty will
be experienced in getting them to
lie flat on the board.

In arranging the wings in position
those which lie underneath should
be moved first, and held in position
whilst those above are being arranged
over them. It will be found neater

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

if the pairs of wings coincide as
closely as possible, as wings out of
line in this position tend to look
very untidy. It may be found that
the legs stick out at odd angles and
a couple of pins to hold them close
to the body is desirable. In arranging
the antennae it will be found in
omany species that there is a tendency
for them to be obscured by the
costal margin of the forewing unless
they are set pointing forwards at
‘a high angle. | usually pin two pieces
-of paper across the groove, with
‘the antennae between them _ in-
‘clined towards the side that the
“wings are on and only separated by
sa small distance from each other.
‘Support of the body will be neces-
sary in a similar way to any other
»setting-method.

»5.2.64. Anthony M. Holmes (3337).

THE PURPLE HAIRSTREAK
| BUTTERFLY AT ‘M.V.’

It may be a matter of interest, in
'view of the recent letter which has
/appeared on the subject of unusual
_ responses in certain Lepidoptera to
light (Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 22: 139),
_to mention that twice during the
| 1963 season lone female specimens
of Thecla quercus Linn. (Purple Hair-
_ streak Butterfly) arrived at mercury-
'vapour light at Alice Holt Forest,
_ Hampshire.

The first arrival was to my 125 watt
'm.v.’ light, which was running in
| the centre of a 100 yard wide clearing,
| at approximately 10.30 p.m. B.S.T. on
- August 5th.

_ The second came to a friend of
/ mine’s 400 watt ‘m.v.’ which was
running on the same site two even-
| ings later, between 9.30 and 10.00
tiem. B.S.T.

| Specimens of another species, Thy-
| melicus sylvestris Poda (Small Skipper

85

Butterfly), could often be seen roost-
ing on grass stems in close proximity
to our ‘m.v.’ in this same clearing,
but in spite of constant disturbance
from blundering and fluttering moths
they made no attempt to move.

Of the above-mentioned species |
would have expected the latter to
be much more likely to respond to
‘m.v.’, given reasonable excuse, than
the former, especially when one
remembers that certain foreign Hes-
periidae fly freely at dusk.

20.3.64. E. A. Sadler (2966).

CARABUS GRANULATUS LINN.
IN MIDDLESEX

Recently (February 1964) woodmen
of the local Council started to clear
out the dead timber and scrub from
the woods adjoining the River Crane.
The woodland is marshy and subject
to occasional heavy flooding, and
consists of willow (Salix spp.), Elder
(Sambucus nigra Linn.), some very
old hawthorns (Crataegus sp.) and a
few alders (Alnus glutinosa (Linn.)
Gaertn.). Many of the willows were
rotten and some had fallen over and
these were to be cut up and burned
on the spot together with the scrubby
undergrowth of Bramble (Rubus frutic-
osus Linn.). Before work commenced
| asked the foreman if he would keep
his eyes open for any beetles or un-
usual insects, and supplied him with
several tins. A few days later the tins
began to return to me, and all were
jammed with specimens of the beetle
Carabus granulatus Linn. On checking
with Dr B. P. Moore’s latest list of
British Carabidae and their distribu-
tion, | found that C. granulatus was
not recorded as occurring in Middle-
sex. On questioning the woodmen
and making my own investigations
| found that the beetles were hiberna-
ting in groups of up to ten beetles

86

in the old willow boles. Each group
had chosen a dead and rotting bole
or stump and had channelled out a
hibernaculum below the bark or
within the rotten wood below the
bark. The situations were thoroughly
damp and the beetles were very
lethargic when found, although they
quickly became active when placed
into tins. The place and gregarious
method of hibernation | feel are
worth noting, and also the abundance
of the beetle in a wood which is often
deep in water is interesting. It would
be well worthwhile searching other
woodlands adjacent to water in the
County to see whether this beetle,
which has not been recorded from
Middlesex before, is also present

there. | would be interested to hear =

whether coleopterist Members have
found this beetle in similar circum-
stances elsewhere in the country.

27.2.64. P. W. Cribb (2270).
REFERENCE
MOORE, B. P. (1957). Entomologist’s Gazette, 8:

129-137. The British Carabidae (Coleoptera), Pare |:
a check list of the species.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE
BRACONID
MICROGASTER ALVEARIA FAB.

Observations have been made in
Step’s ‘ Bees, Wasps, Ants and Allied
Insects’ that when the larvae of
Microgaster alvearia Fab. spin their
wall of cocoons under the looped
body of their host Geometrid larva,
they leave by the under surface in
succession.

| am of the belief that they do not
break the skin—which is what Step’s
observations imply—but that they
emerge through the alimentary tract,
and from there they form up.

| formed this theory after observa-
tions on a larva of Hemistola immacu-
lata Thunb. (Small Emerald Moth)
which was attacked by M .alvearia.

AUGUST, 1964

After the parasite cocoons had
been completed, | examined the
underside of the larva, but could see
no signs of any puncturing. The only
thing evidently wrong with it, apart
from diminished size, was that it
could not grip flat surfaces with its
claspers.

This larva lived for ten days after
the emergence of its parasites. | had
tried, without success, to make it
start feeding. It just clung on in the
arched position until expired.

The braconid flies emerged thirteen
days after the larvae had formed the
cocoons.

The larva, while alive, was very
active if its hindquarters were touch-
ed, and it would swing its head
round as if trying to ward off further
attacks.

R. F. McCormick (3375).

REFERENCE

STEP, E. (1932). Bees, Wasps, Ants and Allied Insects of
the British Isles. Frederick Warne, London. p.190.

“TWO PROBLEMS’ —
POSSIBLE ANSWERS

Mr H. V. Danks (2907) described
two observations on insect behaviour
(Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 22: 121-2)
Perhaps | can throw a little light on
them, however speculatively.

Concerning the unidentified Nema-
toceran, | can offer two suggestions
for the observation, both suggestions
being contained in the original article,
but not enlarged upon.

(1) The legs were, indeed, being
used as antennae. Perhaps experi-
ments in various controlled environ-
ments could be performed, using the
insect with and without its antennae.
It is not unknown for insects to use
their forelegs as antennae (cf, the
Protura). Doubtless other flies use
their forelegs in the same manner,
but | do not know enough about flies

{
HAES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

to cite any examples. |

(2) This is an example of behaviour-
al aposematic mimicry. That is, the
fly was (if you will forgive the tele-
ology) ‘trying’ to look like an
ichneumon fly. This idea is supported
by the reported fact that the forelegs
were black and white-banded—a true
example of aposematic colouring.

_ One might even venture to suggest
that the insect, while looking like an
ichneumon (or related wasp), does,
‘in fact, use its legs as antennae. In
vview of the common occurrence
-amongst the Diptera of mimicry of
the Hymenoptera, | think that this
explanation is very likely.

_ As for the observation concerning
the Tipulid, | am at a loss to account
for it. Similar behaviour may be
»observed in the stick insect—could
‘such behaviour be common amongst
‘long-legged insects? If so, it might
‘be a mechanical result of having long
‘legs, and have no true behavioural
‘significance at all. | have seen it
stated that in stick insects, swaying
after having been disturbed is a
»behavioural effect imitating a twig
‘in a breeze. If this were the only
reason for it, clearly one could draw
no lessons from the stick-insect on
‘this point of behaviour.

Finally, | would like to draw at-
tention to a short note of mine in
)Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 21: 68. The
‘aspect of aphid behaviour there
described may be a mechanical neces-
|sity. Certain of the flight muscles are
‘inserted in the pro- and meso-
‘thoracic coxae. These are the so-
called ‘direct’ flight muscles, in-
volved in controlling the flight char-
/acteristics of the wing, and not used
vactually to work the wing up and
down. Perhaps raising the meso-
thoracic legs renders the control of
_the hindwings for take-off more easy.
|Research on bee flight (Pringle) has
shown that the hindwings act as
vailerons. This would necessitate the
-action of the direct wing muscles of

87

the hindwing. While | have not been
able to find any reference in the
literature to the necessary musculat-
ure (and | have looked through a lot
of the insect literature in the Cam-
bridge zoology department!), | postu-
late that the raising of the meso-
thoracic leg is necessary for the
sufficient control of the hindwing
during take-off, due to the particular
sites of insertion of the direct wing
muscles involved.
17364: J. Vincent (3027).

The second of the behaviour pat-
terns noted in the original article in
Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 22: 121-2 might
also be an example of aposematic
behavioural mimicry, in this case in
imitation of the very similar move-
ment shown by spiders when their
webs have been touched by other
spiders—which are thus ‘ warned
off ’—or by unwanted insects—which
are shaken out of the web.

Dr C. B. Williams (in litt.) has
drawn my attention to the fact that
Phalangids (harvestmen spiders) per-
form similar movements when dis-
turbed.

The behaviour pattern could well
serve to render the insect invisible,
or at least unrecognisable as suitable
prey to a possible predator, and Dr
Williams has allowed me to quote
some relevant observations he made
in Panama many years ago: “ The
species | observed in Panama was a
large Tipulid which | frequently saw
sitting on tree-trunks. The bobbing
movement—which seemed to start
when it became conscious of my
presence...sometimes became so
rapid that the whole insect became
practically invisible. | felt sure at the
time that it was a protective device.”’

It may be too that the * bobbing ’
movement of Tipulids is a means of
accelerating metabolism in prepara-
tion for flight, although this seems
unlikely (as does the suggestion that
quick take-off is facilitated if the

88

insect is already in motion), for the
movement is sometimes performed
for very long periods after settling.

Has any Member made any really
detailed observations on this sort
of phenomenon ?—Editor.

INSECTS, FOODPLANTS AND
PLANT RELATIONSHIPS

2. Grasses and Greenflies

In my article on “Butterfly Botany”
(Airy Shaw, 1960) | suggested that an
insect’s ‘ classification’ of plants was
“likely to reflect broad similarities
(1) of chemistry or biochemistry;
(2) of anatomy ; and (3) of ecology.”’
In the May Bulletin (pp. 55-6) | gave
some examples of the probable
operation of the first of these three
types of similarity, and sought to
show what a suggestive light they
throw on the disputed relationships
of two plant-genera, Buddleja and
Plantago. The present brief note
touches principally on the second
category, and illustrates something
of the possible influence of structural
and anatomical similarities upon an
insect’s choice of foodplant within a
single plant-family.

Some years ago, | had the oppor-
tunity of studying the habits of an
interesting grass-feeding aphid, now
known as Hyalopteroides humilis
Walker (=H. dactylidis Hayh., H.
pallida Theob.). This species is, so
far as is known, strictly confined in
this country, and indeed in Europe,
to the common Cocksfoot Grass
(Dactylis glomerata Linn.). | have
never found it, and | know of no
record of it, upon any other host-
plant in Britain. It is probably a wide-
spread and, at least in some years,
a common aphid ; but, owing to its
habits, it is very inconspicuous and
easily overlooked, for it lives and
feeds in the angle of the trough

AUGUST, 1964

formed by the strongly-folded leaf-
blades of the Cocksfoot, where any-
thing up to thirty individuals may be
found, in single file, closely adpressed
to the mid-nerve. Their pale lemon-
yellow colouring and somewhat nar-
row and elongate form help them
to merge into the line of the mid-rib.

Now this aphid is well-known in
the United States, where it occurs
on Dactylis, as it does in Europe.
D. glomerata, however, is an intro-
duced grass in the U.S.A., although
by now thoroughly naturalised and
widespread, and often looking quite
native. But Hyalopteroides humilis has
also been found there on a native
American grass, Tridens flavus (Linn.)
Hitchcock, which is not closely
related to Dactylis. | therefore asked
my colleague, Dr C. E. Hubbard, a
world authority on the Graminae,
for his comments on this, and | would

like to quote from a paper | wrote at
the time (Airy Shaw, 1946, p. 32), —

the substance of his remarks.

‘““The basal sheaths of T. flavus |

are... compressed-keeled ’ — as in
Dactylis—and | would therefore ex-
pect the leaf-blades to be condupli-
cate, similarly to those of the cocks-
foot. The protection afforded by such
strongly conduplicate leaves, and...
the presence of a zone of thin-walled
motor cells over the mid-nerve,
from which the aphids could most
easily suck the sap, would seem to
be the most probable explanation for
this choice of an alternative host-
plant.”

This case thus seems to provide
an instructive example of how a
normally strictly monophagous
(‘ single-foodplant ’) insect may have
the possibility of finding its basic
requirements as to biochemistry and
ecology (including protection), but
especially anatomy, met in an alterna-
tive foodplant—even though not a
very closely related one—within the
same family.

A second Dactylis-feeding aphid,

FAES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

89

a nnn nnn n eee aE EEE

Rhopalosiphum davisi Mordv., is known
on occasion to attack species of the
grass-genus Elymus (lyme-grass) in
North America. Dr Hubbard sug-
gested that here the common factor
might be ‘“‘the similar general leaf-
anatomy and epidermal cell structure,
for Dactylis and Elymus belong to
two very closely related tribes ”’ (loc.
cit.). During the past twenty to

thirty years much light has been

thrown on the inter-relationships of
the grasses through the study of

internal and external details of their

leaf-anatomy and epidermis structure,

-and it would appear that in this case
-some of the details are appreciated
| by the aphids also !

1.12.63.

» and

H. K. Airy Shaw (545).

REFERENCE

SHAW, H. K. AIRY (1946). Ent. mon. Mag., 82 : 30-34.
On some problems connected with Hyalopterus
dactylidis Hayh. and Hyalopteroides pallida Theob.
(Hem.-Hom., Aphididae).

— (1960). Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 19: 62. Butterfly
Botany.

ENGLISH NAMES

There is a fallacy that as soon as
any object or phenomenon is given

_ aname, understanding of it is thereby

increased. This is because we can at

_ once talk about the new thing with-
| out knowing anything about it what-

soever, other than the word that
has been adopted to represent it.
It can be reported in the newspapers,

_ talked about at meetings and made
_ the subject of papers in journals, all

on the basis of pure hypothesis.
Nomenclatorial jargon proliferates
international commissions are
formed to standardise terms for

_ things about which future genera-

tions will laugh that we know almost
nothing and will curse us for our
premature action. Nomenclature to
a scientist is like fashion to a woman

| —and is about as enduring. When we
| are young, we want the latest ; as

we age, we cannot bear to see our
work ungratefully tossed aside, and
protest that our standard works and
check-lists must still be thought the
very best.

The best nomenclators imagine
that their efforts will eventually
lead to an eternal bliss of stability.
This is never reached, for as soon as
the taxonomists see that there
remains only tidying up to be done
in their field, they transfer to prob-
lems of a new order of finesse.
Species are split up into microspecies
that were not envisaged as essential
to the original nomenclature (for
example the botanist’s brambles
(Rubus) and hawkweeds (Hieracium)).
A new fashion develops of using
trinominals instead of binominals,
because, as with birds, we think that
we know what a subspecies is.

It is small wonder that the lay
mind that only enjoys watching those
things that have always excited
Everyman’s curiosity should seek to
escape from chasing nomenclatorial
shadows by protesting that there are
names in his own language for all the
things that he wants to know about.
If our layman or amateur still wishes
to live by the knowledge revealed
in the Mediaeval herbals there is
reason in his approach, otherwise he
is utterly mistaken. Anyone who
intends to recognise as distinct all
the species in the latest edition of
South’s ‘Moths of the British Isles ’
must work with a nomenciature that
has not grown by tradition but is the
modern work of a few individuals:
many of the species have only been
recognised to be British, or even
been described by entomologists, in
the last fifty years. This ‘ English ’
nomenclature is as much open to
objection as any ‘ scientific’ nomen-
clature.

The usual claim is that ‘ English ’
names are easier to learn because
they are combinations of vernacular
words. In many cases they are nothing

90

of the kind, but are identically the
scientific names (e.g., rhinoceros) or
translations or corruptions of these.
Certainly the ‘English’ names can,
in many cases, be said to have no
more merit than their scientific
counterparts in being actually de-
scriptive of the objects concerned.
Many are in fact supremely ridiculous,
particularly those of ‘ Microlepid-
optera’, which have not had to
withstand the test of usage because
they are quite properly ignored.
Would you keep a Rolling Carrot
Flat-body (Agonopterix rotundella
Douglas) in your collection? No
doubt you would consider a Ruddy
Streak (Parecystola acroxantha Meyr.)
and an Unexplained Sober (Sophronia

humerella Schiff.) a fair exchange for

an example of Cribb’s Manchester
Signal (Euclemensia woodiella Curt.).
How would you feel if, on thumbing
through a new edition of a check-list,
you found that two moths that you
had written about had been arbit-
rarily dubbed Uffen’s Claw (Anarsia
lineatella Zell.) and Uffen’s Case
(Coleophora alnifoliae Barasch)? It is
particularly galling when you realise
that you could have dedicated another
Case that feeds on Nut (Corylus) to
the author of the list !

Vernacular names are all very well
when they identify entities that are
recognisable to the layman, but it is
not in these cases that he objects
to the use of scientific names. Every-
one is happy to call a Dahlia a dahlia :
it is when the additional effort of
recognising the species is called for
that the brain jibs at a binominal
and asks whether, in some other
tongue, this particular thing can be
regarded as just another object,
without having to recognise in its
name any relationship with other
things. We have to admit that he
who is not prepared to learn the
‘ double-barrelled ’ name for a beast
most likely refuses because he has
no real conception of the animal as

AUGUST, 1964

an entity. He has no more interest
in a mere name if it is vernacular
than if it is not. The scientific name
repels the novice simply because its
unfamiliarity shows him starkly that
his understanding of the beast in
question has not been increased one
whit by hearing it named. And so
it should do. A name should only

become familiar when it becomes
meaningful.
1.3.64. R. W. J. Uffen (1660).

REFERENCE

SOUTH, R. (1961). The Moths of the British Isles. 4th
edn. Frederick Warne, London. Series | and 11.

THE NAMING OF
WING VEINS

INSECT

In order to identify living organisms
correctly it is necessary not only to
have a knowledge of structure but
also to know the names of different
structures. If a very large number of
different species is incorporated into
a broad group then only a relatively
superficial nomenclature is needed,
and this holds good for the insects.
The Hymenoptera and the beetles
can be separated by the presence of
either one or two pairs of mem-
branous wings. Wingless Hymen-
optera, of course, will require a
further description.

The smaller the grouping, however,
the more detailed and complex bDe-
comes the nomenclature required
to describe the differences. In this
respect, where insects are concerned,
the three main identification points
are the mouthparts, genitalia and
wings. In order that students of
different groups may have some
common ground for the exchange of
information and for correlating dis-
coveries, it is essential that the names
of appendages and parts of the body
surface should be standardised. Un-
fortunately, where the names of

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

wing veins are concerned, the posi-

tion at the moment is far from ideal.

There are two methods by which
structure can be utilised for purposes
of identification, and these were
probably first enumerated in an
article in the proceedings of the
American Association for the Ad-
vancement of Science, about 1893.

To put the first briefly, a search
for differences of structure within

‘a large and recognisably compact

_group can be made and the members
of the group separated on the basis

of possession or not of one or more
of these differences. Little or no

| consideration of the function of these
diversities of structure is made.

The second method is to study a

particular appendage, sclerite (body
plate) or internal organ, with refer-
-ence to its function, and attempt to

trace its phylogenetic development

»within the chosen group. The effects

of natural selection within the group
_on the insects as individuals can then

be related to the development of the
particular organ and a provisional
classification made. Another append-
age is then selected and a similar
procedure followed. If the second and
other similar studies vindicate the

| provisional classification the ground
_is gradually prepared for the tabling

of a consistent group of features to
enable specific identifications to pro-
ceed. If the deductions are valid,
the individual records of the changes
due to natural selection should not
contradict each other.

In order to study the phylogenetic
changes due to natural selection a
useful primary starting-point is to
examine the fossil ancestors of the
particular group of insects being
studied. The very nature of the pre-
servation, the tremendous pressures

involved, the heat of organic de-

composition, and bacterial action
Specify the most propitious circum-
stances for the preservation of the

_ exoskeleton, to say nothing of the

91

much softer internal organs. The
difficulties that arise in the use of
palaeontological evidence for de-
termining evolutionary trends in
insect development can be summed
up under three headings: the diffi-
culties mentioned above, the fact
that whole insect Orders have arisen
and died out during earlier eras, and
the fact that a range of intermediate
specimens, the missing links, from
wingless to winged types have not
been found.

However, data from this and
present day sources have enabled the
insects to be grouped into Divisions
and Orders. The Upper Carbonifer-
ous Era supplies the greatest number
of remains and the only two extant
Orders which can be seen with
reasonable certainty to share a
common origin with extinct Orders
are the dragonflies (Odonata) and
the mayflies (Ephemeroptera). Their
extinct relatives were, respectively,
the Prodonata from the lower part
of the Upper Carboniferous and the
Protephemeroptera from the upper
levels of the Upper Carboniferous.
There is some doubt as to when our
present day dragonflies actually evolv-
ed ; certainly when the Protephem-
eroptera evolved, the Prodonata had
already undergone a radical change
in another direction, later to die out
altogether in the Permian Era.

Our first true Ephemeroptera ar-
rived in Lower Permian times. This,
then, is a measure of the degree of
certainty which can be placed on
prehistoric records of two Orders
of present day insects which seem
to bear the greatest affinity with
their forbears. In the case of the
beetles (Coleoptera), however, the
earliest specimens found are repre-
sented mainly by small pieces of
elytra occurring in the Lower Perm-
ian, while the earliest sawflies (Sym-
phyta) from the Mesozoic Era had
already evolved fairly specialised
wings.

92

It is the relative ease with which
the wings of insects can be studied,
together with the visible signs of
complex evolutionary changes, which
make these appendages particularly
convenient to study, and hence they
have been the particular target for
many taxonomists.

The main venational feature of
most palaeontological specimens is
the distad branching of the main
veins (accessory veins), and the ir-
regular network of little veins,
termed by Tillyard the archedictyon,
in the spaces between the main
veins. This can be seen today in the
dragonflies and mayflies. Some, how-
ever, of the Palaeodictycptera (the
first of the line of fossil insects) had
begun to regularise the network into
even rows of cross-veins.

Fig. | shows a fossil insect from
Commentry, France. It will be ob-
served that only the femur and tibia
of the front legs remain and the distal
head appendages are missing. The
most remarkable phenomena which
this fossil presents are the lateral
expansions of the body, not only on
the abdomen but also on the thorax
in front of the wings. Many experts
include this as strong evidence of
the origin of wings — namely that
these extensions first functioned as
aids to gliding. This would mean
that initially they would be incapable
of being folded back over the body,
and this is borne out by the fact that
in fossils where both body and wings
are preserved the majority have
their wings extended. It might also
be noted that in the Suborder of the
present day dragonflies which con-
tains the largest members of the
Order the species hold their wings
extended when at rest.

The fossil shown in Fig. 2 was
found in Indiana, U.S.A. It is included
here to illustrate the excessive
branching of the main veins and the
archedictyon. The latter covers the
whole wing but is confined in the

AUGUST, 1964

diagram to a small area, partly to
avoid obliterating the main veins
and partly because it is a painstaking
task to fill in the whole diagram.
Discounting the accessory veins, those
that occur in a quite haphazard man-
ner even in different specimens of
the same species, the main veins do
usually split up into recognisable
branches, and these are indicated by
numbers placed after the main vein
capital letters. The Radius has its
first branch typically uniform but
the second branch bifurcates at
various stages along its length and
is therefore called the Radial Sector
(Rs).

The nomenclature of the main
veins—deduced from a study of fossil
and generalised (i.e., showing an
affinity with fossil relations) present
day insects—gives the main longitud-
inal veins reading successively from
the leading edge of the wing as
Costa, Subcosta, Radius, Media, Cub-
itus and the Anal veins. Though the
use of these names was first put on
to a firm basis by Comstock and
Needham (1898), they in turn ac-
knowledge the initial classic work of
Redtenbacher (1886) who, whilst in
turn borrowing all the terms except
the Media from a variety of much
earlier sources, did at least specifically
quote the above terms in their above
order.

At the expense of dangerous
generalisation it might be said that
taxonomists have studied three main
phenomena in their efforts to place
the correct label to a particular vein.
These three studies have been based
on the tracheation of the wings of
immature insects, both nymphs and
pupae, the corrugation of the wings
and the apparent articulation of the
main veins with sclerites at the base
of the wings.

Such is the modification that
evolutionary specialisation has
wrought in the wings of most of our
insect species that a knowledge of

4

SSS

EAES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

93

dorsal
longitudinal

trachea

Fig.d

Stenodictya lobata (adapted from Handlirsch)—for key to veins see Fig. 4.

page. |.
Fig. 2. Paolia vetusta (adapted from Handlirsch).
Fig. 3. Hypothetical nymphal thoracic tracheation (adapted from Chapman).
Fig. 4. Hypothetical nymphal wing-venation (adapted from Comstock)

C — Costa ; Sc — Subcosta ; R — Radius ; Rs — Radial Sector ;
M — Media ; MA — Anterior Media ; MP — Posterior Media ;

Cu — Cubitus ; 1A — 1st Anal ; 2A —2nd Anal ; 3A — 3rd Anal.

all three methods of ‘labelling’ is
an advantage if the origins of the wing
veins of different orders are to be
understood with equal facility.

The study of pre-imaginal trachea-
tion holds, for me, the greatest
attraction, partly because of the bold
and imaginative work which Com-
stock, Needham and earlier workers

_ put into their researches and partly
_ because of the fact that some of the

venational puzzles which arise can
only be solved by the application of
their findings. In the majority of
pupal and early nymphal wings the
courses of the tracheae follow a
beautiful and simply planned layout
even though in the imaginal wing
the veins show a completely different
and specialised plan: another ex-

tremely useful detail of the wing pads
is that the base of the pad is relatively
broad and hence the _ individual
branches of the tracheae are separated
and easily discernible.

In the majority of insects, the
tracheae extend into the growing
wing bud and supply an increasing
volume of air to the tissues. These
tracheae arise, in a typical arrange-
ment, from the same tracheal branch
that supplies a leg. R. N. Chapman
in the 1890’s produced some ex-
ceptional and original work in this
respect.

Fig. 3 represents the tracheation
of the thorax of a typical, generalised,
immature insect viewed from the
side. It differs hardly at all from the
more generalised insects, and the

94

AUGUST, 1964

pattern eyolved by the more special-
ised insects can still be traced and
correlated with this layout. The
main veins mentioned earlier can be
seen in the diagram and it is of
interest to note that where, in some
specialised insects, the metathoracic
spiracle is absent, a rudimentary
appendix-like trunk is present on
the dorsal longitudinal trachea, de-
noting the spiracle’s original presence.

Fig. 4 represents a hypothetical
nymphal wing, and in some of the
more primitive insects the division
of the main veins into two distinct
groups (as shown for the nymphal
wing) has given rise to the names
costo-radial and cubito-anal groups.
In these insects, Media is obviously

part of the costo-radial group. In

most other groups the gap between
the two basal tracheae is bridged to
form one continuous trachea, and
when this happens the Media tends
to migrate down towards the cubito-
anal group of veins and become one
of them.

The advantage of this particular
study is that in many insects the
tracheae grow out into the expanding
wing membrane which, having origin-
ated as a pleat or fold in the body
integument, consists of an initially
separate upper and lower surface.
As the wing develops, the spaces
between the tracheae fuse together
and the course of a trachea outlines
either closely or approximately a
main vein. At various stages in the
wing development additional veins
(cross-veins) are laid out as linear
gaps between areas of fusion of the
upper and lower surfaces. Hypo-
dermal cells underlying the surface
cuticle of the wing have their bases
elongated to reach down to the
interior of the wing and thus are
able to deposit an increasing layer
of hard chitinous substance around
the courses of future veins.

If the insect is a highly specialised
one where the wing venation of the

mature insect is greatly reduced then
at various stages the islands of fusion
of the surfaces move about the wing,
pushing the original tracheae, to-
gether with the cross-veins, further
and further from their primitive
arrangement.

The continual use above of the
word nymph is to indicate that this
account has up to now been con-
cerned with insects whose wings
develop externally, as the grass-
hoppers, dragonflies or plant bugs.
With internally expanding wings
which are only easily observed during
the pupal stage, tracheation plays a
limited part and diminutive tracheae
called tracheoles supply sufficient
oxygen. Only when the final rapid
expansion is approaching do the
tracheae play a major part in oxy-
genation.

The second method of naming the
veins is based on the corrugations
or fan-like pleating evident in many
of the more generalised wings. The
mechanical efficiency of this system
of wing-bracing is evident if one
considers the stiffness of a pleated
paper fan compared with the original
flat piece of paper from which it was
made. In those cases where trachea-
tion is suitable for study, its hom-
ology with the wing venation is
usually straightforward. The same
claim, however, cannot be wholly
made out in the case of the corruga-
tions.

The veins running along the top
of ridges are termed convex veins,
the others lying between them in the
troughs being the concave veins.
This arrangement can undoubtedly
be observed, but the trouble is that
the more accessory veins there are
present the more pleated becomes
the wing. Some of the additional
veins too, as in the lacewings, lie
halfway up a ‘slope’ of the wing
pleating. There is, however, fairly
general agreement with the following
table (Imms, 1957 ; Comstock, 1918 ;

WAies BULLETIN, VOL. 23

95

Longfield, 1960 in part ; and others).

Convex veins Concave veins

Costa (C) Subcosta (Sc)

Radius one (R1) Radial sector (Rs)

Anterior Medius Posterior Medius

(MA) (MP)
Cubitus one (Cu1) Cubitus two (Cuz)
Anal veins (Sometimes 2nd Anal,
2A)

Table | : Convex and concave veins of the

‘corrugated ’ insect wing

Some Orders, the dragonflies in
particular, present a problem in that
‘the tracheation of some of the
snymphs shows quite clearly that the
‘Radial Sector trachea crosses over
the first two branches of the Medial
trachea. That this nymphal evidence
only pertains to the heavy-bodied
‘Anisoptera and not to the Zyg-
opteran damselflies tends to cloud
the issue. In the Zygoptera the
‘evidence points to a complete trans-
ference of the Radial Sector to the
Medial trunk, which can be seen as a

logical evolutionary step following
the crossing over stage.

The two opposing systems of
naming an Anisopteran wing are
shown in Fig. 5 with convex veins
indicated by a plus sign and concave
veins by a minus sign. Fig. 5a repre-
sents the school of thought followed
by Fraser, Longfield, Tillyard and
others, while Fig. 5b represents the
American and Continental beliefs of
Comstock, Needham and Ris.

For a deeper presentation of the
conflicting points of view on the
venation of this particular Order
see Corbet, Longfield and Moore
(1960, pp. 226-31), and Needham
(1935).

The third method of naming the
veins partly by the basal sclerites
was developed by Ross (1936) in the
case of the Hymenoptera. The rnem-
bers of this Order with their highly
specialised wings lack the primitive

Fig. 5. Sympetrum scoticum (Don) — Skipwith Common.

96

AUGUST, 1964

a

corrugations, and in addition to this
a number of these species lay down
their final wing venation prior to
the penetration of the tracheae.
Comstock (1918), unable to use
either of the foregoing methods,
traced a parallel between the de-
velopment of the wings of certain
Diptera and those of the Hymen-
optera on which to base his venational
interpretations. The wide phylo-
genetic difference between these two
Orders caused Ross to reject this
scheme.

He first endeavoured to find the
present day Order most closely allied
to the Hymenoptera, and in company
with other experienced entomologists
chose the panorpid group, i.e., the
scorpionflies, alderflies and others.
From the analogous position of the
Anal veins and corresponding axillary
sclerites in the panorpid Orders,
1A, 2A and 3A were fixed in a
hypothetical hymenopterous wing.
The parallel paths of the next two
veins, Cubitus and Media, in the
basal part of the hypothetical wing
closely match those of the present
day Hymenoptera.

Ross then left this part of the base
and worked inwards from the leading
edge of the wing. Costa and Subcosta
with their connecting humeral cross-
vein were identified. The remaining
vein is then the Radius. The identifica-
tion of the branches and cross-veins
in the main part of the wing is beyond
the scope of this brief preview and
those interested should refer to
Ross’ paper on the subject. It is of
interest to note, however, as Ross
points out, that the positions of
many of the supernumary cross-
veins correspond closely with those
of the alderfly Sialis, in particular.
3.3.64; DH. Smith: F-REE:S5(2864).

REFERENCES
COMSTOCK, J. H. (1918). The wings of insects. Ithaca,
N.Y.
— and NEEDHAM, J. G. (1898-9). Amer. Nat., 32:

43, 81, 231, 413, 560, 769, 903 ; 33: 118, 573, 845,
851, 853, 858. The wings of insects.

CORBET, P. S., LONGFIELD, C., and MOORE, N. W.
(1960). Dragonflies. New Naturalist Series. Collins,
London.

FORBES, W. T. M. (1933). V. Cong. int. Ent., 2: 277-84.
The axillary venation of the insects.

— (1943). Amer. midl. Nat., 29 : 381-405. The origin
of wings and venational types in insects.

FRASER, F. C. (1938). Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (A), 13:

60-70. A note on the fallaciousness of the theory of
pretracheation in the venation of the Odonata.
— (1949). Handbooks for the identification of British
insects, 1: (10), Odonata. R. ent. Soc. Lond., London.
— (1954). Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B), 23: 89-94.
The origin and descent of the Order Odonata based
on the evidence of persistent archaic characters.
— (1957). A reclassification of the Order Odonata.
Roy. Zool. Soc. N. S. W., Sydney.

HYNES, H. B. N. (1958). Sci. Publ. Freshwat. Biol. Ass.
Brit. Emp., no. 17: 1-87. A key to the adults and
nymphs of British Stoneflies with notes on their
ecology.

IMMS, A. D. (1957). A general textbook of entomology.
Methuen, London.

KEILIN, D. (1944). Parasitology, 36: 1-66. Respiratory
systems and respiratory adaptations in larvae and
pupae of Diptera.

KIMMINS, D. E. (1954). Sci. Publ. Freshwat. Biol. Ass.
Brit. Emp., no. 15: 1-71. A revised key to the adults
of the British species of Ephemeroptera with notes
on their ecology.

NEEDHAM, J. G. (1935). J.N.Y. ent. Soc., 43: 113-129.
Some basic principles of insect wing venation.

—, TRAVER, J. R. and HSU, Yin-chi (1935). Biology
of Mayflies. Ithaca, N.Y.

— (1951). Trans. Amer. ent. Soc., 77: 21-62. Pro-
drome for a manual of the Dragonflies of North
America, with extended comments on wing vena-
tion systems.

OLDROYD, H. (1949). Handbooks for the identification
of British insects, 9 (1), Diptera: Introduction and key
to Families. R. ent. Soc. Lond., London.

REDTENBACHER, J. (1886). Ann. K. K. Nat. Mus.,
1: 153-232. Vergleichende Studien tiber das Fligel-
geader der Insecten.

RICHARDS, O. W. (1956). Handbooks for the identifica-
tion of British insects, 6 (1), Hymenoptera: Introduction
and key to Families. R. ent. Soc. Lond., London.

ROSS, H. H. (1936). Ann. ent. Soc. Amer., 29: 99-109.
The ancestry and wing venation of the Hymenoptera.

SNODGRASS, R. E. (1935). Principles of Insect Mer-
phology. McGraw-Hill, London.

TANAKA, T. (1926). Annot. zool. Jap., 11: 33-53.
Homologies of the wing veins of the Hemiptera.
TILLYARD, R. J. (1926). Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.Wales,
43 : 568-92. Upper Permian insects of New South
Wales, Part i, Introduction and the Order Hemiptera.
— (1935). Ann. ent. Soc. Amer., 28: 1-45. The evolu-

tion of the Scorpion Flies and their derivatives.

— and FRASER, F. C. (1938-39). Aust. Zool., 9:
128-69, 195-221. A reclassification of the order
Odonata based on some new interpretations of
the dragonfly wing.

WIGGLESWORTH, V. B. (1930). Proc. R. ent. Soc.
Lond. (B), 106 : 229-50. A theory of tracheal respira-
tion in insects.

— (1931). Ibid., 109: 354-69. The extent of air in
the tracheoles of some terrestrial insects.

— (1953). Quart. J. micr. Sci., 94: 507-22. Surface
forces in the tracheal system of insects.

WOODWORTH, C. W. (1906). Univ. Calif. Pub.,
Tech. Bull. Ent., 1: 1-152. The wing veins of insects.

GREEK INVADERS?

During late February and early
March this year (1964) a lepidopterist

|

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

friend of mine (not a member of the
AES) went on a school trip to
Greece. On returning, he told me
that he had found on a Pine tree
(Pinus ? sylvestris Linn.) a fairly solid
nest, about the size of a coconut,
containing many lepidopterous lar-
vae. These he described as being
about 2-24 inches long, coloured
yellow with black tracings, and very
furry. The hairs gave a severe skin
-rash. On the return home, however,
they got loose in the train, and were
vall thrown overboard in the panic !

If anyone living or collecting near
the main railway line between Folke-
stone and Victoria has heard anything
of these caterpillars, or has actually
found some, my friend and | would
be pleased to hear from them. My
friend says that the larvae were
jjettisoned over a stretch of about a
mile, roughly half-way along the
journey. There is a slight chance,
>of course, that the larvae have found
some Pine, fed up, pupated, and the
Greek whatever-they-are have start-
-ed appearing before this article is
published : so if any Greek Lepid-
hoptera have been found in S. E.
“England, this will undoubtedly be
the cause.

lf anyone can give information, or
“suggest what species these larvae
/were, would they please write to

me.
273.64. M. C. Watling (36061).

'{[Mr Watling’s address is 104 Frimley
Road, Camberley, Surrey.—Ed.]

ENTOMOLOGY IN NEW
ZEALAND—1

New Zealand is often thought to

97

that of Great Britain and Ireland.
The main islands extend between
34° and 48°S (the approximate equiv-
alent of Tangier to Orleans in the
northern hemisphere). New Zealand
is the most isolated habitable large
area of land in the world: the
shortest distance to Australia is
1,150 miles.

The climate is temperate in fact
as well as in name, at least in the
lowlands. There, rainfall in most
places averages between 20 and 80
inches annually, and is fairly evenly
distributed through the year, there
being no pronounced wet or dry
seasons. Temperatures rarely rise
above 90°F or fall below 30°F near
the coast.

The country is predominantly hilly
or mountainous, with few extensive
plains. Much of the landscape is
geologically young. The main moun-
tain ranges were built up to their
present heights during late Pliocene
and Pleistocene times. Occasional
severe earthquakes are a reminder
that the process is still continuing
in some regions. There are several
active volcanoes in the centre of the
North Island. All the higher moun-
tains of both main islands were
glaciated in Pleistocene times. The
deeper glacial valleys in the South
Island are now occupied by lakes,
or, on the west coast, by fiords.

The flora resembles the fauna
(discussed below) in its affinities and
in its high degree of endemism.
Before man came to New Zealand,
forest clothed most of the country,
with the exception of some dry
plains and valleys—which supported
tussock grassland—and the alpine
areas. Scrub and fern covered only
the subalpine areas, the regions
recovering from natural fires and

be the southern hemisphere equival-
| ent of the British Isles, but this is
\ true only to a limited extent. The
area of the three largest islands
(103,044 sq. miles) is slightly less than

slips, and exposed ridge tops. Scrub-
land and fern-land increased greatly
in area, following clearing (mainly
by fire) first by Maoris, then by
Europeans ; while the latter planted

|
|
|
)

98

AUGUST, 1964

vast cleared regions with exotic
pasture grasses.

In the far north the ‘ bush’ was
dominated by the splendid Kauri
(Agathis australis Steud.), and other
lowland forests comprised various
species of Podocarpus, Dacrydium and
broad-leaf trees, while the main
mountain forests were dominated by
southern beech (Nothofagus spp.).
Fortunately some fairly large areas
of the native bush remain, especially
in the mountains, although often
greatly modified by feral deer, pigs,
goats and Australian ‘possums.

The lowland bush of New Zealand
is correctly classified as subtropical
rain-forest, despite the fact that the
climate is subtropical only in the
far north. The bush has the usual
rain-forest characteristics of thick
undergrowth, numerous climbing
plants (Rubus spp., Metrosideros spp.,
etc.), lianes (Rhipogonum scandens
Forst.), abundant ferns, tree-ferns,
palms, etc. In many places the
growth is so dense that one has to
cut one’s way through it. The
southern beech forests are more
open, somewhat like forests of Fagus
spp. ; but species of Nothofagus, like
almost all other New Zealand trees,
are evergreen. Generally speaking,
the native insects are found only
amongst native vegetation, few having
adapted themselves successfully to
exotic vegetation.

One of the most striking features
of the New Zealand terrestrial and
freshwater fauna is the high propor-
tion of endemic species. Besides
endemic species, some groups con-
tain endemic genera, tribes, sub-
families or even families. There are
a number of animals belonging to
fairly primitive groups which have
become extinct everywhere else—
the best known vertebrates are the
Tuatara (Sphenodon punctatus Gray),
native frog (Liopelma spp.) and kiwi
(Apteryx spp.). These are known as
‘ palaeo-endemics ’. Most of the fauna,

however, shows more or less close
affinities with existing relatives from
Australasia, the Indonesian-Malayan-
Oriental region, Polynesia, or South
America. There are also a few New
Zealand animals with their closest
living relatives in the Holarctic or
Ethiopian regions (e.g., derodontid
beetles).

New Zealand lacks native land
mammals and snakes, and there are
notable omissions in all the major
orders of insects, which will be dis-
cussed in detail later. These missing
groups are well-represented in Aus-
tralia and New Guinea. Geologists see
evidence for a north-westward ex-
tension of land from New Zealand
towards New Guinea during Cretace-
ous times. That this did not form a
continuous ‘land bridge’ is fairly
clear from the absence of terrestrial
mammals, snakes, etc. However, the
ocean gap must have been much less
than at present, and may well have
been traversed by an archipelago,
which enabled the ancestors of some
of New Zealand’s present fauna to
‘island hop’. There is a suggestion
that migration of land animals to
New Zealand may have again been
easier during Miocene times than
at present. Whatever the exact
geological history, however, it is
clear that the more distinct elements
of the fauna have been able to evolve
in isolation for a very long time,
perhaps about 80,000,000 years. The
remainder are either particularly
conservative from an evolutionary
point of view, or have arrived in
New Zealand more recently.

Coleoptera

There are about 4,500 ‘ species’
of New Zealand beetles described,
but many of these are undoubtedly
synonyms. Most of these were de-
scribed last century by several ento-
mologists working independently in
Europe (mainly in Britain), and by
Major T. Broun in New Zealand.

q

I
‘AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

3roun was prone to describe variants
as full species, as were the system-
atists in Britain. The Broun collection
was not kept in New Zealand
‘following his death, and this has
definitely tended to discourage sys-
tematic work on New Zealand
beetles since then. It is quite im-
possible to identify many species from
the descriptions, so that the only
certain means of determination is
by comparison with the types, or
with specimens previously compared
with the types. As few of the types
are in New Zealand, identification
can be a very slow process.

| Despite synonymy in the species
already described, | believe that there
are so many species, especially of
small beetles, awaiting description,
‘that the actual number of species
imay well exceed 4,500. Thus, in spite
sof difficulties in identification, the
coleopterist in New Zealand can be
fairly certain of bringing interesting
movelties to the light of science.
With so little known of basic tax-
sonomy, there is naturally nothing
‘known of the life history and ecology
of most species.

All the great beetle families are
‘represented in New Zealand, al-
‘though there are but two species
of Buprestidae. The Curculionidae
comprise about 1,500 described
_ Species ’, while the following families
(listed in order of decreasing size)
also contain more than 100 described
‘species’ from New Zealand : Psela-
phidae, Cerambycidae, Staphylinidae,
-Tenebrionidae, Colydiidae, Chryso-
-melidae, Elateridae, Scarabaeidae and
Helodidae. The surprising fact to
/emerge from these rather dry statis-
tics is the strong representation of
the usually ‘small’ families Colydiidae
and Helodidae.

__ Undoubtedly the beetles most
‘frequently encountered in general
sweeping and beating are weevils.
There is a bewildering diversity of
these of all shapes and sizes, ranging

i
q

99

from smaller than a pin-head up to
25mm. in length. Some resemble
cut sticks, others curled-up dead
leaves, others pieces of bark, others
bird-droppings, and yet others re-
semble various seeds and _ fruits.
The Eugnominae, which occurs also
in South America, includes the spiny
weevils. These are bizarre insects,
such as Nyxetes bidens Fab., which
bears a long conical spine on each
elytron, and Scolopterus spp., which
have the shoulders produced into
blunt spines, and bear two small
spines posteriorly.

Besides weevils sensu stricto, New
Zealand is well provided with mem-
bers of the smaller families of the
Curculionoidea. The Giraffe Beetle,
Lasiorrhynchus barbicornis Fab., is the
sole member of the Brenthidae in
New Zealand. The male is a greatly
elongated insect, and almost half of
its length of up to 75 mm. is taken
up by its head, which consists mainly
of the attenuated rostrum. The
female is not at all like the male,
being less elongate, with a shorter,
more slender, rostrum, which bears
the antennae at its mid-length,
instead of near the tip as in the male.
It is thought that the female’s rostrum
is adapted for boring holes in the
dead trees in which she lays her
eggs. The peculiarities of the male
may be of significance in courtship,
but this certainly needs further
investigation. The Giraffe Beetle was
known to the Maoris as tuwhaipapa,
and regarded by them as the god of
a new-made canoe, perhaps because
of its shape.

Several New Zealand members of
the Anthribidae [=Platystomidae],
of the genera Proscoporrhinus, Exilis,
and Arecopais, are notable for their
greatly elongated antennae, which
in the males may be as much as
four times the length of the body.
Arecopais spectabilis Broun is almost
always found in association with the
Nikau Palm (Rhopalostylis sapida H.

100

AUGUST, 1964

Wendl. and Drude), being common
in the bases of fallen leaves of the
latter.

The longhorn beetles of New
Zealand include certain large, striking
species, some of which are common
at particular times of the year. The
largest is the Huhu (Prionoplus reticul-
aris White). The larvae inhabit rotten
conifer logs, and have adapted them-
selves well to introduced Pinus sp(p).,
which forms large commercial forests.
These larvae were eaten by the
Maoris, and are actually quite a
delicacy when fried in butter—I have
tried them myself! The adults fre-
quently fly into lighted rooms on
warm, still, moonless summer nights,
causing considerable concern to the

occupants. Their bite can be painful,

especially between the fingers.

A less popular longhorn than the
Huhu is the Two-toothed Longhorn
(Ambeodontus tristis Fab.) which once
bored into dead trees, but now seems
to prefer wooden houses. As most
houses in New Zealand are wooden,
it is a serious pest, and has been
known to cause neglected buildings
to collapse in a pile of rubble! The
so-called ‘Lemon-tree Borer’ (Oe-
mona hirta Fab.) bores into quite a
number of living trees, both exotic
and native, besides Lemons (Citrus
limonum Risso). There are many other
fine endemic species of Cerambyci-
dae, but few of them are of any great
importance economically.

Bronze beetles (Eucolaspis spp.)
are the abundant Chrysomelids of
the lowlands. The adults eat holes
in the leaves of many plants, while
the larvae are root-feeders. The
colourful metallic species of Luperus
are confined almost exclusively to
the mountains, with a single non-
metallic species, L. vulgaris Broun,
common in the lowlands in spring.
Compared with the numbers in
continental areas, there are few
members of the Chrysomelidae in
New Zealand, and there are probably

not more than 100 actual species.
Several subfamilies (Cassidinae, Sag-
rinae, Hispinae, Donaciinae, etc.) are
not represented at all.

The Heteromera of New Zealand
include a number of genera whose
family attribution is in doubt, e.g.,
Techmessa, Lagrioida and Syrphetodes.
This situation is not unusual amongst
New Zealand insects. It frequently
happens that definitions of tribes,
subfamilies or families have been
based on a study of only the Holarctic
fauna, so that the classification event-
ually has to be modified drastically
to conform with reality when genera
from other parts of the world are
studied more thoroughly.

The genus Techmessa includes can-
tharid-like insects which may be
common on forest growth in summer.
Lagrioida spp., in shape like small
Lagria spp., live amongst dune vegeta-
tion on sandy beaches. The genus
Syrphetodes, always previously in-
cluded in the Tenebrionidae, com-
prises a number of species, of highly
cryptic form, which resemble pieces
of bark or dead wood on which the
species live. The beetles are covered
with scales in patterns of various
shades of brown, and bear numerous
rather irregular tubercles. They are
very difficult to see in their usual
haunts, their similarity to irregular
projections of bark on logs being
remarkable. Some true Tenebrionids
(Mitua spp., etc.) and Colydiids
(Enarsus spp., Recyntus spp., etc.) live
in similar habitats, and are similarly
coloured and sculptured. Most New
Zealand Colydiidae are cryptically
coloured, and usually appear to be
rare, although in some cases they
can be found in fairly large numbers
in association with the specific fungi
on which they feed.

Apart from cryptic forms, the
New Zealand Tenebrionids are mainly
ground-dwelling species. Cilibe spp.
are characteristic of the drier parts
of the country. The adults are Asida-

i
AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

101

ike insects which are found under
stones or mat-forming coastal plants,
while the larvae are typical soil-
inhabiting false wire-worms. In wet
forests members of the Australian
tribe Adeliini (Pheloneis spp., Cero-
dolus spp., etc.) are common under
logs except in the far north. Species
found in rotten wood include the
ubiquitous Uloma tenebrioides White,
and less frequently members of the
genera Artystona and Aphthora. Two
species of Choerodes, small almost
spherical beetles with strong digging-
jegs, are found in large numbers
under seaweed drift on beaches.

| There are quite a number of
Melandryidae [=Serropalpidae]
mostly of apparently endemic genera,
including some moderate-sized, col-
ourful species. The Oedemeridae are
‘mainly coastal in distribution, except
for the species of Selenopalpus, which
appear to be predominantly subalpine.
There is nothing outstanding to note
about the remaining Heteromera.
The families Alleculidae, Salpingidae,
‘Mordellidae, Rhipiphoridae, Anthi-
‘cidae, Pedinidae, Scraptiidae and
\Aderidae are all present, but Meloidae
are lacking.

__ The most remarkable New Zealand
Clavicornia are the two species of
Brontopriscus (Cucujidae). Both adults
sand larvae are greatly flattened
‘insects which live under the loose
_bark of logs, a habitat for which their
‘form is uniquely suited. Members of
‘the Cryptophagidae and, less fre-
quently, Lathridiidae, are beaten or
‘swept from foliage, but they are
‘mainly small, obscure species. The
Coccinellidae are not well repre-
sented, and most of the native lady-
|birds are small and dull.

| shall discuss the remainder of
‘the beetle fauna and other insect
‘orders in subsequent parts of this

)

“series.

(20.3.64. J. C. Watt (3578).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A Descriptive atlas of New Zealand. Government
Printer, Wellington.—This is an excellent general
account of the geography of New Zealand, including
maps of geology, vegetation, soil, climate, land use,
etc., in addition to a detailed topographical map.

Insects, general

MILLER, D. (1956). N.Z.Dept. Sci. Industr. Res. Bull.,

120 : 492 pp. Bibliography of New Zealand Entom-
ology, 1775-1952.
— (1959). Nature in New Zealand, Native insects.
A. H. and A. W. Reed, Wellington. (pp. 64, figs. 193)
—A very readable elementary account of some of
the larger and more common native insects.

TILLYARD, R. J. (1926). The insects of Australia and
New Zealand. Angus and Robertson, Sydney.—
Scarce and out of date, but contains much valuable
information that does not date.

Coleoptera

CROWSON, R. A. (1955). The natural classification of
the families of Coleoptera. Nathaniel Lloyd, London.
—Mentions quite a number of taxonomically
interesting New Zealand genera, and is the classifica-
tion | follow (backwards !) above.

HUDSON, G. V. (1934). New Zealand beetles and their
larvae. Ferguson and Osborn, Wellington. (pp. 236,
pl. XVII in colour.)—Out of print, but much the
best general work. Includes much biological informa-
tion and descriptions of larvae and pupae of many
species. The checklist is, of course, out of date,
but is the only complete list of New Zealand beetles
available.

MANSON, D. C. M. and McDOWELL, L. H. (1960).
Nature in New Zealand, Native beetles. A. H. and
A. W. Reed, Wellington. (pp. 64, figs 58.)—An
elementary account with shortcomings, e.g., of
fifty species described, thirteen are not native,
despite the title. | hope that some of the inappropri-
ate and ridiculous vernacular names coined by the
authors do not come into general use.

J.C.W.

JUNIOR NEWS SECTION

Isn’t it annoying how summer
always catches you out? Having just
got used to winter with its rain and
lack of insects you suddenly find
yourself in summer with its rain and
flood of insects. If only you had been
prepared. Each year | promise myself
a winter of intensive study in some
new group of insects or other animals.
| studied dragonflies one year, bumble
bees the next. | even, dare | say it,
worked on spiders, but each summer
finds me nowhere near the end of
my studies or preparations, and
everything just passes me by before
| can get round to it.

| do hope next summer won't
catch us out again.

Many thanks to Peter Hugo (3522J)
of 38 Cotswold Crescent, Chipping
Norton, Oxfordshire, and Michael

102

AUGUST, 1964

Noble (3539J) of 19a Kidbrooke Park
Road, Blackheath, London, for their
news of swarms of Cockchafer beetles
(Melolontha melolontha Linn.). | was
beginning to think such stories were
fairy tales. Peter’s _Cockchafers
crowded the tops of local Sycamore
trees (Acer pseudoplatanus Linn.), and
filled his mercury-vapour light-trap.
He says he could not leave the house
without being hit in the face by one
of these beetles.

Michael also noticed swarms of
Cockchafers crowding trees on Black-
heath. This time they were around
Cherry (Prunus spp.) and Chestnut
(Castanea sativa Linn.) trees. These
beetles were as big a nuisance as
those in Oxfordshire, and forced
Michael to abandon his cricket as
they came down like hornets.

These swarms were seen _ last
summer. Did anyone else see similar
swarms? Please let us know if
Cockchafers appear in large numbers
again this year.

J. Heath (36275) of 26 Shepheard
Road, Sheldon, Birmingham 26, sent
me a very interesting beetle larva.
It was certainly a longhorn grub and
looked very much like that of the
House Longhorn (Hylotrupes bajulus
Linn.) but it was found in seasoned
wavy-edged oak board, while H.
bajulus is supposed to be a plague
in softwood (coniferous) house tim-
bers. Is it a ‘rebellious’ House
Longhorn or a foreign visitor ?

Brian Coles (3533J) of 25 Barnhill,
Pinner, Middlesex, was lucky enough
this spring to catch one of two
Comma Butterflies (Polygonia c-album
Linn.) which he saw for the first time
near his home. He was actually look-
ing for Small Whites (Pieris rapae
Linn.) at the time and managed to
take a mating pair. The female laid
her eggs in Brian’s cage even after
being frightened by his dog. One of
the Small White males taken had
strange indentations on the back
edges of the forewings. There were

smaller indentations on the back

edges of both hindwings. These were |
so obviously balanced that they

could not have been torn edges.
Has anybody else seen one of these
strange butterflies ?

If any of you have any tips on how —
to pronounce scientific names, es- |
pecially those of the butterfly families, —
be helping both Tony —

you. will
Gettins (3630J) of 79 Canberra Road,
Leyland, Nr Preston, Lancashire, and

me. Tony wrote to ask me about this |

problem and | wondered whether any
of you could tell us how you remem-
ber to say the wretched words.

Don’t forget to let Jonathan Cooter
(32903) of 174 Seaforth Gardens,
Stoneleigh, Surrey, have your records
—of numbers, place, date, etc.—for
beetles of the genera Cicindela and
Elaphrus. He is making distribution
maps, although | think if he told us
what the maps were for he would get
more records.

R. H. Allen (3628J) of 26 Burnside
Road, Dagenham, Essex, has
started keeping the stick insect
Carausius morosus Br. He would be
interested to hear about other
people’s experiences with these fas-
cinating creatures. How many of you
keep other species of stick or leaf
insect ?

| almost forgot to give the answers
to the quiz in last May’s issue of the
Bulletin. Here they are :

(1) Damselflies (Odonata) have four

wings.

(2) Orthoptera would include grass-

just |

|
|
|

i

Mes BULLETIN, VOL. 23

hoppers, locusts, bush crickets,
mole crickets and true crickets,
but not cockroaches (Dicty-
optera), earwigs (Dermaptera)
or leaf or stick insects (Phas-
mida).

(3) The three segments of an
insect’s thorax are the pro-
thorax, mesothorax and meta-
thorax.

(4) The forewings of Coleoptera
(beetles) are modified into elytra
or wing-cases.

(5) Scorpion flies (Mecoptera) are
so called because the males have
turned up tails tipped with a
bulge like a scorpion’s sting
(although Mecoptera do not
sting).

(6) The world’s largest moth and
beetle are the Atlas Moth
(Attacus atlas Linn.) and the
Goliath Beetle (Goliathus regius
Klug).

(7) lsoptera are termites.

(8) British social wasps’ nests are
made of wood paper.

(9) The scientific name of the
Honey Bee is Apis mellifera
(=mellifica) Linn.

| (10) Malpighian tubules act as ‘ kid-

neys ’. They absorb waste mat-
erials from the insect’s blood.

| (11) House Flies (Musca domestica

Linn.) used to breed most
commonly in stables on horse
manure before the motor car
took the place of the horse for
travel.

(12) There are nineteen species of
bumble bees of the genus
Bombus and six species of
Psithyrus in Britain.

(13) The yellow cocoons of an
ichneumon parasite are often
found on the dead bodies of
caterpillars of Pieris brassicae
Linn.—usually those of the
Braconid Apanteles glomeratus
Linn.

(14) Robber flies are the ‘ bandits ’
of the fly world. They hunt

103

down smaller insects with great
ferocity.

(15) Tracheae channel air into the
insect’s body from the spiracles.

(16) The ears of shorthorn grass-
hoppers are found (on the
sides) at the front of the
abdomen.

(17) Ladybird beetles
(greenfly).

(18) Parthenogenesis is a process of
reproduction in which females
lay eggs which develop without
the necessity of a male.

(19) Social insects live together in
colonies and actually feed and
take care of the young.

(20) House Flies spend the winter
as pupae.

| do hope Wesley Caswell (3133J)
of 46 Lewgars Avenue, Kingsbury,
London N.W.9, managed to arrange
the expedition to Austria which he
planned for this summer. We look
forward to hearing about his exploits.

| know that Richard Claypole
(3688J) of 196 Lawrence Street, Mill
Hill, London N.W.7, was also plan-
ning to go hunting on the Continent
this year. Do let us know what you
caught, Richard.

| hope to see you all at the Annual
Exhibition.

eat aphids

H. J. Berman (2941A).

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Sir—I have just read Mr John
Moore’s letter concerning the scarcity
of the word ‘ bug-hunter’ and his
view concerning conservation gen-
erally (Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 23 : 32-3).
| have been reading with interest
previous articles on the subject in
past Bulletins and thought you may
permit me to have a little space to
express a few points that seem to
have arisen out of these articles.

| have looked through the Bulletins

104

for the past few months and notice
that since the appearance of Vol. 21,
No. 255, up to Vol. 23, No. 262, there
has been a continual series of articles
and comments upon conservation and
allied topics. There is even a mention
of the word ‘ bug-hunter ’ in Vol. 21,
No. 253 !

However, there seem to be two
points which disturb me. The first
is that there is a tendency to argue
and ‘split hairs’ over words and
phrases. Secondly, there is a danger
that such a concentrated ‘ write-up ’
of these problems over the last few
months may have an effect which is
not the one desired by the authors
of the articles: that is that the
readers become bored, and the

attitude ‘‘ Oh ! that stuff again ’’ may:

very easily be formed.

Surely, what is most important is
that the insects themselves, the very
issue of the discussion, are not lost
in the undergrowth of verbal out-
pourings. Since joining the Society
about seven years ago | have come
into contact with many amateur
entomologists, bug-hunters, call them
what you will. The common character-
istic amongst all these people has
been a genuine concern about con-
servation. Whilst | agree it is neces-
sary to remind Members of the
necessity for conservation the cause
would, in my opinion, be far better
served if space were used in the
Bulletin to record actual achieve-
ments, and instances of damage caused
by thoughtless behaviour, growth of
urbanisation, insecticides, etc. | won-
der how many Members who have
seen such damage have bothered to
inform our representative on the
Nature Conservancy's Entomological
Liaison Committee. | doubt if one
Member in the whole of the AES
Membership has bothered to do so.
lf | am wrong | would be delighted
to be corrected by our representative
Mr T. G. Howarth. How many cases
of this nature have been recorded in

AUGUST, 1964.

the Bulletin? So few in the past ten |
years that one could almost count _
them on the fingers of one hand. If |
our Members are really genuinely |

concerned with conservation | would

have thought that this would be one |
of the obvious ways of actively doing }

something about it. The impression
given at present is one of complete
apathy.

| would like to end by quoting a |

sorrowful letter written to the
Editor of the Entomologist’s Weekly
Intelligencer of Saturday, December
3rd, 1859.

Sir,—In your ‘ Manual of British
Butterflies and Moths’, which | have
lately procured, and which | would
have given anything for when a

young man, after your description of |

Chrysophanus Dispar, you allude to
a letter from Mr Bond, stating ‘‘ You
are quite right in supposing that |
have had personal acquaintance with
the living Dispar,”’ etc., etc. | infer
from this that you have not had that
pleasure yourself; | therefore pro-
ceed to give you some account of
my own acquaintance with that most
beautiful insect, which, some thirty
years ago, was so abundant in the
unreclaimed fens about Whittlesea
Mere that | never expected to hear
of its utter extermination. Its brilliant
appearance on the wing in the sun-
shine | shall never forget, and to
watch it sitting on the flowers of the
Eupatorium cannabinum and show
the underside of its wings, was
something ever to be remembered.
| once took sixteen in about half an
hour on one particular spot, where
the above mentioned plant was very
plentiful ; but unless the sun was
very bright they were difficult to
find. In those days the larva was
unknown, and | attribute the dis-
appearance of the butterfly to the
discovery of the larvae, to the un-
ceasing attacks of collectors, and to
the burning of the surface growth
of the fens, which is done in dry

wes BULLETIN, VOL. 23

weather when they are reclaimed.
_ Thirty years ago the fens about
Whittlesea Mere were most inter-
esting localities for the entomologist,
the botanist, and the ornithologist.
| lived then in that neighbourhood,
and these pursuits were my delight.
‘Papilio machaon might then be had
to any amount ; the flight of Chryso-
-phanus Dispar was abundant in July ;
the moth L. Dispar was very plentiful;
besides many other rare and beautiful
“insects. Now, however, everything is
totally changed. The Great Northern
“Railway runs through a part of the
fen where, when | was a boy, one
‘could scarcely walk; at the spot
vwhere | used to land from my boat,
»on the edge of the mere, stands a
farm-house ; my favourite locality
for C. Dispar—where the bog myrtle
used to grow in profusion and scent
ithe air with its delicious perfume—
was (as | myself saw last season)
“converted into a field of stinking
cole-seed, with a flock of sheep
eating it off. All the better, no doubt
for the landowners, but ruinous work
‘for naturalists, and as such you will
sympathize with me in the destruc-
‘tion of what was one of the most
interesting localities in the whole
,country for persons inclined to such
j pursuits —you will understand how
|

—

ee ee

‘indignant | felt when someone ir-
|reverently told me, a few years ago,
that they had “ tapped the mere”’ !
j EXC: F. Jenkins.”
If Mr Jenkins had known that over
-a hundred years later his letter
would be quoted | wonder what his
| reaction would have been. His letter
“seems to me to contain so much of
| what we are seeing and feeling today.
If we are to save the necessity of
writing that sort of letter in this
century then we must be active, and
_ not feel content to argue over words,
;and preach to the converted. We
_-must report what we see to those
| associations which are fighting against
the ever present drain and destruc-

105

tion of the flora and fauna of this
country.
G. D. Trebilcock (2976).

REFERENCE

-ENKINS, E. C. F. (1859). Entomologist’s Weekly
9:

Intelligencer, 7:

The Editor has always had plenty
of space in the Bulletin to record
specific outrages against our wild
life, but no such records have yet
reached him: hence a general ‘write-
up’ of the problems involved might
be considered the best way towards
ensuring that Members take notice
of activities which are likely to be
harmful to wild life. At least those
Members who are not already aware
of it might then realise that conserva-
tion is a vital issue amongst natural-
ists at the present time—for certainly
there is apathy towards (or even dis-
regard for) wild life preservation.
We must indeed report what we
see to the bodies concerned with
conservation before it is too late.—
Editor.

Sir,—On 29th February 1964 | took
a specimen of Eupithecia centaureata
Schiff. (Lime-speck Pug Moth) at rest
on a window-pane outside the East
End Mission, Stepney, London E.1.
According to South (1961), “ the
moth, which is often common in
gardens, is out from May to August,
and specimens of a second brood
occur in September and October ”’.
As this specimen was captured well
out of its normal flight periods | am
wondering whether it emerged under
abnormal conditions, and would be
grateful if any Member could give
me any information on this.
14.3.64. M. O. Hughes (3612).

REFERENCE

SOUTH, R. (1961). The Moths of the British Isles. 4th
edn. Frederick Warne, London. Series Il, p. 215.

Sir,—I see from p. 34 of your Febru-
ary issue that an Alder Moth larva
found in Devon is considered worthy

106

of record. You may therefore care
to record also that on August 22nd
1963 | found a well grown larva of
Apatele alni Linn. on a tree of Cercidi-
phyllum japonicum Sieb. and Zucc.
(Katsura-tree) in the grounds of
Dartington Hall, South Devon.

R.-S. Ra Fitter.

REVIEW

Report of the Nature Conserv-
ancy for the year ended 30th Septem-
ber’1963.—— Pp. vil and 164: ri. 1.
1 map. Her Majesty’s Stationery
Office. Price 11/6d.

This Report describes the activities
of the Nature Conservancy for the
period under review and concludes
with lists of scientific staff and staff
changes ; a list of Reserves with
information on freedom of access,
and names and addresses of Wardens,
research grants; etc. There is no
list of Sites of Special Scientific
Interest and none is advertised as
being among the publications of the
Nature Conservancy. This is an
unfortunate omission, because the
average naturalist will not recognize
when damage that he sees is occurring
on such a site, which is often declared
to be an ‘SSSI’ because it is highly
vulnerable.

The chapter on Conservation, which
describes the management being
undertaken on Nature Reserves, will
be found the most generally inter-
esting. A preoccupation with mam-
mals and game birds is seen here,
because of the profound effect of
grazing on the vegetation and because
of the prime interest which land-
owners have in these groups. In-
creasing efforts are being made to
transform land use by soil treatment,
especially by the application of fertil-
isers for establishing forest on barren

AUGUST, 1964

uplands. The effect on the wild
vegetation of manipulating cover,
and soil fertility, is obvious enough,
but the effect on the invertebrate
fauna appears to be little noted.
Amateurs can do a great deal to help
here by recording the dominant
plants, variety of vegetation, and
cover, when recording lists of cap-
tures. The severe effect of public use
of Reserves for recreation is recount-
ed in predictable manner. Particularly
sickening are such reports as that of
the need to remove Reserve signs at
Newborough Warren every evening
and replace them again in the morn-
ing to prevent their destruction.

The chapter describing scientific
research at the various Research
Stations is of very uneven presenta-
tion. Some of the reports are written
for too specialized a readership and
the reasons for undertaking some
highly technical investigations are not
made clear. Too much space is de-
voted in the reports of some of the
Research Stations to projects which
have no results to report. In some
cases the space is filled by reference
to what it is hoped to achieve next
year. There are stated to be 144
scientifically qualified staff in the
Conservancy, but as they have 105
Nature Reserves to look after with
a minimal number of Wardens and
assistants, it does not appear that this
staff should feel bound to try to
imitate the research done in Univers-
ities and large Government research
establishments. The Report records
a few secondments of staff from
elsewhere to the Conservancy, and
records that a growing volume of
research is being carried out on
Nature Reserves by universities. No
doubt this trend will help the Con-
servancy’s staff to find the best
direction for their own efforts.

In view of the restrictions placed
upon visitors, particularly amateur
entomologists, on some Reserves, it
is desirable that in the next Report

|

|

‘AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

shere shall be some indication of the
sxistence of an official policy on this
“matter. The references to relation-
ships with the County Naturalists’
Trusts and similar bodies make no
-eference to the friction that is
caused by the extreme views of a
“ew of the Conservancy’s officers.

Every naturalist should read through
chese Annual Reports and have to
hand a reasonably recent volume for
iis information, particularly if he is
_ikely to want to visit Reserves at
short notice.
1.3.64. R. W. J. Uffen (1660).

LUCILIA BUFONIVORA MONIEZ

For experiments on the trans-
nission of a protozoan parasite of the
common Toad (Bufo bufo Linn.) a
saboratory culture of Lucilia bufon-
‘vora Moniez is required. Would any-
one finding living specimens—larvae,
oupae or adults—with which the
culture could be started please send
chem to Dr E. U. Canning, Imperial
‘college Field Station, Ashurst Lodge,
unninghill, Ascot, Berkshire.

eae 25 RS = =e SS ee ew

QUERIES

__ Have any readers had dealings with
‘Araschnia levana Linn. (Map Wing
3utterfly)?
__ | have had no luck in my attempts
so pair this butterfly, but would like
“0 know if anyone has achieved this
ieemingly impossible feat, as | am
nterested in breeding this species.
If anybody has advice on this
oroblem would they please write to
me at the address given in the
Hecerstip List.
R. F. McCormick (3375).

a AE BA

Seow.

erapemec os

A Member has written to me
jisking for advice (through the Bulletin)

|

|
if

107

from other Members on how to
induce female butterflies caught in
the wild to lay eggs, as, despite at-
tempts to implement all the methods
of which he has read, he has had no
success whatsoever in obtaining ova
in this way.

Do any readers have ‘tips’ about
this which they would care to pass
on for the benefit of other Members?
—Editor.

NOTES AND
OBSERVATIONS

MORE RECORDS OF THE
ALDER MOTH

Since the publication of the latest
edition of South’s * Moths’, several
lepidopterists have pointed out mis-
leading information which has been
reproduced from the previous edition
without any attempt having been
made to alter the text in the light
of more recent knowledge.

| would suggest that this must be
the case with the information on
Apatele alni Linn. (Alder Moth), a
species which, prior to 1959 when |
commenced using mercury-vapour
light, seemed, in view of what South
said about it, extremely unlikely ever
to come my way. However, on the
very first night | ran an ‘ m.v.’ light,
in the above-mentioned year at
Sevenoaks, Kent, a perfect male

example of this species ‘ plopped ’
on to the sheet. In all a total of
seven specimens came to ‘m.v.’ at

this locality in two seasons. Last year
two more came to my ‘m.v.’, this
time near Basingstoke, Hampshire.
Also, a friend, Mr P. Rogers, informs
me that an estimated twenty speci-
mens arrived at his “ m.v.’ during one
evening in 1963 at Alice Holt Forest,
Hampshire.

Until 1963 | had never seen the
peculiar and striking larva, but on

108

August 9th, near Basingstoke, | took
an almost fully fed larva from a leaf
on a Crab Apple tree (Malus sylvestris
Mill.), and another of similar size the
next night on a sallow (Salix sp.) at
Alice Holt Forest.

| feel sure other more experienced
Members must have encountered this
species many times over the years.
It would be interesting to hear just
how rare they consider it to be.
203264: E. A. Sadler (2966).

REFERENCE

SOUTH, R. (1961). The Moths of the British Isles. 4th
edn. Frederick Warne, London. Series | and Il.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE
ARCHER’S DART AND ROSY
MINOR MOTHS

According to South’s * Moths of
the British Isles’ the Archer’s Dart
Moth (Agrotis vestigialis Hufn.) is a
coastal species. During August 1962
| found it abundant in my bedroom,
and to street lamps, but in 1963
although | searched and used a moth-
trap (for the first time) | was unable
to take a single specimen (in Ches-
hire). Can anyone offer a reason-
able explanation for this?

As with the above-mentioned
species, the Rosy Minor Moth (Procus
literosa Haw.) is, according to South,
essentially a coastal species, being
rare inland, but every year | have
found it common on Privet (Ligustrum
vulgare Linn.) at dusk.

24.264: S. H. Church (36263).

REFERENCE

SOUTH, R. (1961). The Moths of the British Isles. 4th
edn. Frederick Warne, London. Series 1, pp. 131
and 289.

THE DOT MOTH

The Dot Moth (Melanchra persi-
cariae Linn.) is not supposed to be
common North of the Midlands but
| have found it abundant each year
and have found larvae as late as mid-
November (last year). In some speci-

AUGUST, 1964

mens the ‘ dot’ is much larger than
usual, and | would welcome any
explanations for this from Members.
8.2.64. S. H. Church (3626J).

FURTHER RECORDS OF THE
LEAST CARPET MOTH IN
SOUTH-WEST LONDON

Two more specimens of Sterrha

vulpinaria H-Sch.—previously S. rusti-
cata Schiff—(Least Carpet or Least
Carpeted Wave Moth) have been
taken in my mercury-vapour light-
trap here in Streatham.

One, well worn, was taken on 16th
June 1963. The other, slightly worn,
was taken on 19th June 1963.

These captures, along with the
one taken in 1961 (see Bull. amat. Ent.
Soc., 21: 12), and the reply to that
record given in Bull. amat. Ent. Soc.,
21: 84, lead me to believe that this
species is breeding in this area.

R. F. McCormick (3375).

THE BORDERED SALLOW
IN SOUTH-WEST LONDON

On 23rd July 1962 | took in my
mercury-vapour light-trap a mint
specimen of Pyrrhia umbra Hufn.
(Bordered Sallow Moth).

Have any other Members taken

this species in the London area?
R. F. McCormick (3375).

THE LIGHT ORANGE
UNDERWING MOTH

| would like to record that a male
Light Orange Underwing Moth (Arch-
iearis notha Huebn.) was taken in
mixed shrub near Wickam, Hamp-
shire, on 8th April 1964.

It was immediately recognisable by
its strongly bipectinate antennae and
unicolorous forewings.

12.3164

ee a
Printed by Ellis & Phillips Ltd., East Side Press, Rye Street, Bishop’s Stortford, and published by the Amateur

Entomologists’ Society, 42 Normandy Avenue, Barnet, Herts.

1964.

Richard J. Dickson (36743).

Worldwide Butterflies Lid.

Charmouth, Bridport, Dorset

a OVA, LARVAE AND PUPAE
| ‘

from many parts of the world

—L. CHRISTIE
437, GLENELDON ROAD,

4 STREATHAM, LONDON, SW16

me ~=—S—sé‘é«SNe ane seed

= 4 P. . Entomological Equipment

ee es

: BEE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

- V Woodside House, Chalfont Heights,

Gerrards Cross, Bucks.

-**' aN ve ORMATION ON BEES

=

Pe ee EN ey Ee
ae SS S ae a

is 7 <<
, v > a ce
es ey ce
", : N,v
ss gee oh ey
Pa ete

4 Ez Ww CLASSEY LTD.

a 383 Hanworth Road, Hampton, Mddx |

= . £ Entomological Literature

ee CATALOGUES ‘ON REQUEST _

THE AMATEUR ENTOMOLOGISTS’ SOCIETY

ANNUAL EXHIBITION, 1964

SATURDAY, 24th OCTOBER

(Subject to confirmation) from 2.0 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. ai.)
HUGH MYDDELTON SECONDARY SCHOOL, —
Corporation Row, London, E.C.1 ee
ADMISSION FREE

EXHIBITS. The Hall will be open from 11.30 a.m. for receipt of Members’ ‘exhibits.
Bring along your specimens (any Order, living or set), equipment, apparatus, phot
graphs, drawings, etc. If you require a large space, notify the Meetings Patines in\s
advance. Please label exhibits clearly.

DEMONSTRATIONS. Members will demonstrate setting of i insects eee Order:

GROUPS. Members of Groups who have been corresponding will be able to nom
for discussion.

SURPLUS TABLE. if Members have spare ova, larvae, imagines, equipment, books, a
etc. for sale or exchange, bring them along labelled with name, price or exchange 3
wants. No charge for use of this table. a

ENTOMOLOGICAL TRADERS will be in attendance.

Light Refreshments will be available

Offers of help and enquiries to Hon. Meetings Secretary:
B. F. Skinner, 85 Elder Road, West Norwood, S.E.27. GIPsy Hill 0057.

BRING YOUR FRIENDS AND AN EXHIBIT! :

To get there: Farringdon Station (Underground) connects with most main stations, and a
numerous buses serve the area. Cars may be parked in permitted areas of the School grounds. .

Notice is hereby given that neither the Amateur Entomologists’ Society nor the London County Council can accept

any liability for damage to vehicles or oe which are left i in these grounds. |

TO KitGs

(OVEMBER, 1964
\ es Pas ~ oh x te *

THE BULLETIN
OF
THE AMATEUR
ENTOMOLOGISTS’

i SOCIETY

World List abbreviation : Bull. amat. Ent. Soc.

1

EDITED by H. V. DANKS

CENTIPEDES

E. H. Eason

This is the only fully comprehen-

sive work of reference to deal
exclusively with the biology and
ecology of centipedes, hitherto a
neglected aspect of natural history.
The demand by specialist natural-
ists for a definite work on the sub-
ject will be satisfied by this book.
With nearly 500 line drawings, 4
pages of half-tones and a 4-colour
frontispiece.

63s. net

Write for fully descriptive leaflet
to:-

FREDERICK WARNE
1/4 Bedford Crt., London, W.C.2

THE LONDON NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY |

This Society has sections covering all aspects of natural, |
history and in particular, entomology. Lectures and
field meetings are arranged and research work carried Pe
out. Papers on entomological subjects are prepared

by members and published in the Society's journal — a @

ee London Naturalist’’.

housed at Ealing Public ¢ Library.

Further details may be obtained from:

The General Secretary, Mrs L. M. R- SMALL, Sere. ee 4
&> 2 a ee 7% . ee Tt
13 Woodfield Crescent, Ealing, W.5. oo

1
“AES NOTICE -]
WHERE TO WRITE |

Membership applications, offers of help, |
changes of address, and non-arrival of — |
Bulletins to: D. E. Dodwell, 28 Sum- |
merleaze Park, Yeovil, Somerset. E

|

Yeovil 928. |
Advertisers to: R. D. Hilliard, 54 Gyles | |

Park, Stanmore, Middlesex.
EDGware | 604. |

Offers to lead Field Meetings, exhibit, etc.,
to: B. F. Skinner, 85 Elder Road, West
Norwood, London, S.E.27. j

_ GIPsy Hill 0057.

Manuscripts, crawines and books for |
review to: H. V. Danks, 7 The Ridge. |
Surbiton, Surrey. SRE: 4156.

Subscriptions (15/- per annum, 10/- for |
Juniors) to: B. R. Stallwood, I7 Clare- }
mont Avenue, Sunbury-on-Thames, | o |
Middlesex. ‘Sunbury 2687 .

Youth matters to: H. Berman, St Wed |
School, St Ne Hunts, |

The Society has a library —

EDITORIAL

A few articles are still being sent
7o the previous Editor at his old
iddress: this means that these items
Jo not reach me until a considerable
seriod after they have been written,
jand | apologise to any Member whose
article has been delayed in this way.
t is essential to use the most
recent issue of the Bulletin when
consulting the ‘where to write’
panel inside the front cover.

The second supplement to the
current Membership List is to be
‘found as extra centre pages in this
issue.

H. V. Danks (2907).

ADDITIONS TO
AES ADVISORY PANEL

_ Phasmida (Leaf- and Stick-insects)

General advice and identification
M. H. ROBINSON, Dept. of
Zoology, University Museum,

! Parks Road, Oxford.

_/Araneida (Spiders)

General advice and identification
D. J. CLARK, Zoology Depart-
ment, British Museum (Natural
History), Cromwell Road, S.W.7

PUBLICATIONS ORDER
| FORM

Members are reminded that when
jordering AES publications using the
_|recently revised List and Order Form,
) their names and addresses should

| | Front cover illustration: Stages in the life-cycle of the
ha _Camberwell Beauty Butterfly (Nymphalis antiopa
. Linn.), drawn by Mr A. M. Freebrey (3359).

AES

BULLETIN

No. 265

NOVEMBER, 1964

be included: the absence of a space
on the List for these essentials has
led several members to order
publications from the Society’s
Publications Agent without enclosing
an address to which publications and
invoice are to be sent.

COLLECTING NOTES —
November, 1964

The Smaller Moths

Ypsolophus costellus Fab. (=paren-
thessellus Linn.). Mr. Bradford’s
notes read: — “ Fairly common. The
forewings are variable, some being a
rich reddish brown and others a paler
hue. The white streak or blotch is
also strong in some and obscure in
others. The hindwings are grey
darkening towards the termen. It
is on the wing from August to Sep-
tember.

‘| have taken cocoons of this moth
from crevices in the bark of oak
(Quercus spp.) early in the year when
they have been quite noticeable
against the darker background. The
larva makes a pale ochreous cocoon,
boat-shaped almost the same as Y.
alpellus Schiff. It feeds on oak, Horn-
beam (Carpinus betulus Linn.), and
most likely other trees.”’

Y. sequellus Clerck. Mr Bradford’s
notes read:—‘‘ The drawing is from
a specimen taken locally among
Sycamores (Acer pseudoplatanus
Linn.); its foodplant, or | should say
one of its foodplants. Its preference
is Maple (A. campestre Linn.) and it
may feed on other trees.

“The head, thorax and forewings
are white with black markings.
There is a hint of ochreous colour on
the head and towards the base of

110 NOVEMBER, 1964

YY

Uy
Yy YY

SAMA hb fp tf fy Uf

LA SI Ji hf ff]
LLY YL

\ ESB.

Ypsolophus sequellus Clerck

the wings. Hindwings are greyish, relevant Bulletins, then treat your-|
paler towards base. The moth ison selves and buy some from. our.
the wing in August and September, Publications Agent. If you can’t
(stated by Ford to rest high up on afford to then write to me person-
trees and if disturbed to settle low ally. Don’t forget that | shall always |

down). | have found it low down, be pleased to receive any assistance
about a foot from the ground.” in writing these notes. If | get this.

| have taken this moth on a fence perhaps | shan’t upset the Bulletin:
and also on trees at about eye level — Editor so much by sending in my

although | suppose that depends on material late! The next notes will |
how tall you are! Well, lam average be in 1965, so | wish everyone a|

height. Happy Christmas and a_ successful)

| think that during these last few New Year. I
years | have said about as much D. Ollevant (1514).)
as, there: is to. say in» general REPERERES

terms about collecting at this time FORD, L. T. (1949). A Guide to the Smaller British
don Ent. and Nat. Hist.
of year. If you haven’t got the SRR eS Ge London Ent. an at is

“AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

111

The Hymenoptera Aculeata

Many are first attracted to the
dymenoptera through the bumble
sees, which certainly form both a
conspicuous and an important part
of the bee fauna. Fortunately for
che beginner the British species are
aow well-covered in the literature.
n particular the recent book in the
New Naturalist series, ‘ Bumble Bees ’
oy Free and Butler, includes a wealth
of information, and the appendix by
‘Dr |. H. H. Yarrow includes the
simplest and most up-to-date key
co our more usual colour forms.
‘sor those who wish to pursue the
matter further, the classic book of
meeyy. L. Sladen, he Humble’ bee,
‘ts life history and how to domesticate
't’, contains much acute observation,
and the work of Professor O. W.
Richards (1927) gives a full, funda-
“mental account of the specific charac-
ters of the British species. The
‘illustrations of the male genitalia of
ymost species is a particularly useful
“feature of this latter work. Nor does
‘this wealth of literature mean that
‘nothing remains to be discovered
‘about the group, as in fact they
‘present opportunities for many types
ted study of which | want to consider
‘two here.

__ The species of Bombus and Psithyrus
make a handsome collection. Killing
‘is perhaps best accomplished with
la cyanide bottle. Ethyl acetate can
of course be used, but extreme care
must be taken to ensure that the
coat of the bee does not become
‘wetted. Bumble bees can be set
inasimilar fashion to the Lepidoptera,
‘or can be mounted on longer pins
with the wings in the normal resting
‘position. The latter is preferable for
“scientific study, and can present a
very pleasing appearance as a sight
‘of the Pittioni collection now in the
‘British Museum (Natural History)
‘will show. The presence of the
-worker caste in the genus Bombus

adds to the variety of the collection.
In some species the workers can vary
considerably in size. In B. lapidarius
Linn. workers of the first broods
are smaller than those of later broods,
whilst in B. agrorum Fab. occasional
very small workers, and sometimes
also very small males, are taken.
This latter species is a surface nester,
and the small individuals develop
from larvae that in the nest were
farthest from the food store.

The preparation of a representa-
tive collection can still help in
elucidating certain points. Most
obvious is the case of B. muscorum
Linn. and B. smithianus White. The
fringing distribution of the latter in
the north-west has always presented
the possibility that the two forms
are subspecies. Collections made
where both forms occur are giving
the answer which currently seems
to favour the specific distinction.
Such collections are of the queens
emerging in the spring, and require
appreciable time in the field. Autumn
collecting presents opportunities for
getting to know species. Though the
new generation of queens quickly go
into hibernation, the larger late-
season workers are busy and the
numerous males are easy (and safe!)
to catch, and easy to identify.

One problem pertaining to autumn
collecting deserves more attention
than it has apparently received.
Migration in butterflies has been
often observed and is well authenti-
cated. Often other insects are
observed moving with the butterflies,
and occasionally records of bumble
bees have appeared. Most recently
Mr E. G. Philp (1957) reported a
movement of bumble bees alone.
These movements are certainly real
but what can be their function? Are
they dispersal flights merely chan-
nelled where a physical barrier is
met? Mr Philp observed bees
moving north along the coast against
a N.E. wind. This August at Great-

112

stone | observed a similar movement
of bees moving south against a S.W.
wind. Over what distances do the
flights occur? Could there be any
return movement in spring? Some
of these questions could be answered
by more planned _ observation
perhaps coupled with marking, and
the suggestion is commended to any
who find a locality near their homes
where such movements occur.
So much for bumble bees; perhaps
a closing mention of the social wasps
would not be amiss. Last autumn
the abundance of Vespula spp. promp-
ted my autumn article (Bull. amat.
Ent. Soc., 22: 107-9), and | suggested
some survey methods for assessing
the relative abundance of the com-
mon species. This year populations
of wasps have been low, following
the wet May. At present | have
insufficient data to show whether
V. vulgaris Linn. makes up a greater
percentage of the population than
last year at the expense of v. ger-
manica Fab., as | postulated might
happen under these conditions. How-
ever, | hope to gather the relevant
information over the next few weeks,
and hope that others will do likewise
in their own localities. As a tail-
piece | might mention that the only
wasp to appear in the light-trap so
far is again V. vulgaris. Can this be
significant?
J. C.. Felton.

REFERENCES

FREE, J. B. and BUTLER, C. G. (1959). Bumble Bees.
New Naturalist Series. Collins, London.

PHILP, E. G. (1957). Ent. mon. Mag., 93: 104. Migrating
Bumble-bees.

RICHARDS, O. W. (1927). Trans. ent. Soc. Lond.,
75; 233 -68. The specific characters of the British
Humble-bees (Hymenoptera).

SLADEN, F. W. L. (1912). The Humble Bee, its life
history and how to domesticate it. Macmillan, London.

[For those who find access to Professor Richard’s

Paper difficult, it could be added that the AES Leaflet

on Bumble Bees (no. 25, 1953), by T. B. Poole, contains

drawings of the male genitalia of most of the British

Species, as well as keys, descriptions and illustrations

for the genera Bombus and Psithyrus — Editor.]

CONSIDER THE FLIES

In a recent issue of the Bulletin

NOVEMBER, 1964 |

there was a rather depressing refer- |
ence to the reduced facilities for |

collecting and observing wild life in
Britain: the writer went on to
contrast the gloomy prospects here
with the greatly superior oppor-
tunities abroad.
that there is something to be said
for this argument, | could not help
feeling that if more Members would
turn their attention to groups of
insects other than the butterflies
they would find endless possibilities
for exciting and worthwhile activity
without even going to the remote
parts of Britain, much less crossing
the Channel.

Again, we have been —quite rightly

— reminded from time to time in|
these pages of the dangers of over- |

collecting, and those of us who have
any conscience may sometimes feel
a bit guilty when we look at long
series of some of the rarer Lepidop-
tera. But there are many Orders of
insects where it would be absurd
to criticise the formation of repre-
sentative series, and while | should
certainly not wish to advocate col-
lecting as an end in itself, most
amateur. entomologists enjoy the

While accepting |

pursuit and collection of insects,

to have
named specimens in order to be
able to know what insect one is

is often essential |
\

: |

observing and therefore to increase |
:

and it

one’s knowledge of the group.
Insects are virtually ubiquitous —

but Lepidoptera are amongst the
least ubiquitous! Specimens of many |
other Orders can be found much!

{

more easily: to take only the big
Orders, there can be little doube

that Hemiptera, Coleoptera, Hymen- _

optera and Diptera are all much more |

in evidence, say in the course of an
average country walk, than are
butterflies and moths. Do we realise |
that Lepidoptera comprise only|
about ten per cent of the species of
insects native to Britain? In individ-|
ual specimens the proportion must:

_AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

be very much smaller. Yet only
about a third of AES Members
(according to the most recent Mem-
bership List) take an interest in any
part of this predominant ninety per
cent. Oddly enough — or perhaps
it is not so odd — almost precisely
the same position obtains in the
membership of another well-known
entomological society of which | am
a member.

Now if we are amateur entomolo-

gists because we are interested in
insects and want to find out more
about them, surely there would be
great advantages in spending our
available time on a group where (a)
the field is less ‘crowded’, so to
_ speak, with other students, and (b)
there is an abundance of living
| material at hand.
In this and a future series of
articles | want to talk about the
flies (Diptera) and in particular the
_crane-flies (Tipulidae) and allied
_ groups as a fascinating and inexhaust-
ible world to investigate, both at
_ home and in the field. The Diptera
fulfil both the criteria | have just
mentioned: moreover they can be
found in the adult stage at all times
of the year. Not only are there
enormous gaps in our knowledge of
their life-histories, distribution and
| habits, but new species are still
being discovered. | can think of
_ at least four very large flies, two of
them crane-flies, that have been
found for the first time in England
during the last twenty years.

One of the difficulties in beginning
the study of flies has been the absence
of books with which to identify
_ One’s captures. Since the war,
_ however, things have greatly im-
| proved. We now have a first-rate
_and very readable general account
of the Order — Colyer and Ham-
mond’s ‘Flies of the British Isles’ —
_and keys to several of the more
Prominent families of flies are also
readily available. It must be accepted,

113

of course, that it is virtually impos-
sible to collect and name the whole
Order (over 5000 British species).
But, when we come to think of it,
how many of us attempt to collect
and name all the 2000-odd British
Lepidoptera? Let us recognise that
there is nothing sacrosanct about
an Order of insects as such, nor is
there any special virtue or satis-
faction to be gained by trying to
bite off more than we can chew.
One family of flies —or indeed of
any animals — may well provide us
with enough scope to occupy our
leisure for many years.

Then you may say “ But flies are
so small, so dingy and so unattract-
ive’. Very well —I will admit that
a drawer full of flies will not appear
so beautiful to the layman as a drawer
of butterflies. But surely as ento-
mologists we soon get beyond the
stage when the main object of our
hobby is to fill our boxes or drawers
with dead creatures, however clever-
ly set and arranged? Even so, it
seems to me that a great many, say,
hover-flies are the equals in beauty
of form of most of our Lepidoptera:
normally, of course, it is the bodies
of flies, not their wings, that are the
more colourful parts.

Many flies are certainly very small,
and cannot be properly identified
without a microscope. But | am
suggesting that you should begin to
explore this new field by collecting
and studying one of the groups of
large flies. Crane-flies, mosquitoes
and hover-flies are three such groups
for which good keys are available.
In all three, you will have no difficulty
in finding plenty of specimens, where-
ever you live. You are not likely to
find adult hover-flies during the
winter, but flies of the first two
groups can be seen at most times
of year.

There is an excellent guide to
methods of collecting and studying
flies available to AES Members, Mr

114

L. Parmenter’s leaflet (No. 5) Col-
lecting Flies, and | would strongly
recommend any new dipterist to
get a copy of this: it is a real mine
of information. But in my next
article | propose to deal specifically
with the families of crane-flies and
their allies, and to tell you of some
of the difficulties | experienced when
| began to collect them several years
ago, and how | have dealt with these
difficulties.

20.7.64. R. M. Payne (2982).

REFERENCES
COLYER, C. N. and HAMMOND, C. O. (1951). Flies
of the British Isles. Frederick Warne, London.
PARMENTER, L. (1951). Collecting Flies. AES Leaflet
No. 5. AES, London.

HAND-PAIRING OF
LEPIDOPTERA

One of the difficulties of breeding
butterflies in captivity is the ob-
taining of pairings under artificial
conditions. it is among the active
and strong-flying species that most
difficulty occurs. Artificial pairing
by hand has been successfully used
by many breeders, in particular by
the Japanese, and for the amateur
it is an interesting field for research.
| myself have tried several species
but have only been successful with
the two Papilio spp. P. machaon
Linn. and P. sinon Poda, and the
Large White (Pieris brassicae Linn.);
all of which have the males with
large well-developed claspers.

| expect that there are published
papers on this subject but it might
be helpful for interested Members
if | briefly outline the method | use.
A small muslin-covered cage is used
and this should have in it potted
foodplant and a jar containing nectar-
secreting flowers. The physiological
state of the butterflies to be mated
is important and it is preferable that
the male should have emerged a few
days prior to the female. | hand-feed

NOVEMBER, 1964 |

the male each morning with honey |
water, pulling out the proboscis —
with a setting needle, before re- —
turning him to the cage so that he |
can feed further on the flowers if ©
he desires. The female should also
be fed a day after emergence and ©
introduced into the cage with the —
male and kept in a sunny spot. It
may be that natural pairing will |
occur but if not, | feed both partners
again the next day and then hand-
pair them. | believe that with the
Nymphalidae it would be necessary
to wait much longer than this as
it appears that natural pairings do
not occur until a week or more |
has elapsed after emergence. The |,
method of hand-pairing is fairly |.
simple once one has the knack. I |
take the female firmly by the wings
(closed above her back) in my left |,
hand and the male similarly in my
right hand. With the middle finger |
| push gently upwards on the body |
of the female, who may or may not |
extrude her genitalia. | then do |
likewise with the male so that he |
opens his claspers and extrudes the
aedeagus. The open claspers are |,
then placed over the end of the |
female’s abdomen and what should
then happen, and usually does happen |’
if the butterflies are ready to pair, |
is that the male grips the female
and copulation ensues. If this does. .
not happen, continue the method —
for a short period and if unsuccessful i
return the butterflies to the cage. —
Another try should be made next
day after feeding. When copulation _
has occurred, let go of the male, |’
who will hang in the normal position |
after copulation, and place the female |:
on to the flowers in the cage so that |
she has a good footing and so that
the male may hang freely. Now |
shade them so that they will remain
quiescent. After they have separated |
it is necessary to continue to feed |
the female regularly until she has:
deposited all her ova. I!

|

)
AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

It would be interesting to hear
of other Members’ attempts in this
field, and of the species with which
ssuccess has been obtained.
p25.7.64. P. W. Cribb (2270).

THE ORANGE TIP BUTTERFLY

On 31st May this year, | went off
to the Chilterns to obtain some eggs
-of the Orange Tip Butterfly (Antho-
«caris (=Euchloe) cardamines Linn.).
The weather was not good, so no
‘other collecting was possible, al-
‘though an eye was kept open for
vanything. Near King’s Langley |
‘found a lane bordered on one side
| by plenty of Hedge Garlic (Alliaria
| petiolata (Bieb.) Cavara and Grande).
After a few minutes search, | was
able to spot eggs from a few yards
distance. Usually | found the orange
‘eggs on the remaining flowers, just
_above the forming seed-pods. A few
young larvae were also found.
The eggs began to hatch, one or
| two a day, as soon as | brought them
| home. Before hatching they turn
| greyish with a touch of orange. The
' young larvae were light orange, not
the colour of the seed-pods at all,
| the latter being a medium green.
_ The larvae would eat the seed-pods
| if these were offered, but if the larvae
| were placed on a leaf this would be
eaten.
_ The appearance of the larvae is
as follows:
first instar —light orange, one
eighth of an inch long.
second instar — medium green,
hairs every so often with blobs
of transparent liquid at the end
of each hair.
third instar onwards — blobs lost,
larvae apple green with a white
bloom.
No cages were used, except for
a few large larvae and for those

115

nearing pupation. When small,
four or five disappeared, but whether
this was due to cannibalism | do not
know. I never found any remains,
but the larvae were very small.
When large the caterpillars moved
about more, resulting in three of
them being within a quarter of an
inch of each other, but no signs of
aggravation were apparent, and they
were all there an hour later when
| removed them — just in case.

The larvae did not all develop at
the same rate, sol removed the larger
ones to boxes, in case of cannibalism.
Later, after changing the food (which
| did only once), | endeavoured to
replace them. This resulted in the
loss of one, as they wandered. They
also wandered when about to pupate.
To stop them being lost as they
neared pupation, | placed them in
pill-boxes, with some food. One
larva pupated when rather small, on
the Hedge Garlic stems. This last
larva used a girdle for support though
the others did not.

When newly formed the pupa is
the colour of the caterpillar. It
does not wriggle, and goes more
orange in a week or two. A week
before the end of June all my re-
maining larvae pupated.

| hope for 100 per cent emergences
next May. | will try to get some
pairings, using the method mentioned
in the Countryman (summer 1964,
vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 341-5). This pri-
marily refers to the Map Butterfly
(Araschnia levana Linn.), and _ has
some fine photographs, but the
method of pairing given mentions
A. cardamines.

The Orange Tip is well worth
rearing as it is a pretty butterfly,
often worn when taken on the wing
as it is so frail. The larvae, and
especially the pupae, are rather
‘ different’, while the species pre-
sents little difficulty.

The method of no cages is excel-
lent, provided that the larvae are

116

NOVEMBER, 1964

watched around pupation time. Air
circulates around the larvae, frass
falls well out of the way, and no
sweating can occur.

7.7.64. Brian Coles (3533J).

SOME PERSONAL OBSERVA-
TIONS ON THE BREEDING OF
THE PURPLE EMPEROR
BUTTERFLY

During the later part of the sum-
mer of 1963 | visited some Surrey
woodland with Mr Ron Jarman and
a friend in order to observe the

Purple Emperor Butterfly (Apatura

iris Linn.) and to look for newly
deposited ova. Unfortunately the
day was, as was much of last summer,
a stormy one, and we enjoyed only
a brief period of sunshine. During
this period we were able to watch
a female Purple Emperor circle some
tall Sallows (Salix caprea Linn.) and
cross the ride just in front of us.
She fluttered in amongst the Sallows
and eventually settled and deposited
an egg. We were able to find this,
and afterwards discovered several
others. They were laid on the upper
surface of the leaves but in no par-
ticular position, being at the tip,
along the midrib, and on the lamina
or its edge. The egg is green when
laid and turns purplish when ap-
proaching hatching. The ova were
in all stages, indicating a fairly long
period over which the females lay.

The larva hatches and immediately
devours the egg-shell. This seems
to be necessary to the well-being
of the larva, as some bred in previous
years were placed on fresh leaves as
soon as they hatched, without the
chance of eating the egg-shell, and
these would not eat the leaves and
eventually shrivelled and died. Having
removed all trace of the shell the
larva moves to the tip of the leaf

and lies there, head towards the
tree, along the midrib. The larva
is green with a large black head and
has no horns. In wet weather and
on dewy mornings it lies almost
immersed in water for long periods,
with only its head breaking the
surface of the water. How it breathes
| find to be a puzzle. The caterpillar
is not hirsute and similar larvae
would quickly drown in_ similar
circumstances. | am led to wonder
whether the large black head has
any spiracles or any arrangement for
absorbing air, and whether the
‘horns’ which appear at the first
moult serve some similar function
as | observed that only the tips of
the horns protrude from the water
when the caterpillar is small. The
ova themselves are also more often
in water than out of it, but the
grooved markings on the egg’s sur-
face could well retain sufficient air
to maintain the embryo. Whatever
may be the answer (and a close look
at the head of the larva might give
the answer), it is certain that the
wet has no terrors for the young
‘iris’. The young larva starts to eat
small inroads into the edges of the
leaf near to the tip, first on one side
and then on the other. It will then
move to another leaf, taking up the
same position, and commence eating
again. Eating is very sporadic, occur-

ring usually in the early morning or

evening. At the first moult the two

horns appear and the larva takes on ©

the appearance of the adult larva.

It devours its cast skin completely |

(except for the tips of the horns in
subsequent moults).
moult takes place and then, as the

days begin to shorten, the larva |

begins to reduce its feeding, which

at no time has been voracious, and |

takes up a rigid position on a leaf

tip, having first secured the petiole |

of the leaf to the stem with silk to
prevent the leaf’s fall. A change

now begins to occur in the larva, |

A further

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

117

and the green fades and its place is
taken by brown. The leaves are now
also turning brown and thus the
camouflage is maintained. The aut-
-umn has come and the leaves begin
-to fall: that bearing the larva may
_be only hanging by its silken thread,
-and the time has come for the larva
to move on to the branch or twig
supporting its leaf. Another colour
change is now occurring and the
brown has given way to an ashy grey
which will harmonise with the grey-
‘ish stems of the Sallow. The larva
-crawls along the stem and down the
“branch until it comes to a suitable
-crotch. Here it takes up a charact-
eristic position, lying over the crotch
-with its horns depressed on one side
and its tail on the other. Occasion-
‘ally it may lie flat against the stem
below a crotch or node, simulating
a dormant bud, but in my experience
+the majority choose the crotch
_ position. Once in position the larva
; makes no apparentmovement
;
t

SS eee

ee

——

‘throughout the long winter nights
and short days, whether a gale blows
/or the branches are white with frost
or covered with ice. The larva seems
to be immune to all the vagaries of
f the weather. The dangers to the
larva at this stage are other insects
and birds. If one watches titmice in
| the winter months searching over the
| branches and twigs of the woodland
| trees, one appreciates how vulner-
i able is the larva of A. iris in its
_ exposed position. This factor may
_ be the most important one in the
_ control of the numbers of imagines
_ produced, and in causing the scarcity
of the butterfly. The winter of
- 1962-63 was the most severe for a
_ hundred years and all woodland
_ bird populations suffered heavy los-
| ses, but the summer of 1963 was a
good one for seeing the Purple
Emperor Butterfly on the wing.

As the days begin to lengthen a
_change again occurs in the larva’s
colour, and it gradually regains its

pale green colour of the previous
summer. This is done without a
moulting of the skin. The buds on
the Sallows are also showing their
green and, as they start to break,
the larva moves from its winter seat
to which it will not return. Feeding
on the opening leaves it rests near
them on the stem, appearing like a
young bud, until the leaves are open.
It then moves on to the leaves,
taking up its position on the upper-
side of a leaf in a similar way to that
of the year before. The larva makes
a small silk pad on its resting-leaf
and makes short forays from there
to feed on other leaves on the same
or adjacent sprays. Feeding is still
sporadic, and a third moult occurs.
A further moult occurs at the be-
ginning of May and the larva finally
moves to the underside of a leaf
where it prepares to pupate. This
usually takes place at about the end
of May. The pupa is a pale green
but darkens rapidly about twenty-
four hours before emergence. in
my experience, emergence occurs
very late in the day and the butterfly
hangs through the night drying its
wings ready to take to flight on the
morrow. Emergence may be from
18th June onwards depending on
the particular season but the butter-
flies are still on the wing into August.

The breeding arrangements for
the larvae of A. iris referred to above
were fairly simple. A young Sallow
bush was placed into a large pot
which gave it ample root space, and
the pot was filled with a mixture
of clayey loam, peat and sand. A
cage was then constructed high
enough and large enough to envelop
the potted plant and leave space all
round it (this is important as it
prevents larvae straying on to the
cage). The cage was constructed
from a strong wooden platform to
which were secured uprights (2” x
1” batten) at the four corners.
These were then secured to an

118

open frame at their top ends, and
intermediate horizontal strengthen-
ers were also fitted between the
uprights on each side. Butter-
muslin was then secured around the
whole framework except for one side
which was covered with ‘ Polyglaze ’
for viewing purposes. The top
frame was covered with butter-
muslin so fixed that it could be
removed quite easily when neces-
sary. The pot was lowered inside
after the plant had been carefully
examined for any predators (spiders,
etc.). The leaves bearing the eggs
were pinned to the leaves of the
foodplant and the top was sealed.
Watering was effected by pouring
water through the muslin of the top
of the cage. The ‘ glazed’ side was
placed facing north to prevent direct
sunlight falling on it. It is most
essential that all seams and cracks
should be rendered _ insect-proof,
as despite my precautions | found
that earwigs were able to work their
way in past the fixings of the butter-
muslin, and they will quickly eat all
the eggs if they are allowed to
remain.

P. W. Cribb (2270).

THE PEACOCK BUTTERFLY
IN GUERNSEY

_ In last February’s edition of the
Bulletin (Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 23:
17), Mr G. D: \-iirebileocke4(2976)
recorded a great increase in the
Peacock Butterfly (Nymphalis io Linn.)
in North Cornwall, with a decrease
in the numbers of other butterflies.

The same thing has happened in
Guernsey recently, though to a
lesser extent. A few years ago,
only one or two specimens of N. io
were seen each year, but now the
species is the commonest of the
Nymphalids.

NOVEMBER, 1964

Table | gives the numbers of |
Peacock Butterflies seen in Guernsey
showing the sudden increase in num- |
bers between 1959 and 1962.

year number seen

1957 I

1958 |

1959 4

1960 6

196! 11

1962 too common to be recorded —
Table |. Number of Peacock butterflies |

recorded in Guernsey.

Nobody seems to know the reason
for this rise in numbers. If anybody
has any theories | would be glad to
hear of them. |
22.4.64.

C. David (3504).

REFERENCE
La Société Guernsiaise Report and Transactions, 1957-1962

THE MEADOW BROWN |

BUTTERFLY: |
SUBSPECIES SPLENDIDA |
B. WHITE IN SCOTLAND

It is stunning to think how little |
we really know about some of the —
more familiar insects which enhance |
our open fields and countryside. —
Even less is known about the fauna
of Scotland and much of that country
is virtually unexplored entomologic- .
ally. Most collectors who come up |
to Scotland do not bother with
common species like Maniola jurtina
Linn. (Meadow Brown Butterfly),
for they have a target such as Erebia
epiphron Knoch (Mountain Ringlet),
E. aethiops Esp. (Scotch Argus),
Coenonympha tullia Muell. (Large
Heath) etc., yet M. jurtinag provides
us with a most interesting situation, |
and one in which a number of people
acting together could add a great f

I

deal to our knowledge of this
common insect.

The problem concerns the range |
of Maniola jurtina subspecies splendida |
B. White. E. B. Ford (1945) states |

|

|

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

that M. j. splendida has a distribution
which is rather difficult to interpret.
It is found only in Scotland from
Dumbarton to Western Sutherland,
_and in some of the Scottish islands
—in Baleshare, South Uist and
Vatersay, and also in Barra. Mr A.
L. Goodson of the British Museum
(Natural History) at Tring informs
me that he has specimens from
Longa Island, Gairloch, Ross, Rhum,
Shetland (?) and Uist. Here in
south-west Perthshire M. jurtina

_ ranges from the typical ssp. jurtina

Linn. to an intermediate form be-
tween jurtina and splendida (cline).
For those who are not familiar

_ with subspecies splendida the follow-
_ing points should help to distinguish
_it from the typical subspecies. M. j.

splendida is a much more magnificent
insect than the ordinary M. j. jurtina,
being larger and brighter. The

extent of orange on the upperside

is greater than in ssp. jurtina and in

_ the female may invade the hindwings
and invariably invades the central
area of the forewings.
_ definite difference lies in the under-
side which is rather mottled and
darker, the yellow of the normal
_form being replaced by a greyish
_ tone with little or no contrasting

The most

band, especially in the male. A series
looks quite different from one of
the normal form.

When this article reaches the
press the collecting season in this
country will be over. Many lepi-
dopterists will have ventured north
of the Border to the rather less
rewarding haunts of Scotland — per-
haps neglecting the common M.
jurtina, and in doing so passing over
the more interesting ssp. splendida.
If, however, you were in Scotland
and bothered to take a few specimens
of M. jurting perhaps you could
heip towards filling a gap in our
knowledge.

| am in the process of forming a
map to outline the range and dis-

119

tribution of M. jurtinag jurtina and
M. j. splendida and any intermediate
form throughout Scotland. Any
information about this butterfly in
Scotland would be welcome, but a
more valuable contribution of a
male and/or a female from any part
of Scotland would help greatly to-
wards forming the distribution maps.
Specimens should be sent papered
and marked with full data (including,
where possible, latitude, longitude
and elevation). When requested
they will be returned or specimens
of the cline splendida/jurtina from
south-west Perthshire could be sup-
plied in exchange if so desired. The
result of my survey will be published
in a later edition of the Bulletin.

6.6.64. George Thomson (3689).

REFERENCE
FORD, E. B. (1945). Butterflies. New Naturalist Series.
Collins, London.

[Mr Thomson’s address is 98 George
Street, Dunblane, Perthshire.—Ed.]

THE LEPIDOPTERA OF THE
MAIDSTONE DISTRICT,
1963

The Lepidoptera of the area around
Sutton Valence seems to me to be
very rich in quantity. In the spring
of 1963 the Orange Tip (Anthocaris
cardamines Linn.) was common along
most roads where there is a generous
sprinkling of Garlic Mustard (Alliaria
petiolata (Bieb.) Cavara and Grande),
while the Small White (Pieris rapae
Linn.), the Green-veined White (Pi-
eris napi Linn.), and the Large White
(Pieris brassicae Linn.) were very
abundant. There were not many
Brimstones (Gonepteryx rhamni Linn.)
in the spring, however, although |
did manage to catch one.

Last summer (1962) there were
many Painted Ladies (Vanessa cardui
Linn.) in the gardens but | have not
seen any this year. Red Admirals

120

(Vanessa atalanta Linn.), Small Tor-
toiseshells (Aglais urticae Linn.) and
Peacocks (Nymphalis io Linn.) were
all very common, especially the
latter, the caterpillars of which were
plentiful on most of the large patches
of Stinging Nettles (Urtica dioica
Linn.).

The Small Copper (Lycaena phlaeas
Linn.), the Meadow Brown (Maniola
jurtina Linn.), the Small Heath (Coen-
onympha pamphilus Linn.), the Com-
mon Blue (Polyommatus icarus Rott.)
and the Small Skipper (Thymelicus
sylvestris Poda) were also common
in the sheltered corners of fields
with long grass.

This summer |

found an_ ideal

collecting ground for insects. It was

a very small sheltered field enclosed
on three sides by high hedges and
by a stream on the fourth. Beneath
the long grass and between the
numerous clumps of bramble (Rubus
sp.) and hawthorn (Crataegus sp.)
the ground was covered with ant-
hills, some being a foot in height,
and it was obvious that this was
useless land for cultivation. However,
this place abounded in insect life.
It seemed that nature had been
allowed to take its own course until
| came along. I have never seen so
many Six-spot Burnet Moths (Zygaena
filipendulae Linn.). They were every-
where, flying about like clockwork
toys from one place to another. In
five minutes | found about eight
mating pairs clinging motionless on
the grass stems. There were also
a large number of Ringlets (Aphanto-
pus hyperanthus Linn.) feebly flying
between the shady thistles in a
corner.

Among the other common butter-
flies was the Meadow Brown, the
Small Heath, the Hedge Brown
(Maniola tithonus Linn.), the Small
Tortoiseshell (Aglais urticae Linn.),
the Common Blue, the Large White,
the Small White, the Green-veined
White and the Small Skipper.

NOVEMBER, 1964

The North Downs near Holling-

bourne is another excellent hunting
ground for insects. | found a large
depression on one of the _ slopes
above the Pilgrims Way. This was
covered with long grass and at the
top end there was a crumbling wall
of chalk. The Dingy Skipper (Erynnis
tages Linn.), the Small Skipper, the
Common Blue, the Small Heath,
and the Six-spot Burnet Moth were
very numerous flitting from one
flower to another and basking in
the sun. In one corner a Comma
(Polygonia c-album Linn.) was sunning
itself on a leaf of lilac (Syringa sp.)
while below on a clump of stinging
nettles, larvae of the Small Tortoise-
shell and the Peacock were busily
eating.

Further up the Downs, where the
rabbits and hares scuttled away in
front of me, Green Hairstreaks
(Callophrys rubi Linn.) were very
plentiful. They were especially
common chasing each other around
the many hawthorn bushes. While
walking through the long grass |
disturbed a female of the Clouded
Buff Moth (Diacrisia sannio Linn.),
the first | had ever seen. | have been
told from first hand experience that
the Marbled White (Melanargia gala-
thea Linn.), the Purple Hairstreak
(Thecla quercus Linn.) and the Chalk-
hill Blue (Lysandra coridon Poda)
abounded there but | did not come
across them.

Perhaps other Members living in
this area could add to the above
review of the Lepidoptera as | am
only there during school terms.
12263; John Feltwell (3618J).

THE GREEN-VEINED
WHITE BUTTERFLY.

| have been collecting butterflies
for six years, mostly in Bedfordshire,
my home county. In that time |

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

have been able to obtain representa-
tives of most species found in the
afore-mentioned area.

Last year (1963) | became particu-
larly interested in the Green-veined

White Butterfly (Pieris napi Linn.)

and | hope that in this article | can
show that by both collecting per-

-sonally and buying the occasional

specimen or two from dealers an
interesting collection of even the
most common species can be built

| up.

The typical English specimen is
quite common in the countryside
and can be found in a number of
habitats. | This species has two
‘broods’ a year. The first, the
spring type, has grey markings on
its wings while in the second, the
summer type, these markings are
black.

The male usually has only one

spot on its forewings but a certain
| proportion, of the spring brood at
any rate, has no such spot.

In Irish specimens the markings
are much darker — in my specimens
from Donegal they are a very deep
black. The ground colour, in the
same specimens, is of a creamy shade.
The butterflies are therefore very
different from the English ones.

Scottish ones, in my collection,
are of two totally different forms.
From Aberdeen | have specimens
which are very nearly the same as
those found south of the Border.
| also have found specimens from
Caithness, all of them females. They
have a straw-yellow ground colour
and dark grey markings. The grey
scales on the veins show very
prominently.

| also have a number of specimens,
again all females, from Austria. These
are the var. ‘bryoniae flavescens ’.
They have a similar ground colour
to those from Caithness but have
very deep grey markings. The veins
are thickly covered with grey scales

121

and the grey tip to the wing and the
two grey spots on the forewing are
‘smudged’ together. They are
about a third as big again as the
English specimens.

| have a few Japanese examples,
some very similar to English ones,
and others, known as var. nesis
Fruhst., which are as big as the
Large White (Pieris brassicae Linn.).
The grey marks on the forewing are
all smudged together and in one or
two specimens that | have owned
practically the whole of the forewing
has been almost obliterated by these
dark scales.

This year | was sent a large number
of specimens from central France
but they appear to be but little
different from English ones. | have
been promised some specimens of
the var. napaeae Esp. (from central
France) which has very pale grey
coloured veins which do not con-
tinue as far as the edge of the wing.
| also hope to obtain some specimens
from Norway. ;

Finally | have two forms of the
yellow P. napi. One, known as ab.
hibernica Schmidt, is of a_ bright
yellow colour. My specimens are
from Donegal. The other, called ab.
citronea Frohawk, is a much paler
yellow, one of mine being almost a
pale green.

From this account of my specimens
of the Green-veined White | hope
that | have shown how many differ-
ent varieties of a common species
it is possible to acquire. Many of
my specimens were bought from
dealers, others caught by myself or
by fellow AES Members from abroad.
Practically all my specimens — | have
nearly fifty — were obtained in con-
siderably less than a year. There are
still many other forms to obtain,
and also 68 other butterflies on the
British list, with equally interesting
forms.

Terence F. Knight (3190).

122

THE EFFECT OF THE WINTER
OF 1962-3 ON BUTTERFLIES
IN SCOTLAND

The severe winter of 1962-3,
though perhaps not the coldest, was
the longest for many decades. Snow
lay on the ground from December to
February without even a sign of
melting. When it did finally melt,
it gave way to continuous periods
of rain and cold weather which
lasted until early May. Spring weather
eventually came with a_ splendid
three weeks in late May and June,
but was to give way to more cold,
dull weather. From then until the
end of August the sun showed its
face for a few days, temperatures
being well below average for the
time of year. A few bright days in
September did little to increase the
temperature of the air to any great
degree.

The effect of these unusual weather
conditions on our Lepidoptera is
rather difficult, if at all possible, to
determine. Wild flowers and shrubs
seemed to thrive in the earlier part
of the year, fields and banks being
covered in a colourful carpet as
never before. Populations of Pieris
rapae Linn. (Small White) and Pieris
napi Linn. (Green-veined White)
seemed to have been unaffected,
numbers being as great as ever, but
some of the other species were less
fortunate — Polyommatus icarus Rott.
(Common Blue) and Lycaena phlaeas
Linn. (Small Copper) were greatly
reduced in the early part of their
season, recovering somewhat later.
Argynnis selene Schiff. (Small Pearl-
bordered Fritillary) hardly flew at
all, owing to a continuous period
of rain during its time of dispersal,
and not one individual of Nymphalis
io Linn. (Peacock) or Vanessa atalanta
Linn. (Red Admiral) reached south-
west Perthshire.

The effect of climatic conditions
and environment on our Lepidoptera

NOVEMBER, 1964

has been fully explained by E. B.
Ford (1945 and 1955). Fundamentally
the main principles of temperature
effects on pigment production are:
1. A high temperature favours the
production of leucopteryn (the blacks
in Pierinae) and a low one restricts
it.

2. A low temperature favours the
production of melanin (the blacks
in Vanessinae) and a high one restricts
it.

Thus the seasonal forms of Pieris
brassicae Linn. (Large White), P.
rapae and P. napi have a restricted
amount of black pigmentation in
the spring form and a greater degree
of blackening in the summer form
(generation 2). The factor of time
must not be forgotten when studying
seasonal variation as the difference
in colouring is caused by an accelera-
tion or retardation of the ‘ laying
down’ process. Aglais urticae Linn.
(Small Tortoiseshell) illustrates tem-

perature effects on melanin, the ©
extent of blackening being almost |
entirely due to the atmospheric |

conditions. Specimens of autumn
1963 and again the spring of this
year are well embellished with black
scales especially in the costal areas
of the forewings, and this is to be
expected as this butterfly passed
its late larval and early pupal stages
(the critical ones) under unusually
cool conditions.

The Pierinae of 1963 provide us
with a situation far less conventional
and considerably more interesting.
As has already been mentioned,
those insects which appear in spring
are, on average, far more lightly
marked than the summer form. The
reason, it is generally believed, is
that the first brood undergo the
critical stages at a time when the
weather is rather cooler than it is
when the summer brood is taking
form. In its simplest form this is

correct, but other important factors |

must be at play.

|

e

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

The autumn of 1962 and the
winter that followed provided us
with sub-arctic conditions hitherto
unknown. It would be reasonable
to assume that, in the spring of 1963,
P. rapae and P. napi would be of a
rather lightly marked nature.
Strangely, the reverse was the case.
Males of P. rapae and P. napi were
normal in appearance, ranging from
medium dark to those lacking the
black spot altogether, but females
of both species, especially of P. napi
were on average much darker than
the darkest specimen of the normal
year. In fact it was impossible to
find atypical lightly marked specimen.

In the spring, | collected in both
south-west Perthshire and in the
Lake District. Apparently the English
specimens, though lighter than our
Scottish form, were similarly affected.
Most specimens of P. napi had a
tendency for the black spots to join,
with a simultaneous encroachment
of the black speckling from the base
to the central area of the wings.
One totally striated variety and
several very grey specimens were
taken. The ground colour of the
wings tended towards a yellowish
colour, instead of the light greyish
or buff tendencies in normal years,
but not on such a general scale as
with the black pigment. Only one
extreme variety of P. rapae was
taken in which the ground colour
was a deep greenish yellow. _ In-
sufficient numbers of generation 2
Specimens were taken to compare
with previous years but they seemed
to be fairly normal in nature.

In theory, markings of the first
generation could not have been
brought about by temperature alone.
Perhaps part of the answer could
be that neither P. rapae nor P. napi
appeared in any numbers until the
second week in June, some three
to four weeks later than usual. The
season was cut short in 1962 by the
sudden onset of winter, which leng-

123

thened the larval and pupal stages
by some great degree. It would
seem, therefore, that this extra
time had led to the change, but by
the same reasoning one could say
that the summer form is darker
because of the short period between
ova and imago.

We are then left with several
explanations, each apparently contra-
dicting each other — but to remain
faithful to Professor Ford’s explana-
tion, either:

1. A long larval/pupal stage is more

important to the production of
black pigment than temperature, or
2. The insects passed their late
larval/pupal stages at a time when
the weather was unnoticeably warm-
er, or

3. Other factors, more important
than temperature or time, have
taken control.

Any of these or none of them
could be the explanation.

Now that the winter of 1963-4
has passed in a very mild state;
spring was spring; and summer is
holding to its early promises; has
the extreme diversity of our climate
of these two years affected our
insect populations?

Favourable numbers of most of
the species of butterflies found here
have returned. A. urticae, the
Pierinae, P. icarus, L. phlaeas, and
the common Satyrids all carry on
their lifeecycles with their usual
vigour. But, alas, gone is the brown
charm of Argynnis selene. The winter
and summer of the last two years
has been too much for the populations
of this insect here in south-west
Perthshire. However, we must
remember that Nature works in a
weird and wonderful way and that
when an insect disappears from our
countryside from natural causes,
this is what has been intended for
it by the factors which control the
balance of Nature.

UMS? George Thomson (3689).

124

REFERENCES

FORD, E. B. (1945). Butterflies. New Naturalist Series.
Collins, London.

(1955).

ee Moths.
Collins, London.

New Naturalist Series.

WICKEN FEN

The article under the title “The
Wicken Sedge Fen’ in Bull. amat.
Ent. Soc. 23: 72, is so full of inac-
curacies and misconceptions that |
feel another article is called for to
put the matter straight.

The National Trust property of
Wicken Fen consists of two main
portions, separated by the main
drainage channel of Wicken lode.
The northern portion, Wicken Sedge
Fen, was at no time cut down and
claimed from the wild. Due to the
need for food during the war, how-
ever, the southern area, Adventurers
Fen, was drained, cleared and sown
to crops during 1939-40. In 1952
it was handed back, a mere has been
constructed, and fenny conditions
are returning.

The Large Copper Butterfly (Ly-
caena dispar Haw.) was introduced
to the fen by the late H. M. Edelsten
and others and it did survive for
many years. It does appear to have
been commonest on Adventurers
Fen and there seems little doubt
that wartime activities were the
cause of its demise. But the state-
ment “Thus it was not able to
maintain itself (against excessive col-
lecting) in the small acreage it had
been left’, is very wide of the
mark and quite untrue [see footnote].
It is quite clearly stated on all
permits to visit Wicken fen that the
permit holder agrees “‘ Not to take
any specimens of the Large Copper
Butterfly, the acclimatisation of which
in Wicken Fen is being attempted ”’.
In view of the fact that much of the
fen was inaccessible to the ordinary
visitor | very much doubt that even

NOVEMBER, 1964

the utterly irresponsible collector
(| would not use the word ‘ ento-
mologist ’ for such a person) managed
any excessive collecting of this butter-
fly. Coupled with the drainage of
Adventurers Fen there also occurred
during the 1940’s a steady growth
of Alder (Alnus glutinosa (Linn.)
Gaertn.) and Buckthorn (Rhamnus
catharticus Linn.), tending to smother
many of the typical fen plant com-
munities and convert the fen into
a woodland thicket. This growth
takes place partly due to the lowered
water table and partly because of
the cessation of the four-yearly
cutting of the sedge, due to the
lack of demand for such material.
Strenuous efforts have and are being
made to clear the scrub and raise
the water table. But this overgrowth
by bushes was a contributing cause
to the failure of the Large Copper
Butterfly to maintain itself.

The same growth also was the
most likely cause of the extinction
by 1950 of the Swallowtail Butterfly
(Papilio machaon Linn.) on the fen.
Before this time permit holders
were permitted to take up to six
specimens in any one year. In 1954
an attempt was started to re-intro-
duce the Swallowtail from Norfolk
stock and only in quite exceptional
circumstances, for some very good
scientific reason, would its collection
be allowed today. Even though at
times it may still appear to be
common on some of the Norfolk
Broads, its position in this country
is somewhat precarious and since
ssp. brittanicus Linn. does not occur
elsewhere its loss would be irrepa-
rable, as was the loss of L. dispar
ssp. dispar Haw. | would urge all
Members of our Society to bear this
in mind and, should they desire to
have a long series of Swallowtails,
then these should be bred, not all
caught wild.

The implication in the article
‘Today one must sign the visitors’

RES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

book]. ; is that this_is a recent
requirement. This is not so, since,
from my personal knowledge, it has
been in force for twenty-two years
and indeed signing the visitors’ book
was necessary long before 1942 when
| first visited Wicken fen.

Finally, the natural food-plants of
P. machaon ssp. brittanicus are Peu-
cedanum palustre (Linn.) Moench
(Milk Parsley, Hog’s Fennel) and
Angelica sylvestris Linn. (Wild Angel-
ica). In confinement it will eat most
Umbelliferae and also Rue (Ruta
_graveolens Linn.) but rarely lays on
these in Nature. In this respect it
_ differs from other subspecies since
_ssp. gorganus Fruhst. prefers culti-
vated or wild carrot (Daucus spp.)
while ssp. centralis Stgr is usually
found on Rue.

Wicken Fen is very poorly en-
. dowed and any Members who feel
| like contributing to its support may
' send contributions to Mr D. Briggs,
| M.A., Ph.D., Treasurer, Wicken Fen
| Local Committee, Botany School,
| Downing Street, Cambridge. Much
' of the clearance work on the Fen
| is undertaken by the Conservation
Corps of the Council for Nature.
' Younger Members desiring an inter-
esting working holiday couldn’t do
better than to offer their services
to the Corps, although of course
there would be no guarantee of
being sent to Wicken, since there
are many Nature Reserves in need
_ of their services.
| 30.6.64. Brian O. C. Gardiner (225).

My sincere apologies to the author
_ of ‘The Wicken Sedge Fen’ and to
» other Members for an editorial error
_ which made nonsense of the original
| sentence concerning the Large Cop-
_ per Butterfly. | misread the date
. given in the previous sentence (1940)
» as 1840, and added an editorial com-
ment in brackets accordingly, for
it was in the 1840’s that the British
Large Copper (ssp. dispar Haw.) was

125

finally wiped out by collectors as a
result of the rarity value which it
had acquired, changes in the habitat
playing little part in the final sudden
demise of the butterfly. Unfor-
tunately, the editorial square brackets
were set as parentheses during
printing, and since proof-checking
had to be very hurried both errors
were missed. My thanks to Mr
F. H. Lyon (1025), who first drew
my attention to the blunder, and
to Mr Gardiner for submitting such
an informative article. — Editor.

A WEEK END IN
BROAD

FEN AND

Having obtained permits for col-
lecting Coleoptera in Wood Walton
Fen in Huntingdonshire, my father
and | with my son Philip set off
early on the Friday morning in our
Dormobile via the North Circular
Road for a week-end’s bug-hunting.
It was a bright July morning and we
made very good time, arriving at
Huntingdon by 9.30 a.m. We had
with us water-nets, a butterfly net,
camera and all our camping gear
together with pillboxes and tubes,
and plenty of hope. We reported
to the Warden, Mr Mason, at his
house at the end of the lane leading
to the Reserve and found him most
helpful. He gave us a map of the
Fen and told us that the only insect
we were not to collect was the
Large Copper (Lycaena dispar batavus
Oberth.) which he was releasing in
the Fen. He told us that he collected
the larvae after hibernation and bred
them out in cages in order to avoid
the hymenopterous parasites which
attacked so many of the larvae in
the final stages. The emerging
butterflies he released in the Fen
so that they might pair and lay their
eggs. He had nearly lost his stock

126

a few years ago when a mouse had
got into the cage and devoured the
pupae but he had been able to build
up numbers again with stock from
Ireland.

We then drove the Dormobile
over some of the worst track | have
seen for some time. It was undu-
lating peaty soil which was only
usable because it was dry. We had
the sensation of travelling over a
switchback railway and | feared for
the springs. The track terminated
with a hump-backed bridge over a
wide drain, thick with water lilies,
and after negotiating this we found
ourselves at the beginning of a wide

grassy ride leading into the heart .

of the Fen. We drove to the centre
of the Fen along this to a fine thatched
bungalow which stands on concrete
piles in a clearing. Our first im-
pression was of surprise at the
density of the woodland and under-
growth. A wide drain ran alongside
the ride and from it branched smaller
drains. The sky was beginning to
cloud over as we got out our gear
and put on our gum-boots. We
left the butterfly net behind so that
we could concentrate on the water-
beetles, and set off along a branch
drain accompanied by a swarm of
mosquitoes. The edges were dotted
with large and small plants of the
Great Water Dock (Rumex hydro-
lapathum Huds.) and Purple Loose-
trife (Lythrum salicaria Linn.) and
thickets of reed (Phragmites sp(p).)
and undergrowth prevented us from
wandering away from the path along
the drain edge. We found that
netting for beetles was extremely
difficult. The drains were choked
with two species of duck-weed (Lemna
spp.) and the net was full to breaking
point after a short plunge. We were
able to find a few beetles in the
debris along the bank side and by
sweeping the undergrowth and reeds,
but finding the water-netting some-
what laborious we spent the rest

NOVEMBER, 1964

of the time before dinner exploring
the Fen with an occasional plunging
of the net at random. | caught a
specimen of the Spined Loach (Cobitis
taenia Linn.), a fish which | had not
seen before. It is a very local species.
We saw some newly emerged Gate-
keepers (Maniola tithonus Linn.), and
a pair of Ringlets (Aphantopus hyper-
anthus Linn.) in copulation. The
weather was deteriorating fast and
we made our way back to the
Bungalow where we had our sardine
sandwiches, washed down with some
ginger-beer. We signed the Visitors’
Book and then made off into a further
part of the Fen in the opposite
direction. Here there had been a
considerable amount of clearing of
the undergrowth carried out and
there were several large areas of
open fen. Dotted all over it were
plants of the Great Water Dock,
each with a marker cane and metal
tab. The Warden had informed us
that these markers were used as
the basis of a survey of the laying
habits of the Large Copper and the
growth and survival of the foodplant.
The water-netting still produced
little and we were a little despondent,
when the sun came out for a period
of about half an hour. Walking
through one of the open areas of
fen | put up a female Large Copper.
She immediately settled and | was
able to take a photograph from
about three feet. Philip then dis-
turbed a male and the female joined
him whirling around above our
heads and then dropping down
nearby into the grasses to copulate.
We then saw a further male which
seemed almost tame as it refused
to fly away when approached, oblig-
ingly opening and shutting its wings
to be photographed. Perhaps years
of being photographed has produced
a photogenic strain. If the butterfly
is naturally so easy to approach there
is little wonder at its earlier ex-
termination at the hands of the

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

collector. Feeling that we had at
least accomplished something, we
made our way back to the van and
as rain seemed imminent we drove
back over the bridge and by the
bumpy road to the Warden’s House
where we bade him adieu.

We now set off across country
in the direction of Norwich and
after some thirty miles we pulled

_ into the edge of a large forest of

Pine (Pinus sylvestris Linn.) and with

_ the help of our ‘Gaz’ stove pre-

_ pared an evening meal.

The rain
held off and we spent the last light

| wandering along the wide rides be-

- tween the Pines.

We bunked down

in the van and soon the roof was

rattling with rain which continued
all night. We were up at six o’clock

and the rain had eased to a light
- drizzle which enabled us to cook a
_ breakfast in reasonable comfort. Our

| the face and throat.

main discomfort was the appreciation

- of the extent to which we had been

bitten by the mosquitoes on the
previous day. My eyes felt very
puffy and Philip was stung badly on
We found the
roads deserted as we drove on to
Norwich which we by-passed, using
the ring road, and soon we were
travelling along the small lanes that
lead to the Broad we had as our goal.

We arrived with the rain still
falling, and parking the van near a
boat-yard we set off into the dense
reed beds which flank the Broad.
Mingled with the reeds are dwarf
sallow bushes (Salix spp.) and low
down are the fronds of the marsh
Hog’s Fennel (Peucedanum palustre
(Linn.) Moench) the foodplant of
the Swallowtail Butterfly (Papilio
machaon brittanicus Linn.) for the
larvae of which we had come to
search. We were quickly soaked
by the wet foliage and although it
had almost stopped raining we were
most uncomfortable. Philip found

| the first larva, a very small one, with

its black body and whitish encircling

127

band half way down its body. This
gave us some encouragement and
by systematically searching a limited
area we found about two dozen
larvae. Several were in the last
instar and one or two had only just
hatched. Some of the butterflies
must have been on the wing fairly
early and others could have only
‘gone over ’. We eventually reached
the edge of the Broad and watched
the sailing boats for a while, taking
a few photographs. The rain had
now stopped and we made our way
back through the reed beds to the
van. In some marshy ground quite
near to our parking place | found
three more larvae of the Swallowtail
feeding, all quite large, indicating
that the butterfly was quite wide-
spread in the area. We had a meal
and as the weather did not appear
likely to improve at all we decided
to make our way in easy stages back
to London. Our first stop was at a
stream which led through a tall reed
bed to a small Broad. The reeds
were over head high and although
we found the Hog’s Fennel growing
sparsely here there were no signs
of the Swallowtail Butterfly. There
were plenty of fish moving in the
stream but the water-net produced
no beetles. We found the edges of
the Broad dangerous as the whole
of the bank seemed to be afloat,
moving underfoot, so we decided to
venture no further. Our drive home
through Thetford Chase and back
into the whirl of suburban traffic
was uneventful apart from the failure
of a front brake which made us
swerve violently at each application
of the brakes.

The larvae of the Swallowtail were
placed on to garden carrot (Daucus
sp.), and the first pupated on the
18th July; the photographs were
moderately successful in view of
the weather and although the beetles
had not come up to expectations,
we considered it a successful expe-

128

dition. The best beetles taken were
Silis ruficollis Fab. and Telephorus
(=Cantharis) thoracica Olivier on
the Fen. Other commoner species
were taken on both Fen and Broads,
including a number of water-beetles
on the former.

23:17 64. P. W. Cribb (2270).

INSECT FAUNA OF A
SANDY BANK

In the summer of 1963 | spent
some weeks studying the solitary
bees living in exposed sandy banks
near my home. A detailed account
is not given here for various reasons
but | should like to draw attention
to the very interesting fauna to be
found in this type of habitat. What
follows are a few general observations
and comments.

The bank consisted of an exposure
of loose friable sand of the Lower
Greensand (Cretaceous) beds. This
coarse sand was well drained and
dried up rapidly after rain. Erosion
from the action of weather and
animals was considerable. Heavy
rain washed the sand down and it
tended to be blown about once the
crust was broken. The temperature
of the dry sand changed considerably
with weather conditions and time
of day. The sand surface remained
cool on sunny but windy days,
whereas it became hot during calm
sunny days.

Very little vegetation grew in
the sand: there were a few scattered
clumps of grass.

The majority of the insects on
the site were species of Hymenoptera.
The commonest species other than
Hymenoptera was the larva of the
coleopteran Cicindela campestris
Linn.

Formica fusca Linn. was the most
common species of ant, and the

NOVEMBER, 1964

foraging workers came in from out-
side the sandy area.

There were several species of
wasp. The members of one unidenti-
fied species excavated tunnels in
the low vertical face of sandstone
at the back of the area, and stocked
these with flies which they carried
back after catching them in the
surrounding areas.

A species of Ammophila also occur-
red, but in smaller numbers. These
conspicuous, long-bodied, black and
orange wasps make vertical tunnels
in the sand, each stocked with a
paralysed caterpillar on which is laid
an egg. The site for the tunnel seems
to be carefully chosen. The wasp
excavates vertically into the sand
using its jaws, and carries the sand
away in its jaws, flying a short dis-
tance before dropping it. Very
often the sand is dropped in the
same place throughout the excava-
tion of the tunnel. When the tunnel
is finished the wasp blocks the
entrance with a few selected stones,
and covers these with sand. In short,
the wasp then catches a caterpillar,
stings it and drags it back to the
area of the tunnel which it re-opens
and into which it drags the cater-
pillar gripping it at the head end
with its jaws and backing into the
tunnel. An egg is laid on the cater-
pillar and the entrance to the tunnel
is blocked once more. The larva
which develops from the egg feeds
on the caterpillar. At this stage it
can be removed and the develop-
ment followed by keeping it in a
specimen tube.

There was one species of solitary
bee (species uncertain) which exca-
vated tunnels into the sand, making
several cells out of cemented sand
at the base of the tunnel, in each of
which it made a ball of pollen grains
glued together with honey. A single
egg was |jaid on the side of each of
these spheres, and the developing
larva fed on the food stores.

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

The bee showed fascinating be-

-_ haviour in both the construction of

the tunnel and the cells, and in the
stocking of the cells with pollen.
The tunnel was very often dug in
the roots of the grass clumps or in
areas of stones. The sand was dug
out with the jaws, pushed under the
body and pushed out of the tunnel
when the bee backed out of the
tunnel. Thus a small mound of sand
collected at the entrance to the

| tunnel.

All the tunnels were mapped day

by day to show changes in the number
_ of tunnels in use, the time taken in
_ excavation, and the details such as
_ number and times of journeys during
- the stocking of the cells with pollen.

A section of the site was chosen in
which all the cells were dug up
(only a small area was so treated so
as to preserve the population).
Measurements were made of the
number of the cells and their depth,
the size of the pollen mass and the
development of the larva. The cells
were dug up with a penknife; care
had to be taken in digging the cells
from amongst grass roots.

Observations were made on the
behaviour of the bees during stock-
ing flights to and from the major
source of pollen — which was Gorse
(Ulex europaeus Linn.) — and the
tunnel.

Some simple experiments were
devised to try to disorientate the
bee in its return to the tunnel after
foraging. For example, two large
cubical blocks were each placed in
the same position next to the en-
trance of each of two tunnels, just
before the bees left the tunnels.
One of these was moved through
90 degrees in relation to the tunnel
entrance after the bee left the tunnel,
while the other was left in the same
position throughout. Different sized
blocks were also tried, and the time
before the block was moved was
also varied. These experiments did

129

not seem to affect the bees a great
deal, and there were no conclusive
results.

Larvae were removed on the
pollen store from the cell and kept
in darkened specimen tubes. They
continued to feed on the pollen
mass until they were fully grown,
but | did not succeed in rearing
them through all the stages. The
atmosphere of the tube was kept
moist by a cap of wet filter paper
in the form of an inverted cone in
the opening of the tube.

There are some interesting features
of the habitat and the insect fauna.
The majority of the species are
burrowing insects, and they use the
sand because it is easy to dig into.
It is also interesting to note that
the bees and the wasps both collect
food from outside the area.

59/204. Jo MM. Porter (3187).

ENTOMOLOGY IN
NEW ZEALAND —2

Coleoptera (continued *)

The Cleroidea of New Zealand
include some very interesting beetles,
especially the endemic family Chaeto-
somatidae. Chaetosoma _ scaritides
Westw. is found as adult and as larva
in tunnels of other insects in south-
ern beech (Nothofagus spp.) and
other trees. The larva is predacious,
feeding on wood-boring Arthropods.
Adult Chaetosomatids are similar to
Passandrids in general appearance.
Crowson (1955, p.83) states of the
Chaetosomatidae: ‘‘ At present this
family appears to be a sort of inter-
mediate stage between Trogositids
and Clerids, and may well represent
an archaic type of Cleroidea ’”’. There
are quite a number of Cleridae,
mainly species of the genus Phyma-
tophoea: predaceous, frequently met-

*from Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 23: 101.

130

NOVEMBER, 1964

allic beetles which are sometimes
beaten from flowers or foliage.
Trogositidae include species of the
genus Leperina, which occur under
loose bark of coastal trees. Phyco-
secis discoidea Pasc. (Phycosecidae)
is a small rotund beetle that lives
on sandy beaches, and whose larva
is often seen running quickly over
the sand surface.

Borers of the genus Anobium cause
considerable damage to wooden
houses and furniture. The intro-
duced species (see below) cause most
damage, but some of the native
species can be destructive to timber.
Most native Anobiids, however,
seem to be relatively harmless. There
are few native Ptinids, and of these,
| have found only two specimens of
the commonest (Ptinus speciosus
Broun) in eight years collecting.
There is but one endemic Bostrychid,
and there are no native Lyctids at
all.

The New Zealand Dermestoidea
include Nothoderodontus gourlayi
Crowson, the only Derodontid
known from outside the Holarctic
region. There are two species of
Nosodendron, which are found under
the bark of trees. Dermestidae
include several species of Trogoderma,
and one of Hexanodes. Larvae of
Trogoderma live under loose bark of
Dacrydium spp., Metrosideros spp.
and probably other native trees.

Cantharoids are poorly represen-
ted, there being but the genus Asilis
(Cantharidae) present. These are
predacious beetles which are found
on flowers and foliage in summer.
Their larvae are unknown at present.

There are quite a number of fine
Elateridae of fairly large size, but
most of these are fairly difficult to

identify. The known larvae are
mainly typical wire-worms which
live in decaying wood, although

some of them seem to be carnivor-
OUS. There are also some soil-
inhabiting species. The adults are

found on foliage, under loose bark
or at light, mainly during summer.
New Zealand click-beetles are poorly
known systematically, but will no
doubt receive attention soon be-
cause of the economic importance
of some of the soil-dwelling species.

Buprestidae are quite poorly repre-
sented. Nascioides enysi Sharp is
a pest of southern beech. Larvae
tunnel in the inner bark and are
often abundant in trees which have
recently been felled. Adults are
found during summer, especially in
hot sunshine.

New Zealand has about fifty des-
cribed species of Byrrhidae. These
are convex beetles which feed on
moss. They are frequently found in
the wetter parts of the South Island,
but are rare in the far north.

The Helodidae are numerous, both
as species and as individuals. Adults
are beaten frequently from foliage
in late spring and summer. Larvae of
some species live in stagnant water,
others live amongst rotting vege-
table matter or rich leaf litter, and
one (Byrrhocryptus urquharti Broun)
lives in fluvial sands near the water’s
edge. The Dascilloidea are repre-
sented also by two or three species
of both Clambidae and Eucinetidae.

The Lucanidae include several
large species of Dorcus which show
allometric development of mandibles
and head in the males. Two species
are moderately common in some
South Island podocarp forests. Fur-
ther north, species of Lissotes, es-
pecially L. reticulatus Westw., are
the common large stag beetles. The
genus Ceratognathus includes mainly
smaller species, adults of which
sometimes fly to light. The larvae
live in dead, usually rotten, wood,
and have been recorded damaging
wooden telegraph poles.

Pericoptus truncatus Fab. (Dynas-
tinae) is a large beetle which lives
on coastal sand dunes. Larvae live
under logs cast up on beaches by

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

-storms, feeding on the wood. Adults

are most common in spring. There
are three other species of the genus,

which are not, however, as common

or as widely distributed as P. trun-

catus. The Melolonthinae are repre-

sented by numerous species, in-
cluding the most serious pest of
pastures, Costelytra zealandica White.

This notorious insect causes millions
of pounds
| pastures
larvae, grass grubs, which feed on
-roots and native grasses.

worth of damage to

every year, through its

It is con-

‘trolled by top-dressing pastures with
_D.D.T. superphosphate, and does
not seem to have become particu-

‘larly resistant so far.

Larvae of the
other New Zealand genera (Odontria,
Chlorochiton, Pyronata, etc.) feed on
roots, but they have not become
serious pests like C. zealandica.

_ Adults of the genus Saprosites (Apho-
.diinae) sometimes fly to light in

summer, or they may be found
under the bark of dead coastal trees,
together with larvae. There are a

| few species of Saphobius (Scarabaein-
_ ae) which are often caught by trapping
using rotten meat as bait. The large

scarab subfamilies Rutelinae and Cet-
Oniinae are absent from New Zea-
land, as are the families Passalidae,
Trogidae, Acanthoceridae and Geo-
trupidae. (There is an introduced
species of Trox, however.)
Anisotomidae are frequently
caught in baited traps together with
Saphobius spp. They normally feed
on decaying animal and vegetable
matter. Silphidae include Necro-
philus prolongatus Sharp, found under
bird carcases and in baited traps,
and the primitive genus Microsilpha.
Many species of Staphylinidae and
an even greater number of Psela-
phidae have been described from
New Zealand, but these are mostly
poorly known. Species of Xantholi-
nus live, with their larvae, in tunnels
of wood-boring insects and under
loose bark of dead trees. Several

131

large ‘ staphs’ live amongst decaying
seaweed on beaches, especially Cafius
spp. and Omalium spp. One of the
most striking species is Creophilus
oculatus Fab., a stout, black beetle
with a prominent red spot behind
each eye (often mistaken for an eye
by non-entomologists).

New Zealand has several species
of Histeridae, the largest of which
is Sternaulax zealandicus Mars. Larvae
of this species live under bark of
dead coastal trees, where they feed
on beetle and moth larvae. Most
of the other species are rare and
small.

The Hydrophilidae include about
60 New Zealand species, many of
which are not, however, true water-
beetles, but live as larvae and adults
in damp leaf litter. Adults of the
genus Rygmodus are frequently beat-
en from shrubs and trees in late
spring, and during summer in the
mountains. The water-inhabiting
species live mainly in pools or rivers.
There are a few species of Dryo-
pidae, the larvae of which are found
sometimes in fairly swift streams,
where they feed on algae. The only
other water-beetles occurring in
New Zealand are a species of Gyrinus
and about fifteen species of Dytis-
cidae. The latter family includes the
almost cosmopolitan Rhantus _ pul-
verulosus Steph., and Lancetes lan-
ceolatus Clark, which occurs also in
Australia. Both species seem to
have reached New Zealand by their
own flight, and there is no sound
reason for regarding either as intro-
duced. Although most New Zealand
insects are endemic at the specific
level, there are exceptions which
almost always have an efficient means
of aerial dispersal (strong flight in
the case of the Dytiscids, Herse
convolvuli Linn., Locusta migratoria
Linn. and other large insects).

There are five species of Rhysodes
(Rhysodidae) in New Zealand, all of
which are found in the north of the

132

North Island in rotten wood. The
Carabidae include many large flight-
less species, mostly with fairly lim-
ited ranges, and often exhibiting
considerable geographical variation.
The genus Mecodema (Broscini) in-
cludes about 60 species of moderate-
sized to large, flightless beetles,
which are found under logs and

stones in native bush and tussock
country, and sometimes in exotic
plantations. The front legs are

modified for digging, and the beetles
often make tunnels in the topsoil.
Some species exceed thirty mm. in
length, and as they have large man-
dibles need to be handled with care.
The Pterostichini are represented
by Megadromus, Holcaspis and some
smaller genera, which are like Meco-
dema in their flightless condition,
but are usually more widely distri-
buted and better able to adapt them-

selves to modifications of their
habitats. In the far north the com-
mon large flightless Carabids are

species of the genus Ctenognathus
(Agonini). Also in the far north are
several genera each containing only
one or two known species, and ap-
parently relics of an earlier warmth-
adapted fauna which mostly became
extinct during glaciations of Pleis-
tocene times (e.g., Maoripamborus
fairburni Brookes). The relict south-
ern tribe Migadopini is represented
by Amarotypus edwardsi Bates, which
lives on moss-covered Nothofagus
spp., and in New Zealand’s sub-
antarctic islands by the genera Loxo-
merus and Calathosoma. There are
about fifteen native species of tiger
beetles of the genus Cicindela.

The Stylopoidea are represented
by a single known species of Elenchus,
which parasitises Jassidae (Homop-
tera) (Gourlay, 1953).

This account has deliberately om-
mitted reference to introduced Cole-
optera so far in order to avoid
confusion with the native fauna.
Some of the most common beetles

NOVEMBER, 1964

in the more densely settled parts
of New Zealand have been intro-
duced mainly accidentally. Many of
the introduced beetles were brought
originally from Britain, which has
always been the most important
source of goods imported into New
Zealand, but most of the species
concerned have a virtually cosmo-
politan distribution. Quite a number
of species have been introduced
from Australia at various times, and
others are known to have come from
South America or South Africa. In
recent years strict quarantine regu-
lations have greatly reduced the
number of introductions, but new
species are still being found; although
it is not certain how many of these
have been established for some time
but only discovered recently.

Beneficial introductions include the
Carabids Rhytisternus miser Chaud
(Australia), Laemostenus complanatus
Dej.(cosmopolitan); various Staphy-
linids; Coccinellidae such as Cocci-
nella 11-punctata Linn., C. leonina
Fab., Leis conformis, Boisd., Rhizobius
spp., Orcus chalybeus Boisd., V. edalia
cardinalis Muls. (which controls the
cottony cushion scale Icerya purchasi
Mask.); the Chrysomelid Chrysolina
hyperici Forst. which controls St
John’s Wort (Hypericum spp.); and
others.

The majority, however, are more
or less serious pests. These include
Tenebrioides mauritanicus Linn. (Trog-
ositidae); Carpophilus spp. (Nitidu-
lidae); Oryzaephilus surinamensis Linn.
(Silvanidae); Dermestes spp. and An-
threnus spp. (Dermestidae); Necrobia
spp. (Cleridae); Ptinus spp. (Ptinidae);
Anobium punctatum Deg. and others
(Anobiidae); Lyctus brunneus Steph.
(Lyctidae); several Elateridae; Alphi-
tobius spp., Tribolium spp., Gnathocer-
us cornutus Fab. and Tenebrio spp.
(Tenebrionidae); Paropsis spp. (Chry-
somelidae); Bruchus spp. (Bruchidae);

Bethelium signiferum Newm., Phoar- |

cantha semipunctata Fab., Tessaromma

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

undatum Newm. and other Australian
-Cerambycidae; Otiorrhynchus sulcatus
Fab., Anthonomus pomorum Linn.,
‘Phlyctinus callosus Lea, Listroderes
obliquus Klug, Calandra spp. and
other weevils; Heteronychus sanc-
tae-helenae Blanch., Aphodius granarius
-Linn., etc. (Scarabaeidae). Many of
these species are quite familiar to
“British entomologists.

| It is interesting to note that
Coccinella 11-punctata, which in
Britain is predominantly a coastal
“species, has been observed in New
Zealand swarming on the summits of
mountains over 7,000 ft in height.
This type of swarming on mountains
‘is quite common in some other
vladybirds, especially in North Ameri-
ca, but does not seem to have been
trecorded for C. 11-punctata from
sanywhere other than New Zealand.
;

Diptera

“ Knowledge of New Zealand flies
is far from complete. Species already
Sifnown number about two thousand,
and many more await discovery. Of
the described species, many are
“known from one or few specimens,
adequate information on distribution
is lacking, and, as in other groups,
‘the older descriptions are so brief
“that the species cannot be recognised.
|New Zealand Diptera lacks any
“major text and the literature is
scattered in New Zealand and over-
seas journals.” (Harrison, 1959).
_'Nematocera. The family Tanyderidae,

including the most primitive of all

living Diptera, is represented in
New Zealand by five species of

_Mischoderus. These are slender flies
with prettily patterned wings, with
“venation rather like that of Mecop-
tera. Crane-flies (Tipulidae) include
524 known New Zealand species,
thus comprising about one quarter
_of the known dipterous fauna. Many
jof the species are large, and some
have striking wing markings which
are readily recognised. Adults fre-

Katee

133

quently enter buildings at night, of
may be seen swarming, especially
at sunset. Aphrophila spp. live in
the spray of waterfalls and cascades.
Larvae of Tipulids are found frequent-
ly in rotten wood, moss or soil,
particularly in damp places, and
some are aquatic. Zaluscodes auck-
landicus Lamb is a peculiar wingless
species found on the subantarctic
Auckland Islands.

There are thirty-four species of
Psychodidae recorded from New
Zealand, belonging chiefly to the
genera Pericoma and Psychoda. Sev-
eral species breed in the trickling
filters of sewage purification plants.
Nemopalpus zelandiae Alex. is a
hairy fly rather like a mosquito but
with wing venation allied to Phle-
botomus, and certain similarities to
Tanyderidae. The blood-sucking
Phlebotominae are absent.

Culicidae are represented by only
twelve known indigenous species
and two introduced species, but
some of these are present in vast
numbers of troublesome individuals
during the warmer months of the
year. The most common species is
Culex pervigilans Berg., although the
introduced C. fatigans Wied. is
fairly common in the north. The
latter species is a vector of elephant-
iasis in the tropics, but fortunately
Wuchereria bancrofti Cobbold, the
parasite causing this disease, does
not occur in New Zealand. The
salt-water mosquito, Opifex fuscus
Hutt., is found along the rocky
coasts of the North Island. The
adults are large black mosquitoes;
the males are unusual in having only
three large antennal spines instead
of the densely plumose antennae
characteristic of most male mosqui-
toes. The early stages of this species
live in brackish pools above high
water mark. Corethrella novae-
zealandiae Tonnoir lacks a projecting
proboscis, and does not bite. There
are no Anopheline mosquitoes in

134

New Zealand.

The nematocerous families Aniso-
pidae, Trichoceridae, Dixidae, Bibio-
nidae, Scatopsidae and Thaumaleidae
each have a few New Zealand species.

There are forty-one species of
Chironomidae known from New
Zealand. The largest and commonest
of these is Chironomus (s.s.) zealan-
dicus Huds., which sometimes swarms
in vast numbers near lakes or large
ponds, especially eutrophic waters.
Adults fly to light, thus becoming
a nuisance when swarming occurs
near settlements, as it did recently
near Auckland. Larvae are typical
bloodworms, which construct tubes
of soft mud in which they live. They

are indiscriminate feeders on micro-.

scopic algae, which they ingest along
with any other fine particles sus-
pended in the water. Pupae, which
are of the usual Chironomus type,
remain in the larval mud tubes until
mature, when they rise to the water
surface, and adults emerge. Eggs
are laid in large numbers, embedded
spirally in a gelatinous matrix, usually
attached to stones, plants, etc., near
the water’s edge. Some of the
chironomid species have larvae which
inhabit streams. Recently a marine
chironomid larva belonging to the
subfamily Clunioninae was discovered
living on intertidal rocks on the
west coast near Auckland, but it
has not yet been described.

Over 200 species of Mycetophili-
dae are recorded from New Zealand.
The best known is the famous “ glow-
worm’, Arachnocampa luminosa Skuse.
The larva lives in caves, tunnels and
dense, dark, damp bush, where it
spins a sticky web. The luminous
organ is situated in the terminal
abdominal segment. Light from this
is said to attract small insects, which
become entangled in the web, and
are then consumed by the larva.
The pupa and the adult female are
slightly luminous also. An enter-
taining account of this species is

NOVEMBER, 1964

given by Hudson (1950, pp. 15-37).
A well-known limestone cave popular
with tourists at Waitomo is lit by
millions of glow-worms.

The Simuliidae are represented by
about ten species of Austrosimulium.
These swarm in the neighbourhood
of running streams, where they bite
viciously, and can make picnics by
the river side miserable. Larvae
live in streams, where they attach
themselves to stones or water-
plants. Larvae of Blepharoceridae
are found in similar habitats. Adult
females are predacious, but fortun-
ately confine themselves to small
insects, and do not attack man.
There are some Ceratopogonidae in
New Zealand, but none that attack
vertebrates. The larva of Forcipomyia
antipodum Huds. is found under bark
of newly fallen trees, where it feeds
On sap.

There are about thirty known

species of gall midges (Cecidomyi- —

dae). Two introduced species which
are serious pests are the pear leaf-
curling midge, Dasyneura pyri Bouché,
and the hessian fly, Mayetiola destruc-

tor Say, which damages wheat (Tri-

ticum spp.).

Brachycera. About twenty species
of Tabanidae are known from New
Zealand, but these seldom suck

blood, being content to feed on
nectar. Their larvae, which are
predacious, live in moist soil: Strati-
omyidae (thirty species) are found
frequently on flowers during summer.

Therevidae (twenty-two spp.) fall |
mainly in the genus Anabarynchus. |
The peculiar many-segmented larva |
of A. bilineatus Fab. lives in sand just
above high water mark on beaches, |
while larvae of other species live in|
rotten wood. |

The families Leptidae and Bomby-
liidae each have one, and the Cyrti- |
dae seven New Zealand species. |

There are but fourteen species of!
Asilidae recorded from New Zealand.
These are mostly large, conspicuous)

;

‘mon (forty

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

flies, apparently generally predaceous
on a wide range of insect prey. The
smaller predaceous Empididae are
represented by more than 100 known
species, and 110 species of Doli-
chopodidae have been recorded.

Cyclorrhapha. Phoridae are repre-

-sented by twenty-nine New Zealand

is

species, including the remarkable
Sciadocera rufomaculata White, which
intermediate in some _ features
between this family and Platypezidae

‘(one sp.). Four species of Pipunculus
_(Pipunculidae) have been recorded:
‘their larvae parasitise fulgoroid Hom-
< optera.

Hover flies (Syrphidae) are com-
indigenous and four

- exotic species). Larvae of Helophilus
-are ‘ rat-tailed maggots’ which live

in mud and stagnant pools. Larvae
of Syrphus are slug-like, and feed on
a variety of insects attacking foliage

_(e.g., aphids and larvae of moths).

_ including

The New Zealand Acalypterate
flies have recently been monographed
by Harrison (1959). In this impor-
tant study 233 species are recorded,
thirty-eight immigrant

species. There are twenty-one

‘families represented, which is too

' many to discuss each separately here.
The fauna consists of 76 genera,
_ twenty-eight of which are endemic,
_ thirty-seven indigenous, and eleven
_ recent immigrants.
seven indigenous genera, three are

Of the thirty-

_ confined to Australia and New Zea-

land, two to South America and
New Zealand, and the remaining
thirty-two extend over a much wider
range. There are several archaic

» and aberrant forms, e.g., species of
_ Huttonina, Protoborborus and Terato-

- myza.

Many New Zealand genera

_ do not fit readily into present-day

_ concepts of families.

- dant during summer.

All the indi-
genous acalypterate species are also

- endemic.

Blowflies (Calliphoridae) are abun-
There are
sixteen indigenous species recorded,

135

mainly of the genus Calliphora, and
two introduced species (Calliphora
erythrocephala Meig. and Lucilia seri-
cata Meig.). Any of the species are
likely to blow meat if they have the
Opportunity. Calliphora laemica
White and Lucilia sericata are respon-
sible for blowfly strike in sheep.
Eggs are laid on soiled wool around
the crutch, and the maggots often
penetrate the skin. Blowfly strike
is controlled by shearing off the
soiled wool, i.e., crutching.

Muscidae (including Anthomyiidae)
number about /0 indigenous species,
placed mainly in the genera Hylemya
and Limnophora. Flies of the latter
genus are found resting on stones
in or near streams, and fly up to and
sieze other insects (especially may-
flies), which they suck dry. L.
flaviventris Malloch is said to resemble
a raindrop when seen from in front.
The remarkable Exsul singularis Hutt.
has been observed feeding on a
Trichopteran. Introduced Muscids
include the familiar pests Musca
domestica Linn. and Stomoxys calci-
trans Linn.

Tachinidae are numerous (130
species recorded), and some are
important in controlling lepidopter-
ous pests. Protohystricia alcis Walk.
is found in pastures in the spring,
where it lays live maggots that seek
out and parasitise Porina caterpillars.
Cerosmyia spp. have been recorded
parasitising moths of the genera
Leucania, Melanchra, Nyctemera, Oece-
ticus, Oxycanus, Proteodes and Tyria.

As there are no indigenous ter-
restrial mammals in New Zealand,
it is not surprising that there are no
native Oestridae, whose larvae para-
sitise mammals. There are three
introduced species, however.

Hippoboscidae are represented by
a single known species, Ornithomyia
opposita Walk. The sheep ked,
Melophagus ovinus Linn., has been
introduced.

24.8.64. J. C. Watt (3578).

136

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(Refer also to Bibliography in part 1 of this series:

Bull. amat. a Soc. 23: 97 - 101.)

Insects, general

HUDSON, G. V. (1892). An elementary manual of

New Zealand Entomology. West, Newman, London.
(pp. 128, pl. XX) — Long out of print. Describes
immature stages, life histories and biologies of some

species.

HUDSON, G. V. (1950). Fragments of New Zealand
entomology. Ferguson and Osborn, Wellington.
(pp. 188, pl. XIX) — Further biology and _ life
history studies.

Coleoptera

GOURLAY, E. S. (1953). N. Z. Ent. |, 3: 3-8. The
Strepsiptera, an insect order new to New Zealand.

Diptera

HARRISON, R. A. eek Acalypterate Diptera of
New Zealand. N. Z. Dept. Sci. Industr. Res. Bull. 128.
(pp. 382, figs 438).

MILLER, D. (1950).
New Zealand sub-region. N.
Res. Bull. 100. (pp. 194).

Catalogue of the Diptera of the
Z. Dept. Sci. Industr.

J.C.W.

CASUAL OBSERVATIONS
ON

The rather ambiguous title
attempts to condense the following
account of five part-day excursions
during the course of a fortnight in
Italy on business in May 1964. It
is not ‘done’ for an engineer in-
specting roads to be blatantly equip-
ped with a full kit of an entomologist
— and in any case the limitations of
baggage weight by air transport
forced me to keep my equipment
to a minimum. Nevertheless these
five trips resulted in over forty
different species of butterflies, plus
a few moths which were taken only
when there were no butterflies in
sight of particular interest to me.
Usually | only took one example of
the commoner butterflies which are
also found in Britain, although |
tried to examine at least one of
each species to make sure there
were no noticeable variations. | had
been told by Mr P. W. Cribb (2270)
that this was a wise practice, and in
fact | found it so— an example being
that what on casual observation |
had taken to be the Grizzled Skipper
(Pyrgus malvae Linn.) turned out
to be P. sao Bergstr. There were
other ‘ skippers ’, as well as ‘ blues ’,

ITALIAN LEPIDOPTERA

NOVEMBER, 1964

fritillaries, etc., which proved this
to be worthwhile.

My equipment, then, was _ rudi-
mentary — a folding pocket-net
without handle (though | usually
found a suitable stick on the field
of operations), two or three pillboxes,
and a cigarette box filled with layers
of cotton-wool between which speci-
mens were placed in the field and ©
properly papered at night on return ©
to base. | did not attempt to do any
setting as | had few spare evenings |
anyway and even the papering often
took until well after midnight. When
papered the day’s catch was stored
in flat cigarette tins, carefully labelled
on the outside, as well as on each
paper, with date and location, and |
the inside of the tin liberally sprinkled |
with camphor. On a previous short
trip to Switzerland last year | had
found that it was quite possible to
set specimens and bring them back
in a home-made travelling box con-
sisting of a deep (100 size) cigarette-
box lined with cork cut from a table
mat just the right size to fit tightly
into the bottom of the box —on |
top of this was glued a second layer |
of cork cut in strips to leave varying |
widths of groove for the bodies, and |
varying widths of strip for the wings.
A large number of boxes would have |
been needed in Italy this year (and
it would have meant a prohibitive
increase in baggage), but for the few
specimens | took in Switzerland in
one spare lunch-hour — a male
Purple-edged Copper (Lycaena hippo- |
thoe Linn. var. eurybia Ochs.) and a |
couple of Small Mountain Ringley
(Erebia epiphron Knoch), it was ideal. |

As | did not know where to look |
for specimens, my excursions were |
rather hit-or-miss. On my first free |
day (10th May) | left Rome for the |
distant mountains: from the map it
seemed Tivoli was the most likely
station at which to alight and in
fact a short walk took me to the
open country. Along a high hedgerow |

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

| saw my first ©Sulphur’ (Gonep-
teryx cleopatra Linn.) but it was far
out of reach of my pocket-net. In
the train both on the flat plain and
in the foothills approaching Tivoli
| had already seen several examples
of the Swallowtail (Papilio machaon
gorganus Fruhst.) and the smaller
Fritillaries (Melitaeag spp.) but these
were much scarcer as | left the road
and climbed a sloping hillside planted
with Olive trees (Olea europaea
Linn.): here the chief residents were
the various whites, including Leptidea
sinapis Linn. (Wood White) and an
occasional Orange Tip (Anthocaris
cardamines Linn.) — one of which
| found at home to be instead Euchloe
crameri Butler, with its noticeably
different underside to the hindwings.
Vanessa cardui Linn. was also seen,
together with many of the © browns ’.
of which the Large Wall (Pararge
imaera Linn.) was the only new species
for me. The examples of P. aegeria
Linn. (Speckled Wood) were of
‘course the typical form with gingery
ground colour instead of the pale
yellow of the British race aegerides
Stgr. On the open hillside there
were fewer butterflies but returning
to the flatter grass by the road |
found a number of ‘ blues’ (mostly
Polyommatus icarus Rott.; Aricia
‘agestis Schiff., and Lycaena phlaesa
Linn.) | examined several of the
latter but none displayed any wide
Variations, nor the blue spots (var.
‘caeruleopunctata) which | find com-
‘mon here in Scotland. The females
of P. icarus were all uniformly brown
‘with none of the blue scaling com-
‘mon in Britain. There were several
large nests of larvae on hawthorn
(Crataegus sp.) and other bushes by
the roadside: | could not cope with
a large collection of living larvae
but took two of the largest from
one colony and successfully kept
‘them on my hotel balcony for the
next fortnight. | Unfortunately |
could not identify them or the

\

5

17

bush from which they were taken,
nor find suitable food on my return
home, and they died without being
definitely named — they seemed to
be like the Lackey Moth (Melacosoma
neustria Linn.).

During the next week | had only
two spare afternoons so that it was
not possible to travel far from Rome
but as the grounds of my hotel in
the N.W. suburbs furnished occas-
ional examples of V. cardui, V. atalanta
Linn., ‘browns’ and ‘ blues’, and
even one or two P. machaon gorganus,
| thought the nearest countryside
worth trying. The local trolleybus
terminus was only about five minutes
walk from a sheltered valley with
rough grass, marshy in places, and
with shrubs and trees on the slopes.
Despite quite a strong wind there
were plenty of butterflies, with
Swallowtails well represented: the
wind probably helped me take these
in my pocket net, although it was
an energetic task. As well as P. m.
gorganus there were a few P. podalirius
Linn., and so another new species
was added to my collection! This
valley was visited on May 12th and
16th, yielding twenty-six different
species at least. Here were a large
number of * skippers ’, including Och-
lodes venata Br. and Grey; Thymelicus
actaeon Rott.; P. sao (mentioned in
my opening paragraph), and Carchar-
odus alceae Esp., which | similarly
mistook for the Dingy Skipper (Eryn-
nis tages Linn.). In the grassy valley
bottom a number of small fritillaries
appeared occasionally, including Meli-
taea didyma Ochs., M. athalia cela-
dussa Rott., and on the second visit,
four males of M. phoebe Knoch.
The latter, in particular, were rather
small. On the hillside | found a
number of Green Hairstreaks (Cal-
lophrys rubi Linn.) which were easily
taken whilst resting on sloe bushes
or on the grass. Down in the valley
again a solitary example of Limenitis
sybilla Linn. (=anonyma Lewis) eluded

138

me for some time but was eventually
netted. | only saw one other example
of this species later on, in an Alpine
valley, but that one got away! A
second similar valley a_ half-mile
further out from Rome produced
similar species and in addition my
first example of Aporia crataegi
Linn., which | was not expecting
and may have previously passed
over as being merely P. brassicae.
Later, in the Alps, | was to become
surfeited with A. crataegi, but here
there could only have been a few.
A number of Colias species were
seen flying fast in a north-easterly
direction but none were taken and
| could not identify them on the
wing. :

| had no opportunities further
south, nor on the long journey from
Naples to Turin except for a brief
stop near Orvieto where a grassy
slope on a river valley was frequented
by P. machaon, Melitaea species,
and O. venata. From Turin my
business took me to St Vincent in
the Aosta Valley of the Italian Alps.
Here | had a full afternoon to spare
and five minutes walk from the hotel
led me to an alpine valley with
well-wooded sides and a trickle of
water along a rocky channel at the
bottom. It was heavy going amongst
the stones and bushes, but a fifty-
yard length provided enough variety
for several hours’ observation with-
out monotony. There was a grassy
slope at one side profuse with wild
flowers where many varieties could
be taken at rest, but everywhere
A. crataegi was so abundant as to be
almost a nuisance. P. aegeria, P.
megera, and P. maera were flying
together in fair numbers, and L.
sinapis was also abundant. One
example of Polygonia c-album Linn.
was seen and taken, and the other
Vanessids V. cardui and V. atalanta
were also present. But the greatest
thrill— and exasperation — was to
see several specimens of Nymphalis

NOVEMBER, 1964

antiopa Linn. flying fast up the valley,
usually out of reach and certainly so
when resting on high branches!
Late in the afternoon | did manage
to find one resting on a large rock

and this was duly netted, but there |

were at least three others.
The grassy patch produced several

small fritillaries such as Argynnis |
euphrosyne Linn. and Melitaea cinxia |

Linn., but | was more thrilled to |
take a pair of Argynnis lathonia Linn. |
A single Silver-washed Fritillary |
(Argynnis paphia Linn.) rested on a
leaf of bramble (Rubus sp.) long enough |
for me to identify it but eluded my

net, as did the solitary Parnassius

apollo Linn. which passed up the
valley that afternoon. A number
of ‘ blues’ were taken ‘in case’ and
were found to include Cyaniris cyl-
larus Rott., similar to the Mazarine
Blue (C. semiargus Rott.); Lysandra
orion Linn., a larger blue with the
females a deep blackish-brown and
both sexes heavily marked with
black spots on the underside; and
an apparent Adonis Blue (Lysandra

bellargus Rott.) which was found to!

be Polyommatus hylas Esp.
Climbing from the valley to grassy
slopes further up the hillside pro-
duced more of these ‘blues’, a
number of Colias of which the only _
one | could take proved to be Colias

|

i
|

hyale Linn., and for me another
exciting ‘ first ’ in the form of Hamea-|
ris lucing Linn. (Duke of Burgundy).
Papilio podalirius was also present
in this valley though outnumbered
by about three to one by P. gorganus,
and a single L. sybilla was also seen.)
The next day we went throu
the new road tunnel into Switzer-
land but although fine and sunny,
and C. hyale, croceus, and A. crataegi
were seen around Aosta on the
Italian side, | was very disappointed
to see few butterflies along the
roadside near Bourg St Pierre —
only one Aglais urticae and one Ni
|
Pr

cinxia being seen.

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

Before returning home | had a
vhole day to spare and thus the
»pportunity to explore the Italian
akes area around Como. The day
yeing Sunday and very hot, | kept
way from Como itself and took the
rain to Asso, a small town to the
vast. Walking northwards my first
ittempt to leave the road was foiled
xy a farmer who was fearful that |
ould trample down his grass which
nas just ready for haymaking. Here
“here were Large Walls in abundance,
Walls as well, and a profusion of
skippers’ — mainly O. venata but
also a few P. sao and * blues’ inclu-
ding C. cyllarus and L. orion as at St
Vincent. Cupido minimus Fuessl.,
was present as well. Returning frus-
arated to the road | went on to
where the valley widened out again:
here there were a fair number of
Colias species, but usually flying fast
and only lingering safely in ie
middle of clover (Trifolium spp.) o
aay fields where | dare not une
them. Working my way towards
the hillside again | kept meeting A.

but there were few of the brown
woodland species as | left the flat
plain and started to climb. There
were several grassy meadows
amongst the trees and in one such
clearing | found quite an abundance
‘of Carterocephalus palaemon Pall.,

an identical form to our own Cheg-
uered Skippers, as well as more C.
rubi and H. lucina which were easily
taken when resting on flowers or
on the grass. Melitaea species found
‘here were M. didyma and M. athalia
-celadussa, rather more abundant
‘than at Rome. One solitary P. m.
‘gorganus was seen, and also a Comma
“resting on a bramble leaf — this was
most likely P. c-album although as |
did not see its underside | cannot
be sure.

_ On the way back to the station
‘with my collecting box well-filled |
‘took a couple of moths which turned

crataegi, L. sinapis and A. cardamines’

139

out to be the Black-veined White
Moth (Idaea lineata Scop.), and also
three very tiny black larvae feeding
on bramble — these were barely a
quarter of an inch long, but survived
the flight home without food and
although they refused the Scots
bramble, they fed voraciously on my
beech hedge (Fagus sylvatica Linn.)
until, to my surprise, the third skin
shedding revealed a bright green
skin! Two successfully pupated,
forming light brown cocoons in the
beech leaf, and | am now waiting to
see if they are, as | suspect, Emperor
Moths (Saturnia sp.). Large nests
of what | think were Lackey larvae
were also seen, and others con-
taining a white larva with black
spots — perhaps the Magpie Moth
(Abraxas grossulariata Linn.)? As the
bushes were completely defoliated
| could not identify their foodplant
and with two families of larvae to
cope with already | decided to leave
them in peace.

Thus ended my first serious at-
tempt at European collecting and
considering it was a business trip
with limited opportunities and equip-
ment, my catch of 150 selected insects
including P. podalirius and N. antiopa
was not too bad. More than the
actual catch, however, the increase
in my knowledge of the localities
frequented by many species difficult
to find in Britain was most useful.
28.8.64. D. H. Fletcher (3620).

REFERENCES
FORSTER, W. and WOHLFART, T. A. (1955). Die
Schmetterlinge Mitteleuropas, Vol. Il, Tagfalter.
W. Keller, Stuttgart.
LE CERF, F. (1944). Lépidoptéres de a Vol. I,
Rhopalocéres. N. Boubée et a Par
Additional identification by P. CRIBB (2270).

JUNIOR NEWS SECTION

| expect you are all settling down
to sorting out and dealing with the
excellent captures you made in the
glorious summer. | do hope you
will let us know if you found anything

140

interesting.

St Ivo School Entomology and
Natural History Society made its
annual safari south this year. We
went booted, rucksacked and suita-
bly equipped to the Isle of Wight,
Isle of Purbeck (Swanage) and the
New Forest, staying in Youth Hostels.
We were lucky enough to be shown
round a nature reserve at Studland
Bay (Swanage) by Mr Copland of the
Nature Conservancy and the Warden
of the reserve. Mr Copland also
brought along some slides in the
evening and gave us a most interest-
ing talk on the Nature Conservancy
in England. The Warden of South-
ampton Youth Hostel, Mr Vernon,
is a keen bee-keeper and on the last

evening of our trip entertained us.

with some excellent slides showing
various aspects of the life in a hive
of bees (Apis mellifera Linn.), and
pictures of bumble bees (Bombus
spp.), solitary bees, and flies that
mimic bees and wasps.

Several Vipers (Vipera berus Linn.)
were seen and a Smooth Snake
(Coronella austriaca Laurenti) was
caught on our second day in the
New Forest. However, as most of
our Members are coleopterists we
made every effort to catch at least
a glimpse of the ‘king’ of beetles
—the Stag Beetle Lucanus cervus
Linn. We made several sorties into
Rhinefield where they are supposed
to abound but found nothing but a
small piece of abdomen. It was only
the Bloody Nosed Beetles (Timarcha
tenebricosa Fab.) and Wood Tiger
Beetles (Cicindela sylvatica Linn.)
found at Swanage which managed to
make up for our disappointment.
Back in the New Forest the party
was kept contented by the vast
numbers of beetles found in horse
and cattle dung.

Julian Francis, our president, made
several exciting catches. He is a
keen Orthopterist and was especially
pleased to find the little black Wood

NOVEMBER, 1964

Cricket (Nemobius sylvestris Bosc.)
and the Bog Grasshopper (Mecos-
tethus (—Stethophyma) grossus Linn.),
which cost him a bootful of rich
brown mud. M. grossus is larger

than most British shorthorn grass- —
olive |

hoppers (Acrididae) and is
green, with a yellow strip down the

length of the forewing and red and |

yellow legs. This species cannot be
confused with anything else.

Our president was almost lost to
us as a great horsefly (Tabanus sp.)
attempted to carry him off from a

pinewood where we were busy |
collecting the Great Raft Spider |
(Dolomedes fimbriatus Clerck) which }
is considered to be Britain’s largest _
It ise

and most beautiful spider.
velvety chocolate brown with a
‘Sudz’ white stripe along its sides.
D. fimbriatus spends

insects which fall into the water.
For anybody interested in spiders

(J. H. Fabre, the great French natur- |

alist, said that spiders can be con-
sidered insects for study purposes
and who are we to argue with the
great Jean Henri) there is a new
society called the British Spider

Study Group, c/o D. W. Mackie, —

11 Ashmore Avenue, Cheadle Heath,
Stockport, Staffordshire.

St Ivo’s vice-president Clem Tac-
coni has taken up the collecting and
study of Hemiptera. He discovered

its time in|
forest bog areas hunting luckless |

quite early on in our New Forest | .

expedition that carnivorous
will taste humans if nothing else is
available. | wonder how often we
have blamed gnats for bites which
have been made by predatory bugs.
Clem was hoping to study frog- |—
hoppers (Cercopidae) but cannot |
find any books dealing with these |
animals. Can any of you help him |
with this problem? |

Have you been kept awake through |
-out August and September by the |
never-ending stridulation of that |
brown and green rascal the Autumn |

i

bugs |

|

|

AES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

oush Cricket (Pholidoptera grisecap-
ra Deg.)? As you know, the mem-
-ers of the family to which this insect
-elongs —the Tettigonidae — were
ften called longhorn grasshoppers,
_ut as they rarely eat grass and are
auch more often found in bushes
_unting for insects they are more
correctly called bush crickets. Al-
though female specimens of P. griseo-
-ptera make themselves conspicuous
vy frightening the life out of unsus-
vecting mothers by appearing sudden-
ly on the dressing- -table in mid
“eptember, they in fact hatch from
‘heir eggs in early spring long before
“rasshoppers appear. They are
orobably the longest living of all
british Tettigonids. It would be
vather interesting to see who can
ve the first to find a tiny nymph of
this species next spring.
John Gill (3566J) tells me that
-nention of his interest in swallow-
vail butterflies in last February’s
News Section has resulted in contacts
vith a local Member and with an
‘American Member. He also has
ome interesting observations on
he Vanessids of his area: John
‘vrites ‘‘ During the past five years
| have noted only four specimens of
Yanessa cardui Linn. (Painted Lady)
on the Buddleja bushes near my
ome. However, | saw about two
dozen specimens in one day early
‘ast week; as many as seven on one
oush. Also the humbers of Vanessa
‘ttalanta Linn. (Red Admiral) have
‘creased... Perhaps other Mem-
ners could let me know if this
jotable increase is widespread.”’
_ Has anyone any ideas how the
‘ollowing insects obtained their Eng-
ish names:

Ocypus olens Muell.

Coach Horse

Coccinellidae — ladybirds

Dermaptera — earwigs

Vanessa atalanta Linn. — Red

Admiral Butterfly.

St Ivo still have spare Indian stick

— Devil’s

141

insects (Carausius (=Dixippus) mor-
osus Br.) and can offer these and

other odd insects free to AES
Members.
28.8.64. H. J. Berman (2941A).

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Sir, — After reading the two recent
articles on Volucella zonaria Poda,
by Mr H. V. Danks and Mr A. W.
Jones in the November 1963 and
May 1964 Bulletins respectively (Bull.
amat. Ent)-Soc., 22: 140; 23: 54-5),
| also should imagine that Mr Danks
has been very lucky to find this
impressive insect extremely common
in north-east Surrey.

Although | lived in Croydon for
three and a half years | only once
had the privilege of seeing this
insect which was at rest on a garden
wall in Whitehorse Road, Croydon.
This was in mid-September 1963.
Incidentally | was not carrying a
receptacle to capture the specimen —
an omission from which | am still
smarting!

2125.64: M. O. Hughes (3612).

Mr Danks comments:—

Volucella zonaria seems to be some-
what less common this year than
during its apparent abundance of
1963, but although | was abroad for
five weeks at the beginning of its
season and have been unable to
search for it since, several specimens
have appeared in my own garden
at Surbiton. As mentioned by Colyer
and Hammond (1951) it occurs on
Wimbledon Common, and it seems
to be fairly generally distributed in
that area as other entomologists
have informed me that they have
found it there.

The area in which | live is some
four or five miles to the south-west
of Wimbledon Common, and | am
certain that V. zonaria is breeding
nearby. The commonest species of

142

social wasp in the immediate vicinity
is Vespula germanica Fab., although
V. vulgaris Linn. does occur.

The fact that Volucella zonaria has
been seen at Wimbledon, at Croydon
(some ten or eleven miles to the
south-east), as well as in other parts
within a radius of several miles of
my own area—it was recorded
from Kew, several miles to the north,
as long ago as 1946, for instance
(see, for example, Airy Shaw, 1955)—
would seem to indicate that it is
generally to be found in this region.
In my experience it is now common,
but it appears that | may have been
fortunate as it is an insect which
is not likely to be easily missed by
other entomologists.

Have any other Members found

it in’ this area or -elsewhere? — |
should imagine that if it is well:
established in this part of Surrey
it may be spreading even further
north.

31.8.64.
REFERENCES

COLYER, C. N. and HAMMOND, C. O. (1951). Flies
of the British Isles. Frederick Warne, London.

SHAW, H. K. AIRY (1955). Bull. amat. Ent. Soc., 14:
39.

Sir, — What a refreshing and wel-
come breeze swept through the
pages of the February Bulletin, fanned
by letters from Mr John Moore and
Mr W. E. Collinson (Bull. amat. Ent.
Soc., 23: 11-13 and 32-3).

How they echoed my own views
on the undue emphasis placed on
the so-called scientific aspect of
collecting. But for real down-to-
earth debunking of scientific postur-
ing let me commend readers to
P. B. M. Allan’s book ‘ Moths and
Memories’, and the chapter on
‘Letters and writers’. Here are
just a few choice extracts:

‘““ There is no science whatever in
catching insects for our collections.”

“Why in the name of all that is
wonderful do we throw dust in our
own eyes by pretending that our

NOVEMBER, 1964

ensnaring of moths, etc.,...is a
scientific pursuit ”’

“We do not catch and breed and
set and store insects for any other
purpose than our own pleasure.”

There is much more in the same
strain in the chapter in question,
couched in terms guaranteed to
penetrate the carapace of the most
bigoted.

| have been collecting for over 60
years and in that period have met
numerous entomologists, but as far
as recollection goes, they were col-
lectors like myself. | just cannot
imagine them going about with a
Tilley lamp in one hand and a note-
book in the other. |

Now for the literary aspect of |
contributions. |

Under the present regime, what
is served up on the plate is apparently
of less importance than the meticu- |
lous and scientific arrangement of |
parsley around the edges, judging |
by the four columns of Guidance |)
for Authors in the February issue |i
of the Bulletin. | cannot imagine |
anything more calculated to scare |
away budding contributors than this
bewildering array of rules and regu- |}
lations. What a contrast this makes | i
to the Editorial in Vol. 8 of the |:
Bulletin, page 23. “It is, naturally, th
quite impossible to please everyone |‘
all the time. But it might be said, | »
in general, that the Bulletin is not | i
intended to bea“ scientific journal ”’;
it is for young and old, beginners | '
and experts, and for all interests ’”’. | :

This leads me to the problem of |
scientific names.

In the New Naturalist series, ||
E. B. Ford, the author of the two
volumes ‘ Butterflies’ and ‘ Moths’, | :
states: “‘| have used both English | ;
and scientific names the first time!)
that a species is mentioned in each
chapter, but subsequently the Eng: |
lish ones only.”” The present trend | |
in the Bulletin is to plaster Latin| \
names after every common or garden | —

)

/ES BULLETIN, VOL. 23

ference to plants, trees, insects,
aimals and birds. No wonder P.
. M. Allan wrote: ‘‘ Can any printed
vatter be more tedious to read than
ne in which paragraph after para-
raph is thick with scientific names
rinted in italics ”’

t5-04- G:F. Waddington (169).

1 am informed that Mr P. B. M.
llan’s comments were aimed at
ollectors of numbers of insects who
‘ttempt to justify themselves by
cience, not at entomologists who
2ek to collect as little and observe
s much as possible. | personally
flow of some entomologists (‘ scien-
‘ists’ and ‘ non-scientists ’) who do
deed collect with a notebook in
one hand —this is a very welcome
rend amongst our present Juniors,
vor instance.

| With regard to the treatment of
ontributions for the Bulletin, per-
aaps the analogy that even good
as can be spoilt by bad cooking
night be suggested. | can assure
Aembers that were editing simply
| parsley arranging’ it would not
vake the amount of time which it
i
|

‘loes. The inclusion of scientific
lames is designed to help as many
people as possible to use the Bulletin
© their advantage, the only logical
nethod being (as.in Professor Ford’s
}pooks) to include the full scientific
‘ame the first time that a creature
/s mentioned in an article or chapter.
in particular, since so many insects
‘eed on plants, the scientific names
pF foodplants are helpful to readers.
This is one advantage of the correct
aming of every plant mentioned.
Would Members prefer the other
‘ess conspicuous tasks of editing to
zo undone, leaving random methods
of capitalisation, punctuation, spel-
iling, grammatical construction, giving
jof references, etc., etc? | do not
‘mind these tasks — or | would not
‘be Editor — yet having limited time
‘| try to give Members an opportunity

: {

|

i
ere

143

to help me if they so wish by pro-
viding a list of the standards which
| use, as in the February 1964 Bulletin.
— Editor.

FUNGAL PARASITES OF
INSECTS

W. J. Byford, Brooms Barn Experi-
mental Station, Higham, Bury St
Edmunds, Suffolk, would be grateful
for collections of Entomophthorous
fungi attacking aphids. He would
also be very pleased to attempt to
identify these fungi on other insects.
If the diseased insect is not identified,
uninfected specimens of the same
species would be very useful in
enabling this to be done.

Postage would be refunded if
required.

NOTES AND
OBSERVATIONS

THE OLD LADY MOTH

In the early days of August last
year, | found what first appeared to
be a large specimen of Mormo maura
Linn. (Old Lady Moth), in the corner
of the front porch. When | examined
it more closely, | found it to be no
less than five of the above, tightly
packed together in a ‘ V’ formation,
so as to look like one large moth.
Three were females and two were
males. | managed to obtain a pairing,
and subsequently reared the larvae
on hawthorn (Crataegus sp.).

Looking there again next morning,
| found another two specimens, and
during the next week | found one or
two every morning. Altogether |
found eleven specimens, and they
were all in the same corner. It has
puzzled me why they always congre-
gated in that particular corner of the
porch. Perhaps it was the most
sheltered position ?

| would like to know if any other

144

NOVEMBER, 1964

Member has come across a similar
phenomenon.
22.3.64. A. G. W. Deacon (3587).

THE CONVOLVULUS
HAWKMOTH

On 3rd September 1964, a small
girl brought me a dilapidated speci-
men of the Convolvulus Hawkmoth
(Herse convolvuli Linn.) which her
brother had caught as it flew at
dusk in the village of Kemerton,
Gloucestershire.

9.9564: John Moore (146).

SURVIVAL OF A PARASITIZED
ALDER MOTH LARVA

On 4th September 1963, a friend
sent me a fully grown larva of the
Alder Moth (Apatele alni Linn.) from
Pembrokeshire. It was found feeding
on oak (Quercus sp.) in oak coppice
woodland. The woodland was on
a dry, well-drained slope which faced
east. The annual rainfall is forty
inches.

| placed the larva in a coffee tin
which contained dead grass with
oak leaves on top. After eating
only a little it began to shrink. After
a few days, when it appeared to be
almost dead, a parasitic grub began
to emerge from under the second
segment. Being extremely annoyed
at seeing this happen to my first
Aider Moth larva, | crushed the grub
between my forceps. Later, much
to my surprise, the larva pupated
successfully. No cocoon was spun,
the pupation taking place on top
of the grass.

On 19th May this year (1964) a
somewhat undersized male Alder
Moth successfully emerged.

Has anyone ever known a parasi-
tized larva of any species to success-
fully complete its life cycle?

8.6.64. Alan P. Waters (2615).

WATCH YOUR KNOTGRASS
Many of you probably use that

ubiquitous little weed Knotgrass
(Polygonum aviculare agg.) for feeding
the less hungry of your caterpillars
that feed on nothing more definite
than ‘low plants’. Before you cast
the sprigs into your tins, examine
them for more particular insects
that feed only on this plant. Keep
your eye open especially for reddish
or greenish galls about a centimetre
long and a few millimetres in diam-
eter on the flowering shoots in
August, persisting in the autumn.
Each contains a larva of the ‘ Micro’
moth Augasma aeratellum Zell. The
galls have been recorded only a few
times in S.E. England and | am most
anxious to learn more about the
insect, the habits of which are quite
unlike those of any other of our
coleophorid moths. These others
form portable cases and attack their
food from the outside.

5.4.64. R. W. J. Uffen (1660).

A BRIEF NOTE FROM EGYPT

From my schoolboy days, | can
remember how Painted Lady Butter-
flies (Vanessa cardui Linn.) would
often, when found, seem to be attrac-
ted to some particular sunny spot
and though disturbed many times
would return to the same area.

This habit | saw persisting on 30th
April 1964 at the very top of the
great pyramid of Cheops at Giza,
which is about 450 feet high. The
apex is in continual sunshine, of
course, from dawn to dusk.

On 27th April 1964 at Aswan,
Long-tailed Blues (Lampides boeticus
Linn.) were flying, and one Milkweed
Butterfly (Danus plexippus Linn?) was
seen: since the latter species is
usually reckoned to come from
America, | thought this was indeed
food for thought. Is there, however,
a species in this corner of Africa
which could be mistaken for D.
lexippus?
ake P. J. Gent (192).

RSS 2 ent oe EE a ee ee ee eee
Printed by Ellis & Phillips Ltd., East Side Press, Rye Street, Bishop’s Stortford, and published by the Amateur
Entomologists’ Society, 42 Normandy Avenue, Barnet, Herts. 964.

Silkmoth Rearer’s Handbook

A Spice peerence book for those who embark upon the fascinating adventure
of rearing the largest and most colourful moths in the world.

Part | records practical experience in breeding Silkmoths from all over the world
_ during the past decade. It illustrates bought and home-made apparatus and gives
| hints on everything the beginner needs to learn about the life-cycle of the insects.

Part Il, for the first time in one book and one language, gives complete or nearly
complete descriptions of all stages of the life-cycle of over 120 species. Some
1,400 species and subspecies can be looked-up under 138 generic names.

Part Ill is a reference section, covering cross- pairing, the major reference works
and an index of oes and subspecies.

|} The Handbook comprises 165 pp. with full colour cover, 2 colour plates, 63 mono-
_ chrome proto and a line drawings or charts.

beh Ay ‘ }

Price 17s. 6d. (plus postage)

»
i)

¢ oleopterist’s Handbook

A symposium by various authors edited by

| bel ‘G: B. WALSH, B.Sc., M.R.S.T., and J. R. DIBB, F.R.ES.

The Be odbeok Mesecibes the tools and apparatus and mechads of collecting British
Beetles; their habitats, commensals and pre-adult stages: how to record, photo-
graph, make a personal collection and conduct a local survey.

Twenty full- -page plates ‘illustrative mainly of pre-adult stages (including seven
reproductions « of rare peneravinizs), and fifty Hinealet Soh and clagrams: 112 pp.
and Inde) Sa pe ly

Ra eee “Price 15s. Od. ene postage)

ella

strom),

- OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS AGENT
Pia 137 Gleneldon Road, ‘Streatham,
— LONDON, SWAG

}

Cae (Please do not send ‘money with order: an invoice will be sent)

€. sik fi i le WA N rane hie Fa

me

Worldwide Butterflies Ltd. —

Charmouth, Bridport, Dorset

OVA, LARVAE AND PUPAE

from many parts of the world

L. CHRISTIE

137, GLENELDON ROAD, A (Postal Business only)
STREATHAM, LONDON, SW16 |

New and Used — _
Entomological Equipment —

BEE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION —
Woodside House, Chalfont Heights,
Gerrards Cross, Bucks. © |

FOR ALL INFORMATION ON BEES. @

E. W. CLASSEY LTD. |
353 Hanworth Road, Hampton, Mddx ms a

Entomological Literature =

CATALOGUES ON REQUEST |

a

a fe Peaks

arr

<n

re

7 sy
ae

xt

SU a.

A) ARS BR NL aR

62) (9 YR NHC ES

THR EASES] WS ADS TR

5
.
ie
a ‘
[
Be
[
i
a
ae
-
i]
ie.
5
|
‘
)
|
9
i

ietitia hs
part
Hight

hae Reasks
eter babebhod ~
St3t + Eat SH :
8 Sze $33: +3 a PHS ayrsiterirs ASS
cy. Sesceestesect
°

$35

re
=e:
=

Serterstess

.
BSNS OLOWH

Sitstetss
seereseee

Senewraatn ee

ok bepctek baer aon

Rekeoehes~w

PEAKS Teme re weese ae wea
~vemne

bab rsh tr Fpedy bd
stscsssstees
oon

Brae ee sep» tee
Ce de ok oe ee

Be Bowens HS
TAG ROREH Soy s

SeRageereoenne «
er rr reer

ee id
oe a — ho F~—eeree soe ohaoa nae
er sere hes

oe $< 6-0 > heen em ane

Ser Geee Sear hae Hee ee we

e
e-egoe

Seis
om =e < 2 rr I o
2
dageei sts Soe rf : t : %: = :
rir kr:
eibeveastasccqseceaceqsest sere: pesstesies ay sty
t ied
eeee: op a > aoe He Oe e
eStotssstisse
Seek ore! Oh wer ewrheoy~ar
7 : pe Oe Brees emg —me e
PASO Boer Seem er ere~
toes od 4 phe dere rere kets Pets SES!
BELeceseceseretesete se

Seetsceeestaes
Seestiieiticisitissinese
sesessyesets

i
32
>

sie
42 |

eeee
ee

ehee-ee