stort f iss, .06h D* {Fhe

- ee

ee ae en nee ae

A NATURAL HISTORY OF THE

a

BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA

Ment BOOK FOR SrUDENTS AND COLLECTORS

BY
Ld df e nm -
De INE ELST ig Si aS

o@?

Author of ‘‘ A Natural History of the British Butterflies,’’ ‘“‘ The British Noctuse
and their Varieties,’’ ‘‘ Monograph of the British Pterophorina,’’ ‘‘ British
Butterflies,’’? ‘‘ British Moths,’’ ‘‘ Migration and Dispersal of Insects,’’
‘¢Melanism and Melanochroism in Lepidoptera,’’ ‘‘ Practical
Hints for the Field Lepidopterist,’’ etc.

VOL. VY.

LONDON :
SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & Co., 25, High Street, Bloomsbury, W.C.

BERLIN:
FRIEDLANDER & SOHN, 11, Carlstrasse, N.W.

1906.

PREFACE.

If the volume under consideration be presented to my brother lepi-
dopterists with even more misgivings than any of its predecessors, it is not
because less work has been devoted to the preparation of its contents,
but rather that the group dealt with is so little known and scarcely at
all understood, that one feels oneself to be treading on treacherous
ground at every step forward that one attempts to take to reach the
light, which one knows should show somewhere out of the mass of
new and old facts that we have here collected together.

An early interest in the group was somewhat stimulated by
Mr. South’s ‘‘ Contributions”? to The Entomologist, and, in 1887, a
commencement was made to collect together the details already
published on the British species of the group. These rough notes were
printed in The Young Naturalist, and later, in 1895, were collected in
book form, and published by Mr. J. E. Robson, under the ambitious
title ‘“‘ The Pterophorina of Britain: A Monograph,’ but so crude were
the notes, so superficial the treatment, so apparent our ignorance of
the superfamily, and so marvellously abundant the misprints and
errors scattered throughout the little work, that no sooner was it
finished, and The Natural History of the British Lepidoptera contem-
plated, than the help of Dr. T. A. Chapman and Mr. A. W. Bacot
was sought, fresh material was collected, the life-histories were, as
opportunity offered, studied ab ovo, and preparation for a new volume
on the superfamily was commenced. It was intended that this
volume should have comprised Volume II of the series, but so slow
was our progress, so difficuls the work, and so hopeless seemed our
efforts to form any satisfactory conclusions as to the relationships of
the various Alucitid groups, that it was not till fully ten years had
elapsed, that we felt in a position to commence to formulate our
ignorance in the pages of Volume V.

It is, therefore, 20 years since the earliest contributions towards
the material for this volume just finished, and its successor, should it
ever be completed, were collected, yet, at the completion of this
volume, all one can honestly say is that one feels one is just a little
more fit to commence it than was the case two years ago. Our
excuses for not destroying what has been done and commencing again
are twofold—(1) That if we waited till we knew that we knew our
subject, nothing would ever be written, knowledge would be lost, and
progress impossible. (2) That at the later stage of again finishing,
we should be, in our recognition of our appalling ignorance, exactly
where we stand to-day. Friends must, therefore, believe us when we
say that no student of the Palearctic Alucitides can be more painfully
aware, when he has carefully studied our book, than we ourselves are,
of the many lapses, blanks, possible errors and doubtful conclusions,
that it must contain. Still we hope that all will agree that it is an
honest attempt to bring together whatever is known of this interesting
superfamily, so far as the species dealt with are concerned, and that,
from the details here offered, someone, less distracted by the accumu-

PREFACE. ill,

lation of detail, and with a wider grip of general principles, will be
able to suggest some advance with regard to the phyletic relationships
of the genera and species with which we have here attempted to deal.

We have, here and there, in seeking for facts by means of which
to explain some of the difficulties presented by the species of our
British fauna, been compelled to study material from foreign countries,
but, as has already been noticed in our account of other groups, we
have, in Britain, representative species of almost all the main
Palearctic groups, ¢g., bennett among the Agdistids, lithodactyla
among the Oidematophorids, paludum among the Bucklerids, and so
on. This is, perhaps, not altogether an unmixed evil, for, although
it tempts the purely British collector a littie out of the narrow path to
which he strangely loves to confine himself, it allows one, on the other
hand, to strike out a little as_it were, and formulate some general
suggestions that may prove of some small value as a foundation for
similar work outside our own, and comprising at least the whole of
the Palearctic, Alucitid fauna.

There are many points in this volume to which the collector, apart
from the biological student, will possibly take objection. The mere
necessary insistence on the proper name for the group, the treatment
of the Agdistids from the larval and pupal standpoints, the cutting up
of the superfamily into small natural groups of similar structure, the
creation of many new genera to represent these groups, and other
similar points will afford sufficient food for the criticism of the
dilettanti apart from the serious student. But who will say that our
treatment of the Agdistids is not necessary, unless we be prepared to
go on for ever assuming that the Agdistids form a little genus of
closely-allied species, that only a few specialists ever try to separate,
because of their superficial similarity in the imaginal stage. This
method is perhaps simple, but it is not scientific, and we trust that
someone, well placed for a study of this interesting little group, will
soon give us a well-digested summary of the species contained therein,
on a sound phyletic basis. Even the Platyptilids are not at all so
homogeneous as their imagines would lead one to believe, and
Eucnemidophorus and Amblyptilia, characteristic Platyptiliids in their
imaginal stages, present structural features in the pupal and larval
stages, that are not at all easy to understand, and make their real
relationship to each other and the remaining Platyptiliids, a matter of
more than ordinary difficulty to explain with satisfaction. The
Stenoptiliids, too, the species of which form a very homogeneous little
group inter se, with very distinct Platyptiliid characteristics, are very
difficult to locate on phylogenetic grounds with the remaining
Platyptiliid sections. The Oxyptiliids, however, present the greatest
difficulties of all, difficulties that are not lessened by our comparative
(often absolute) ignorance of the structural features of the early stages
of some fairly common species. Here we find species, e.g., distans
and daetus so similar in the imaginal stages, that the eye refuses to
separate them, yet so different in their larve and pup, that ordinarily
one would be justified in placing them in different genera. We have,
in our account of Oxyptilus parvidactyla, the life-history of which is
published for the first time in Britain, utilised, not only British larval
and pupal material, but also similar material from the south of France:
yet, an indication of difference in the character of the larval tubercles,

iv. PREFACE.

leads us to suspect that this supposed southern parvidactyla is referable
to the so-called var. marginellus, and that the latter is possibly a
distinct species, as Zeller half-a-century ago surmised. We also
found, from a study of the early stages, a wide difference between
Capperia (heterodactyla) and Oxyptilus (parvidactyla} in spite of the
similarity of the imagines in everything but size; whilst a study of
the g genital organs shows a great separation between Buckleria
paludum and Stangeia siceliota, two species, often, on the strength of
the similarity of their wing-structure, placed in the same genus.
Of O. pilosellae we know practically nothing, and we have never
yet been able to tell, by breeding, whether the insect we get in
Britain is really the same that Zeller reared from Hieracium.
Chapman’s discoveries of great differences in the g genital organs of
the otherwise almost inseparable species of Marasmarcha are most
striking, and open up quite new ground in the specific determination
of what have hitherto been considered of little more than doubtful
local races. Distinct differences in the g genital organs of Amblyptilia
cosmodactyla, Hb. (acanthodactyla, Tr.), and A. punctidactyla, Haw.
(acanthadactyla, Hb.), of Gillmeria pallidactyla and G. ochrodactyla,
leave no manner of doubt of the specific distinctness of these erstwhile
dubious pairs of species, whilst, on the other hand, the almost
complete similarity of these organs in Adkinia zophodactyla, VAN
coprodactylus and A. var. pneumonanthes, makes one, in a small
degree, somewhat less certain of their specific distinctness, yet the
comparative ease with which one discriminates the imagines of these
species leaves one in no real doubt that they are abundantly separate.

We may here note that, since this volume has been completed,
Mr. G. F. Mathew has discovered Adkinia graphodactyla var.
pneumonanthes to be a British species. About this species, gua species,
1.€., a8 graphodactyla, there is very grave doubt, and it is not easy to
say certainly what was graphodactyla, Tr. The original description
was made from specimens bred from larve found feeding on Gentiana
lutea, taken by Freyer in the Bavarian Alps, the only species since
bred from this plant being certain gigantic Adkinias reared by
Chapman from larve found thereon at Larche, in the Basses-Alps.
Later larve, taken by Freyer, near Augsburg, on Gentiana verna, were
possibly those of coprodactylus, and not graphodactyla to which they were
referred. Frey’s graphodactyla, now in the British Museum collection,
are apparently first brood pnewmonanthes, his plagiodactylus being merely
specimens of the second brood. Specimens sent from Staudinger and
Bang-Haas to Chapman, as graphodactyla, are certainly pneumonanthes,
but Chapman has a doubtful specimen from the “ Barrett collection,”
labelled as coming from Zeller, that may be the original species, and
Hofmann states, in his Deutsch. Pterophorinen, that he has bred it from
Gentiana asclepiadea. Still, it seems necessary here to mention that,
to us at present, graphodactyla, as apart from pnewmonanthes, is some-
what of a myth.

There have been, undoubtedly, two masters in this group, whose
work stands unrivalled, and far beyond that of any other workers.
These are Zeller and O. Hofmann. The work done by these two men
may be taken as a sound basis for all future work. ‘Test it as deeply
as one will, one is struck with its sterling excellence, and one particu-
larly wonders how, with the scanty material at hand, Zeller always

co

PREFACE. Vv.

came so straightly and directly at the truth, and how Hofmann’s
keenness accurately detected phylogenetic affinities, as it were, by
instinct.

For ourselves, there is little to be said. Such value as this volume
presents is particularly due to those two earnest collaborators, who, for
the past nine or ten years, have patiently worked away at the life-
histories of such species as have incidentally come to hand. More
recently, Mr. A. Sich has done good service in the same direction,
whilst it is also to his further kindness, and that of Mr. Stanley
Edwards, that the work that has been published by foreign lepidop-
terists has been made much more directly and easily accessible. Mr.
EK. Bankes and Mr. J. Ovenden have done splendid service in collecting
material in the field, and the former has, in addition, most carefully and
conscientiously read proofs, and attempted to keep us in the right path,
where stumbling was easy, during the course of the work through
press, indicating and clearing up many doubtful points where our
own information was at fault. To Mr. Gillmer we owe our “distribu-
tion lists’’ for Germany and Austria, and which, pace our critics, we
still believe have an important duty to perform. Our ignorance of the
distribution of almost all the species dealt with, even in Britain, is
amazing, and one can only say that, on the continent, it is still, as a
rule, much worse. In France, Spain, Italy, Russia, and the south-
eastern corner of HKurope, one can safely assert that nothing really is
known of the distribution of the Alucitids. It is true that here
and there limited lists of species are recorded as occurring in certain
restricted districts of France and Italy, and that Nolcken has noted
those of the Baltic provinces, but no approximately complete details
are available for any of these countries. Chapman has discovered
Capperta heterodactyla and many other hitherto unrecorded species
in Spain, we have ourselves found many species, including C. distans,
etc., in southern France, and Zeller found an excellent ‘‘plume”’ fauna
in limited parts of Italy, but we want someone now to do for France,
Spain, Italy, Austria, Russia, and the various countries of the Balkan
peninsula, what Frey long since did for Switzerland, Walleneren for
Scandinavia, Crombrugghe de Picquendaele for Belgium, Snellen for
the Netherlands, etc., though the lists of the first and last of these
might now well be brought up to date. On the whole, it may be
said that we have a fair knowledge of the “plumes” of central
and north-western Europe, but the south-western, southern, and
eastern districts of the continent still remain largely an ‘‘ unknown ”’
land, that cannot be well, or at all completely, worked by those
Hnglish and German “ trippers’’ who, like ourselves, spend a day
or two here and there, in the short summer holidays, enjoying the
beauties and picking up the treasures, that only a native lepidopterist
can collect satisfactorily, successfully, and really well. But even the
‘‘trippers’’ do not help all they might, for many, even now, do not add
“plumes’’ to the “larger fry’ they so diligently bring together in
their summer “ bag.”’

This volume contains only the Platyptiliid branch of the ‘ plumes,”
so that our account of the Alucitid branch of the “plume” phylum
still remains unpublished. We have a large amount of material that,
with our limited leisure, will take some considerable time to arrange,
work up, and see through the press. In the meantime, we should be

vl. PREFACE.

glad of any and every detail bearing on the species yet to be worked
out. With regard to the publication of these less known groups,
another difficulty faces us. Our subscription list does not increase, and,
in spite of all our labour, it would appear that such detailed studies as
ours are so worthless as not to be of sufficient value to pay the printer
and binder for producing them. Many friends praise our work, borrow
the volumes, use them as books of reference, but fail to support the
undertaking sufficiently to make it clear expenses. Are there no
large provincial libraries in which our lepidopterists are sufficiently
interested to see the work placed ?

For the two “ general ’’ chapters with which this volume opens, we

have chosen the subjects of ‘‘ Hybridisation”’ and ‘“‘Mongrelisation”’ in
lepidoptera. These subjects have so close a bearing on the question of
‘“‘Species”’ that we make no excuse for bringing forward, into an easily
accessible form, the greater part of the matter already published on
these subjects. The wide interest now being taken in the broad
principles of ‘‘ variation,” ‘‘fixation of forms,” ‘‘species-development, ”’
“heredity,” etc., is enough to make chapters of this kind of more than
passing interest, and to give them considerable value in the eyes of the
biologist, as well as the lepidopterist, pure and simple. We do not
claim to have exhausted the recorded accounts, but we have obtained
all that were known and available to us at the time they were written
and printed (now so long ago as October, 1905). In order to include
some more recently recorded facts we have added an ‘‘ Addendum ”’ to
our earlier chapter on ‘‘ Hybridisation.”

For the compilation of the ‘‘ Synopsis of Contents”’ and the
“‘Index’’ we are indebted to the great kindness of Mr. H. J. Turner, who
at once responded to our request for help in this direction, whilst for the
plates illustrating some of the structural details we are again indebted
to the great generosity of Dr. T. A. Chapman, who, in addition, has
given us sufficient copies of a chromo-lithograph plate, illustrating the
early stages of Buckleria paludum, to supply each of our original
subscribers with a copy.

That the volume will obtain as satisfactory a reception from, and
prove as useful to, scientific lepidopterists as its predecessors, and that
the work will help forward, on scientific lines, our favourite study, is
the earnest wish of the author.

CONTENTS.

Part I.

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA
MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA ...

Part II.

ALUCITIDES.

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES .

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE “ALUCITIDES
PHYLOGENY OF THE ALUCITIDES

AGDISTIDES

AGDISTIDA

ADACTYLUS .

ADACTYLUS BENN RTI

ALUCITIDES 200 ool 060 tee
COMPARISON OF PLATYPTILIIDH AND ALUCITIDA
PLATYPTILIIDA, PLATYPTILIIN”

PLATYPTILIIDI

FREDERICINA..

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA .

FREDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA

PLATYPTILIA .

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA ... : 306 ete
GILLMERIA ... 500 “100 iors eco
GILLMERIA OCHRODACTY. INS oo

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA

COMPARISON OF PLATYPTILIINA, EUCNEMIDOPHORIN®, AMBLYPTILIINE AND

MARASMARCHINE
EUCNEMIDOPHORINA, EUCNEMIDOPHORIDI
EUCNEMIDOPHORUS a
EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA EN
AMBLYPTILIINE, AMBLYPTILIIDI
AMBLYPTILIA.. ‘
AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA
AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA
STENOPTILIINE, STENOPTILIIDI
ADKINIA
ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS
ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA
STENOPTILIA..

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA ae
MARASMARCHINAE, MARASMARCHIDI ...
MARASMARCHA

MARASMARCHA LUN EDAOTYL A

OXYPTILINE ...

OXYPTILIDI

OXYPTILUS

OXYPTILUS PARVIDAOTYLA

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLE

CROMBRUGGHTIA

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS

OAPPERIIDI

OAPPERIA

CAPPERIA HETEROD AO TYLA

BUOKLERIIDI, BUOKLERIA

BUOKLERIA PALUDUM :
ADDENDUM I: ADKINIA GRAP HODACTYL, A
ADDENDUM IIT: WYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA

PAGE.

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.—HyBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA.

Hybridisation in lepidoptera; Purity of specific forms; Purity of Anthrocerid
species in nature, 1; Partial fertility, and infertility in hybrids, 2; Records of
pairing of distinct species in nature, 3; Pairing of closely allied species in con-
finement; Effect of irregular pairing on power of egg-laying; Infertility of eggs
resulting from irregular pairing, 4; Uncertainty of results from irregular pairings ;
Reasons for infertility in such pairings; Uncertainty of development of embryo ;
Imperfect development of embryo, 5; Abundant fertility between hybrids and
species; Records of pairings of hybrids and species; Sterility of hybrids not
necessarily so, 6; Records of hybrids fertile inter se; Causes of varying fertility in
hybrids; Comparative impotence of ¢ hybrids; Influence of gynandromorphism
on infertility, 7; Gynandromorphism in secondary hybrids, 8; Conditions affecting
hybrid larve, 9; Unequal fertility of crosses; Decrease of pupal period in hybrid
és; Decrease of larval period in hybrid ¢s, 10; Different action of hybridisation
on the sexes, 11; Tephrosia hybrids becoming continuous-brooded; Predominating
influence of ¢ parent in crossing ; Laws of transmission of habits and superficial
characters of parents (Standfuss), 12; Hybridisation leads to reversion; Pre-
dominant influence of phylogenetically older species in crossing, 13; Causes of the
formation of species, 14; Fertility between hybrids by no means free; Hybridisa-
tion causes upset in the sexual characters; Improbability of hybrids crossing in
nature, 15; Unreliability of, and caution in, accepting evidence of natural hybrids,
16; Papilio brucei, a case of local variation, not hybridity; Hybridity in
PapILIoNIDES, 17. Hyprip Arctiipes, 18; Spilosoma hybr. crassa; S. hybr. viertli ;
S. hybr. beata; S. hybr. hilaris, 19; S. hybr. seileri. Hysrrp Noropontipzs;
Cerura hybr. guillemott ; Notodonta hybr. dubia, 20; N. hybr. newmani; Clostera
hybrids; C. hybr. prima, 21; C. hybr. inversa; C. hybr. raeschkei; C. hybr.
difficilis ; C. hybr. facilis, 22; C. hybr. approximata; C. hybr. similis. Hysrip
SpHincipEs; Amorphid hybrids; Mimas hybr. leoniae; Calasymbolus hybr.
interfaunus ; Smerinthus hybr. hybridus ; S. hybr. oberthueri, 23; S. hybr. fringsi;
Amorpha hybr. metis; A. hybr. inversa; Eumorphid hybrids; Theretra hybr.
standfussi ; Turneria hybr. vespertilioides ; Hyles hybr. epilobii ; H. hybr. eugeni ;
H. hybr. lippet; H. hybr. pauli; Celerio hybr. phileuphorbia, 24. Hysrip
ArractpEs, 25, 26: Standfuss’ hybrids, 26, 27. Hysrip Lacunerprs ; Malacosoma
hybr. caradjae ; M. hybr. schaufussi, 27; M. hybr. penzigi; Bacot’s experiments
with Malacosoma, 28; Lasiocampa hybr. wagneri. Hyprip Gromerripes; Zonosoma
hybr. brightont, 29; Amphidasys hybr. herefordi; Biston hybr. pilzii; Nyssia
hybr. hiinit, 30; Ennomos hybr. dartfordi ; Selenia hybr. parvilunaria ; Tephrosiid
hybrids, 31; Riding’s experiments; Bacot’s experiments, 32; Inbred hybrids of
T. hybr. ridingt and T. hybr. ridingi-suffusa, 33. Hysrip CymatoPrHoRIDEs ;
Cymatophora hybr. fletchert. Hysrip Dreranunipes; Drepana hybr. rebeli; D.
hybr. approximatula, 35. Hysrip ANTHRocERIDES; Anthrocera hybr. intermedia &
A. hybr. inversa ; A. hybr. fletcheri; A. hybr. worthingi ; A. hybr. secunda, 36;
A. hybr. complexa ; A. hybr. confusa; A. hybr. complicata; A. hybr. angloitalica ;
A. hybr. italoanglica; A. hybr. escheri. Hyprip AlaertpEes. Hyprip Psycurpss:
Catalogue of hybrid lepidoptera, 37. ;

CuaprTer IT.—MonGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA.

Mongrelisation in lepidoptera ; Crossing productive of vigour and fertility, 39 ;
Influence of internal and external conditions ; Mongrels = crossings of varieties ;
Doubttul scientific utility of results of mongrelisation, 40: Darwin on “ crossing 2
and “‘ sterility’; Natural versus artificial selection, 41; Competition of various forms
of a species protect it; Instances of racial changes, 42; Need of much exact data:
‘‘Dominant”’ and ‘‘ recessive ’’ elements in breeding forms of Abraxas grossu-
lariata ; Latent characters in first generation of crossing, 43.

Section I.—Crossine or Typican Form anp Locan Race.—Standfuss’ experi-
ments ; Callimorpha dominula $ X persona ¢, 44; C. persona 3 x dominula ¢:
Ocnogyna hemigena $ X zoraida ¢; Spilosoma mendica 3 x rustica 2: S. rustica

¢ xX mendica ¢, 45; Emydia candida 3 x cribrum 2; Oporabia filigrammaria

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS. 1X.

xautumnata; O. filigrammaria 3 X autumnata ?, 46; O. autumnata 3 x
filigrammaria ¢; Lasiocampa querctis $ x meridionalis ?; L. meridionalis g x
viburni 2; L. sicula ¢ xX meridionalis 2,47; L. sicula 3 x querctis ¢; L. sicula
$ x bacoti 2; L. bacoti § x sicula 3; L. intermedia g x sicula ?, 48.

Section II.—Crosstina or Typican For: and ABERRATION.—Production of
artificial races by interbreeding; Standfuss’ iibreeding of Spilosoma lubricipeda,
48; Clear idea of the value of an aberration to be used in experiments; Origin of
S. lubricipeda var. zatima, 49; Bateson on breeding varieties of S. lubricipeda ;
Bateson on crossing varieties of Lymantria monacha ; S. zatima 3 x zatima 2,
50; (1) Reversion to lubricipeda form; (2) Progression to greater darkening, 51;
S. lubricipeda 3 x zatima ¢; S. fasciata $ x fasciata ¢, 52; S. zatima g x
fasciata ¢; Zonoscma annulata; Z. obsoleta $ x annulata 2; Z. obsoleta 3 x
obsoleta 2; Z. obsoleta 3 x biobsoleta ¢ , 53; Z. biobsoleta g x biobsoleta ¢, 54.

Srection III.—Crossinc or Typicat Forms witH ABERRATIONS TENDING TO
DEVELOP MrnAnocHroic Races.—Bacot’s note on the pale patch in many examples
of Amphidasys betularia ab. doubledayaria, 54; Grammesia trigrammica f x
bilinea 2; Polia olivacea $ x olivacea 2; Lymantria monacha ¢$ x eremita ¢;
L. eremita $ X monacha ¢, 55; Agliatau; A. lugens 3 x tau 2; A. lau ox
lugens 23; A. lugens 3 x lugens 2,56; Amphidasys betularia 3 x doubledayaria
9; A. doubledayaria $ x betularia 2,57; A. doubledayaria g x doubledayaria
2; Hemerophila abruptaria 3 x fuscata ¢; H. fuscata 3 x abruptaria ?, 58;
H. fuscata $ x fuscata 2; Gonodontis bidentata ab. nigra ?; G. bidentata g x
bidentata (nigra strain) 9; G. bidentata $ x nigra 2; G. nigra $ x bidentata
OG. nigra 3 xX nigra °, 59; G. nigra 3 x nigra ?; Larentia nubilata ¢
(multistrigaria) x nubilata ?; Venusia cambrica ab. bradyi, 60.

Section IV.—Crossine or Typican Form witH ABERRATION TRYING TO SET
up Locat Racr.—Setting up local races; Boarmia repandata 3 x conversaria 2? ,
60; Cidaria suffumata $ x porritti ¢, 61.

Section V.—Crossinc or DimorpHic Forms oF A SPECIES WHICH OCCUR
TOGETHER AND RARELY APPEAR TO SUPPLANT EACH OTHER.—Coremia ferrugata ; C.
unidentaria 3 x ferrugata 2; C. ferrugata $ x ferrugata °; C. ferrugatas x
unidentaria 2; C. unidentaria $ x intermedia ?; Prout’s experiments, 61;
Cidaria truncata $ xX comma-notata ?; C. comma-notata 3 X comma-notata 3? ;
Angerona prunaria $ x sordiata ?3; A. sordiata $ xprunaria ¢; A. sordiata $ x
sordiata 2; Abraxas grossulariata $ x flavofasciata ?, 64; A. flavofasciata ¢
x flavofasciata ? , 65.

Section VI.—Crossinc or Typtcan ForMS WITH POSSIBLE CONSTITUTIONAL
ABERRATIONS.—Constitutional aberrations, 65; Mimas tiliae $ x obsoleta 2; M.
-obsoleta $ x tiliae, 2; Abraxas ulmata 3 x suffusa ¢ , 66.

Section VII.—Dimorpuism IN ONE SEx.—Colias edusa 3 x helice 2, 66.

ALUCITIDES.

1. Historica Account or THE AxuciripEs, 70. Linné; Réaumur; Geotiroy;
Scopoli, 70; De Geer; Fabricius; Schiffermiiller and Denis; Barbut, 71; De
Villers; Fabricius; Latreille, 72; Cuvier; Lamarck; Schrank; Latreille, 73;
Hiibner, 74; Laspeyres; Haworth; Oken, 75; Leach; Samouelle; Zincken;
Charpentier, 76 ; Hiibner’s ‘‘ Verzeichniss,’’ 78; Curtis ; Treitschke ; Stephens,
79; Duponchel; Westwood; Zeller, 80; Duponchel, 81; Zeller; Herrich-
Schaffer, 82; Herrich-Schiffer; Frey, 84; Doubleday; Wallengren, 85;
Jordan; Staudinger and Wocke; Heinemann and Wocke, 87; Meyrick, 88;
Hofmann, 90; Fernald; Dyar; Staudinger and Rebel, 93; Summary of the
literature for Generic purposes, 93; Critical list of Genera (to date), 95.

2. GeneRAL BioLogican CHARACTERS OF THE AxUcITIpES, 97. Réaumur’s
general statement; Superficial characters, 97; Importance of studying the early
stages; Examination of the ovum, 98; Chapman’s tabulation of sizes, 99;
Hofmann’s characters of the larve ; Most prominent larval characters; Peculiar
raised spiracles of larva, 100; Spiculated skin of larva, 101; Secondary larval
hairs, etc. ; Characters of primary tubercles, 102; Accessory tubercular hairs;
Tubercles modified into warts, 103; Tubercular hairs; Hofmann’s types of
tubercles, 104; Dyar’s classification by warts, tubercles, and hairs; Hofmann’s
classification by warts, etc., 105; Bacot and Chapman’s tabulation of the
chief larval characters [face page 106]; Description of the process of pupation,
106; Characters of the plume pupa; Structure of ditto, 108; Characters of
the pupa of classificatory value, 109; Remarks on the characters of pupe of
various groups of Alucitides, 110; Evolution of the Alucitid pupa, Chap-

xX. SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS.

man, 112; Importance of imaginal characters; ‘ Divided’ and ‘ undivided’ wings,
113; Position of the genus Heptaloba; The wing evolution in the Palzarctic
plumes, 114; Evolution of the hindwings of plumes, 115; Importance of the
frenulum in Alucitid imagines, 116; The single-spina group, 117; The double-
spina group; Structure of the antenne; The imaginal neuration, 118; Characters
of the legs, particularly the spurs; Fernald’s summary of the Alucitid characters,
119; Interesting habits of the Alucitids, hybernation, feeding, resting, etc., 121.

3. THE PHYLOGENY OF THE A.UcITIpES.—Indeterminate position of the
Alucitides, 121; Allies of the Alucitides; Discussed by Chapman, 122; Discussed
by Meyrick, 123; Discussed by Hampson; Discussed by Bodine; Imaginal characters
unsatisfactory, 124; Larval structure quite as unsatisfactory, 125; Pupal and oval
characters more satisfactory; Evolution within the group; Agdistides; Alucitides,
126 ; Alucitides = Platyptiliidae + Alucitidae ; Main characters of these groups, 127.

AGDISTIDES.

AqpisTIp®, 127. Chief characters for separation of group, 127; Hiibner’s
opinion; Analytical summary of genera and species, 128; Adactylus bennetit and
Herbertia tamaricis compared; Protective resemblance in larva, 129; Agdistid
larve in Walsingham coll.; dAdactylus bennettii, A. staticis, 130; Larva from
Chiclana; Ernestia lerensis larva; <Agdistis frankeniae larva, 131; A. heydenti
larva; Herbertia tamaricis larva; Agdistis adactyla larva, 132; A. satanas larva,
particularly the sete, 133; Characters of Agdistid pupa; Meyrick’s diagnosis of
Agdistid imago; Hofmann’s additional diagnosis, 134; Hoftmann’s tabulation of
Agdistid species, 135.

Genus: Apactytus, 135. Synonymy; Diagnosis by Curtis, 135; General
characters of ovum, larva, and imago, 136.

ADACTYLUS BENNETI, 136. Synonymy; Original description; Imago, 136 ;
Variation; var. portlandica; Egglaying; Ovum, 137; Habits of larva, 138;
Description of larva, 140; Pupation; Description of pupa, 146; Variation of Pupa,
149; Foodplants; Time of appearance, 150; Habits; Habitat, 151; British
localities ; Distribution, 152.

ALUCITIDES.

CoMPARISON OF THE PLATYPTILIIDA AND ALUCITIDH, 152. General characters
of the Palearctic species; Egg; Larva; Pupa, 152; Imagines, 153. Family:
PuatypTinup#®, 153. General characters, 153; Ovum; Larva; Pupa, 154;
Imago; Hybernation, 155. Subfamily: Puaryerinmnm. Tribe: PLatyprinipt1,
156. Tribal characters; Specialisation ; Larval peculiarities, 156 ; Internal feeding ;
Cocoon making; Pupal specialisation; Peculiarity of wing form, 157; Diagnosis
by Wallengren; Diagnosis by Hofmann, 158; Resting habit; Hofmann’s
diagnosis of the species, 159; Natural subdivisions, 160.

Genus: Freperictna, 160. Synonymy, 160; Criticism of Synonymy, 161.

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA, 161. Synonymy, 161; Original description ;
Description of Imago, 162; Variation; Diagnoses of forms, 163; var. zetterstedti ;
var. petradactyla, 164; var. taeniadactylus ; var. doronicella, 165; Comparison
of F. calodactyla and F. nemoralis; of F. calodactyla and Platyptilia gonodactyla,
166; Egglaying; Ovum; Habits of larva, 167; Larva, 168; Foodplant; Puparium ;
Pupa, 170; Time of appearance, 172; Habits, 173; Habitat; British localities;
Distribution, 174.

FREDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA, 175. Synonymy, 175; Original description ;
Imago, 176; Variation; var. hihernica; Comparison of F. tesseradactyla with its
allies, 177; Ovum; Habits of larva; Larva, 178; Foodplants; Puparium; Pupa;
Time of appearance, 179; Habits, 180; Habitat; British localities; Distribu-
tion, 181.

Genus: Puarypriia, 182. Synonymy; Criticism of ditto, 182; Diagnosis of
restricted genus (imago, pupa, and larva), 183.

PLATYPTILIA IsoDACTYLUS, 182. Synonymy, 183; Original description ;
Criticism and amplification of ditto, 184; Imago; Sexual dimorphism; Variation;
var. aestiva; List of forms, 186; Egglaying; Ovum; Habits of larva, 187; Larva,
190; Seasonal variation of larva, 192; Foodplants; Puparium, 193; Pupa, 194;
Colour variation and markings of pupa, 197; Time of appearance, 198; Habits;
Habitat, 199; British localities, 200; Distribution, 201.

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA, 201. Synonymy; Original description, 201; Imago;
Variation, 202; List of forms; Egglaying, 203; Ovum; Habits of Larva, 204; Larva,
208 ; Variation of larva; Foodplants, 211; Puparium, 212; Pupa, 213; Variation
of pupa; Time of appearance, 214; Habits, 216; Habitat, 217; British localities,

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS. Ap

Genus: Ginuuerria, 219. Synonymy, 219; Diagnosis of genus (imago, pupa,
and larva), 220.

GILLMERIA ocHRODACTYLA, 221. Synonymy, 221; Original description ;
Imago ; Sexual dimorphism ; Variation ; var. borgmanni, 222 ; var. bosniaca ; Com-
parison of G. ochrodactyla and G. pallidactyia, 223; Egglaying; Habits of larva,
226; Larva; Variation of larva, 227; Comparison of larve of G. ochrodactyla
and G. pallidactyla, 228; Pupation; Pupa, 230; Variation in pupa; Comparison
of pupa of G. ochrodactyla and G. pallidactyla, 232; Foodplants; Time of
appearance, 232; Habits, 234; Habitats; British localities; Distribution, 235.

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA, 236. Synonymy, 236; Original description; Imago;
Genitalia, 237; Variation ; Diagnoses of forms; var. albescens, 238; var. scotica ;
var. marginidactylus ; var. nebulaedactylus ; var. bischoffi, 239; var. cervini-
dactylus ; Egglaying ; Ovum, 240; Habitsof larva, 241; Larva, 242; Variation in
colour according to age of Jarvee, 244; Foodplants; Pupation; Pupa, 245; Time
of appearance, 247; Habits; Habitat, 249; British localities ; Distribution, 251.

CoMPARISON OF PULATYPTILIINE, HEUCNEMIDOPHORINE, AMBLYPTILIINE, AND
MarasMARCHIN®!.—Internal and external feeding of larve; sete; arrangement of
tubercles; development of cremastral hooks, etc., 251; Scale-tufts; skin-hairs ;
pupal dorsal ridge; segmental processes, etc., 252; Fan-shaped warts, etc., 253.

Subfamily: HucnemtmporHorinm™. ‘Tribe: HucNemMIpopyHoripi, 253. Position
of subfamily, Bacot, 253; Ditto, Chapman; Pupal characters; Cocoon-forming
habit, 254.

Genus: HvucnemiporpHorvs, 254. Synonymy, 254; Criticism of ditto, 255;
Diagnosis of larva and pupa, 256.

EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA, 256. Synonymy, 256; Original descrip-
tion; Imago; Genitalia; Egglaying; Ovum; Habits of Larva, 257; Larva, 259 ;
Variation of Larva, 261; Foodplants; Puparium; Pupa, 262; Variation of Pupa ;
Time of appearance, 265; Habits; Habitat, 266; British localities; Distribution, 267.

Subfamily: Ampiyprinunm. Tribe: Ampiyprimmp1, 267. Larval, pupal,
and imaginal characteristics, 268.

Genus: Ampuiyprinia, 268. Synonymy; Hiibner’s diagnosis; Historical
summary; Wallengren’s diagnosis, 269; Restriction of genus; Chief characters
of two British species, 270; Confusion in nomenclature, etc., of A. cosmodactyla,
A. punctidactyla; Bankes’ opinion on Hiibner’s figures, 271; Fletcher’s ditto;
Frey’s ditto, 272; Hofmann’s ditto, 273.

AMBLYPTILIA cosMopacTyLA, 273, Synonymy, 273; Description of original
figures, 274; THarliest description; Imago; Variation, 275; ab. nivea; var.
tetralicella, 277 ; var. calaminthae, 278; Comparison of the imagines of A. cosmo-
dactyla and d. punctidactyla; Egelaying; Ovum, 279; Habits of larva, 280;
Larva, 282; Variation of larva; Comparison of the larve of A. cosmodactyla and
A. punctidactyla, 286 ; Foodplants, 287; Parasites; Puparium, 288; Pupa, 289 ;
Colour variation in pupa, 292; Similarity of coloration of larve and pupe of
A. cosmodactyla and A. punctidactyla ; Time of appearance, 293; Habits, 295;
Habitats, 296; British localities, 297 ; Distribution, 298.

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA, 299. Synonymy; Original description, 299 ;
Imago; Variation; ab. albida, 300; var. stachydalis, 302; var. ulodactyla;
Comparison of A. pwnctidactyla and A. cosmodactyla, 303; Habits of larva, 304 ;
Larva, 305; Variation of larva; Foodplants, 307; Pupation; Variation of pupa;
Pupa, 308; Time of appearance, 309; Habits; Habitat, 311; British localities;
Distiibution, 313.

Subfamily: Srenoprinunaz. Tribe: Srenoprimimp1, 313. Hiibner’s coitus ;
Herrich-Schiffer’s Pterophorus ; Wallengren’s Mimaeseoptilus and diagnosis, 313 ;
Generalised character; Larval peculiarities and structure, 314; Pupal ditto;
Imaginal ditto, 315; Hofmann’s diagnosis of imago, 316; Hofmann’s analysis of
subfamily, 317; resting-habit, 318.

Genus: ApkIn1A, 318. Synonymy; Constitution, 318; Ovum; Suggestion
of grouping, 319.

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS, 319. Synonymy; Original description, 319 ; Imago;
Sexual dimorphism; Variation, 320; Diagnoses of forms, 321; Comparison of
A. zophodactylus and A. bipunctidactyla; Egglayiug ; Ovum; Habits of larva, 322;
Larva, 825; Variation of larva; Foodplants ; Parasites; Pupation, 328; Pupa,
329; Variation of pupa; Time of appearance, 331; Habits, 332; Habitat, 333;
British localities ; Distribution, 334.

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA, 334. Synonymy, 334; Original description ;
Imago; Variation, 335; Diagnoses of forms, 337; var. et ab. plagioductylus;

»).

Xil. SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS.

Synonymy ; Ovum, 338; Habits of larva; Larva; Foodplant; Variation of larva ;
Pupation; Pupa; Time of appearance, 339; Habits; Habitat; Localities;
Distribution; Stainton’s descriptions, 340; South’s, Barrett’s, and Bankes’
considerations of ditto, 341; var. hodgkinsonti ; Controversy on ditto, 342; var.
aridus ; Continental authorities’ remarks on ditto, 343; Egglaying; Ovum; Habits
of larva, 345; Larva, 348; Comparison of larve of A. bipunctidactyla and
Stenoptilia pterodactyla, 351; Foodplants; Parasites; Puparium; Pupa, 352 ;
Time of appearance, 354; Habits; Habitat, 356; British localities, 357; Distribu-
tion, 358 ; Addendum—var. aridus ; Variation of larvee, 359.

Genus: StenoptiniA, 360. Synonymy; Heterotypical difficulty, 360.

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA, 361. Synonymy, 361; Original description ;
Imago; Variation, 362; Diagnoses of forms, 363; var. paludicola; Hofmann’s
and Zeller’s notes, 364; var. (an spec.) mannii, 365; Egglaying; Ovum, 366;
Habits of larva, 366; Larva, 369; Variation of larva; Pupation ; Colour-changes
during pupal development, 375; Pupa, 376; Variation of pupa, 378; Foodplants ;
Time of appearance, 379; Habits, 381; Habitat, 382; Localities, 383 ; Distribu-
tion, 384.

Subfamily: Marasmarcuin®. Tribe: Marasmarcuipi, 385. Position of
genus Marasmarcha ; History of ditto, 385; Mixed structural characters, 386.

Genus: Marasmarcua, 387. Synonymy; Diagnoses of Meyrick, 387 ;
Hofmann’s diagnosis ; Larval and pupal characters, 388.

MARASMARCHA LUN&ZDACTYLA, 389. Synonymy; Original description ; Sexual
dimorphism ; Male genitalia, 389; Variation; Egeglaying; Ovum, 380; Habits of
larva, 391; Larva, 394; Foodplants; Parasites; Puparium; Pupa, 398; Time
of appearance, 401; Habits, 402; Habitat, 403; British localities; Distribu-
tion, 404.

Subfamily : Oxypririnm, 404. Herrich-Schaffer’s detailed grouping ; Wallen-
gren’s diagnosis and grouping, 405; Hofmann’s grouping, 406; Hofmann’s
detailed account of Oxyptilus; Imago, 407; Larva; Pupa, 408; Peculiar pupal
structure, 409 ; Peculiar larval variation; Dyar’s account of Oxyptilid warts, 411.

Tribe: Oxyprinip1, 411. Hofmann’s detailed grouping, 411; Pupal
characters ; Larval characters, 412.

Genus: Oxyprinus, 413. Synonymy; Original diagnosis by Zeller, 413;
Consideration of the species, 414.

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA, 414. Synonymy; Original description, 414; Imago;
Sexual dimorphism; Variation, 415; Diagnoses of forms, 416; ab. dentellus ;
var. marginellus ; var. hoffmannseggi, 419; Egglaying, 420; Ovum; Habits of
larva, 421; Larva, 424; Comparison of larve of O. parvidactyla and O. pilosellae ;
Puparium; Foodplants; Pupa, 429; Time of appearance, 431; Habits, 432;
Habitat, 433; British localities; Distribution, 434.

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLEH, 435. Synonymy; Original description, 435; Imago;
Sexual dimorphism; Variation, 437; Comparison of O. pilosellae and its allies,
438; Barrett’s summary of Oxyptilines, 439; Original description of O. hieracii,
Zeller, 440; Hgglaying; Ovum; Larval habits, 441; Larva, 442; Comparison of
larva of O. pilosellae with that of O. hieracii; Foodplants; Puparium ; Pupa,
443 ; Comparison of pupa of O. pilosellae with that of O. hieracii ; Life-history of
O. hieracii, 444; Time of appearance, 445; Habits, 446; Habitat, 447; British
localities; Distribution, 448.

Genus: Cromprucenia, 449. Synonymy; Chief characteristics; Chapman’s
diagnosis, 449 ; Consideration of the species, 450.

CROMBRUGGHIA DisTANs, 451. Synonymy; Original description, 451; Imago;
Sexual dimorphism, 452; Variation ; Diagnoses of forms, 453; Historical notes on
C. distans and C. laetus, 456; C. laetus, synonymy, imago, larva, etc., Zeller;
ditto Milliére, 459; Comparison of C. distans with its allies, 460; Ovum; Habits
of larva; Larva; Foodplants; Pupation; Pupa, 461; Time of appearance, 464 ;
Habits ; Habitat, 465; British localities, 466 ; Distribution, 467.

Tribe: Capprripr, 467. Hofmann’s grouping of tribe, 467; Chapman’s
ditto, 468; Table of characters of Oxyptiline pupal spines, 469.

Genus: Capprrta, 470. Synonymy; Chief characters (imago, larva,
pupa), 470.

CaPPERIA HETERODACTYLA, 471. Synonymy; Original description; Imago,
471; Sexual dimorphism; Variation; var. loranus (diagnosis, etc.), 472; var.
celeusi (diagnosis, etc.), 474; Comparison of C. heterodactyla with its allies, 475;
Kgglaying, 476; Ovum; Habits of larva, 477; Larva, 479; Pupation, 484;
Foodplants; Parasites; Pupa, 485; Variation of pupa; Time of appearance, 488;
Habits; Habitat, 489; British localities; Distribution, 490.

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS. Xl1ll.

Tribe: Bucxuerip1, 491. Genus: Buckueria, 491. Synonymy; Walsing-
ham’s diagnosis of genus Trichoptilus, 491; Meyrick’s ditto, 492; Hofmann’s
ditto, 493.

BuckLEeRIA PALUDUM, 493. Synonymy, 493; Original description, 494;
Imago; Sexual dimorphism, 495; Variation, 496; Comparison of Buckleria
paludum wiih its allies; Egglaying, 497; Ovum; Habits of larva, 498; Larva,
504; Foodplant, 508; Pupation; Pupa, 509; Variation in Pupa, 511; Time of
appearance; Habits, 512; Habitat, 514; British localities; Distribution, 515.

AppENDum I (to p. 319).

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA: Synonymy; Original description, 515; Imago, 516;
Historical account of species, 517; Variation, 520; var. pnewmonanthes, 522;
Comparison with allied species, 523; Habits of larva, 523; Larva (pnewmonanthes),
527; Pupation, 529; Foodplants, 530; Pupa, 530; Variation of pupa; Com-
parison of pups of Adkinia graphodactyla, pneumonanthes, zophodactylus, bipuncti-
dactyla, and Stenoptilia pterodactyla, 533; Time of appearance, 534; Habits ;_
Habitats, 535; British localities; Distribution, 536.

AppENDvM II (to p. 39).

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA.—Sphingid hybrids: EHumorpha hybt. pernoldi,
536; Thaumas hybr. densoi, 538. Attacid hybrids: Saturnia hybyr. casparii, 539.
Geometrid hybrids: Hybrid Zonosomas; Zonosoma hybr. orbiculo-pendula; Z.
hybr. pendulo-orbicula, 541; Z. hybr. headi; Nyssia hybr. merana, 542; Cabera
hybr. jletcheri. Oporabia hybrids, 543.

PLATES, ETC. OPPOSITE
PAGE.

TABULATION OF STRUCTURAL CHARACTERS AS EXHIBITED IN ADULT ALUCITID
LARVA v6 106

BuckLERIA PALUDUM, egg, larva and. pupa ‘(in private subscription copies only) 504
Plate I.— Pupal armature and ancillary appendages of st is Laas cosmo-

dactyla and A. ‘punctidactyla x 24. 270
Plate I1.—Ancillary appendages of Adkinia zophodactylus, A. “pneumo-
nanthes, A. coprodactylus, and Stenoptilia pterodactylax28 .. 317

Plate ITI.—Diagrammatic representation of dorsal portion of ancillary appen-
dages of the gentian-feeding Stenoptilias and of the other two
British speciesx 80 .. 317
Plate [V.—Diagrammatic representation of dorsal portion of ancillary appen-
dages of Crombrugghia distans (British) and C. laetus ee 457
Plate V.— Eggs of Agdistid and Platyptiliid Plumes... 69

Peis Le PIpOP TE ha:

CHAPIN I:
HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA.

The subject of hybridism is one of the most interesting of the
experimental branches of biological work that entomological science
presents. The fixity of specific forms in nature within the hmits of
specific variation, the specialisation of their various habits, the regularity
with which gs select the ?s of their own kind for purposes of procrea-
tion, however many and closely-allied may be the number of other
species on the same ground, and the rarity of crosspairing in nature, so far
as observation has gone, between forms believed to have specific rank,
have resulted in the purity of specific forms, and the expectation of
finding such to be a fixed point in the study of a species in the wild
state.

It is true, however, that, in nature, one or two groups, of which
the Anthrocerids are the best known to us, are stipposed not to
maintain this purity of strain, and the consideration of hybridism
between the species in question becomes somewhat involved owing to
the fact that one occasionally (frequently compared with the rarity of
the occurrence in other groups) finds wild insects believed to belong
to different species paired, and, in confinement, well-defined species
have been successfully crossed and intercrossed, some at least
having been proved to be freely fertile inter se. In spite of this,
however, the finding of any examples in nature that cannot
at once be referred to a known species, is an exceedingly rare
occurrence, and one suspects that Standfuss’ acceptation of a wide
range of hybridism in this group in nature (Handbuch, ete., pp. 55-56)
is quite unwarranted ; at any rate, it is absolutely contrary to our
experience (although we have occasionally found instances of cross-
pairing) which bears out absolutely Oberthiir’s statement (Bull. Soc. Ent.
de I’rance, 1897, p. 257) that out of above 6000 picked Anthrocerids in
his collection, he has only two that might be possibly hybrid forms,
and these he doubts. Our experience is similar, and, apart from a
possible hybrid origin of Anthrocera hippocrepidis, Stphs. (stephensi,
Dupont) (Hnt. Rec., ix., pp. 108-107), we have only seen a single speci-
men that could possibly be a hybrid, out of some thousands captured.
With Oberthiir we believe wild Anthrocerid hybrids to be exceedingly

2 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

rare, and, before accepting any general statements to the contrary,
should require exact data and absolutely reliable evidence.

Some thirty years ago it was accepted as an article of entomological
faith that, even if hybrids of first-crosses were obtained, the hybrids
were sterile and unable to produce further progeny, yet, at the time,
few facts could be brought forward in support of the general belief,
although vague statements like that of House, concerning Smerinthus
hybr. hybridus (quoted anted, 11., p. 449) were freely stated and accepted.
House asserted that some examples of this hybrid bred by him
appeared “to be as nearly intermediate between the sexes as
between the species, and evidently to partake of the nature of both
sexes,”’ etc., yet one, when examined critically by Westwood, was
pronounced to be a g ; certainly those in our own collection (bred by
Kirk) consist of four gs and one @. Pierce, too, examined the
genitalia of the hybrids bred by Bacot, and found that the apparently
3 specimens possessed distinctly $ organs (anted, 111., p. 390). In
spite of this, experiments on a large scale have shown that the
impression, on the whole, was a fairly correct one, although it has
been proved, especially in the case of g hybrids, to be incorrect in
many cases. Some of the earliest experiments showing that certain
hybrids were more or less fertile, inter se, were discounted by the
superficial criticism that, if the progeny was fertile, then the species
crossed were not truly distinct specific forms, e.g., Wallace, in 1866,
recorded (Ent. Mo. May., i1., p. 240) that Philosamia cynthia and ricint
(=lunula), although differmg remarkably in all their stages, feeding
on very different plants, and natives of different countries, would
hybridise freely, the hybrids being not only fertile among themselves,
but also with either of their original parents. Watson, repeating
the facts of the fertility of hybrid P. cynthia and P. lunula (ricint),
asserts (Hntom., xxvi., p. 174) that lunula (=ricint) ‘‘is merely the
Burmese local polyvoltine, or many-brooded, variety of the common
cynthia,” thus reducing lunula (ricini) to varietal rank, and follows this
up with the extreme statement that “it 1s quite the rule for hybrids to
be infertile,” that he “ only knew of one hybrid moth depositing ova,”
and that he ‘‘ very much doubted that these, if fertilised, could produce
larve.”’? Watson would evidently, from his further statements (op. cit.,
p-. 178), make the fact of a @ hybrid moth producing ova, anda ¢
hybrid spermatozoa, the sole test of distinctness in the parent species.
If “ the absence or presence of eggs in ¢ hybrids conclusively proved,”
as he says they should, ‘the bona fides of the parents to rank as
species or varieties,’ we should by this time find it necessary to
reduce Philosamia cynthia and P. lunula, Saturnia pavonia, S. spini
and S. pyri, Clostera pigra, C. curtula and C. anachoreta, Anthrocera
lonicerae and A. trifolti, Tephrosia crepuscularia and T. bistortata, &c.,
to varietal rank, which might not meet with general approval.

The older naturalists considered that hybrids had been specially
endowed with sterility in order to prevent their confusion, and it is
clear to the most casual observer that, had the various species been
able to cross freely, they could not maintain their distinctness, especially
when several close allies are localised in a restricted space. The failure
of such species to cross is, however, dependent on many things, of which
actual inability to pair is probably rarely, if ever, the most important,
for there are occasional records of pairing not only between closely

Z

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 3

allied, but also between most distantly related, species, even those
belonging to different superfamilies, between which it would be idle to
suppose that hybrid progeny could result. From our British magazines
we cull the following records of actual crosspairings found in nature—
Eluchloé cardamines 8 Xx Bapta taminata 2 (HKntom., xxi., p. 188),
Dryas paphia 3 xX Zephyrus quercis 2 (Hntom., xxviil., p. 26),
Attacus cecropia g X Sphina liyustri 2 (Hntom., xix., p. 136),
Hybernia marginaria 3 X Taentocampa pulverulenta 2 (op. cit., Xxix.,
p. 166), Kpinephele ianira $ x Aglais urticae 2 ( Hnt. Mo. May., vi.,
p. 95), Aglais urticae g xX Epinephele ianira 2 (Entom., xxxiil., p.
224), Hurytela hiarbas 3 x Neptis ayatha @Q (op. cit., XXXv., p. 242),
Aybernia marginaria g xX Tephrosia bistortata @ (op. Cite, XVIN1.,p:
150), E’ipinephele tanira § x Knodia hyperanthus 2 (op. We Mle ps
230), Porthetria dispar 3 x Lymantria monacha 2 (Hnt. Wk. Int.,
vill., p. 141), Spilosoma fuliginosa § x Arctia caia 2 (Entom., xxx.,
p. 24), Hybernia maryinaria g xX Nyssta hispidaria 9 (Ent. Rec.,
iv., p. 156), Orrhodia vaccintt $ x Miselia oxyacanthae Q (Entom.,
XxL, p. 188), Charaeas yraminis $ xX Noctua wanthographa 2 (Ent.
Rec., u1., p. 201), Xylophasia monoglypha $§ x Hadena trifolii 2 (Entom.,
X1., p. 282), Laeniocampa stabilis 8 x T. yothica* 2 (twice) (op. cit.,
XxL, p. 158; xxix., p. 166), Noctua c-nigrum g x N. wanthoyrapha ?
(op. cit., xxxi., p. 279), Taeniocampa stabilis 8 x T. munda 2 (Ent. Rec.,
wile, p. 36), Colias hyale g x OC. var. helice 2 (Ent. Mo. Mag., xxii.,
p. 168). Standfuss records (Handbuch, &c., p. 59) many others, of which
some are also very pecuhar. Thus we find—Noctua baia § x Leucania
pallens 2, Hybernia maryinaria g xX Orrhodia vaccinit 2 , Porthetria
dispar 3 xX Preris brassicae 9, Pieris napi g x P. brassicae 2
(teste Caradja), Polyommatus corydon g x P. damon 2 (Wiskott),
Rusticus var. argulus @ x LE. lycidas @ (teste Schulz), Melitaea athalia
go xX M. deione 2, M. parthente 3 x M. deitone 2 (teste Caradja), M.
didyma S$ xX M. aurinia @ (teste Honegger), M. dictynna § x M.
athalia 2, M.athalia § x M. parthenie ? (teste Standfuss), &c. The close
alliance of some of these Meliteeas makes one feel that one would like to
have seen the paired specimens. On the whole, however, one is forced to
the conclusion that pairing between very closely allied species in nature
is exceedingly rare. Further pairings noted by Standfuss are—Syntomis
pheyea 3 xX Anthrocera filipendulae 9, Syntomis pheyea 3 x
Anthrocera carniolica 2 + (teste Turati), ddscita statices 8 x Rhayades
globulariae Q (teste Standfuss), Dendrolimus pint gS x Lymantria
monacha ? (teste Donitz), Orthosia pistacina g§ X Miselia oxyacanthae
2 (Ent. Nach., 1878, p. 20) ; Oberthtir notes having seen (see anted, i

a

* The reciprocal cross of the species, viz., Taeniocampa gothica 3 x stabilis
?, has resulted in fertile ova and larvae (Ent. Record, xvii., pp. 160-161).

+ One of the most remarkable records is that made (Soc. Ent., xviii., p. 121)
by Doleschall, in which he makes the astounding statement that, in August 1891, he
captured a ¢ Syntomis phegea and ¢ Anthrocera purpuralis, in cop., kept the pair
alive and obtained ova, from which larve in due course resulted ; that finally he
bred a ¢ imago which differed in no way from the 3 of S. phegea. We have
already criticised (Wnt. Rec., xiv., p. 353) this record, and pointed out the only
possible explanation, viz., that the sexes were the opposite of those named, the
phegea being ?, and further, that it had already been fertilised by a ¢ of its own
species. The fertilisation of a ¢ Anthrocerid by a ¢ Arctiid, belonging as they
do to entirely different lepidopterological stirpes, appears to us to be absolutely
impossible.

4 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

p. 3887) Anthrocera filipendulae paired with a Procris. Pairings that have
been effected in confinement, even if the eggs have proved infertile,
will be dealt with in connection with our notes on the various super-
families.

It would appear that, in confinement, closely allied species belong-
ing to certain groups pair more readily than those belcnging to
others, and the production of hybrid progeny from such has been
frequently recorded. To what extent actual alliance between the
parents is required to produce fertile ova, and subsequent progeny,
is not known, but hybrid progeny has thus far only been produced
between quite closely allied species; the most distant that have
produced fertile eggs and subsequent larve (which, however, did
not produce imagines), appear to be Saturnia pavonia § x Graeéllsia
isabellae 9. Pairings like that of Attacus (Platysamia) cecropia g
x Sphinw ligustri 2 (Entom., xix., p. 186) are foredoomed to failure.
It may be well to note here that the question of infertility (which
Darwin calls sterility) between two distinct species when first crossed,
appears to us to belong to an entirely different class of biological
phenomena from the sterility of hybrids, the product of such a cross.

We may assume as a fact, that the organs of reproduction (external
and internal) of any two pure species with which a cross is attempted,
are normally perfect anatomically and functionally, and that the
female is primarily capable of laying her normal number of eggs.
That she should not lay her normal number of eges if the g of another
species pair with her, suggests that such pairing has adversely affected
her ability to lay all the eggs that she otherwise would have laid.
There is some evidence tending to suggest that certain ?s have had
their egg-laying power decreased by cross-pairing, although most lay
their ordinary quantum of eggs. Again, capable as the eges are of
being fertilised given suitable spermatozoa, and capable as the
spermatozoa may be of fertilisme given suitable ova, it is certain
that the eggs laid by a 2 crossed by a g of another species, are
frequently wholly, or in great part, infertile, among all but the most
closely allied species. It is advisable, however, not to too hastily
assume that attempted crossings are ineffectual, and the experience of
Standfuss illustrates the difficulty of drawing conclusions from an
insufficient number of experiments or trials. Reference to his account
(Handbuch, &c., pp. 60-61) of the crossing of Malacosoma neustria 3
x franconica 2, shows that, of 24 trials made, the results gave every
transition between complete absence of issue, and the deposition of
eggs normal in numbers and in fertility, failure being, in some
instances, according to Standfuss, plainly due to inadaptability of the
genital apparatus.“ Again, in 1894, Caradja obtained six crossings of
Spilosoma mendica g X luctuosa @ ; all the ¢s laid good batches
of eggs, but whilst five of them were infertile, the sixth, consisting of
335 eggs, produced 141 larve (the eggs first laid being those ‘that
hatched). Chapman, too, obtained (Ent. Rec., ii., p. 883) readily
enough at the first trial, fertile eges of Amphidasys strataria x betularia,
yet all his later attempts failed. Similarly, in the Tephrosiid hybrids
(Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., pp. 17-42) it was found that the intercrossings

* This explanation, considering that some pairings produced the normal
number of fertile eggs, clearly involves the assumption of considerable variation in
the genital apparatus, of which, however, Standfuss gives no evidence.

= rl ree

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 5

of two species (Tephrosia crepuscularia and T. bistortata) might result in
every possible intermediate stage of fertility, from complete sterility to
the production of the full number of fertilised eggs. These extreme
results may even happen when dealing with different individuals of
the same brood. Failure, therefore, in a few individual cases must
not be taken as proving that any particular cross is infertile, and it
is, at any rate, clear from this, that many trials are necessary
before it can be assumed that any cross is positively infertile. Standfuss
found the usual range of fertility in Malacosoma neustria x franconica
to extend from 0 to 50 per cent. of the eggs, but the most successful
pairing produced 90 per cent. He believes that absolute impossibility
to obtain fertile eggs only oceurs when the pairing is between sexes
belonging to widely different genera, e¢.y., Smerinthus and Sphina,
Syntomis* and Zyqaena (Anthrocera), Dimorpha (Endromis) and Aglia,
Aglia and Saturnia. In such cases he considers failure to be
inevitable.

Failure to obtain fertile eggs by crossing two species really may
occur between very closely allied species, if they have specialised greatly
away from each other in some particular character, and the reason for
failure may be very different in different cases. That species of
comparatively distant affinities may produce fertile ova is proved, as
we have already pointed out, by Standfuss’ results with Saturnia
pavonia 3 and Graéllsia isabellae 9, from which crossing he reared
larvee to the second moult. Some of the reasons for failure that occur
to us are: (1) Unsuitability of the genital organs to allow effective
pairing. (2) The failure of the spermatozoa to be deposited in the
receptacula seminis. (3) The inability of the spermatozoa to enter
the micropyle of the egg. (4) The unsuitability of the protoplasmic
elements (spermatozoa and germ) to combine to form an embryo.
(5) The inability of the embryonic structures to blend, owing to the
great difference in the structures. (6) A want of synchronism in the
sequence of time at which the various embryonic changes in develop-
ment occur. Or,as Standfuss summarises the reasons of failure, they
must be sought in (1) External morphological or anatomical con-
ditions, (2) Microscopic histological structure, (3) Molecular
differences.

When the ereater part of a batch of eggs is fertilised by the
spermatozoa of another species, and the eggs undergo a certain amount
of development, it follows that the failure to produce a living larva does
not lie in the functional inability of the spermatozoa, but to some one
or other of the other causes noted. In some cases, the embryonic
development ceases in the early stages of growth, in others, it goes on
and the embryo is developed into a larva, and yet none, or only a few, of
the latter may hatch. This rags eee development appears, of course,
to be primarily due to the fact that the conditions of the egg are
unsuitable to the development of the embryo, which has only one-half
the constitution and nature of the 2 parent (that laid the egg), that
of the g parent being possibly entirely different, and hence leading to
the early death of the embryo. In the case of the larva becoming
fully formed in the egg, failure to hatch may be due to (1) The embryo

* Syntomis and Anthrocera, in spite of the similarity of wing-markings, are
exceedingly distant from one another. The former belongs to our Noctuo-Hepialid
(‘‘ upright-egged ’’) stirps, the latter to the Sphingo-Micropterygid (‘* flat-egged **)
stirps.

6 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

being too weak to eat its way out of the egg, (2) The egeshell being too
thick (or otherwise unsuitable) for the jaws of the hybrid larva to
work on. These are, of course, physical conditions, quite independent
of the phenomena that one has to consider when the eggs of actual
hybrids are proved to be sterile, for, in this case, the reasons adduced
above must be largely inadmissible, and one suspects that actual
weakness of the embryo is generally the prevailing cause.

Recent experiments have gone to prove that the external repro-
ductive organs of hybrids are usually perfect in structure, especially
those of the gs (see anted, vol. il1., p. 890), although. compared with
pure species, there is certainly a great tendency to an admixture of
imperfectly developed g and 2 sexual organs internally, producing
what is known as gynandromorphism, especially in specimens which
are largely in external structure and appearance ?s. Such specimens
are, of course, alike in true species and hybrids, necessarily sterile.
Weare still, however, much in the dark as to how far the sexual
organs themselves are functionally impotent, as Darwin avers, when
perfect in structure, but it is quite clear that they are not so to anything
like the extent assumed by the older biologists, and that g hybrids are
frequently, abundantly and freely fertile with ¢ s of either parent species,
e.g., Saturnia hybr. emiliae* f x pyrt 9; S.hybr. emiliae § x pavonia ;
S. hybr. bornemanni 3 Xx pavonia @ ; S. hybr. bornemanni 8 x pyri 2;
S. hybr. bornemanni f x spint 2; S. hybr. standfussi § x pavonia Q ;
S. hybr. schaufussi 8 x pavonia 9 ; Anthrocera hybr. fletcheri g x
lonicerae 9 ; A. hybr. fletchert $ x trifolti 9 ; A. hybr. worthingi g
x lonicerae 9; A. hybr. worthing? g x trifolti 9 ; A. hybr. compleaxa
SX trifolti 2 ; Clostera hybr. raeschkei 8 x anachoreta 2 ; C. hybr.
difficilis 8 x curtula 2 ; C. hybr. facilis g x anachoreta 9. Female
hybrids, too, are occasionally fertile when crossed with a g of one of
the parent species, e.y., Spilosoma hybr. viertli 9 x mendica g ; S. hybr.
hilaris @ x mendica 8 ; Antheraea hybr. perny-yama 9 X pernyt f ;
Anthrocera hybr, fletcheri 2 x lonicerae @ ; A. hybr. fletcheri 2 x
trifolti 8 ; A. hybr. worthingi 9 x lonicerae g ; A. hybr. complexa 9
x lonicerae g ; Saturnia hybr. schaufussi 2 x pavonia g ; Tephrosia
hybr. vidingi-suffusa 2 X crepuscularia g ,and this may be so even when
the hybrids are not apparently fertile inter se. On the other hand,
some hybrids are fertile inter se, e.g., Anthrocera hybr. worthingi; A.
hybr. fletchert; Philosamia hybr. wallacei; Saturnia hybr. schaufussi ;
Clostera hybr. prima; C. hybr. tnversa ; Tephrosia hybr. ridingi: T.
hybr. ridingi-suffusa ; Spilosoma hybr. seileri; S. hybr. hilaris.

Very few gs and @s of related hybrids have been crossed, but
Anthrocera hybr. worthingt and A. hybr. fletcheri and Tephrosia hybr.
bacoti-sufiusa and T. hybr. ridinyi-suffusa, are quite fertile inter se, and
Saturnia hybr. bornemanni 8 X hybr. schaufusst 2 has been successfully
reared to the imaginal state, all of which goes to prove that hybrids are
not necessarily, and by the mere fact of their being hybrids, sterile, but
that ¢ hybrids appear to be much more frequently functionally impotent
than gs. Recent evidence bearing on the subject goes far to suggest
that the sterility of first crosses, and hybrids of allied species, is due

* We are inclined to disagree with this form of nomenclature, adopted first by
Standfuss and other entomologists, since it tends to obscure the ancestry of the
forms dealt with, and so, to make the names intelligible, we have added a complete
list of the hybrids mentioned, with their parentage, at the end of this chapter.

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. i!
rather to difference of function or difference of habit in the parent
species, than to any marked difference of structure in the genital organs
brought about by natural selection for the purpose of keeping the species
separate. ‘To this extent, recent experiment supports Darwin that
sterility, so far as it exists, has not been effected through natural
selection ; that such sterility is, however, at all so general as was
supposed by Darwin, is, as already noted, much open to question.
Experiments on hy bridising lepidoptera, also, tend to prove that, con-
trary to Darwin’s conclusion, it is the 9 element that is more liable
to be affected than the ¢, many g hybrids being functional when
their 2 s appear to be absolutely sterile.

The difference in the fertility of the various hybrids that have been
reared by various experiments, ¢.y., the absolute fertility of Anthroccra
hybr. fletcheri, and its reciprocal cross, A. hybr. worthingi, compared with
the absolute sterility of Biston hybr. pilzi and its reciprocal b. hybr.
hint or Smerinthus hybr. hybridus and its reciprocal S. hybr. tversa, is
explained by Standfuss as being due to the varying degrees of physio-
logical divergence between the parents of the hybrid, 7i.¢., that the
different pairs of species are related to each other in very varying degrees.
Concerning this he points out that, beginning with pairs of species
with which crossings may be effected, without, however, the capacity
of producing offspring, and with such degree of relationship that
hybrid offspring could be obtained, but apparently without sufficient
vital energy to maintain life, e.y., Malacosoma castrensis x franconica,
Saturnia pavonia x isabellae, there existed many steps to a higher and
higher physiological affinity between the various pairs of species, on
which experiments had so far been made, until, at last, although not
to a very high degree, hybrids were found capable of reproduction,
e.g., Drepana hybr. rebeli, Clostera hybr. prima, C. hybr. inversa. In
other cases, the g hybrid has been found capable of fertilising a
female of one or other of the parent forms, e.y., Saturnia bornemanni
dS X pavonia 2, S. emiliae 8 x pyri 9, C. hybr. raeschket 3 Xx ana-
choreta 2, etc., whilst, in still rarer cases, the ? hybrid has been
fertilised by a male of one or other of the parent forms, e.g., Antheraea
perny-yama 2 xX pernyt g, Saturnia schaufusst 2 XxX pavonia fg.
Beyond this stage we reach the few cases of absolutely fertile hybrids
such as Anthrocera hybr. worthingi, A. hybr. fletcheri, Philosamia hybr.
wallacei, Clostera hybr. prima, Tephrosia hybr. ridinyi whose ability to
continue their own kind appears in confinement only to be limited, as
in the case of pure species, to the exigencies of in-breeding and similar
adverse circumstances. Standfuss concludes from his experiments
that ‘a lengthy period of existence, phylogenetically speaking, of the
divergence between nearly related types, is in no way connected with
the higher degree of difference on the lines of biological, physiognomical
and physiological characters, between pairs of species which have been
divergent for a less period even when nearly related groups of species
are in question. The long separated Saturnia pavonia and S. spini are,
in most of their characters, less separated from each other than the
later formed S. pyri from either of them.”

The comparative impotence of ¢ hybrids compared with ¢ hybrids
appears to be largely due, as already noted, to gynandromorphism,
which manifests itself largely in the intermixture of ¢ sexual elements
among the more or less normally or abnormally developed ¢ sexual

8 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

organs. Pierce has shown by dissection (antea, vol. i1., p. 890; Ent.
Rec., x., pl. 111., fig. 4) that the male sexual organs of Smerinthus hybr.
hybridus are quite normal in structure, although differing from those
of either parent, thus supporting the examination made by Westwood
(antea, vol. i11., p. 452), whilst those of the ? exhibited (mixed up
with the ¢ lobes) the rudimentary and partially developed organs of
the g, the whole apparatus being much smaller than that of the
parents (H’nt. Rec., x., p. 189). Although ova were discovered in the
body, the specimen appeared to be quite incapable of reproduction
(Pierce, anted, vol. ill., p. 453; see also general references to this
matter, vol. 111., pp. 449-453). Among the Malacosomas, too, Standfuss
states (anted, vol. i1., p. 525) that the dozen imagines bred of Mala-
cosoma hybr. schaufusst ‘‘are all Qs, or, to speak more correctly, a
form with the external appearance of 9s; some of these hybrids were.
crippled, and the body of one, on being opened, was found to contain
the rudiments of an ovipositor and an extraordinarily developed mass of
fat (a quite unusual occurrence in Lachneid @s).’’ On the other
hand, Bacot, in 1901 and 1902, bred both sexes of M. hybr. schaufusst,
though with an overwhelming preponderance of 28, viz., 6¢s and 44
? s(in 1901), and 6 # sand 16 2 s (in 1902), the gs of 1901 very uniform
in appearance with pale fore- and dark hindwings, the ¢s also very
uniform, dark umber-brown in colour with narrow pale transverse lines
on the forewings. The gs of 1902, on the other hand, were not only
different from those of 1901, but also varied 7nter se, similarly, of the @ s,
only about one-half were of the 1901 type, the others tending to lose,
or having entirely lost, the transverse bars. Although the sexes were
apparently distinct and the 3s of schaufusst paired with ¢ castrensis
and 2 neustria, the eges proved infertile. Pairings between g and
? schaufussi also were obtained, but the hybrid @s laid no eggs, so
that both sexes were apparently functionally impotent. A similar
case in which the external organs of the hybrids appear to be well-
formed, but the gs as well as ?s fail functionally, is that recorded by
Oberthur (Bull. Soc. Hint. France, 1897, p. 259), in which pairings of
§ Biston hybr. pilzii were obtained with ¢@ pilzii and @? hirtarius,
and of g Biston hybr. hindi with @ pomonarius and ¢ pilzii. This
sort of evidence is, however, very unsatisfactory. Much more to the
point is Standfuss’ information with regard to the Saturniid hybrids.
Of some 4000 hybrids bred, he observes (Hntom., xxxiv., p. 11) that he
reared only two gynandromorphous primary hybrids, one a Saturnia
hybr. emiliae, the other a S. hybr. bornemanni. On the other hand,
of 282 secondary hybrids reared, 27 were gynandromorphic and he
-oncludes that ‘“ the percentage of gynandromorphic specimens among
primary hybrids is infinitesimal compared with the occurrence among
secondary hybrids.”” He concludes that ‘the degree of fertility of a
form stands in direct connection with the percentage ef gynandro-
morphic individuals in its offspring; the greater the fertility the
smaller the percentage of gynandromorphic forms and vice versa,
whilst the degeneration and malformation of the ege-germs, which
these gynandromorphous forms have been shown by anatomical
investigation to possess, are directly connected with the appearance of
secondary sexual characters in male individuals, and vice versa; the
occurrence of secondary male characters in female individuals has long
been known to be a fact.” A full summary has already been given

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 9

(anted, vol. ii., p. 802) of the gynandromorphic hybrids among the
Saturniids, and it is to be noted that, although g hybrids among the
Saturniids have frequently fertilised @s of either parent form, very
few 2 hybrids have ever been fertilised either by gs of their own
kind or of their respective parent forms. Anatomical investigation
into the structure of g and @ hybrids is still much needed.

So much for the questions of infertility and sterility in first crosses,
and the hybrids arising therefrom. The difficulties of hybrids reaching
maturity do not, however, end with the successful hatching of the
hybrid larva. The larva, compounded as it is of the differing anatomical,
physiological, morphological, and molecular conditions and peculiarities
belonging to two distinct species, having in each case highly specialised
larve of their own, with differing constitutions, habits, and maybe
foodplants, may find itself unable to deal satisfactorily with the
foodplant of either parent, may find its alimentary system so far dis-
turbed as to be unable to satisfactorily digest these foodplants, may find
its habits so complex that, whilst the half inherited from one parent
tends to make it hybernate as larva, that inherited from the other
parent tends to make it hybernate as pupa; may find its mixed habits,
exposing it to the attacks of foes from which the habit of either
parent alone would protect it. Hence there may be many difficulties
in bringing the larva to maturity, and, when this has been done, it is
often found that the time of emergence of the imago has been greatly
hastened or retarded, agreeing with that of neither parent, and hence
tending to its isolation and rapid extermination. On the other hand,
when the hybrid follows the habits of one of the parents, and emerges
with the progeny of one of them, there is no doubt that, if functionally
active, it would cross therewith, and that its progeny would show
little trace of the hybrid origin of the other of its parents. This leads
us to note Darwin’s statement that “in hybrids, the external conditions
have remained the same, but the organisation has been disturbed by
two distinct structures and constitutions, including, of course, the,
reproductive systems, having been blended into one.” ‘To the first
part of this statement, our remarks above will show that we take
great objection. External conditions have not remained the same ;
the whole environment is altered; the new organism has to choose
between two foodplants or two sets of foodplants, and, in natural
hybrids, this choice is practically non-existent, for the @ parent will
naturally lay her eggs on her own foodplant, and any hereditary tendency
in the larva to insist on the foodplant of the g parent spells death. It
has also to choose between two entirely different sets of habits, and may
choose some intermediate condition that is unavailable, &c. As to
the combination of two organisations, we are quite of Darwin’s
opinion, that ‘ it is scarcely possible that two organisations should be
compounded into one, without some disturbance occurring, in the
development, or periodical action, or mutual relations, of the different
parts and organs one to another or to the conditions of life. When
hybrids are able to breed inter se, they transmit to their offspring from
generation to generation the same compounded organisation, and hence
we need not be surprised that their sterility, though in some degree
variable, does not diminish; it is even apt to increase, this being
generally the result, as before explained, of too close interbreeding.
It must, however, be owned that we cannot understand, on the above

10 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

or any other similar view, several facts with respect to the assumed
sterility of hybrids, e.g., the unequal fertility of hybrids produced from
reciprocal crosses, or the ‘increased sterility in those hybrids which
occasionally and exceptionally resemble closely either pure parent.”
We have no facts among the recorded experiments relating to hybrid
lepidoptera to show that the latter statement is true, but, as to the
unequal fertility of reciprocal crosses, it is amply illustrated by the ease
with which fertile eggs of Smerinthus hybr. hybridus (ocellata § x populi
2) are obtained compared with the difficulty of obtaining those of
Amorpha hybr. inversa (populi g x ocellata ?). Bacot offers (Hint. Rec.,
x., p. 190) two possible explanations of the peculiarities as noticed in
these hybrids; (1) The small size of the eggs of Smerinthus ocellata would
prevent, or prematurely stop, the development of the embryonic larva (if
the g parent were Amorpha populi a species which produces a much
larger embryonic larva). (2) The @ being the more conservative
sex, has a larger portion of ancestral determinants than the $ ; so
that, when the more progressive g¢ of the less specialised species
(Smerinthus ocellata) pairs with the conservative ? of the more
highly developed species (Amorpha populi), the cross is between
individuals that are more nearly related as regards the constituents of
the germ-plasm than would be the case were the sexes reversed, and
there is, therefore, a far greater likelihood of fertile ova resulting.

One of the most remarkable facts relating to hybridity is the
tendency observed for the hybrid imagines to emerge more quickly
than either of the parent species. We have illustrated this point at
length with regard to Smerinthus hybr. hybridus (anted, iii., p. 459),
the imagines of which largely emerge in the autumn, after a pupal period
of about three weeks*. Pingeler notes (Standfuss’ Handbuch, etc., p. 56)
a similar result in Fumea hybr. piingelert and F’. hybr. inversa, stating
that males only were bred, and that these emerged in the autumn with-
out the larvee hybernating, whilst the pure larvee of both species (F’. casta
and H’. affinis) hybernated, some of those of F’. affinis, indeed, going
over two winters. The same peculiarity is well illustrated by Stand-
fuss (Hntom., xxxiv., pp. 78-80), who, in the spring of 1897, crossed
Clostera curtula g x anachoreta 2, and the fertile eggs, hatching
simultaneously, produced larvee, the greater number of which rapidly
attained full growth, pupated and produced imagines (hybr. raeschket)
before the end of June—all gs, whilst the smaller number fed on
slowly. In the meantime, the g raeschkei paired with @ C. anachoreta,
and, by the beginning of August, had produced another generation of
imagines—again all gs (hybr. facilis). These in turn were paired
with @ C. anachoreta, and the larve of this cross were feeding contem-
poraneously with the spring larve (their grand-aunts), two of which
finally pupated on August 21st and 28rd, and produced imagines in
October. In the meantime, the larve of the early August cross (facilis
x anachoreta) fed up, pupated, and later in the autumn produced imagines
—yet again all g's (hybr. approwimata). Relative to this, Standfuss

* Newman (of Bexley) reared many S. hybr. hybridus in 1901 and 1902. Certain
individuals of these are noted by Adkinand Clark (Proc. Sth. Lond. Ent. Soc., 1902,
pp. 110-111) as emerging from pupz of the year, whilst, on the other hand, Adkin
records another example (op. cit., 1903, p. 70) that emerged July 10th, 1903, from
a larva reared in 1901, the pupal stage having lasted one year and eleven months.

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 11

writes: “ The fact that, in the experiments undertaken, the male
Closterid hybrids develop much more quickly than their sister females,
and that the male hybrid immediately produces (when crossed with a
pure ? )a large third generation of males, indicates a progressive develop-
mental tendency, which is further confirmed by other facts. . . .
On the other hand, with regard to the ?s of the Closterid hybrids,
they endeavour to return to the original simple state of one brood per
year (for this was certainly the primitive condition).’’ As bearing on
the point now under review, t.c., the different action of hybridism on
the two sexes of the resultant progeny, so far as relates to the length
of the early stages, we may note that, when Standfuss bred Drepana
hybr. rebeli, the ¢ and ? hybrids emerged together, whilst with the
reciprocal cross, D. hybr. zirichi, the gs developed at once, and
- produced imagines, whilst the females hybernated as pupe. ‘This
difference was already foreshadowed during pupation, for, whilst the g
larvee only bent round a small portion of the edge of the leaf, and fixed
themselves in the same by a few short threads on the surface, and changed
to pup in the more or less open pockets thus formed, those of the ?s,
on the other hand, rolled a large portion of the leaf sharply round, begin-
ning at the edge, and closed over the so-formed pocket with
numerous strong silk threads, with the exception of a small
Opening to allow the larva egress, and then gnawed this puparium
loose from the rest of the leaf, so that it fell into the sleeve, and then
fastened up the opening. In this manner, the pupa was better pro-
tected against many dangers than if it fell, in late autumn, with the
rest of the leaves. Standfuss further notes (Mntom., xxxiv., p. 78)
that the 9 larve of Clostera hybr. prima developed much more rapidly
than the @ larve, so much so that he would have got no pairings had
he not artificially exposed the g imagines to a low temperature, and
so kept them in a torpid state for some weeks, until the ? s emerged.
A parallel fact was noted with regard to C. hybr. inversa, although the
interval of time between the emergence of the gs and 2s was much
less. Strangely enough, Newman records an exactly opposite result
(Proc. Sth. Lond. Ent. Soc., 1899, p. 110) for a large brood of larve of
Clostera hybr. prima, which fed up rapidly, and of which about 240 pupa-
ted, one-half—117 ¢s and 8 g s—emerging at the end of August, the
quickest being only 32 days from the hatching of egg to imago, the
rest of the pup going over the winter, the imagines emerging the next
spring. Bacot’s experiments (1900-1902) in breeding Malacosoma
hybr. schaufussi gave a similar result to that of Newman, for he
records (Proc. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1902, p. vii) that his last females
emerged in 1901, a good three weeks before the earliest male, and thus
prevented pairings between the hybrids, the female larve having fed
up at an unprecedentedly rapid rate, and emerging not only earlier than
the ¢ hybrids, but much sooner than either sex of the parent forms.
In 1902, another experiment (op. cit., p. xxv) based on the same species,
produced an almost exactly similar result. On the other hand, the
larvee of Amphidasys hybr. herefordi (Ent. Rec., ii., p. 88) showed great
variation in the rate of feeding up, and in the length of the pupal
stage. Some half-dozen of these larve missed a moult, pupated early,
and produced imagines the same autumn, whilst the rest developed
into pup which went over the winter, one attempting to go over a
second winter. So marked was the result of the hybridisation on the

12 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Tephrosiids bred by Bacot and Riding, that they lost all regularity
as to the time of emergence and became continuously brooded, 2%.e., all
the crosses paired, producing progeny, which again paired, and so on.
Even the influence of 7. crepuscularia (biundularia), one of the most
regularly single-brooded species in England, was unable to prevent
this, the broods emerging almost entirely, whilst they appeared capable
of going on indefinitely so long as food could be provided for the larve
(Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1898, pp. 39-40).

It would appear that, in reciprocal crossings, the sex condition of
the hybrids depends on the predominating influence exerted by one of
the parents. In the Tephrosiid hybrids (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1898,
pp. 17 et seq.) 1t was found that certain crossings produced almost entirely
male offspring. This occurred in the only four fertile crossings
obtained in which Tephrosia crepuscularia (or its ab. delamerensis) was
the maleand 7’ bistortata the female parent; two broods of this parentage
bred by Riding produced 608 s and one ill-developed @ ; a third brood
bred by Bacot, 58 gs and no female; a fourth brood, bred by Riding
38 gs and no @. On the other hand, in the reciprocal cross, in
which 7. bistortata was the §, and 7. crepuscularia the ¢ , parent, a fair
share of 9s was the result. We have no details as to the exact proportion
of sto gs in Smerinthus hybr. hybridus, but the percentage must
be a very small one, and Newman informs us that, of a very large
number of this hybrid bred during the last few years, only 3 or 4
?s have appeared, z.e., only about one per cent., and of these
he notes that, though the antenne are of ¢ form, the body
is not so with regard to size, there appearing to be no ova
present in them. The great rarity of the reciprocal cross, Amorpha
hybr. inversa, makes it difficult to draw any comparison, although
Standfuss goes so tar (Handbuch, etc., p. 63) as to say that the offspring
thereof consists of both sexes in normal proportions (but we doubt the
records, not Standfuss’ own, on which this statement 1s based) [see Hint.
Rec., xiv., p. 191, also antea, vol. i11., pp. 895-6], but the broods of S.
hybr. fringst (analogous with S. hybr. hybridus) gave5 2? sagainst 45 g's,
and those of A. hybr. metis (analogous with A. hybr. inversa), gave only 6
imagines—all gs. Asin A. hybr. metis, Calasymbolus hybr. interfaunus
has also S. ocellata for the ¢ parent, and in this also the 12 specimens
bred were all gs. The facts relating to the Malacosomid hybrids are
also interesting. Of Malacosoma hybr. caradjae in which neustria is
the g and franconica the 2 parent, gs only have been reared,
whilst of Malacosoma hybr. schaufussi, in which also neustria is the
3 parent, but castrensis the 9 ,an abundance of ?s have been rapidly
produced, whilst the gs have been very few in number and reared
from slow-feeding and weak larve. Piingeler’s results with Fumea
casta § X affinis 2, and its reciprocal cross, I’. affinis § X casta 2,
throw no light on the subject, both giving only 3's, 2s being quite
absent from both crossings. Much experimental work is wanted in
this direction.

As to the degree of superficial appearance, and, to a certain extent
also the habits, of hybrids to the parent forms, two so-called laws have
been formulated by Standfuss (Handbuch, &e.) as follows :—

(1) In reciprocal pairing the male is able to transmit the characters of the

species in a higher degree than the female.
(2) The final extent of approximation towards the male parent depends on

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 13

the relative phylogenetic age of the two species; the older being able to transmit
its properties, whether of structure or habit, better than the younger.

With regard to these, Standfuss shows that, in crossing Saturnia
pavonia § with 8. pyri 2, the resulting imago is by more than two-
thirds of its external appearance S. pavonia, and by less than one-third
S. pyri. Its habits and functions correspond with its external aspect.
It prefers to fly by day, like S. pavonia 3, and pairs easily with the
? of that species, from 48 to 62 per cent. of the eggs being fertile.
On the other hand, it does not pair readily with S. pyri, and the
resulting eggs, in an average of nine cases, gave only one larva out of
180. Similarly, S. pavonia g, when paired with S. spini 2, gives a
form of which, in the perfect state, about two-thirds of the external
aspect belong to the type of S..spint. The g flies by night. After
crossing with S. pavonia @ the resulting eggs were only fertile to the
extent of 16 to 22 per cent., while the crossing with S. spini ?,
though not easily brought about, in consequence of their diverse times
of appearance, yielded eges of which from 94 to 98 per cent. were fertile.
So that the g S. pavonia (considered the middle species phylogeneti-
cally) is able to influence the issue of the relatively gigantic S. pyri
? (considered the youngest phylogenetically) much more than it can that
of S. spini 2 (considered the oldest phylogenetically). Again the issue
of S. spint 3 x S. pavonia 2 is much nearer S. spin? than is that of
S.paronia 3 x S.spini ? , which shows that the older-established species
(spint) 18 more effective than the younger (pavonia), and the sexual
prepotency of the g S. pavonia counts far less than the specific pre-
potency of the @ S. spini. The greatest effect is produced when the
two influences concur, as in the hybrid S. spint 9 x S. pavonia @,
the male parent being also the oldest phylogenetically. This rule as
to the prepotency of the phylogenetically older species is, as Dixey
says, probably only another expression of the fact so clearly established
by Darwin (Animals and Plants under Domestication, 1868, u., p. 254)
that hybridisation frequently leads to reversion. It is significant that
Standfuss considers the hybrid form S. hybr. emiliae (pavonia x pyri)
as partly reproducing an ancestral stage in the history of S. pavonia
rather than the form of that species now existing. Kaye also observes
(Proc. Sth. Lond. Ent. Soc., 1902, p. 117) that, in Amorpha hybr. metis
and Smerinthus hybr. hybridus, the prepotency of the § was noticeable.
Detailed observation on a larger number of specimens is, however,
desirable.

Some of the Tephrosid hybrids (Trans. Hnt. Soc. Lond., 1898, pp.
17 et seq.) did not altogether appear to bear out the first of these
rules, but this may have possibly been due to the disturbing
influence of using an aberrative form (delamerensis) instead of
the more stable typical form of crepuscularia (biundularia). On
the other hand, those reciprocal broods, in which this disturbing
influence was eliminated, ¢viz., 7’. bistortata x crepuscularia and T.
crepuscularia X bistortata showed distinctly in the first cross a great
tendency to the bistortata form, and, in the second, a less distinet
tendency in the same direction, thus bearing out Standfuss’ further
suggestion that bistortata, assumed on various grounds to be the
phylogenetically older species, is more dominant in stamping its
characters on the progeny. It may be, of course, that 7. bistortata is
merely a predominant species, more active in its vital functions, and

14 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

more ready to respond to environmental influences, although the local
variation of T. crepuscularia renders the latter scarcely probable. At
any rate the dominating influence of T. bistortata on the progeny is
most marked.

As further tending to support his position, Standtuss notes (Entom.,
Xxxlv., p. 80) that his experiments in hybridising Clostera pigra, C.
curtula and ©. anachoreta support most strongly the view that the
characters of the oldest species phylogenetically are most impressed
upon the offspring, z.e., that the physiognomical aspect of the hybrid
will be mainly influenced by the phylogenetically oldest species. On
various grounds, he assumes C. pigra, U. curtula and C. anachoreta to
stand in this order phylogenetically, and he states (/ntom., xxxiv., pp.
82-3) that, in the crossings of CU. piyra g xcurtula 9 and C. curtula
3 Xpigra 2 , the progeny of both are nearer to CU. pigra, whilst, in the
reciprocal crossings, C’. curtula g x anachoreta 2 and C.anachoreta g
xcurtula , the progeny are nearer the phylogenetically older form
curtula than the younger anachoreta, but in a subordinate manner the
influence of the male prevails in the aspect of these reciprocal
hybrids. Contrary to Standfuss’ opinion, Adkin notes (Proc. South
Lond. Ent. Soc., 1902, p. 110) that many specimens of both CU. hybr.
prima (curtula § Xpiyra 9) and C. hybr. inversa (pigra 3 xXcurtula
? ) in his possession more nearly resembled in each case the 2 parent
than the g, while the markings showed the cross parentage; and
Fletcher, who reared imagines of C. piyra $ xcurtula 2 from pupe
obtained from Newman, states that the progeny was scarcely different
from pure bred C. curtula.

As bearing on the question of the influence of the ¢ parent, we
may note that in d. hybr. worthinyi (lonicerae g xtrifolti ° ) there is
a strong tendency to resemble the mother, although when several
of a brood are seen together the influence of both parents is very
marked; this is especially noticeable in the blotchine of the spots of
the forewings, a very common character in trifolii and a very rare one
in lonicerae. Fletcher’s experiments tend to prove not so much that
the g influences most the progeny, as that a particular species (trifoltz)
does it; it may be that this is explicable on the assumption that tr/folii
is, compared with lonicerae, the older species phylogenetically, an
assumption that we are not altogether inclined to support, trifolii
being even now in a state of flux with regard to its species-forming
power, and lonicerae one of the most fixed and constant in the
Anthrocerid fauna, and maintaining its fixity under a variety of
conditions of environment, latitude and altitude.

It is now generally accepted that increase in the number of species
is due either (1) To the modification of an existent species by changed

environment; or (2) To the splitting up of a species into more than one ~

by various changed conditions acting on the original species. The
early separation of these forms gives us what are known as local races,
the impress of the different conditions to which they are subjected
developing a divergence of habit, form, colour, or other outward
conditions accompanied by modified anatomical or physiological
(functional) changes. When these diverging forms have become quite
isolated we call them species, and, by the time this stage has been
reached, the forms are usually so divergent that they do not cross and
produce offspring that are fertile inter se, not, perhaps, so much from

fe

a

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 15

an absolute inability to thus produce fertile progeny, as from the great
difficulty, owing to changed habits, etc., of the forms ever coming
in contact sufficiently to allow it. When the change of habit is accom-
panied by a morphological or functional change, and when the forms
have been further isolated by the loss of the most closely allied indi-
viduals, the anatomical and functional differences existing between the
species may be so great as to absolutely prevent crossing or the pro-
duction of fertile offspring. If it be accepted that species have thus
been formed by the slow accumulation of differences in habit, accom-
panied with an ever-increasing difference in anatomy and function,
then the ease or difficulty of hybridising allied species may indicate
the actual amount of difference and distinctness of the species on
which experiments are made.

It has, however, long been a matter of discussion as to how far the
actual hybridity of species may itself be an active factor in the formation
of new species, i.e., how far hybrids are capable of forming a new
species. Standfuss discusses (Hnt., xxxiil., pp. 240 et seq.) this question
and considers that the experiments that he has already undertaken
have largely answered the question in the negative. Even when
hybridity is not difficult to procure between two species, the progeny

shows little fertility inter se, and, although the g's are more frequently

fertile with 9s of either of the parent species, the ° hybrids are
much more rarely fertile with the gs of the parent species, and at
present few hybrids show comparatively free fertility inter se. This
appears to be largely due to the anatomical and morphological upset
in the sexual organs of the ? hybrids, an upset that frequently finds its
outward recognition in the development of gynandromorphic forms, in
which the primary sexual characters are often considerably modified,
and correspondingly marked changes take place in the secondary
sexual characters.

Assuming, however, hybridity ever to take place in nature, the
hybrids themselves will often, presumably, follow one or other of the parent
forms so far as relates to its habits, time of appearance, etc., and the
chance of a g and @ hybrid, assuming that some of both sexes get
through successfully, then meeting each other, asagainst the possibility of
either meeting and pairing with or being paired with a § or @? of the
much more abundant parent form, is so remote that one puts aside the
possibility; one suspects that such individuals as survived would
almost certainly pair with one of the parent forms and the hybrid
characters (if any marked ones occurred) would be bred out in two or
three generations. As illustrating this point, we captured, on May 20th,
1898, a S specimen of what we have no doubt is Polyommatus corydon
x bellaryus, at Cuxton, with the shape and contour of corydon, but
with the unmistakable colouring of bellargus in it. It was flying
among hundreds of bellaryus and was paired with a typical bellaryus @ .
No doubt exists in our mind that this was a cross between an early
emerged August specimen of bellaryus of the preceding year with a late
emerged August specimen of corydon. It had evidently followed the
habit, of hellarqus, had emerged with the early spring brood of that
species, had paired with a typical ? bellargus, and its progeny ee
one suspects, if any, have reverted to ordinary be largus in, at most,
few generations, although in appearance the specimen is much more
like corydon. Possibly following Standfuss’ conclusions the male parent

16 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

was corydon and the female bellarqus (see Ent. Rec., iv., p. 280; Trans.
int. Soc. Lond., 1894, p. xv). On the other hand, we have already given
instances in which divergence from both parent forms occur, and where
isolation is fairly certain to lead to their failure to maintain themselves.
The evidence relating to hybridity in lepidoptera is of two distinet
kinds: (1) That in which the parentage is known, the crossings
having been brought about as the result of artificial conditions
determined by the operator. (2) The capture in nature of individuals
bearing apparent resemblance to two species, the parentage being
altogether unknown. Evidence of the latter kind must be accepted
with very great caution. It is well-known to all experienced field-
naturalists that, within the limits of a small group of closely-allied
species, variation runs frequently in the same direction, so that
parallel forms are found, that bear more or less close resemblance
to one another, and so that a rare aberration of one species may
bear considerable superficial resemblance to the typical form of another
species. Such specimens, even to those who have considerable
knowledge of the group, have often proved a stumbling-block, whilst
to those whose experience is small they form a pitfall, the readiest
escape from which is to explain the puzzling form as a hybrid between
the two species, 7.e., the species which it superficially resembles and
the species to which it really belongs. We do not wish to be under-
stood as suggesting that there are no natural hybrids, which 1s,
indeed, contrary to our opinion, but we should be unwilling to
acknowledge as hybrids any specimens that did not exhibit struc-
turally some difference that would bring the supposition largely within
the bounds of possibility. Mere coloration we should, as a rule, hold to.
be altogether insufficient evidence. A similar feeling that many of the
so-called hybrids that have been recorded may be merely unusual aber-
rations of well known species, must have led to Standfuss making the
remark (Handbk. Pal. Gross-Schmett., pp. 51-52) that much of the
so-called hybrid material is untrustworthy, and that many of the
so-called hybrids are merely aberrations. Yet some of his own remarks
on the matter are particularly unsatisfactory, e.y., he records that
he reared many specimens from larve found on Rhamnus catharticus
and A. alaternus in Dalmatia and Italy, and supposed to be those of
Gronepteryx cleopatra, that he considered could be nothing but hybrids
between G. rhamni and G. cleopatra. Again he observes that Melitaea
dictynna, M. athalia, M. aurelia and M. parthente are so nearly related
to one another that a particular hybrid appearance can scarcely occur,
the markings of these species, except in striking occasional aberrations,
being so very similar. He, however, believes that, among other
Melitzeids sent to him for determination, many examples, chiefly from
Switzerland, have had a distinct hybrid origin. He further assumes that
some of the Erebiids that he has examined, in the epiphron, melampus,
eriphyle, and mnestra group, have been the result of crosspairing
between different species. We have examined some thousands of the
Mehtzeid and Erebiid species mentioned by Standfuss, and have never
seen a specimen that we could in anyway suppose was a hybrid.
Such evidence as Standfuss thus offers is very unconvincing, and
appears to have little real bearing on the solution of the problems
relating to hybridity in butterflies. The pairings between butterflies
of different species (antea, p. 3) also carry our knowledge of whether

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 7.

the species are capable of producing hybrids, very little forward; whilst
the determination of individual specimens caught wild, as hybrids, is,
as already noted, unless there are some marked structural peculiarities,
exceedingly difficult. The specialist must follow these up for himself.

As tending to show how easily natural variation can be mistaken
for hybridisation, reference may be made to Edwards’ account of
Papilio var. brucei (Can. Ent., xxvil., pp. 229 et seq.). Itappears that a
Papilio described as oreyonia is taken in Washington and British
Columbia. Much farther south occurs Papilio bardit. In Colorado,
between the two areas inhabited by these forms and at a height of
from 5000-6000ft., the species (to which both are now referred) occurs
in two forms, both forms slightly modified from the lowland types,
and with intermediates frequent, and @?s of either produce progeny of
both races. Edwards named these intermediates brucei, and, having
begun by assumingo regonia and batrdii to be two species, looked upon the
Colorado mixture as the result of hybridisation, whereas, no doubt,
the lowland varieties are extreme specialisations of the two main forms
found in Colorado, each specially suited to its particular area.

We may now deal with the matter under the headings of the
various families to which the hybrids belong :—

PapitionipEs.—Of individual specimens supposed to be hybrids and
recorded as such, we have met with the following :—A supposed hybrid
of Aylais urticaex Pyrameis atalanta (Bruand, Bull. Soc. Ent. Fr.,
ser. 2, 1844, t. 11., p. vi); hybrids between Coenonympha pamphilus x
C. iphis (Stein, Isis, 1885, pp. 848-3844); Polyommatus bellarqus x
icarus (Klopsch, Stett. Ent. Zeit., 1858, p. 409); P. tcarus x escheri
(Standfuss, Handbuch, ete.) ; P. bellargus x corydon (Tutt, Proc. Ent.
Soe. Lond., 1894, p. xv); Limenitis ursula x archippus (Holdredge, Ent.
News, x.,p. 181). Offhand assumptions as to hybridity being common
between Lycznid species, like those of Sabine and South (Fnton.,
x1x.. pp. 40, 81, 181, 220, 222, 294, 274) and criticised at the
time (op. cit., pp. 207, 258, 257) are hardly worthy of consideration.
Somewhat similar are the suggestions of Butler and Staudinger
as to hybridity among the Coliads. In the Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond.,
1880, p. 409, Colias var. sareptensis, C. erate and its var. pallida,
and var. helichta (chrysodona), etc., come under discussion; so
also do they in the Ann. and May. Nat. Hist., vii., p. 187; ix.,
p. 208; 1888, p. 197, and Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1866, p. 871. In
his Cat., 3rd ed., p. 17, Staudinger still maintains chrysodona
(=helichta) as a hybrid of erate and edusa, and sareptensis as a possible
hybrid betweeen hyale and erate. It appears to us that there are, no doubt,
among the Coliads, difficult questions as to the limits of specific identity
and of variation, and several forms, more or less distinguishable, appear
to have the character of local races, but, as for real evidence of
hybridisation between recognised and well-defined species there is none.
The idea of a man in Berlin or London, with a few specimens before
him, deciding that, in India, a “‘hybrid’’ is displacing the parent form,
is great nonsense. ‘The evidence of the so-called hybridity between
eogene, cocandica, and regia appears to be equally unsatisfactory.

Honrath (Berl. Ent. Zeits., xxxi., pp. 501-508) asserts that cross-
pairing is frequent among the Parnassiid species, states that Grum-
Grshimailo frequently observed P. delphius 3 paired with charltonius
var. princeps 2, in the Alai mts., and that Alphéraky often saw
P. discobolus paired with P. var. hesebolus, in the Thianshan mts.

18 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

He further notes that Graeser remarked of two (g and 2?) suspicious
P. nomion that he had captured at Pokrofka, that he had taken them
both at a time (early July) when P. bremeri var. graesert was very
worn, and typical nomion not on the wing till about 14 days later.
This circumstance, and their size, led him to consider them at first
as early P. nomion, but later he supposed they might be bremeri.
Dorries also took a pair at Bikin, where also the two species occur.
He also thought that they were nomion. Honrath, because of these
peculiarities, and because the specimens occurred where bremert and
nomion were both found, and because they were captured between the
dates of appearance of the species, and further, because Alphéraky had
recorded pairings between the Parnassiids, considered the specimens
hybrids. Their peculiarity, he says, consists of their appearing to be
nomion with the black antenne of bremert. He further refers to a note
by Streckfuss (op. cit., 1887, p. xi) noting that he had taken apollo with
antenne ringed like those of delius at Muhlwald-Thal, at 3500ft. eleva-
tion, where delius and apollo were flying in company. These he thinks
may be hybrids. He then goes on to describe two possible hybrid
specimens between rhodius and apollonius taken by Grum-Grshimailo.
None of the evidence appears to be at all conclusive. That of Frings (Soe.
Ent., xix., p. 52) who describes a g Parnassius taken in the Valais in
July 1904, as possibly a hybrid between apollo and delius, is equally
unsatisfactory.

ArctupEes.—Attempts to hybridise Arctudes appear up to the
present to have failed, except in five instances, in producing
imagines. Standfuss records (Handbuch, &c., p. 56) having obtained
pairings between Nemeophila plantaginis § and Euthemonia russula @ ,
Arctia caia g and A. flavia 2, Phraymatobia fuliginosa g and P.
luctuosa @ , allof which produced a normal number of eggs, but no larve.
Schreiner records (Stett. Hnt. Zeit., xiv., p. 140) repeated pairings
between Spilosoma urticae ¢ and S. menthastri 2, and Bacot obtained
the same but the eggs failed to hatch although they became darker
in colour. Caradja made the first approach to success, obtaining
crossings between Spilosoma mendica var. rustica g and S. luc-
tuosa.9 , S. luctuosa g and S. var. rustica 9°, S. luctuosa gf ands
mendica 2. In 1898, eight @ luctuwosa paired with g var. rustica, laid
some 1800 eggs, of which 99 produced larve, some two-thirds of the
remaining eggs undergoing some development, the rest being quite
infertile, two of the larve lived to spin their cocoons, but no imagines
resulted. In 1894,six more crossings of S. rustica 3 x luctuosa 2 were
obtained, five of the batches of eggs laid gave no larve, but the other
batch gave 141 larve (from the earliest laid eggs), and 194 other eggs
were infertile. The reciprocal cross, in its two forms, S. luctwosa 3 x
rustica 2 and S. luctuosa 3 xmendica 2, gave only infertile eges.
The hybrid larve again fed up vigorously, but none reached the
imaginal stage (Soc. Ent., viii., pp. 89-90; 1x.,p. 49). Later, Caradja
was more successful, and described and figured (Iris, x., pp. 371-378,
pl. ix., figs. 1-11) hybrids between Spilosoma mendica and S. sordida,
two species which he had succeeded in crossing, and the progeny of
which he had reared to the imaginal stage. He used two forms of
S. mendica for the purpose, one, the form rustica, the other the form
standfussi (a cross between rustica x mendica). In each case, mendica
(in one of these forms) was the g and sordida the 2 parent. Next
year he was even more fortunate obtaining imagines from a crossing

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 19

of S. luctuosa g xS. sordida 9, also from S. viertli 3 x rustica 9,
and from S. inversa gf x viertlt 2 (Iris, 1898, pp. 392-7, pl. vi). A
crossing of sordida g xluctuosa 2 produced a few weakly larve that
soon died. He describes the hybrids as:

1 and 2. Srmosoma hybr. crassa, Caradja (standfusst § x sordida 2° )
and Spitosoma hybr. viertii, Caradja (rustica J x sordida 2 ),—Hight
fruitful pairings of S. hybr. crassa were obtained, the reciprocal
crossing of sordida 3 x standfusst 9 being unfruitful. One fruitful pair-
ing of S. hybr. viertli was also obtained, the reciprocal cross sordida 3 x
rustica 2° being, however, unfruitful. In each of the broods of both forms
some 12-13 per cent. only of the larve hatched (all the eges had
become darker on the 6th day, and some progress of larval development
was observed in the eggs that did not hatch), many other larvee had
begun to eat through the eggshell, but had not strength to get further.
Of those that hatched, some 25 per cent. refused food and died. The
others were healthy, developed normally, and finally pupated, some
larve, however, taking 48, others 72-76, the majority taking about
60, days. Altogether 12 healthy pupe of crassa and 114 viertli resulted.
Mismanagement of the pupe ended in only two pairs of imagines of
crassa, and a few pairs of viertli being reared. These varied considerably,
and all four examples of crassa, and the seven most diverse specimens
of viertli, are figured in the Ivis, vol. x., pl. ix., figs. 1-11. The ovaries
of the hybrid @s were apparently quite normally developed, and
one 2 viertli, paired with a g rustica, laid 198 eges, all of which
produced healthy larvze(see beata postea. The hybrid larve of both crassa
and viertli copy the larve of sordida accurately in the arrangement of the
markings, but are more brightly coloured; in the last instar, however,
they differed greatly from sordida, some having fox-red hairs like mendica
larve, the majority, however, had hairs of dark brown, or brown-grey
tint; in all, the light, yellowish-bordered, longitudinal stripes (dorsal
and lateral) were as sharply marked as in sordida, the last segments
being reddish-yellow laterally, these last two characters being character-
istic of the hybrid larve. In their broad characters, the hybrid larve
are much nearer sordida, although in their last skin some more
nearly approach mendica.

3. Sprosoma hybr. Beata, Caradja (rustica g x viertli 2) (ris,
1898, pl. vi., figs. 7-9).—-Rustica blood is prevalent over that of sordida
as 3:1. The sordida-characters transmitted are—the somewhat
elongate form of the wings, the faint yellowish-grey ground colour of
wings, even in 2, the tendency to a row of spots commencing at apex,
the black-spotted fringe of forewings, and, in the Q, the dark longi-
tudinal stripes. [Further crossings could not be effected. |

4. Spinosoma hybr. nmarts, Caradja (inversa* 3 x viertli 9) (Iris,
1898, pl. vi., figs. 10-11).—The facies of sordida is not very evident
(except in the stronger spotting of wings in 3g), while the influence of
standfussi, seen in the marked darkening of 3, is unmistakable. The
& tint is similar to that of palest standfussi 9s, whilst the 9 is
similar to the ¢nversa 9 figured by Caradja, except that the black
marginal spots of hindwings are much more clearly marked. The
form was inbred, each crossing being fertile, those of rustica ¢ x

* The form itnversa is a mongrel of two mendica races, viz., ¢ rustica x 9
{rustica <x mendica).

20 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

hilaris 9 being equally fruitful. From a crossing of sordida $ X
hilavis @ , produced eggs of which about 75 per cent. hatched, whilst
from a pairing of hilaris g xsordida 2 only about 16 per cent. of the
eggs gave larve; from a crossing of hilaris 3 xluctuosa 9, afew
weakly larve only were produced.

5. Spmosoma hybr. semert, Caradja (luctuosa 3 x sordida 2)
(Iris, 1898, pl. vi., figs. 1-6).—This crossing succeeded in five cases,
the egg-batches producing respectively 8, 8, 7, 48 and 71 eggs. From
these only 15 gs and 27 2s reached the imaginal stage. In pattern
and the outline of the wings, the hybrid is exactly intermediate
between the parents. The ground colour is grey-brown (darker than
in luctuosa), the yellowish scales, always plentiful in latter, more
scanty, appearing along anterior and exterior margins of forewings.
The ?s rather more thinly scaled than luctuosa 9s, and with much
less transparent wings. The general arrangement of the wing-pattern
inclining to that of sordida, except that all the spots and stripes are
much more sharply marked (nearly as in luctwosa). The forewings
with three rows of equidistant, parallel (not sinuately-divergent as in
luctuosa) spots proceeding from costa, a fourth, shorter, row arising
from apex, and running obliquely towards outer of the three parallel
rows; five black spots along outer margin. The hindwings darker
than the forewings, with distinct discal spot, and black longitudinal
stripes from base of wing to the seven marginal spots, as in luctuosa.
There is, however, considerable variation, some specimens inclining to
luctuosa, the majority to sordida. The hybrids pair freely; five fertile
pairings produced an average of 180 eges. Crossings between sordida
3 xX seileri 2 and Iuctuosa g Xx seileri Q were also fruitful (only
about 17 per cent of infertile eggs), whilst crossings between seileri
3 Xluctuosa 2 and seileri § x sordida Q resulted largely in infertile
eggs, only 13 eggs (out of four batches) producing larve, all of which
died before the 1st moult. A pairing of rustica g x seileri 2? resulted
in only a few fertile eggs, only one larva pupatinge.

Noropontipres.—The hybridisation of Notodontids has been rather
more frequent. Those recorded are as follows :—

1. Cerura hybr. Gur~uEemoti (vinula g x erminea 2 ).—Hybrids of
Cerura vinula X erminea were obtained by Serisié, a pairing between C.
vinula 8 and CU. erminea 2 occurring May 28th, 1854, the ° laying about
a hundred eges of which ten only emerged in fifteen days. Guillemot
notes (Ann. Soc. Ent. I'v., 1856, pp. 29 et seq.) the larve as being
nearer erminea than vinula. All the larve safely pupated, the pupe
appeared to be nearer those of vinula than erminea. From the pupe,
seven (6 g and 1 2) emerged at the end of April, 1855, and three (8
g) on May 7th-8th, 1856. These were nearer CU. vinula, but two of
the latest to emerge were pale and weakly marked. One of the more
typical gs is figured (vp. cit., pl. i., fig. 2). Opening the ? hybrid
and a 2 erminea that emerged at the same time, the body of the lattea
was found to contain, as usual, a large number of eggs; in the hybrid
only 22 eggs, ill-formed, depressed, atrophied, and bathed in a clear
fluid, and apparently quite incapable of being fertilised.

2. Noroponta hybr. punta (torva 3 x dromedarius 9 ).—Standfuss
notes (Handbuch, etc., p. 59) that a few years ago, hybrids between
Notodonta torvra 3 xX dromedarius 9, were obtained, but that the
hybrid is not known to him. It is, however, one of the species that.

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 21

he mentions (op. cit., p. 63) as being one in which the g hybrids
predominated over the females.

3. Noroponta hybr. NEwmanl (ziczac g x dromedarius 2 ).—In early
June, 1904, Newman was successful in obtaining a pairing between Noto-
donta ziczac § x dromedarius 9. The ? laid some 250 eggs, all of
which were fertile, but comparatively few hatched; the larvee were sleeved
on birch, but the mortality was great; pupation took place in due course,
imagines appearing from August 1st-31st,16 9s inall; some pupe then
alive and going over winter. Attempts to pair some of these ?s with
oO N. ziczac and N. dromedarius failed. We examined two @?s of this
cross and noted that the hybrids were larger than either parent (of
which the g (ziczac) was a pale form and the Q (dromedarius) of the
dark northern race). The hybrids exhibited the dark ground colour of
dromedarius, but had a rather reddish tint, the most important feature
of the specimens, however, being the combination of the markings of
dromedarius and ziczac, the apical mark of ziczac being exhibited,
modified, however, mcst towards the costa, where the transverse lines
of dromedarius in this area become visible as costal streaks ; the
aneular extension is also well-marked. The hindwings are dark, like
those of dromedarius. The pupe that went over the winter emerged
in 1905, in three separate instalments, some in April, others at the end
of May, and yet others at the end of June and early July, whilst, at the
end of August, two pup were still alive. All the 1905 emergences
were g's, and their number exceeded that of the 2s by two.

ChostgeRA HyBRIDS.—In 18738, Bond exhibited (Hint. Mo. May., x.,
p- 184) hybrid Clostera curtula x pigra (reclusa), which are noted as
partaking of the characters of both parents. In 1897, Standfuss also
obtained fertile crossings between (1) C. curtula § x pigra 2 and
reared the offspring (= C. hybr. prima), also of (2) C. curtula
3 X anachoreta 9 (=C. hybr. raeschket). These were followed up
by successful pairings between (3) C. pigra g xcurtula 2, which
resulted in the production of imagines (VC. hybr. inversa) in due
course, as did also the crossing of (4) (. anachoreta $ xX curtula

@ (=C. hybr. difficilis). The gsand ¢s of C. hybr. inversa were
found to be fertile inter se, as were also the gs and @s of C. hybr.
prima. The 3 of (5) C. hybr. raeschkei was paired successfully with
a 2 CU. anachoreta, and imagines were reared (C’. hybr. facilis) ; whilst
a male of (6) C. hybr. difficilis paired successfully with ? C. curtula
and produced imagines (C. hybr. similis). Males of (7) C. hybr. facilis
were again crossed with anachoreta 9 , but the larvee were not followed
up, although, in 1898, from another cross of this parentage, imagines
were obtained in due course (=C. hybr. approvimata). In the
spring of 1899, gs of C. curtula were crossed with @?s of similis,
the latter laying an abundance of fertile eggs which, however, do not
appear to have been recorded as successfully reaching the imaginal stage.
The following appear to be the chief points relating to these hybrids :—

1. Cuostera hybr. prima (curtula g xX pigra?).—In_ 1897,

parents crossed readily,“ eggs fertile, larvee fed up rapidly,} produced

* Newman states (Hnt. Rec., xii., p. 296) that, in his experience, the crossing
of C. pigra $ X curtula ? is an easier crossing to obtain than C. curtula ¢ x
pigra ?, but that the latter lays its eggs more freely.

+ Newman notes (Ent. Rec., xii., p. 296) that, whilst the larve of C. pigra ¢
x curtula @ feed up very quickly, as do the larvew of C. curtula, those of C. curtula
¢ xX pigra ? feed up very slowly, thus following the larve of C. pigra.

Do BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

gs and ?s with normal genital organs [figured Hntom., 1900, pl. viil.,
figs. 11(¢ ), 12(¢)], and nearer C. pigra than C. curtula. The 3 larve,
however, developed much faster than those of the @s, and g imagines
appeared earlier; in order to bring about a pairing, 3s were placed in a
cool cellar, where they became lethargic and were then brought into
ordinary temperature when ?s emerged. Five pairings were thus
obtained, and the @s laid respectively 85, 103, 112, 121, and 154
egos; larve developed in most of the eges but only 5, 12 and 17 larve
hatched (from the 2nd, 4th and 5th batches respectively). Larve fed
up well for a time, sleeved out on willow, but, being neglected, died.
In 1898, C. hybr. prima wasagain bredand gs and ¢s of the hybrids
paired, but the larve died in spite of good weather and food, being
apparently wanting in energy.

2. CrostEra hybr. inversa (pigra g X curtula Q ).—This reciprocal
cross to prima was obtained in 1898. gsand ¢s both emerged and are
figured [F'ntom., 1900, pl. viii., figs. 9(@ ), 10(¢ )], the males emerged
rather earlier than females, but not so much earlier as was the case in
C. hybr. prima. It was possible, therefore, to obtain numerous in-
breedings of ¢nversa without resorting to artificial means; but, although
plenty of fertile ova resulted and the larve appeared in due course,
they died soon after leaving the egg. This hybrid varies, sometimes
being nearer pigra than curtula (Standfuss), at other times hardly
different from purely-bred curtula (Fletcher).

3. CirosterA hybr. RaEScHKEI (curtula 3 X anachoreta 2 ).—This
cross was obtained in 1897, and the greater number of the larvee fed up
very rapidly, pupated about mid-June, and produced imagines before
the end of the month—all g's (figured E/ntom., 1900, pl. viul., fig. 14).
The rest of the larve developed very slowly, were different in appear-
ance from the rapidly feeding ones, being much nearer pure curtula larve
(with fewer traces of anachoreta origin); they fed slowly through
August, became very large (larger than big fullgrown anachoreta larve),
one pupating on the 21st and the other on the 28rd ; the others died
later; the two pupze produced imagines, probably at the end of
September, but were not discovered until the commencement of October
when they were still alive, but knocked to pieces ; they had distributed
in the breeding-cage masses of eggs, which seemed to be normally
constructed (but which, of course, had, unfortunately, not been
fertilised). In 1898, two more female larvee pupated, one emerged in
October and is figured (Hntom., 1900, pl. viii., fig. 18) to show its
immense size; the other pupa died during the winter. This ? was
not so near curtula as the two bred in 1897 ; pairing was not attempted.

4. Crostera hybr. prrriciuts (anachoreta f Xcurtula ).—This cross
is difficult to obtain. In 1898, 6 pairings obtained, each ? laid from
150 to 200 eggs, yet only 70 larvee were obtained and only 27 imagines
bred. Two only of these were ?s, both small, and their ovaries could
have contained but few eggs (one @? is figured, Entum., 1900, pl. vi.,
fig. 15, anda ¢ fig. 16); 3(or 4) individuals presented gynandromorphic
characters; the other 21 were normal gs.

5. Curostera hybr. Factiis (raeschket g x anachoreta 2 ).—The g
raeschket that emerged at the end of June 1897, crossed back readily
with anachoreta 9 8, the larve hatching quickly, and, by the beginning
of August (7.e., in only about 4 weeks and before the 9 raeschkei larve
were nearly fullfed) produced another generation of imagines, but all Js,
the female pupe going on to hybernation, the 2 imagines emerging in the

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 25

spring. Both sexes of this hybrid were much nearer to anachoreta than
raeschket, but differ in a regular manner from anachoreta in the reduction
of the group of dark spots at the dorsal angle of the upperside of the
forewings. The males of facilis paired again with female anachoreta,
the latter laying eggs that hatched in due course.

6. Crostera hybr. approxmara (facilis § x anachoreta ? ).—Malesot
the secondary hybrid facilis were paired with anachoreta ? in August 1897,
egos and larve were obtained, but the latter sleeved out, and not noted
further. In 1898, however, imagines of this tertiary hybrid were reared,
all males, and differing very little from anachoreta. The gs were not
tried but were, Standfuss thinks, without doubt, capable of reproduction.

7. Cuostrera hybr. simiuis (difficilis 3 x curtula 9 ).—A g of hybr.
difficilis, paired with a @ curtula in the summer of 1898; fertile eggs
were obtained and the larvee fed up very quickly and pupated, the pup
separated into two lots, one, the males, producing imagines very
quickly, the other, the females, going over the winter as pup and
emerging in the spring of 1899. The males and females were both
very like C. curtula, and the females were especially well-developed.
The latter paired freely with gs of C. curtula, eges were laid, and the
larvee were especially healthy.

SPHINGIDES.*—As we have already pointed out, crosspairing
between different Sphingid species has been noticed, and, although
pairings, such as those of Hyloicus pinastri g and Mimas tiliae 2
(Bartel, Pal. Gross-Schmett., ii., p. 148), Smerinthus ocellata § and
Hyloicus pinastri ¢° (Treitschke, Die Schmett., x., pt. 1, pp. 187-1388),
and Sphinw ligustrti g and Smerinthus ocellata 92 (Hntom., 1., p.
307), have taken place, in some cases more than once, they have
resulted, as might be expected, in the production of infertile ova.
The pairing of Smerinthus ocellata g and Mimas tiliae 9 (Herfert,
Insekten- Borse, xvi., p. 280), although not productive of fertile ova,
may be successful, for imagines of its reciprocal cross, Mimas hybr. leoniae
(tiliae 3 x ocellata ) have been reared by Standfuss. We have, however,
already dealt with the recorded hybrid Sphingids at such length
(anted, 111., pp., 8380-381; pp. 390-396; p. 495; iv., pp. 44-54; p. 481)
that detailed repetition would be purposeless. We simply note,
therefore, the actual Sphingid hybrids that have so far been reared.
These are :

AmorpHip& :—1. Mimas hybr. Leonrm, Stdfss. (tiliae g x ocellata
2 ) (anted, 111., pp. 891-2), of which only 3s were obtained, and these
resembled Mimas tiliae much more than Smerinthus ocellata.

2. CatasymBoLus hybr. interFauNus, Neum. (astylus 3% xX ocellata
@) (anted, 111., p. 392), of which 25 gs emerged in the summer of
1894, other pup apparently menlilay going over a second winter.

38. SMERINTHUS hybr. uysripus, Stphs. (ocellata gf xpopuli Q)
(anted 111., pp. 892-3; pp. 448-459) the best-know n, and most frequently
bred of all the Sphingid hybrids; in appearance intermediate between
the parent species; some hundreds have been bred of late years
by Standfuss and Newman.

4. Smerintuus hybr. operravert, Tutt (atlanticus Xaustauti 2 )
(anted, il., p. 398), only once successfully reared by Austaut, the

* As the details of the hybrids belonging to this superfamily have already
been published in volumes iii and iv, we give only brief summaries of them here.
Details can be obtained by reference to the earlier volumes.

24 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

imagines not differing much from those of Amorpha hybr. metis, Aust.,
the reciprocal cross between these Algerian species.

5. Smermntaus hybr. rrinest, Stdfss. (atlanticus g x popult 2)
(anted, lll., pp. 898-894), somewhat smaller than A. hybr. metis;
both sexes of the hybrid were reared.

6. Amorpna hybr. metis, Aust. (austauti ¢ xatlanticus 2) (antea
iii., pp. 894-5), a hybrid with parentage similar to that of A. hybr.
inversa and like that, according to Austaut, exceedingly difficult to
obtain.

7. Amorpua hybr. mversa, Tutt (populi g xocellata 2) (antea iil.,
pp. 895-896, 495), exceedingly rare and difficult to obtain; the imagines
are nearer to A. populi that is S. hybr. hybridus, but have traces of the
ocellated spots on the hindwings. It was not till the early part
of 1902 (March 20th and May 11th), that Standfuss succeeded in
rearing Amorpha hybr. inversa. Whether earlier breedings took place
is open to question, at any rate this appears to be the first recorded
one.

KumorpHip# :—1. Tueretra hybr. stanpFusst, Bart. ( porcellus 3 x
elpenor 2) (antea, iv., 46), one specimen reared from a larva found at
large with others on Epilobtum, and supposed to be Humorpha elpenor,
a second single specimen afterwards bred by Rossi.

2. Turneria hybr. vEsPpERTILIOWES, Bdy. (=amelia, Feisth.)* (hippo-
phaes 3 X vespertilio 2) (antea, iv., pp. 49-51, 481-482), described by
Boisduval and Feisthamel almost simultaneously from larve found near
Grenoble.

8. Hyzes hybr. epitosu, Bdv.(euphorbiae § x vespertilio 2 )(anted, 1Vv.,
pp. 46-49), reared from captured larve which resembled those of
euphorbiae, but fed on Epilobium, and reported from Hitningen in
Alsace, Basle and the Valais in Switzerland, Bozen and Vienna in
Austria, Lyons in France.

4, Hyxes hybr. reverent, Mory (? epilobti 3 x vespertilio 2 ) (anted, Iv.,
pp. 51-52), bred from larve taken with normal larve of 7. vespertilio,
but differing from them in coloration, markings and presence of a
short caudal horn. The latter character certainly suggests hybridity,
but there must be always great doubt as to epilobit being the g parent
in nature.

5. Hynes hybr. tipper, Mory (? euyent 9 x vespertilio 2 ) (antea, iv.,
pp. 52-58), bred from larvee found at Hitiningen with those of eugeni
above; the particular larve that produced them were unrecognised as
being different at the time, and the nearer resemblance of the imagines
to vespertilio appears to have suggested the assumed parentage.

6. Hyres hybr. pauui, Mory (? ewnhorbiae 3 x hippophaes ¢ ) (antea,
iv., p. 58), described from an imago bred from a pupa obtained from
a larva taken near Sion, no description of the larva being made. The
parentage is guessed from the appearance of the imago.

7. CeLerio hybr. pameupHorsia, Mitz. (? gallit 3 x euphorbiae ¢ ),
bred from a larva quite like that of C. gallii, but the imago came
nearer in appearance to euphorbiae than gallit.

The value of this latter evidence is small compared with that of the

* Guillemot (Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr., 1856, p. 29) throws doubt on the hybrid origin
of epilobit and vespertilioides, and asks ‘‘ Who is to say that they are not very rare
varieties of one of the species from which they are said to have descended ? ”’

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 25

Amorphids. If the parentage of most of these hybrids be as assumed,
and such forms are developed in nature, there should be little trouble
to verify the facts by breeding in captivity. It is not, perhaps, out of
place to note that Standfuss (Handbuch, etc.) states that remarkable
Phryxid larve were taken by Rober of Dresden, on fuchsia that he
supposed might be the progeny of a cross between Hyles euphorbiae
and HMumorpha elpenor. He failed, however, to rear them.
Arracipes.*—The first notes we have of hybridity among the
Attacids (Saturniids) are those of Ochsenheimer (Die. Schmett., i1., p.
Vill; lli., pp. 9-10; iv., pp. 191-193). Here he described two forms
of Saturnia hybr. hybrida (spint 3 x pavonia 2); which he later
separated as hybrida-major (approaching spini) and hybrida-minor
(approaching pavonia). Staudinger and Standfuss appear to have
been misled into assuming a different parentage, which we have
discussed (anted, 111., pp. 296-297). These appear to have come from
Vienna. In 1856, Anker bred others, at Budapest and Brinn (Fnt.
Nach., 1878, pp. 180-181; p. 175). Later notes on S. hybr. hybrida
were published by Aigner, in 1880 (Soc. Hnt., 1880, pp. 57-58; 1889,
pp. 56-57). In 1870, however, Wallace records (Hnt. Mo. Magq., vi.,
p. 267) pairings (obtained in 1869) between Antheraea pernyi 3 x
cecropia 2, Antheraea pernyt S xX polyphemus @, and Antheraea
pernyt 3 Xyamamai 2, of which eggs produced from the A. pernyt
xX yamamai pairing proved fruitful. Part of these eggs were handed
to Dr. T. A. Chapman, and, although Wallace failed to get imagines,
Chapman obtained one example, which was sent to Bond in 1876, and
exhibited by him (Hnt. Mo. Mag., vii., p. 263), the first A. hybr.
perny-yama successfully reared (the remark that it was reared by
Wallace being an error due to the reporter). About 1870, Bigot, a
French sericulturist, also obtained (1) Antheraea hybr. perny-yama
(pernyi 3 X yamamai ¢) and (2) its reciprocal cross, A. hybr.
inversa (yamamat 3 xX pernyt @ ), the progeny being magnificent moths,
hybernating in the pupal stage and maintaining themselves as distinct
for some time. JBerce also obtained examples of 4. hybr. inversa, and
nineteen of these cocoons came into the possession of Wailly in 1875
(Hntom., xiil., pp. 154 et seq.). From these cocoons only one imago,
a 2, emerged, and this paired with a g¢ A. perny?, the larve, when
hatched, being entirely black hke those of A. pernyi, and bearing no
resemblance to those of A. yamamat. Wailly does not tell us what
special characters were developed later, or whether he reared these
imagines, but says that degeneracy quickly occurs in the hybr. perny-
yama as a result of inbreeding. About 1878, the Bombay silk-spinners
are said to have successfully hybridised Antheraea mylitta with A.
yamamat, whilst Bourdier, in 1878, obtained further fruitful pairings
between Antheraea pernyi and yamamai (A. hybr. perny-yama), and
Wailly observed (Mntom., xiil., pp. 154 et seq.), in 1880, that, for several
years he has obtained crossings between pernyi g xX poluphemus @ ,
cecropia sg xX cynthia 92, several times; cecropia gf xX ylovert? ;
cecropia 3 X polyphemus@? , several times; pyrt g xX cecropta 3, but
that, in every case, the eggs had proved infertile. Im 1884, Wailly

* 'The details of the hybridism in this superfamily have already been published
in volume iii, to which reference must be made, as only a brief summary of facts is
recorded here.

26 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

exhibited (Ent. Mo. Mag., xxi., p. 115) hybrids between Antheraea
roylei and A. pernyi, and Samia cecropia x californica (ceanothi). The
first-named hybrid had been described in 1882 by Kirby (Proc. nt.
Soc. Lond., 1882, p. vii), whilst Moore described the reciprocal cross
(Ent., xxix., p. 237). Here, too, Wailly gives (op. cit., pp. 280 et
seq.) @ full account of Antheraea hybr. roylei x pernyi, stating that the
hybrids are perfectly fertile inter se, and notes that, at the end of three
years, they showed no signs of degeneracy. Wallace cites (Darwinism,
1889, p. 163) from Quatrefages, a case of fertility, inter se, in Attacus
cynthia x arrindia. This Watson attempted to discount (/nt., xxvl.,
p. 174) by stating that arrindia (which he calls ricini) is the Burmese
local many-brooded variety of the common cynthia, but we believe that
it is the Burmese local form of lanula not cynthia (Kirby, Cat., p. 748).
He, however, notes (op. cit., p. 176) that Antheraca mylitta crossed with
yamamai and A. pernyi with mylitta, but gives no details of eggs or
larve. Records of many other unsuccessful crosspairings are made by
Heyer (Soc. Hnt., xiii., pp. 187-188 and quoted anted, vol. ii1., p. 291).
At the meeting of the Entom. Society of London, July 7th, 1886,
Wailly exhibited some remarkable hybrids between Platysamia cecropia
and P. californica (ceanothi), afuller account, however, of the hybridisation
of the American species being published later (Hnt., xxvi., pp. 176-177;
Proc. Ent. Sec. Lond., 1895, pp. xxxiv-xxxv). An account of five of these,
with descriptions, is given anted, vol. iii., pp. 292-293. These are
Platysamia hybr. griffithst (cecropia x yloveri), P. hybr. watsoni (cecropia
x ceanothi), P. hybr. heyeri (ceanothi x cecropia), P. hybr. americana
(columbia x cecropia), Actias hybr. mortoni (luna x selene). Heyer notes
(Soc. Ent., xi., p. 187) that attempts to pair P. hybr. watsoni and P.
hybr. heyeri with each other failed to produce a single egg, whilst 2s
of P. cecropia paired with gs of both these hybrids produced a very
high percentage of fertile eggs. Standfuss (Handbuch, &c., pp. 99-100)
records the pairing of Saturnia pavonia § with Actias luna ? , obtaining
nine pairings, and over 1000 eggs, of which, however, none hatched.
A crossing of Saturnia pavonia § with A. isabellae ? also took place
(loc. cit.), the @ laying 98 eggs, of which 7 hatched, the larvee, however,
not surviving the first change of skin.

But it is the experiments that Standfuss has carried out on the
hybridism of Saturnia pavonia, S. spini, and S. pyri that have
thrown probably more light on some of the problems of hybridity
than any others (see Handbuch, &c., pp. 66 et seq., pl. i-iv; and
Entom., 1900, pp. 348 et seq., pl. vii-vili), already fully noticed (antea,
lil, pp. 296 et seg.) and that may be detailed as follows :—In
1891, Standfuss crossed S. pavonia 8 with pyri 2 (the hybrid pro-
duced being figured Handbuch, pl. i., figs. 1-4, and pl. iii., figs. 18-14),
and, in 1892, S. pavonia g with spini @ (the hybrid produced being
figured op. cit., pl. i1., figs. 8-5; pl. iii., figs. 9-10). These Standfuss
named respectively S. hybr. emiliae (with a dark ab. daubii) and S.
hybr. bornemanni. In 1898, Standfuss bred the first of his secondary
hybrids by crossing S. hybr. emiliae g back with S. pavonia 9. This
was described by Wiskott (Iris, vii., pp. 237-240) as S. hybr. standfusst.
A pairing between S. hybr. emiliae g and S. pyri 2 was also obtained
in 1898, and eges obtained, but these were infertile, but, in 1894, a few
larve hatched and the resulting imago was called S. hybr. risii by
Standfuss ; the hybr. standfusst is figured in Handbuch, &ce., pl. ii.

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. AAT |

figs. 6-7; and visti, pl. iv., figs. 1-8, the former being three parts
pavonia and one part pyri, the latter one part pavonia and three parts
pyrt. This year also he crossed S. hybr. bornemanni g with pavonia 2 ,
but the larve all died of an infectious disease in the last stadium.
The greatest surprise of 1898 was, however, the pairing of S. pavonta
3 with Graélisia isabellae ? ; of this cross 98 eggs were obtained, and
seven larve hatched. These Standfuss reared as far as the second
moult, when they died (a figure of the larva is given op. cit., pl. 11.,
fig, 6). Hermann, at Heinrichau, also paired a g Dimorpha verst-
colora with a @ Aylaia tau, and a g Aylaia tau with a 2? Saturna
pavonia, but the eggs laid were infertile. In April, 1894, Standfuss
obtained six pairings of A. tau g x Saturnia pavonia 2 and
seven pairings of the reciprocal cross, S. pavonia § x A.tau Q ; from
the first lot of pairings 800 eges were obtained, and from the second
500 eggs; yet, although they were laid quite normally, not a single
larva hatched. In 1895, Standfuss reports nine apparently normal
pairings between S. pavonia g and Actias luna 2, and over 1000 eggs
were laid, but none of these hatched.

During 1896 and 1897, Standfuss carried further his crossings
with the Saturnid hybrids. Having already obtained the primary
hybrids—S. hybr. bornemanni (pavonia g x spini Q), S. hybr.
emiliae (pavonia 3 x pyri ?)—and found the males of both hybrids
fertile with the original parents; he obtained the secondary
hybrids—S. hybr. schaufussi (bornemanni 3 x pavonia 9), S. hybr.
diaeyt (bornemanni 3 x spint 9), S. hybr. standfussi (emiliae
ox pavonia 2), and S. hybr. ristt (emiliae $ x pyri 2). He
then carried his experiments further, obtaining the hybrid S. hybr.
complera (standfussi g x pavonia @), and a remarkable tertiary
hybrid, S. hybr. schlumbergert (bornemannit g xX pyri Q), te, a
combination of pavonia, spini and pyri. Two other hybrids
were reared to the larval stage, viz., pavonia g x schaufussi 2,
schaufusst 3 xX pavonia 2, whilst a quaternary hybrid reached the
larval stage, viz., bornemanni g x schaufussi ?, thus proving S. hybr.
schaufussi 9 to be fertile. This proof he carried still further by
pairmg a schaufussi with a 9 schaufussi, from which he ob-
tained 3 imagines, a full account of which has already been given
(anted, i11., p. 298).

Lacuneipes*.—Of the Lachneids, Standfuss obtained pairings
between Malacosoma franconica g and M. castrensis 2 , between M. cas-
trensis § and M. franconica 2 , between M. neustria ¢ and M. franconica
2, between M. neustria g and M. castrensis 9 (Stett. Ent. Zeity.,
1884, pp. 198-199). The experiments were detailed later (Handbuch,
&¢., pp. 62-68), and it is to be noted that only the crossing J. castrensits
3 X franconica 2 produced no imagines. The others he described
and named as follows :—

1. Maxacosoma hybr. caransm, Stdfss. (neustria g x franconica @ )
12 gs bred, no @. These resemble MW. franconica more in contrast of
colour of wings with that of thorax and abdomen, and resemble 1.
neustria more in distinct yellow border of central band of forewings
and dark fringes on nervures iii and iv of hindwings.

2. Manacosoma hybr. scuaurussi, Stdfss. (neustria ¢ X castrensis

28 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

2). 12 ¢@s bred, no g. The markings intermediate between
those of the two species, following castrensis in that the inner
transverse line of band makes a small pointed angle into median
band, just before costa.

8. Maxacosoma hybr. penzia1, Tutt (franconica f x castrensis 2 ).—
1 @ only bred. Traces of the median band of castrensis (always
absent in franconica) are weakly indicated in the hybrid. The re-
ciprocal crossing, M. castrensis g x franconica 9, produced two
batches of eggs from which 70 and 92 larve emerged, but these died
without eating anything except their own eggshells.

In 1901-1902, Bacot successfully reared Malacosoma hybr. schaufusst
(neustria X castrensis) (Proc. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1902, p. vii; Ent. Rec.,
xiv., p. 106), when, from 200-800 eggs were laid, some of which were
quite empty, some devoloped embryos, which then died, others
produced larve. The young larve (very lke those of M. castrensis),
after the second moult, divided into two sections: (1) ‘ Forwards,” that
were healthy, fed up at an unprecedentedly rapid rate and produced
only @ imagines. (2) “Lagegards,’ an unhealthy, slow-feeding,
weakly lot that produced 30 pupe, from which 7 gs only emerged,
the other pupe belonging apparently to the same sex. The last
@ emerged three weeks ahead of the first g and before any g of
either of the parent species. In 1902, these experiments were continued
and described more at leneth (Proc. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1908, pp. vill-1x ;
Ent. Rec., xv., p. 184). Again the larve divided into “forwards”
and “laggards,” the former producing only females, and the latter
males. By forcing the 3 pup, however, pairings between g and 9
schaufussi were obtained. The ?s went through all the ordinary move-—
ments of egeglaying and deposited the ordinary cement without, however,
laying any eggs. Pairings between 3 schaufussi x Q castrensis, and
3 schaufussi X 2 neustria were obtained, but only few eggs were
laid, and these were infertile. The imagines of schaufusst bred in
1901 were remarkably uniform in colour and markings, those in 1902
were particularly variable. Of the 1901 brood, there were 6 fs and 44
9s, the gs with pale forewings and dark hindwings, and showing
unmistakable traces of both parent species. In the forewings, the
straightness of the transverse lines follows the g parent, but there
is a tendency in some of the specimens for the inner of the two lines
to turn inwards towards the base of the wing, as in castrensis, instead
of continuing straight to the outer margin as happens with neustria ;
they also follow the @ parent in showing more or less strongly
the outer dark shaded band, between the transverse line and the
margin of the wing (which is developed throughout a long series
of castrensis, but is present in none of the neustria); the dark hind-
wings are also almost entirely due to the same source, as I have never
seen a g§ of the pale canary-coloured form of the last-named species
that had dark hindwings, whereas this is the normal arrangement |
in castrensis. The 44 9 sare practically all of one type like the g's, the
ground colour being very dark umber-brown with narrow pale
transverse lines on the forewings; these are much sharper as well as
narrower, than is normally the case with castrensis, in which species
the lines are not only broader, but are suffused as well as at their
edges. In contour, they rather follow the neustria pattern, but there
are not wanting traces of the @ influence if carefully looked for.

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 29

There is a shght, but very shght, only just discernible, trace of the
space between the transverse lnes, being more strongly (darkly is
hardly the word) coloured than the remainder of the wing area, this
darkening being a marked characteristic of the females of neustria
where the band is more faintly, but still clearly, continued across the
hindwing as well, but of this there is no trace in any of the hybrid
specimens except on one where the outer transverse line is very faintly
continued on the secondaries ; this continuation of the transverse lines
is, however, frequently noticeable in castrensis 9s. There is no inter-
mingling of g coloration or pattern in any of the @ specimens,
the variegated marginal fringe, which many of the specimens show,
being quite normal to the ?s of both the parent species, though more
stronely marked in neustria. “One @ is aberrant in having a broad
longitudinal streak of the pale canary colour of the transverse lines
on the right wing only, and it is perhaps significant that this streak
is interrupted on the area between the transverse lines. The 1902
brood produed 6 gs and 16 ¢@8s. Of these, the gs differ considerably
among themselves and also from the previous brood. The largest
is a very fine specimen of the last year’s type, but much more strongly
and richly marked. There is one other weakly-marked specimen
of this type, but the others differ greatly. One is of a suffused ochre-
brown, which is not uncommon in specimens of castrensis, and is
occasionally present in males of neustria as well; both the bars
and the outer dark shading of castrensis are very faintly in evidence,
and the hindwings, though of a slightly different tint, are not markedly
darker than the forewings, the remaining three specimens are also of
this type as regards form and markings but very much darker, being
of a rich umber-brown, one of them being exceedingly dark, their hind-
wings also being noticeably darker than the primaries. As regards
coloration and variation these last four seem certainly to be
following castrensis rather than neustria. The 16 9s, like the gs,
show much variation among themselves, about half of them
approximating to last year’s brood, one of these, however, has a pale
unicolorous marginal fringe. ‘The other specimens haye, to a varying
extent, lost the pale transverse bars, in some instances entirely,
and they vary in regard to their uniform coloration from the darkest
umber-brown, to a pale dull brownish ochre; in two specimens
there is a tendency to be thinly scaled, after the fashion of females
of franconica (Bacot).

Selmons records (Soc. Hnt., 1894, p. 156) pairings between J.
alpicola 3 Xcastrensis 9, and M. castrensis § xalpicola 92; the
eges proved infertile.

4. Lastocampa hybr. waGnerti (quercis 3 Xtrifolii 9 ).—Standfuss
records (Handbuch, &c.) that Wagner obtained a pairing between
Lasiocampa quercis x trifolii @ from which fertile eggs and larve were
obtained, only one @ , however, reaching the imaginal state. He gives
no further particulars.

Gromerripes.—Hybridity among the Geometrids is rare, rather,
one suspects, from want of experiment than any other reason. Those
already recorded are as follows :—

1. Zonosoma hybr. sriewront (orbicularia 3 Xx linearia 2 ).—In 1859,
Cooke paired a g Zonosoma orbicularia with a 2 Z. linearia
(trilinearia) ; eight eggs only were laid, these hatched in due course,

30 j BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

and the larve varied much, some being like that of Z. linearta, others
like that of 7. orbicularia, others intermediate. They all pupated, but
only one imago appeared——a specimen much more like Z. porata or
4. punctaria than either of its parents (Hnt. Wk. Int., vili., p. 47).

2. Amparpasys hybr. HEREFORD! (strataria g Xx doubledayaria 2 ).—
In 1890, Chapman forced pupe of Amphidasys betularia in order
to pair the imagines with those of 4d. strataria and succeeded
in obtaining a pairing, a g A. strataria with a large black ¢@
A. betularia. Many fertile eggs were laid, the larve hatched
and fed up well, some half-dozen missing a moult, not feeding died
without being up to full-size, and assuming the pupal stage earlier than
the others. All the imagines from these emerged in autumn or winter
and died without being observed at the time. The rest of the larve
only produced about a dozen pups, which refused to be forced, and died
with the exception of two, which lived on until June, apparently
meaning to go over until another season (nt. Rec., il., p. 88).

8 and 4. Biston hybr. pruzm (hirtarius g x pomonarius @) and
Nyssra hybr. xtnut (pomonarius $ X hirtarius 2 ).—1n 1890, Pilz found
a gf Biston hirtarius paired with a Q B. pomonarius in nature; from
the eggs obtained, some interesting imagines were bred in due course,
and named by Standfuss, Biston hybr. pilzi (Hnt. Zeits. Guben, 1v.,
pp. 142-143 ; v., pp. 109-110). This form is figured by Standfuss
(Handbuch, &c., pl. i., figs. 1-2). Wiskott is said to have a ¢
of this hybrid, captured many years before on the promenade at
Breslau. This and its reciprocal cross have again since been bred,
and Oberthir, in 1897, described the reciprocal cross under the
name of Nyssta hybr. hiinii, figuring both pilzit and hint (Bull. Ent.
Soo. Fr, 1897, pl. 1., plz) (10 os, 4 9s); (pl. i, fun) eee
In 1900 (op cit., 1900, p. 274, pl. 1) he published a supplementary
note and figured the @ of hiinii. He notes that the interesting point
of crossing these species lay in the fact that the @ of biston hirtarius
is winged, that of Nyssia pomonarius is apterous. The hybrid pilzit
shows an intermediate stage of development between those of the two
parents, being semideveloped, and not apterous as the mother
(pomonarius @).- The g of the reciprocal cross hiunti is rather yellower
in tone than the g pilzi, but the @ hiinii is very similar to the ?
pilzu. Huni, who bred the specimens of the two hybrids that Oberthur
figures, says that he obtained, in 1896, about 100 eges of pilzii
(hirtarius X pomonarius) and about 200 of hiinit (pomonarius x hirtarius) ;
these hatched in May 1896, and the larvee were not easy to distinguish,
approaching rather to pomonarius, although a few only differed slightly
from the larva of hirtarius. They were, throughout their growth, larger
than larve of pomonarius of the same age, aud ate apple, pear, plum,
and Prunus padus, but preferred plum; the mortality was comparatively
small. In July, the larve pupated, and, as a result, about 70 pupe of
pizt and 140 of hiinii were obtained ; the pupz wintered in a cocoon,
and, in March, 1897, 30 examples (15 of which were illdeveloped) made
their appearance, the gs and ?s at the same time (although Pilz,
who had first bred the form, obtained the @ s the first year and the gs
the second year). Some hybrid hiimti also emerged in March, 1897, but
these consisted only of g's, the rest of the pupe going over. None then
emerged until March, 1899, and March, 1900, when 6 @s were reared,
other pup at the time still being alive and going over to another spring.

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 51

On the whole, in spite of certain similarities that make the two hybrids
very like each other, hiinti tends more to pomonarius (its g parent)
and pilzti to hirtarius (its g parent), thus supporting Standfuss’
first law (anted, p. 12) that the g¢ has a greater result on the
hybrid progeny than the @. Pairings were obtained between pilzii
S Xpilziti 2, pilzit S x hirtarius 9, hunw J X pomonarius 2, and
hiintt S xX pilzi 2, but the eggs resulting from all these pairings
proved infertile.

5. Ennomos hybr. partrorpi (alniaria § xX anyularia 2 ).—In 1895,
Farn recorded (Hint. Mo. Mag., xxxi., p. 280) the breeding of a cross
between Hnnomos alniaria (autumnaria) g and KH. angularia (quer-
cinaria) 2, the latter, which emerged unusually late in 1894, being
paired with a g FE. alniaria, which happened to come out in the same
breeding-cage ; the progeny showed characters of both parents and
paired together, but the ova proved infertile.

6. Sevenra hybr. parvinunaria (bilunaria 3 x tetralunaria 3 ).—In
1902, Newman crossed a g Selenia bilunaria with a Q@ S. tetralunaria
(Ent. Rec., xv., p. 25); the ? laid about 60 ova that hatched, the
larvee, however, appeared to be sickly, and, in the end, only 3 gs, which
emerged between July 30th and August 2nd, were reared. In general
tone these more nearly approach tetralunaria, and the inner line of fore-
wings and band of hindwings follow that species, whilst the outer line
of forewings and absence of any spot on hindwings are characteristic
of bilunaria (Proc. Sth. Lond. Ent. Soc., 1902, pp. 110-111). Bartel
records (Hint. Nachr., xxvi., pp. 340 et seq.) that his friend Herr R.
Sauermann obtained, in several cases, reciprocal crosses between
Selenia bilunaria and tetralunaria second broods, the progeny of
captured specimens of the spring generation. In both crossings, the
duration of copulation was shorter than is normal in these species.
The eggs were only laid very gradually, and the emergence of the larvee
was irregular. The larve are described and were distinguishable from
both parent forms, but differed little from one another. The only
hybrid form which had emerged up to the date of writing is named (on
p. 342) Selenia hybr. parvilunaria, and is diagnosed as: ‘“ Hybrida
Selenia bilunaria, Esp. var. juliaria, Haw. 9 et Selenia tetralunaria,
Hufn. var. aestiva, Ster. ¢@ ; lunula media alarum omnium supra
minima. Hxpans. alarum anticarum: 21-30mm. (¢); 2 ignota.”
These appeared as a third generation, some pupe of the same
brood going over the winter, as also did all those from crosses
of the types, and those from the reciprocal cross tetralunaria 3 Xx
bilunaria 2, which had seemed the more difficult cross to obtain.
A very detailed description of hybr. parvilunaria is given, from
which it appears that it is intermediate between the parent forms in
colour and some other respects, but is readily distinguishable from
both in some particulars, especially in the minutely small, transparent
lunules on the upper side of the forewings.

7-12. Terarosup uyprips.—The most important scientific results
obtained by hybridising Geometrid moths, however, are those produced
by crossing Tephrosia bistortata and 7’. crepuscularia, in the experiments
carried out in 1897 by Bacot and Riding. These, and the conclusions
drawn therefrom, are published in detail (Ant. Ree., ix., pp. 149,
248, 277, 819; x., 148; Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1898, pp. 17-42).
We can only here give the following summary thereof :

32 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

I. Rrprne’s Experiments: Fertile crossings were obtained of —

1. T. bistortata ¢ xT. ab. delamerensis 2¢.—a. Paired March llth; ova
deposited March 15th ; hatched April 26th to 27th.

2. T. ab. delamerensis 3 xT. bistortata ?.—a. Paired March 9th; ova
deposited March 14th; hatched April 18th to 19th.—8. Paired March 9th; ova
deposited March 13th to 14th ; hatched April 18th to 19th.

3. T. bistortata g xT. crepuscularia ?.—aand 8. Two pairings on March
17th ; ova deposited March 20th to 22nd; hatched April 25th to 27th.

4. T. crepuscularia $ xT. bistortata ¢ .—a. Paired March 7th; ova deposited
March 16th; hatched April 21st to 22nd. 8. Paired March 14th; ova deposited
March 20th ; hatched April 22nd to 23rd.

Crossings that failed were—(1) 7’. ab. delamerensis 3 x T. bistortata
2 , two pairings, February 28th and March 12th. (2) 7. crepuscularia g
x T. bistortata @ , three pairings, March 7th, 10th, 14th. The results
of the above crossings were as follows :—

i. Hybrid between ¢g T. bistortata (Clevedon) and? T. ab. delamerensis
(York).—No. lin list above. One batch of eggs hatched April 26th to 27th, 100
imagines emerged between June 12th and October 22nd, 1897; 48 ¢sand 52 ¢s
=T. hybr. riprnei-surrusa, n. hybr.

ii. Hybrid between ¢ T’. crepuscularia ab. delamerensis (York) and ¢? T.
bistortata (Clevedon).—No. 2 of above list. Two batches of eggs obtained ;
hatched April 18th to 19th. The two broods were fed up together, the imagines
exhibited being a mixture of both broods. 61 imagines were reared (60 ¢s and 1
¢). These emerged between June 12th and September 19th, 1897=T. hybr.
BACOTI-SUFFUSA, n. hybr.

These two crosses represent the reciprocal crosses of T. bistortata
and 7’. crepuscularia ab. delamerensis. Only 1 2 occurred in cross 11. The
percentage of a form approaching ab. delamerensis in the two crossings is
60 and 40 per cent.respectively ; the crossing in which 7. bistortata was the
male parent produced by far the larger and more vigorous offspring.

iii. Hybrid between ¢ T. bistortata (Clevedon) and ¢ crepuscularia (York).
—No. 3 of above list. Two batches of eggs obtained; hatched April 25th to
27th; larve fed up together. 121 imagines emerged between June 17th and
November 3rd, 1897. These consist of 65 ¢sand56 ?s=T. hybr. rrpinet, n. hybr.

iv. Hybrids between g T. crepuscularia (York) and ¢ T. bistortata (Clevedon).
—WNo. 4 of above list. Two batches of eggs obtained; hatched April 21st to 23rd;
larve fed up together, 40 imagines emerged between June 16th and November Ist,
1897. These consist of 40 males and no female=T. hybr. Bacortt, n. hybr.

These crosses 111 and iv, are the reciprocal crosses of typical T.
bistortata and T. crepuscularia. The most noticeable point is that
cross 11 produced 47 per cent. of females, and cross iv no female. The
earliest specimens to emerge (of both sexes) were pale, those longest
in the pupal stage were the darkest.

Il. Bacor’s Expertmuents: Fertile crossings were obtained of —

1. T. bistortata ¢ x T.ab. delamerensis ? .—Paired March 9th.

2. T. ab. delamerensis ¢ xT. bistortata ¢.—Three pairings. a. Paired
February 26th; ova hatched April 6th. §. Paired March 5th. vy. Paired March
9th ; ova hatched April 7th.

3. T. bistortata ¢ xT. crepuscularia ?.—Two pairings. a, Paired March
9th; ova hatched April8thto9th. 8. Paired March 9th; ova hatched April 8th to 9th.

4. T. crepuscularia g xT. bistortata ¢ .—Paired February 27th.

Crossings that failed were—(1) 7. crepuscularia 3 x T. bistortata @ .
Paired February 27th. (2) 7. ab. delamerensis § xT. bistortata @.
Paired March 4th. The results of the above crossings were as follows:

i. Hybrid between g¢ T. bistortatax ¢ T. ab. delamerensis.—(Ova received
from Dr. Riding. They are part of Dr. Riding’s cross marked 1.) Eggs laid
March 15th; hatched April 26th to 27th. 21 specimens emerged—11 males, 10
females=T. hybr. RIDINGI-SUFFUSA, n. hybr.

ii. Hybrid between 3 T. ab. delamerensis x ? T. bistortata.—No. 2a above.

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 33

One batch of eggs, hatched April 6th; some larve fullfed by May 9th; larve
mostly like that of the ? parent (bistortata), only a few having the apex of the p-
mark open like the larva of T. crepuscularia. Most of the larve pupated about the
middle of May. Imagines commenced to emerge early in June, at first rapidly
and afterwards more slowly, until end of June; there was then a break until July
16th, when they again commenced to emerge, and continued to do so at intervals
until the first week in September ; one specimen emerged during the last week in
October. 58 specimens emerged, all males—29 pale and 29 dark specimens=T.
hybr. BAcoTI-SUFFUSA, n. hybr.

iii. Hybrid between g T. bistortata x ¢ T. crepuscularia.—Of this cross there
were two different broods. Of the first, (2) (marked 3a in Bacot’s pairings), the
larvee for the most part followed the g parent (bistortata), only a few having the
apex of the a~-mark open as in that of ¢ parent; fullfed from about 16th to
20th May. 22 specimens emerged—14¢sand 8¢?s. These emerged in June, with
the exception of two (which came out in July). (8) Of the other brood of this cross
(marked 38) a fair number of the larvee fed up and pupated very quickly, but others
fed up slowly, and did not go down until the earliest specimens had commenced to
emerge; larvee unhealthy, large proportion died. 9 specimens emerged—six males
and 3 females. Four minute specimens—j2in. (3), +2in. (2 2s), ldin. (12).
These small specimens emerged in late June, two normal specimens in early June,
one on September 29th, and two late in October. It may be well to mention here
that these tiny specimens are not infrequent in inbred T. bistortata. Such a brood
e oe last is practically useless for comparative purposes=T. hybr. RrpIner, n.

ybr.

INBRED HYBRIDS OF JT’. HYBR. RIDINGI AND JT. RIDINGI-SUFFUSA.—
T. hybr. ridingi and T. hybr. ridingi-suffusa were the only two
hybrids that were inbred to the imaginal stage. (1) Of the form
(ridingi) both Riding and Bacot obtained fertile ova and bred imagines
in due course. The former obtained two batches of eges:—(a) Paired
August 10th; ova laid August 12th ; hatched during the fourth week
of August, some only fertile. (8) Paired August 13th; ova laid August
15th ; hatched first week in September. By October 22nd all except
thirteen larve had pupated. The first two imagines emerged on
November 4th, five fullfed larve at that date not having gone down.
The imagines continued to emerge till January 19th, 1898—84
imagines in all (28 ¢.s and 1198). These are paler than the parents,
varying from pale brownish to brownish-grey, some approaching the
2nd brood of T’. bistortata, others the gs of T. crepuscularia, but most
have very mixed characters. Six of these were paired in November,
of which about half the eees hatched in January, but the larve soon
died (Hint. Rec., xi., p. 144). Bacot obtained two similar crossings,
both from parents belonging to his batch iia, the parents being in
each case normal for that brood—(a) Pairing took place on June 17th,
1897 ; 22 imagines emerged, 12 gs and 10 38, between the middle of
August and end of October. (g) Of this brood, 8 imagines, 4g sand 4

2s, emerged during August, and others continued to do so until the end

of October. (2) Of the latter (ridinyi-suffusa), the parents were both taken
from Bacot’s batch i. They paired on June 18th, and as progeny
produced, in September, only two small round-winged imagines—one a
g (1din. in expanse) suffused with ochreous-fuscous, and with distinet
transverse lines; the other a ¢ (1+ins. in expanse), whitish ground
colour, with basal and median bands, and well-developed submarginal
lines to forewings, and median and outer bands to hindwings. Both
specimens show traces of a fine black longitudinal line on median neryure
at outer point of discoidal cell, and a small black costal blotch at upper
end of the basal line. This latter is most marked in two males of 7.
crepuscularia (2nd brood) bred by Bacot.

34 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Besides obtaining reciprocal crossings of the two species, as
detailed above, pairings of the hybrids were obtained by Riding between
June 13th and 26th, as follows :—

1. g(¢ T. bistortatax ¢ T. ab. delamerensis) x 9(¢ T. ab. delamerensis x
¢ T. bistortata).

2. (6 T.ab. delamerensis x 2? T. bistortata)x ¢(¢ T. bistortata x 2 T. ab.
delamerensis).

3. ¢(¢ T. bistortatax ? T. ab. delamerensis) x ¢(3 T. bistortatax ¢ T.
crepuscularia).

4. $(s TT. crepusculariax 2? T. listortata)x ¢ (¢ T. bistortata;egeeie
crepuscularia).

5. 3(¢& T. bistortata x ¢ T. crepuscularia) x ? (¢ T. crepusculariax ? T.
bistortata).

Of these different crosses twelve pairings in all were obtained,
eleven of which gave ova, and yet, of these eleven batches, only two
were fertile, both crosses of § (gf T. ab. delamerensis x 9 T. bistortata)
x 2? (g T. bistortatax 2 T. ab. delamerensis). Later pairings of ¢
(S T. crepusculariax @ T. bistortata)x 2 (gf T. bistortatax Q T.
crepuscularia) also proved infertile. Riding, however, obtained four
inbred pairings of g¢ (6 TI. bistortatax 9 T. crepuscularia) x 2 (fo
T. bistortatax @ T. crepuscularia) ; one of these produced no eggs,
another was infertile; the two others were, however, partially fertile. In
addition to the first crosses already summarised, Bacot obtained the
following more or less fertile crossings of the various hybrids reared
from the already described broods:

1. ¢(¢ T. ab. delamerensisx ¢ T. bistortata)x 9 (gT. bistortatax ¢ T.
crepuscularia). Two pairings—a. June 10th; 8. August 6th.

2. ¢ (3 T.ab.delamerensis x ¢ T.bistortata) x ¢(¢ T. bistortatax ¢ T. ab.
delamerensis). Two pairings on June 10th (eggs mostly fertile).

3. 3 (3 T. bistortatax 9 T. crepuscularia) x ¢(3 T. bistortatax g T. ab.
delamerensis). Paired June 11th.

He further obtained the following inbred pairings :—
ADs, (o -E. bistortatax ¢ TT. crepuscularia) x @ (¢ T. bistortatax 9 T

crepuscularia). Four pairings:—a. June 10th. 8. June 10th. y. June 14th. 6.
June 17th. (A large percentage of the eggs infertile.)
5. ¢ (o T. bistortatax ¢ T. ab. delamerensis) x ? (g T. bistortatax 2 T.

ab. delamerensis). One pairing June 13th. P
The following pairings of a hybrid with one of the parent species
were also obtained :

6. ¢ (& T. ab. delamerensis x ¢ T. bistortata)x 9 T. bistortata (second
brood). Paired June 15th. Only one or two ova hatched, remainder infertile.

7. ¢ J. crepuscularia (second brood)x ¢ (¢ T. bistortata x ? T. ab.
delamerensis). Paired July 4th.

The following crosses entirely failed :—

1. ¢ (& T. bistortata x ¢ T. ab. delamerensis) x ¢ (¢ T. bistoriatax 9
T. ab. delamerensis). Paired June 12th. ;

2. 6 (¢ T. bistortatax ¢ T. ab. delamerensis) x 2 (& T. bistortata x ¢
T. crepuscularia). Paired June 14th.

3. ¢ (¢ T.ab. delamerensis x ¢ T. bistortata) x ¢ (¢ T. bistortata x ¢ T.
crepuscularia). |

Only one secondary hybrid was reared to the imaginal stage,
Nie

v. Hybrid between g T. bacoti-suffusa x ¢ T. ridingi-suffusan—A ¢ (¢
T. ab. delamerensis x ¢ bDistortata) paired with a ¢ (¢ TI. bistortata
x 2? T.ab. delamerensis), the parents being taken from Dr. Riding’s crossings ii and i
above respectively. Two batches of eggs, hatched June 27th-30th ; forty-six imagines
emerged between August 21st and November 19th, 1897 (see Ent. Rec., x., pp.
143-145). It is almost impossible to classify these=T. hybr. urxta, n. hybr. T.
hybr. mixta was inbred by Riding. The pairing is noted as occurring on August 31st,

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 85

1897 (Ent. Rec., ix., p. 320) and fertile eggs were laid September 4th, which
hatched September 18th-19th; the larve were fullfed in November and early
December. From the pupx, imagines emeiged December 28th, 1897-January
27th, 1898—14 in all (11 ¢s and 3 ?s). The imagines small, pale brownish-white or
greyish-brown in colour, with some ancestral markings more or less defined but 4
only can be referred to a distinct form (viz., T. crepuscularia). Another batch of
eggs laid October 21st-22nd produced larvee November 13th-14th, but the larve
died. Of the 14 inbred T. hybr. mixta four were paired, one ? depositing two, the
other six eggs; seven of these hatched, but the larve died in a few days.

In one case a g of the parent race was crossed with a ? hybrid,
and the cross successfully reared to the imaginal stage, viz. :—

vi. Hybrid between 3 T. crepuscularia x ? ridingi-suffusa.—The parentage
being ¢ T. crepuscularia (second brood) x? (¢ TL. bistortata x 9? T. ab.
delamerensis). The progeny is, therefore, three-fourths 7’. crepuscularia and one-
fourth T. bistortata. The female hybrid chosen for this experiment was of the
delamerensis form, and taken from Bacot’s batch i. Pairing took place on July
4th. 49 imagines resulted and were exhibited, 38 ¢sand 11 ¢s. These emerged
during September and October. Only 2 ¢s were present among the first 37
emergences, and 9 among the last 12. The imagines consisted of 31 pale and 18 dark
specimens. With the exception of 7 females the remainder of this brood are, to
all intents and purposes, 7. crepusculuria. Only one who has made a very special
study of these species could tell that the latter specimens had been obtained from
parents that had been crossed with 7. bistortata=T. hybr. Reversa, n. hybr.

CymatopHoripes.—The Cymatophorids give, we believe, only one
recorded instance of hybridity, viz. :—

CymatopHora hybr. rLercuerti (ocularis 3 x or 2 ).—Fletcher placed
in a sleeve a C. ocularis (uctogesina) g and C. or 2, in June, 18938,
obtained eggs and larve and bred 33 9 moths in August and September
of the same year. The progeny resembled C. or, except that both orbicular
and renifori stigmata were very conspicuous, being pure white filled
up slightly with black, whereas in C. or they are usually inconspicuous
and the orbicular sometimes wanting. None of the pure bred C. or reared
at the same time has the stigmata so fully developed as have the hybrids,
which were most uniform in this respect (nt. Record, iv., p. 804).

DrepanuLwes.—Hybrids among the Drepanulids are exceedingly
rare. We can only trace the following :

1. Dreeana hybr. REBELI (curvatula g x falcataria 2 )—The first
record of this hybrid appears to be that of Gravenhorst (Isis,
1834, p. 720) who notes that a pairing of Drepana curvatula 9 x
falcataria 2 produced fertile eggs, larve, and finally @ imagines,
whilst the reciprocal cross produced infertile eges (see also Stett. Ent.
Zeit., 1858, pp. 281,411). ‘he same crossing was made by Standfuss
in 1897, and imagines reared and figured (Hntom., 1900, pl. viii., figs.
5-6). This he named Drepana hybr. rebeli. The resultant hybrid imagines
paired very easily and the females laid a varying number of eggs, normal
to outward appearance, in which embryos formed, but no larve hatched
therefrom, the shells, when opened, being found to contain normally
developed, but dead, caterpillars. In 1898, from fresh hybrid crossings,
a small number of larvae of rebeli g x rebeli 2 emerged from eggs, the
larvee full of life, but they refused food and died within 48 hours. In
1898, also, the reciprocal hybrid was bred by Standfuss (/ntom., 1900,
pl. vil., figs. 7-8).

2. Drepana hybr. approxmatuta (falcataria g Xcurvatula 2 ).—In
Standfuss’ D. hybr. rebeli the gs and Qs emerged together; in D.
hybr. approwimatula, the gs soon emerged (autumn), but the females
hybernated as pup, and emerged in spring. All the @8 of approwi-

36 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

matula had a number of eggs in their ovaries, although their develop-
ing power was not ascertained. Both hybrids are nearer to Drepana
curvatula than to D. falcataria, but the limited number of D. hybr.
approximatula bred makes it difficult to determine whether the g has
a stronger influence on the aspect of the hybrid than the ¢. The
earliest record of rearing this form is apparently that noted in the Ann.
Soc. Ent. Fr., 1833, p. lvi, where M. Apatz is stated to have done so
and named the hybrid approaimatula.

AnTHROCERIDES.—We have already referred (anted, p. 1) to the
remarks of Standfuss as to the frequency of crosspairing among the
Anthrocerids, and we have ourselves detailed (anted, i., pp. 418-420) a
large number of cases, including the obtaining of larve of A. /ili-
pendulae 3 xachilleae 2, of A. hippocrepidis (transalpina) gf X
peucedant @, and of A. fausta § x A. hippocrepidis 9. In spite of
this we agree with Oberthtir (Bull. Soc. Ent. France, 1897, pp. 256-7)
that wild Anthrocerid hybrids are very rare, and we are not altogether
inclined to accept as hybrids the many captured specimens, that
Standfuss avers that he has received, belonging to the group including
trifolit, lonicerae, stoechadis, filipendulae, angelicae, and transalpina, and
which he has not been able to refer to any of these species. Still we
are not altogether free from the suspicion that Anthrocera hippocrepidis,
Stphs. (stephensi, Dupont), described in detail (anted, 1., pp. 532-538 ;
544-546), has had a hybrid origin (Hint. Rec., 1x., pp. 103-107).
Of actual hybridisation experiments, the earliest are those made by
Fletcher, in 1889 and 1890, between Anthrocera lonicerae and A.
filipendulae*, and in 1891 and 1892 between Anthrocera lonicerae and
A. trifolii, the details of which were recorded in 1893 (Ent. Mo. Mag.,
xxix., p. 58). At the same time he obtained two pairings between A.
viciae (meliloti) g and A. filipendulae ?, and one pairing between A.
viciae § and A. worthingi 9 ; he failed entirely to obtain a pairing
between A. victae and A. trifolii, and the eggs resulting from the pair-
ings obtained failed to hatch. The fertile crossings obtained by Fletcher
(see anted, vol. i., pp. 418-420) may be summarised as follows :—

1 and 2. AnrHrocera hybr. mnrerMEpiIA (/filipendulae 3 x lonicerae
2) and AntHrocera hybr. wversa (lonicerae § x filipendulae ¢ ).—
These reciprocal crosses are reported as being intermediate in markings
between the parents, some of the gs showing only a shght trace of
the sixth spot when examined with a strong lens, whilst some of
the 9s have it as well-developed as it is in typical A. filipendulae.
The specimens were very large; two pairings of the hybrids were
obtained, but the eggs were infertile.

3 and 4. AnTHRocERA hybr. FLETCHERI (frifolii g xlonicerae 2?)
and AnrHrocera hybr. wortsinel (lonicerae g xtrifolii ¢ ).—Both
these hybrids laid fertile eggs, and the hybrids were fertile inter se,
progeny of fletchert 3 x fletchert 9, and of worthinyi J x worthingi 2
being obtained. Pairings between fletchert and lonicerae (one of the
parent species) were obtained and progeny reared.

5. AntHrocera hybr. secunpa (lonicerue g x fletcheri 2 ).—Larve
of A. hybr. secunda g x fletchert 9 were also obtained, which, however,

* Hamm records (Ent. Rec., xi., pp. 269-270) the finding of five pairs of A.
lonicerae and A. filipendulae, in copula, in nature, on the same day in July, 1899,
near Oxford. Three of the females found thus paired laid good batches of fertile.
eggs,

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. oT

were not persevered with, to bring them to the imaginal state. A
secondary hybrid, however, was reared as follows :—

6. AnrHrocera hybr. compLexa (worthingi g x fletchert 2); which,
in due course, was extended still further by obtaining—

7. AntHrocera hybr. conrusa (complera 3 x trifolii 2), and—

8. ANTHROCERA hybr. compuicata (lonicerae 3 xcomplexa 2 ).

It may be here noted that A. hybr. complewa interbred freely,
imagines of compleaa S$ Xcomplexa 2 being successfully reared.

9 and 10. AnrHrocera hybr. aneLorranica (jfilipendulae 3 x
ochsenheimert ¢ ) and AntHRocERA hybr. 1raLoaneuica (ochsenheimert g
x filipendulae ¢).—In 1895 and 1896, Fletcher was successful in
crossing British A. filipendulae with Italian A. ochsenheimeri, and also
obtained the reciprocal cross. The hybrid gs exhibited markedly the
characters of g ochsenheimeri, the hybrid ?s the characters of 9?
filipendulae (see Ent. Rec., ix., pp. 69-70). Fletcher records further
(Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1897, p. lit) that these crosses were fully
fertile inter se.

11. Anrurocera hybr. Escuert (trifolii g x filipendulae ¢? ).—In
1896, Standfuss describes and figures (Handbuch, etc., pl. ii1.,
fig. 5) imagines of a hybrid (A. hybr. escheri, Stdfss.) which he had
bred, the imagines being distinctly intermediate between the parents,
Anthrocera trifolti 3 x A. filipendulae @.

AXGERUDES.—Concerning hybridism among the Avgeriids, some
interesting details as to a supposed hybridisation in nature of Algeria
chrysidiformis and 44. ichneumoniformis are given (fnt. Rec., xill., pp.
174-175) by Delahaye, who asserts that he observed pairing between
ichneumontformis g and meyillaeformis 2 , and between chrysidiformis
dg and megillaeformis ¢ , but the facts given are such as to obscure
' any useful conclusions.

Psycumpes.—Among the Psychids, Standfuss reports (Handbuch,
etc., p. 56) that Ptingeler reared hybrid imagines from eggs obtained
by crossing Pumea casta $ x F. affinis 2; also from eggs obtained
from the reciprocal cross Fumea affinis § and I’. casta 2, only gs
resulting in each case.

CATALOGUE OF HYBRID LEPIDOPTERA.
ARCTIIDES.
Spilosoma, Stphs.
hybr. crassa, Caradja (standfussi ¢ x sordida ¢ ).
hybr. viertli, Caradja (rustica ¢ x sordida ¢).
hybr. beata, Caradja (rustica ¢ x viertli ¢).
hybr. hilaris, Caradja (inversa ¢ x viertli ¢).
hybr. seileri, Caradja (luctuosa ¢ x sordida ¢).
NoTopoNnTIDES.
Cerura, Schrk.
hybr. guillemoti, Tutt (vinula ¢ x erminea 9 ).
Notodonta, Ochs.
hybr. dubia, Tutt (torva ¢ x dromedarius ¢ ).
hybr. newmani, Tutt (ziezac ¢ x dromedarius ¢ ).
Clostera, Stphs.
hybr. prima, Tutt (curtula ¢ x pigra ¢ ).
hybr. inversa, Tutt (pigra ¢ xX curtula ¢).
hybr. raeschkei, Stdfs. (curtula ¢ xX anachoreta ? ).
hybr. difficilis, Tutt (anachoreta ¢ xX curtula ¢ ).
hybr. facilis, Tutt (raeschkei ¢ X anachoreta ¢ )
hybr. similis, Tutt (difficilis ¢ x curtula ¢ ).
hybr. approximata, Tutt (facilis ¢ X anachoreta ¢ ).

88 - BRITISH LEPIDOPTRRA-

SPHINGIDES.
Mimas, Hb. ~
hybr. leonie, Stdfss. (tiliz ¢ x ocellata 2).
Calasymbolus, Grote
hybr. interfaunus, Neum. (astylus ¢ x ocellata ?).
Smerinthus, Latr.
hybr. hybridus, Stphs. (ocellata ¢ x populi ?).
hybr. oberthueri, Tutt (atlanticus ¢ x austauti ?).
hybr. fringsi, Stdfss. (atlanticus ¢ x populi ¢).
Amorpha, Hb.
hybr. metis, Aust. (austauti g¢ x atlanticus ¢).
hybr. inversa, Tutt (populi ¢ x ocellata ¢).
Theretra, Hb.
hybr. standfussi, Bart. (porcellus ¢ x elpenor 2).
Turneria, Tutt
hybr. vespertilioides,* Bdy. (? hippophaes ¢ x vespertilio ?).
Hyles, Hb.
hybr. epilobii,* Bdv. (? euphorbie ¢ x vespertilio ¢ ).
hybr. eugeni,* Mory (? epilobii ¢ x vespertilio ¢).
hybr. lippei,* Mory (? eugeni ¢ x vespertilio ¢ ).
hybr. pauli,* Mory (? euphorbie ¢ x hippophaes ¢ ).
Celerio, Oken
hybr. phileuphorbia*, Miitz. (? gallii ¢ x euphorbie 2).
ATTACIDES.
Antherea, Hb.
hybr. perny-yama, Bourd. (pernyi ¢ x yama-mai @ ).
hybr. inversa, Tutt (yama-mai ¢ x pernyi ¢ ).
hybr. kirbyi, Tutt (pernyi ¢ x roylei ?).
hybr. moorei, Tutt (roylei ¢ x pernyi ¢?).
Philosamia, Grote
hybr. wallacei, Tutt (cynthia ¢ x arrindia (lunula) ¢).
Samia, Hb.
hybr. griffithsi, Tutt (cecropia ¢ x gloveri ¢).
hybr. watsoni, Tutt (cecropia ¢ x rubra (californica) ? ).
hybr. americana, Tutt (columbia ¢ x cecropia 2? ).
Platysamia, Grote
hybr. heyeri, Tutt (rubra (californica) ¢ x cecropia ¢ ).
Actias, Leach
hybr. mortoni, Tutt (luna ¢ x selene ¢).
Saturnia, Schrk.
hybr. bornemanni, Stdfss. (pavonia ¢ x spini ?).
hybr. hybrida, Ochs. (spini ¢ x pavonia @).
hybr. emiliz, Stdfss. (pavonia ¢ x pyri 2).
hybr. hybrida-major, Staud. (pyri ¢ x spini ¢).
hybr. hybrida-media, Staud. (pyri ¢ x pavonia ?).
hybr. schaufussi, Stdfss. (bornemanni $ x pavonia ?).
hybr. standfussi, Wiskt. (emiliz ¢ x pavonia 9).
hybr. visii, Stdfss. (emilie $ x pyri ¢).
hybr. schlumbergeri, Stdfss. (bornemanni ¢ x pyri ¢ ).
hybr. dixeyi, Tutt (bornemanni ¢ x spini ¢).
hybr. complexa, Tutt (standfussi ¢ x pavonia ¢ ).
LACHNEIDES.
Lasiocampa, Schrk.
hybr. wagneri, Tutt (quercts ¢ x trifolii ¢).
Malacosoma, Hb.
hybr. schautussi, Stdfss. (neustria ¢ x castrensis @ ).
hybr. caradjx, Stdfss. (neustria ¢ x franconica @ ).
hybr. penzigi, Tutt (franconica ¢ x castrensis ¢ ).
GEOMETRIDES.
Zonosoma, Led.
hybr. brightoni, Tutt (orbicularia ¢ x trilinearia ¢ ).

* Those marked * require to be reared in confinement to substantiate the
parentage.

CO ———————

HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 39

Amphidasys, Tr.
hybr. herefordi, Tutt (strataria ¢ x betularia ? ).
Biston, Leach
hybr. pilzii, Stdfss. (hirtaria ¢ x pomonarius @¢ ).
hybr. hunii, Obth. (pomonarius ¢ x hirtaria ¢ ).
Selenia, Hb.
hybr. parvilunaria, Bartel (bilunaria ¢ x tetralunaria 2? ).
Ennomos, Tr.
hybr. dartfordi, Tutt (alniaria ¢ x angularia ¢@ ).
Tephrosia, Bdvy.
hybr. ridingi, Tutt (bistortata ¢ x crepuscularia 2? ).
hybr. bacoti, Tutt (crepuscularia ¢ x bistortata ¢ ).
hybr. ridingi-suffusa, Tutt (bistortata ¢ x delamerensis ¢ ).
hybr. bacoti-suffusa, Tutt (delamerensis ¢ x bistortata @¢ ).
hybr. mixta, Tutt (bacoti-suffusa g¢ x ridingi-suffusa ¢ ).
hybr. reversa, Tutt (crepuscularia g x ridingi-suffusa ? ).
CYMATOPHORIDES.
Cymatophora, Hb.
hybr. fletcheri, Tutt (ocularis ¢ x or @).
DREPANULIDES.
Drepana, Schrk.
hybr. rebeli, Stdfss. (curvatula ¢ x falcataria ¢ ).
hybr. approximatula, Apatz (falcataria ¢ x curvatula ¢ ).
ANTHROCERIDES.
Anthrocera, Scop.
hybr. escheri, Stdfss. (trifolii ¢ x filipendule @ ).
hybr. intermedia, Tutt (filipendule ¢ x lonicere @ ).
hybr. inversa, Tutt (lonicere ¢ x filipendule ?).
hybr. fletcheri, Tutt (trifolii ¢ x lonicere ¢).
hybr. worthingi, Tutt (lonicere ¢g x trifolii ¢?).
hybr. secunda, Tutt (loniceree g x fletcheri ¢ ).
hybr. complexa, Tutt (worthingi ¢ x fletcheri ¢ ).
hybr. confusa, Tutt (complexa ¢ x trifolii ¢).
hybr. complicata, Tutt (loniceree ¢ <x complexa ¢ ).
hybr. angloitalica, Tutt (filipendule g x ochsenheimeri @ ).
hybr. italoanglica, Tutt (ochsenheimeri ¢ x filipendule ?).
PsYCHIDES.
Fumea, Stphs.
hybr. piingeleri, Tutt (casta ¢ x affinis @ ).
hybr. inversa, Tutt (affinis ¢ x casta ?).

Clavaeubiae It.

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA.

It is often assumed, as a biological fact, that the crossing of indi-
viduals of the same species that have been subjected to somewhat
different conditions of environment usually results in the production
of progeny that are more vigorous and fertile, and it is generally
considered that, so long as we keep strictly within the specific limit,
this law holds good, even when the forms crossed constitute distinct
local races of special form or colour. Little is really known of the
limitations of this generalisation, and it is obvious that, if local races
of special form, colour, or habit, engendered by different conditions of
environment, are the primary steps in the development of species,
exceptions may possibly be found, for, coupled with this change of
external characters, there may be changes in the tissues, in the
functional details of the organism, etc., superimposed by the changed

40 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

conditions of food, mode of life, habit, etc., in other words, that these
local races themselves vary in the extent to which they have travelled
towards species, for we have no doubt that the internal physiological
variations are often of much greater importance in the making and
fixation of species than the external differences which are so patent.
These external differences, on which the systematist separates his
species, are often merely outward marks of a much more fundamental
internal variation of structure and function, difficult to observe and
still more difficult to demonstrate. Whilst, therefore, the general
principle may be admitted, that crossbreeding between males and
females of the same species that have been subjected to different
environmental conditions resulting only in superficial differences,
usually results in greater vigour and fertility, it must not be overlooked
that, if functional and internal structural changes have also taken
place, the results may be entirely contrary to those expected, and that
.a lower grade of vigour and fertility, if not a real approach to sterility,
so frequently found in the crossing of true species, may be presented.
In this way, the crossing of races of the same species may give very
different results in different species, and their study may help much to
solve some of the difficult problems growing out of the subject of
hybridism.

We have suggested here that internal differences of structure and
function, changes in mode of life, food, and habit, etc., have brought
about the separation of specific forms, and that closely-allied species
are more often due to a differentiation of function or habit than to any
marked external structural character, and hence we find that, when
local races begin to offer marked physiological, ¢.e., functional, differ-
ences, the races often lose that invigorating power that crosses of more
nearly related local forms present, and produce offspring that are in some
degree sterile. But, although this may be conceded, we must be careful
not to assert that, because two assumed species being crossed do produce
fertile progeny, the two species are not in reality distinct species, but
only forms of the same species. The attempt to make sterility the
test of species has already been put forward ; it can only, however, be
considered as one of many other tests of specific distinction.

In dealing with this subject it is well to keep clearly in mind the
distinction between crosses of distinct species, resulting in the pro-
duction of hybrids, and crosses of varieties (local races) of the same
species, resulting in the production of monegrels. The scientific
utility of the results hitherto obtained by crossing two forms of a
species, one of which is more or less typical, and the other merely a
sporadic aberration, or a form which has not yet developed into a
distinct local race, is very problematical, and the results are, probably, ©
so far as their bearing on the broad questions underlying hybridity
is concerned, of little more importance than of breeding any two other
specimens of the same species together. That the sporadic aberration
happens to have a marked peculiarity of colour or form (due possibly
to a matter of larval health) may be nothing, and, so far as this question
is concerned, such an aberration is not to be considered on the same
level as a local race. The crossing of different forms of a dimorphic,
trimorphic, or polymorphic species, the two, three, or more forms being
developed naturally, in the same locality, and occurring in the same
brood, must be placed in a different category, but the most that can be said

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 4]

for the results yet obtained by crossing one of such forms with another,
is that they may possibly throw some light on the problems of heredity.
As soon, however, as a form becomes permanently associated with a
certain condition, or conditions, of environment, and has, possibly, a
‘correspondingly marked variation in its internal structure and
functions, the results become directly connected with the broad
problems relating to hybrids proper, and are likely to throw light on
the origin of the peculiarities which so many hybrids undoubtedly
present.

As bearing on this point, Darwin writes (Origin of Species, 1884
ed., p. 263): “ It is not surprising that the difficulty in crossing any
two species and the sterility of their hybrid offspring, should, in most
cases, correspond, even if due to distinct causes, for both depend on
the amount of difference between the species which are crossed. Nor
1s it surprising that the facility of effecting a first cross, and the
fertility of the hybrids thus produced, should all run, to a certain
extent, parallel with the systematic affinity of the forms subject to
experiment ; for systematic affinity includes resemblances of all kinds.
First crosses between forms known to be varieties, or sufficiently alike
to be considered as varieties and their mongrel offspring, are very
generally, but not, as is so often stated, invariably, fertile. Nor is this
almost universal and perfect fertility surprising when it is remembered
how liable we are to argue in a circle with respect to varieties in a state
of nature, and when we remember that the greater number of varieties
have been produced under domestication by the selection of mere
external differences, and that they have not been long exposed to
uniform conditions of life. It should also be especially kept in mind,
that long-continued domestication tends to eliminate sterility, and is,
therefore, little likely to induce this same quality. Independently of the
question of fertility, in all other respects there is the closest general
resemblance between hybrids and mongrels—in their variability, in
their power of absorbing each other by repeated crosses, and in their
inheritance of characters from both parent forms. Finally, then,
although we are ignorant of the precise cause of the sterility of first
crosses and hybrids . . . . yet the facts given do not seem to be
opposed to the belief that species akoriginally existed as varieties.”’

In this, without expressly stating the fact, Darwin recognised that
domesticated races that have been brought about first of all by selection
of casual similar aberrations, and weeding out from the progeny all
but those possessing the superficial characters desired, without bring-
ing into play any selection of characters essentially functional, are
distinctly different from those races that have been selected by nature,
not only as presenting some superficial external character, such as colour,
etc., that fits each one better for its environment, but as also having
undergone some functional modification with regard to some detailed
specialisation, ¢.g., to some particular foodplant, which has separated
it to some small extent functionally as well as superficially from the
parent race.

The broad statement that we have made, that the results of crossing
a quite sporadic aberration with an example of typical form may
possess little scientific value, appears to be well substantiated by the
experiments noted later with Mimas tiliae and its obsoletely-banded
aberration (Standfuss), Abravas ulmata and its ab. sufusa (Riding), ete.,

49 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

that is to say, that an aberration resulting from individual constitutional
weakness, or other temporary cause, is not to be developed into a special
local race, nor has the progeny of such a parent reared under healthy
conditions any tendency to reproduce the form of the individually
weak parent.

Where, however, a dimorphic, trimorphic, or polymorphic species
develops its various forms from healthy larve in nature, under the
same or somewhat similar conditions, it affords prima facie evidence
that any one form is kept from becoming predominant because the
others are equally well protected and enter into competition with it on
equal terms. The experiments enumerated tend to prove that this is
the case, ¢.g., in the case of Coremia ferrugata (red-banded) and its
aberration wnidentaria (black-banded), the two forms of which occur
together in most parts of Britain, it is possible in a few generations, by
careful selection of inbred parents, to breed purely red- or black-banded
forms. Similarly the experiments with Gonedontis bidentata, tend to
prove that where the ab. niyra is a protected form, it is easy, by selec-
tion of black parents and by removing the ordinary outside competition
of the typical form, to rear artificially a race of almost purely black
individuals. Almost identical with this are the cases of Lymantria
monacha ab. eremita, Hemerophila abruptaria ab. fuscata, and Amphidasys
betularia ab. doubledayaria, of which careful selection and the removal
of normal outside environmental conditions allow one to rear typical
or melanic races at will, showing that very little variation in these
conditions would convert these melanic formsfrom mere aberrations into
local races, which would supplant the type in those districts where the
conditions were favourable to their development. These appear to
us to be much more nearly of the character of natural local races than
does Spilosoma lubricipeda ab. zatima, which appears to be everywhere
a rare aberration in a wild state, and to have assumed its present
fixed varietal or racial characters from domestic selection spread over
many years, in some cases, perhaps nearly half-a-century. The racial
character of Doarmia repandata ab. conversaria, in certain districts, is
almost on a par with those of the melanic forms of the species already
noted, viz., that it is a form able to hold its own with the type in the
particular areas in which it appears and is possibly due to comparatively
modern changes of the environment in the areas which it affects. One
of the most remarkable instances of racial value, in what would other-
wise have been deemed a purely sporadic and incidental sport, is that
of Zonosoma annulata ab. obsoleta. The results of Riding’s experiments
prove the racial value of the form, but our ignorance of the habits of the
insect does not enable us to give an explanation of its meaning. We
may surmise fairly that Amphidasys betularia, Tephrosia crepuscularia,
Gonodontis bidentata, Lymantria monacha, etc., are undergoing racial
change for protective purposes, and in response to a changing environ-
ment, that possibly, in most of these cases, the so-called melanic form
is atavistic, and that the peculiar colour has been slowly acquired at
an earlier period in the life-history of the species, so that it has
always had potentialities in this direction, that Boarmia repandata ab.
conversaria, is the result of a change in the wooded haunts the typical
form loves, and is also most probably atavistic, whilst its var. sodoren-
sium, has been produced by its having an entirely different habit (resting
on rocks), but, as we have just noted, we are unable to give an explanation

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 43

of the reason why it is so easy to breed out the little omicron in the
centre of each wing of Zonosoma anniulata, nor can we hazard a guess
as to whether the abs. obsoleta and biobsoleta are atavic forms, or
developments due to recent changes in the haunts where they occur.
Workers in this branch of study must not overlook the secondary
bearings of the experiments of Riding and Bacot when using Tephrosia
crepuscularia ab. delamerensis as one of the forms of the species experi-
mented on, for their hybrid experiments between 7. crepuscularia and
T. bistortata. Reference can be readily made to the details (77ans.
Ent. Soc. Lond., 1898, pp. 17-42). The influence of the aberrational
form, when used instead of the typical form as one of the parents, on
the progeny, was most marked..

It must be conceded, that there may sometimes be considerable
scientific value in knowing the results of crossing a well-marked
aberration with its typical form, yet it must not be overlooked that it
is still more important to discover how far the characters that come to
the front in an aberration are capable of being made permanent by
selection, and also what are the natural conditions of environment
that repress these latent characters, so that they are only occasionally
exhibited in any brood bred under quite natural conditions. Many
data in this direction are no doubt available, but they are difficult to
discover, and often too incomplete to be of real value. Exact data
bearing on this view of the question are much wanted.

As an illustration of the nature of the so-called ‘‘ dominant” and
‘recessive’ elements that appear and disappear in the progeny
resulting from the crossing of a type and a well-marked colour, or
structural, aberration, we may call attention to Raynor’s account of
the breeding of the flavofasciata (lacticolor) form of Abraxas grossulariata
(Hint. Rec., xiv., pp. 821 et seq.; xv., pp. 8 et seqg.). In these experiments,
a first crossing of grossulariata $ xX flavofasciata Q produced only
grossulariata, whilst inbred grossulariata of this strain, t.e., with flavo-
fasciata latent in them, produced several flavofasciata Qs. These flavo-
fasciata 9s, again crossed with outside g yrossulariata, produced no
flavofasciata, etc. Doncaster, who has made an attempt to explain
Raynor’s results, on the basis of Mendel’s ‘law of heredity, ’’ observes
(dint. Rec., xv., pp. 142 et seg.) that it may seem remarkable that
among the children of a flavofasciata there should be none resembling
their mother, but that the aberration should appear again in some
abundance in the grandchildren, but the results are so exactly in
accord with what would be expected according to the Mendelian law
of heredity, that it has seemed worth while to draw attention to
the facts.. In a simple Mendelian case when two varieties—in this
instance yrossulariata and flavofasciata—are bred together, their
offspring all resemble one of the parents, and the character of that
parent is said to be “dominant,’’ while the character of the other
parent, which disappears in the first generation of offspring, is called
‘“‘ recessive.’ But, although the recessive character disappears, it is
latent, and the hybrid offspring produces germ-cells bearing either the
dominant character or the recessive, but not both characters, in the
same germ- -cell. If, now, equal numbers of dominant (yrossulariata)
and recessive (flavofasciata) germ-cells are produced by each hybrid,
and these meet one another in fertilisation quite by chance, then:
according to the law of probability, the insects of the second generation

44 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

should be in the proportion of 1DD,2DR, 1RR, the form DD representing
an insect derived from an ovum and spermatozoon each bearing the
dominant character, RR from two germ-cells bearing the recessive
character, and DR from germ-cells, one of which bore the dominant,
the other the recessive, but, in every case where a dominant-bearing
germ-cell has taken part in fertilisation, the offspring will show the
dominant character, so that, in the second generation from the cross,
one quarter only of the insects should appear with the recessive ( flavo-
fasciata ) character. Of the remaining three-quarters, all of which
will be grossulariata, two-thirds will be hybrid in nature, and will give
recessive flavofasciata when bred together, while the remainder will be
pure grossulariata, and will never throw jlavofasciata when bred
together. This particular instance is complicated by the fact that
flavofasciata is confined to the female, and, therefore, if a specimen is
paired with a pure yrossulariata, no flavofasciata will appear in the
offspring; but it should be possible to breed flavofasciata in every
generation by pairing it with a dominant hybrid (DR) which has the
grossulariata character in appearance, but also the recessive jlavo-
fasciata character ina latent condition. Mr. Raynor does not tell us
what proportion of his insects were jlavofasciata in the second
generation from the cross, but this is a matter of considerable interest,
for if there were much less than a quarter of the whole, which the
Mendelian theory leads us to expect, it might indicate that there is
a male flavofasciata which has the character of yrossulariata, and,
therefore, cannot be distinguished from it except by breeding it with
a flavofasciata 2 , in which case all the females produced from such
an union should be flavofasciata. Not all Mendelian cases are so
simple, for there may be two or more characters which are inherited
separately, but 1t seems worth while to call the attention of entomo-
logists to the matter, for most of the work upon the Mendelian theory
has been done upon vertebrate animals and flowering plants, and it
would be of great value to have additional evidence from insects.
Further details relating to this subject are noted (posted p. 65), Raynor
having since bred 3s of the flavofasciata form.

In dealing with the details we have been able to collect, relating to
the question of mongrelisation, we think it may be well to consider
them under the following headings.

I. CRossING OF TYPICAL FORM AND LOCAL RACE.

Standfuss is one of the few authors who has worked out mon-
grelisation experiments on the basis of obtaining data similar to those
obtained by hybridisation experiments, and Dixey (Science Proyress,
vil., April, 1898) considers the results in many cases analogous. The
facts at our disposal concerning the crossing of a type form with a
local race may be summarised as follows :—

1. CALLIMORPHA DOMINULA g X PERSONA @ .—In these crossings, the
imaginal issue produced, though very variable, resembled on the whole
dominula rather than persona. In one brood, however, a majority
more closely resembled the latter, whilst one specimen was even more
extreme than ordinary persona. From 38 to 5 per cent. of the eggs
were sterile ( Handbuch, etc., pp. 220-221, pl. v., figs. 6-10). Of the
five examples figured from this crossing, three are noted by Standfuss
as C. ab. romanovi, Stdfss. (with red hindwings and excess of black
markings), one is a C, ab. italica (with yellow hindwings and excess

]

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA, 45

of black markings), and one is a (. var. persona (with yellow hindwings
almost entirely suffused with black).

2. CALLIMORPHA PERSONA g X DOMINULA ? .— In this, the reci-
procal cross of the last, the imagines also varied between the parentai
types, but, on the whole, came nearer to (. dominula than to the
variety, though less so than in the former cross. Of the eggs, from 10
to 15 per cent. were sterile, from which Standfuss concludes that the
3 of persona has already diverged from the physiological standard of
the species (Handbuch, etc., pp. 221-222, pl. v., figs. 11-15). Of the five
specimens of this crossing figured by Standfuss all are of the var.
romanovt, with red hindwings and increased black markings. The
specimens are markedly smaller than those of the preceding cross.

Standfuss notes that theimagines produced from each of these crosses
are fertile in both sexes. One suspects, from the overwhelming pre-
ponderance of dominula characters in both lots of mongrels, as repre-
sented by the specimens figured by Standfuss, that the typical dominula
is not only the phylogenetic type of the species, but is also the
predominant and more powerful form.

3. OcNOGYNA HEMIGENA ¢ X zoRAIDA §.— Although these are
treated as distinct species by some lepidopterists (e.., Staud. and
Reb., Cat., 3rd ed., p. 367), Standfuss considers that they are only
local races of the same species, the former inhabiting the Pyrenees
and the latter the mountains of Andalusia and Aragon (Handbuch,
etc., p. 65). The progeny of the cross called by Standfuss, zorayena,
Staud., resembles a large O. hemiyena. He says that Kroning found
that the mongrel issue was fertile inter se, but quickly degenerated in
size and vitality (Handbuch, etc., pp. 222-223).

4. SPILOSOMA MENDICA g XRUSTICA ¢ .—Standfuss says that the
larve resulting from a crossing of mendica 3 xX rustica @, were
nearly always formed within the egg, but, in some broods, not
one, and, in others, only from 8 to 12 per cent. hatched. In one case,
however, as many as 98 per cent. of the eggs gave living larve. All
the broods suffered severely from disease, the perfect insects reared,
however, in 1894, did not show much variation, and diverged only slightly
in appearance from var. rustica. The gs were mostly light-coloured
as in that variety, and the darkest of them were far hehter than any
3 of S. mendica (Handbuch, etc., pp. 223-224, pl. iv., figs. 12-13).
The two gs of this cross figured by Standfuss represent one no
darker than ordinary g¢ rustica (=standfussi), the other considerably
paler than typical g mendica (=mus). Caradja noted that the eggs
resulting from his early experiments gave only about 15 per cent. of
larvee.

5. SPILOSOMA RUSTICA g X MENDICA 9 .—This (or the reciprocal)
cross was first bred by Adkin in 1889,* the specimens being noted
(Proc. Hint. Soc. Lond., 1890, p. xl), the gs being of a dusky-white
colour and intermediate between the English and Irish forms. The
imagines of this ‘reciprocal cross, which Standfuss reared from BER e

% It i is douse ernethien Baten bred this or the reciprocal cross. His first
(Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1890, p. xl) and second records (Proc. Sth. Lond,
Ent. Soc., 1890, p. 56) of this pairing give the parentage as mendica ¢ xX
rustica @. His third and fourth records (Mntom., xxvi., p. 297, and Entom., xxx.,
p- 206) give the parentage as rustica ¢ X mendica 2, and this latter he now asserts
is the accurate parentage.

46 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

obtained by Caradja, consisted of 17 gs and 14 9s. These were more
variable than the former cross-product, but, on the whole, inclined towards |
var. rustica (Handbuch, etc., pp. 224-225, pl. iv., figs. 9-11). Harlier
specimens of this cross were reared by Caradja, in 1894, and named
by him standfussi [Soc. E'nt., ix., p. 48 (see Ent. Rec., v., p. 189)]; he
further notes that his experience of this crossing was that every egg
yielded a larva. In 1895, Caradja gave further results (Soc. Hnt., x.,
no. 7) which we have translated in full (Fnt. Rec., vi., pp. 75-78).
The results of two fairly large broods were very different, one producing a
very variable lot of gs, consisting of (1) 24 per cent. of var. standfusst
(a form exactly intermediate between the dark smoky-grey of § mendica
and the milk-white of g rustica, etc.). (2) 33 per cent. of var. mus (a
darker form nearer $ mendica, but distinctly hghter grey, etc.). (8) 28
per cent. of var. clara of a pale dirty yellow colour. (4) 20 per cent.
which form transitions between the forms described. The second batch
yielded imagines, most of which he said must be considered genuine
standfuss?, but were more strongly dotted than the original of that form ;
three examples, however, called var. mixta are as pale as the form clara
on the thorax, discoidal cell of forewings, and outer margin of fringes of
all wings, the rest of the wing area thickly sprinkled with black dots.
Standfuss gives three figures of this cross (Handbuch, etc., pl. iv., figs.
9, 10, 11) of which fig. 9 is noted as clara, fig. 10 as standfussi and fig.
11 as mus. Caradja concludes that the g¢ of these crosses determines
far more essentially the external facies of the mongrel than the @ , and
asserts that var. rustica is the older form phylogenetically, a conclusion
with which we entirely agree. Caradja further notes that the mongrel
forms interbreed freely, e.y., standfussi 3 sand ? s, 14 pairings; standfusst
3 xX mendica 2 and standfussi g x rustica @ , 24 pairings, every one
of which produced fertile ova. One can only suppose that Caradja’s
comparative failure in obtaining fertile eges of mendica 3 x rustica Q
must have been due to quite outside circumstances. The experiments
point to the fact that rustica g or @ has more to do with deter-
mining the facies of the progeny than has mendica. His later note
(Hntom., Xxxul., p. 296), referring to the crossing of rustica 3 x stand-
fuss’ 2, gives no further particulars of importance.

6. Kmypia cANDIDA g X cRIBRUM ? .—Schultz records the results of
a crossing between the well-known Alpine white candida and typical
eribrum. He notes (Intern, Ent. Zeits. Guben, 1895, pp. 184-185) that,
of 17 imagines reared, 15 were of the cribrum and only two of the
candida form.

OPoRABIA FILIGRAMMARIA X AUTUMNATA.—Allen, who has wide
experience in breeding these insects, considers filigrammaria the
moorland and autumnata the woodland (lowland) form of the same
species. They pair readily, and the offspring are freely fertile inter se.
The imagines in their extreme forms appear to overlap, some specimens
of autumnata being hardly, if at all, distinguishable from the lightest
forms of filiyrammaria, etc. In 1900, Allen reared larve of autumnata
(Fermanagh) and jiligrammaria (Lancashire); and by retarding pupe
of the latter, the imagines of the two forms were brought out at the
same time so that four pairings resulted, viz., three of filigrammaria
3 X autumnata Q and one of the reciprocal cross (autumnata $ xX
jiliyrammaria @).

7. OPORABIA FILIGRAMMARIA g X AUTUMNATA @ .—(@) The progeny

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. AT

(reared in 1901) resembled filigrammariain appearance, and autumnata in
size. Theimagines were healthy, a and ? of the mongrels were paired,
and from these 29s and 29s were reared, in 1902, ‘smaller than the
parents, about the size of filiyrammaria, and hardly so strongly marked.
A pairing was also obtained between a @ of the mongrels and a g
autumnata, the eggs were fertile, and larve hatched, but no imagines
were reared (Mera). (8) Some 200 ova were laid, about 100 kept, and
from these 11 specimens were reared, 7 gs and 4 9s (Allen).
(y) 112 ova obtained. About 60 hatched, but less than half of these
arrived at the pupal state, and only 7 moths emerged, all gs, average
size rather small, and one a cripple. 4 pale specimens strongly
favour auéwnnata, one or two being whiter than any known /iliyram-
maria, the 8 dark ones are more intermediate, but only one could be
called fairly representative of the normal filigrammaria (Prout).

8. OPORABIA AUTUMNATA $ X FILIGRAMMARIA 9 .—About 70 ova laid,
from which 28 imagines were reared, 18 gs and 10 ¢@s. Of these
17 gs emerged before a single @. The specimens were rather small
(perhaps due to unfavourable rearing conditions). Many would pass
for undoubted autwmnata, others were of a nondescript appearance,
with wavy lines crossing the wings and more or less obliterating the
markings (Allen).

9. LastocaMpa QUERCUS J X MERIDIONALIS 9 .*—(¢) 38g sand 4 ? s, the
former quite of the broad-banded English type ; he 2s also show
this broadening of the transverse bands. The larve showed the
predominant characteristics of the Enelish quercits strain (Bacot
coll.). (8) 4 gs and 8 9s, the offspring distinctly like British
qu-rcus in both sexes, the gs with the characteristic tendency to wider
bands, the ?s less red and more yellow than the @ parent (Warburg
coli.). (vy) 11 gs, the offspring small; the outer marginal area we i
in colour compared with the ¢ parent; the transverse bands narrow
(Warburg coll.).

10. LastocAMPA MERIDIONALIS 3) X VIBURNI 2 .—(a) The és (30) are
scarcely distinguishable from the g parents (the progeny is from four
pairings); the 9s are distinctly yellower than the ¢ parents, which
are more than usually red even for viburnt (Warburg coll.). (8) 5 #8, all
showing rather more than a tendency to the widening of the ee erse
band of fore- and hindwings ; two have them somewhat wider than any
viburnt examined, and in ‘this respect approach British quercis (Bacot

coll.). The great interest in this cross lies in the fact that, in every
case, the mongrel larve divided into two series following the larval
forms of the parent (white-haired or brown-haired).

11. Lastocampa stcuLa 3 X MERIDIONALIS 2. —(a) 8 J sand1 9; the
ground colour rather nearer the darker tint of meridionalis than the more
russet hue of .sicvda; the transverse band of forewing definite and
narrow ; the hindwing with the orange marginal area of steula altered
to the brown marginal area and narrow yellow transverse band of
meridionalis; the ?@ retains the russet tint of sieula, but has not the
distinct pale outer marginal area of that form (Bacot coll.). (8) 23s
and 19? emerged the first year, the males of the russet hue of steula, but
the hind marginal area of hindwing surrounded with brown as in

* For details of the crossings, characters (larval and imaginal) of p: wrents, etc.,
see anted, ili., pp. 34 et seq.; Hnt. Record, xiii., pp. 114 et seg., and pp. 237 et seq.

48 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

meridionalis; 2 gs and. 29s of same batch emerged second year, one:
weakly pigmented g of above form, the other ¢ with full yellow
marginal area to hindwings, as in sicula; ?s small, and had evidently
been ill-nurtured (Warburg coll.).

12. Lastocampa sicuLA g X QUERCUS ?.—(«) 8 gsand 10 @s, the
gs almost identical with stcula except for a gradual fading of
transverse band of forewings into the marginal area, and a slight.
trace of a marginal brown shade edging the orange marginal area of
hindwings; the ¢s distinctly of the @ parent form, yellow, and
quite unlike the warmer-tinted ? sicula (Warburg coll.). (8) 21 gs
and 7 @s. All the specimens comprising this brood larger, otherwise:
the gs very like the last in ground colour, and follow the 3 parent;
the outer margin of hindwing rather less orange-yellow and more
shaded with brown externally, and hence nearer quercus. The ? also
yellow, nearer quercus than sicula, although there is a distinct trace of
the warmer sicula hue than in ¢s of preceding brood. 3 ¢s (of same
brood), emerging after second year in pupa, are very dark reddish-
ochreous, the outer marginal areas of hindwings scarcely differing in
tint from the rest of wings (Warburg coll.).

13. LastocaMpa sicuLa gf X BACOTI? .—8gsand2¢s; thegs having
distinctly wider transverse bands to forewings than sicula, the ground
colour showing trace of the sicula tint, but on the whole both bands.
and colour are nearer those of bacoti (meridionalis x viburni) than of
sicula ; the hindwings in all the specimens with distinct brown marginal
border, in three quite as well defined as in viburni; the @s follow the
@ parent (meridionalis x viburni).

14. LastocamPa BACOTI g X sIcULA 2?.—2 g¢sand4?¢@s. The gs
peculiar, one being very near the g parent, with well-developed
narrow bands, the other with the transverse bands on the forewing
restricted and not quite reaching the costa; that on the hindwing
absent, the marginal area (including normal position of band) being
very dark buff and almost unicolorous, the fringes paler; the Qs.
incline rather to meridionalis « viburni than sicula (Bacot coll.).

15. LasrtocAMPA INTERMEDIA g\ X BACOTI ?.—2 gs of most bizarre
appearance; a peculiar mixing of the dark chocolate and russet tints.
of the males of meridionalis and sicula respectively, the transverse
band on the forewing being reduced to a narrow line, that on the
hindwing still narrower and tending to obsolescence (Warburg coll.).
II. Crossing OF TYPICAL FORM AND ABERRATION.—PRODUCTION OF:

ARTIFICIAL RACES BY INBREEDING.

We have already stated that the results obtained by crossing a.
typical individual of a species with an aberration of the same species,
may have very little scientific value from the particular standpoints.
afforded by the results to be obtained from a crossing of two
already ditferentiated species, or by the crossing of an example
of the typical form with a highly specialised local race of the
same species. Standfuss has already carried out, and published,
the results of some experiments in this direction, and summarises.
(Handbuch, etc., pp. 805 et seq.) these results as showing that
‘when an aberration is crossed with its parent form the issue is.
sharply divided in both sexes into specimens of the aberration and of
the normal form of the species”’ (see Standfuss, Berl. Ent. Zeits., 1886,
pp. 238-9). We suspect that this conclusion largely depends upon the:

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 49

character of the aberration, ¢.y., to illustrate this point, Standfuss
observes that between the aberration intermedia of Spilosoma lubricipeda
and the darkest of its aberrations, deschanyei, there are many degrees
leading from one to the other, but that no transitional forms occur to
bridge over the wide gap between intermedia and lubricipeda, nor can
they be produced by crossing these two. ‘‘ It seems,’”’ Standfuss says,
‘Cas if there were antagonistic characters which cannot exist in the
same individual.” When one turns to Standfuss’ figures (op. cit., pl.
vili., figs. 11, 12, 18, 14), one finds that his fig. 12 is an intermedia
really fairly close to lubrictpeda, between which, however, we ourselves
have many examples bred with broods that have given progeny
extending from the palest typical forms to the darkest deschangei. We
are, therefore, in want here of a distinct definition from Standfuss as
to what he considers an intermediate. The statement that inter-
mediates are not to be produced in the manner described by crossing
these forms is entirely contrary to fact.

What one desires, in estimating the value of results in the direction
of crossing aberrations with the parent form, is, as we have already
indicated, a clear idea of the value of the aberration used. It is quite
certain that there will be considerable difference in the results obtained
- 1f we use for such experiments as are here indicated—(1) an individual
which is a chance sport occasionally (or frequently) appearing in
nature, but with no capability of becoming a fixed race under its
natural conditions of environment, or (2) one of a selected race,
produced and maintained as such under artificial conditions of en-
vironment through many generations, and inbred until it has ali the
characters of a local race rather than an aberration.

This point is well illustrated in Spilosoma lubricipeda ab. zatima.
In Helgoland, and on the northeast coast of England, occasional
extreme, and other less marked, aberrations of S. lubricipeda have
occurred for more than a century (Cramer, 1782; Haworth, 1812;
Wood, 1839, etc.), but the total number taken in Britain, for at least
a century, appears to have been fewer than a dozen, and evidence as to
any greater regularity of its occurrence in Heligoland and Holland,
other than as an almost equally rare sporadic aberration, appears to be
wanting. Gitke, in 1882, had numerous examples bred in Heligoland,
including intermediates between zatima and the type (see E’ntom.,
Xxvil., pp. 6-7). In Britain, up to that time, it had never occurred
except as a purely sporadic and very rare aberration. From the
Heligoland stock, a French lepidopterist (and dealer), named Deschange,
appears to have interbred extreme and intermediate forms for many
years, advertising the imagines and pup for sale in the continental
magazines, whilst, in 1886, Depniset described and figured the then
most extreme form known as deschanyei (Ann. Soc. Ent. France, 1886, pl.
iv., fig. 4). In 1889 and 1890, imagines were on sale in Britain, and in
1889, Clark exhibited examples, so bought (Hnt. Rec., i., p.71). In
1891, Harrison advertised for pupe of lubricipeda, and, later, bred a 9
zatima from a pupa, supposed to haye come from London through
Riches (Hnt., xxvi., p. 846). Riches considered this a mistake.
asserting that he had never bred the form, and that it was quite
unknown as a local form to London _lepidopterists (op. cit., p.
347), and he further informed us that South’s description of the ¢
bred (op. cit., p. 846) exactly coincided with the specimens exhibited
by Clark in 1889. Tugwell transferred (Hnt., xxvii., p. 97) the

50 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

probable home of this pupa to Grimsby, but there is no evidence
whatever that this was so. Our own suspicion is that it was un-
wittingly obtaimed from someone already breeding the form.*
This ? was paired with a typical g¢ (loc. cit.) and from the progeny of
these, in 1892, Harrison obtained typical lubricipeda, intermediates, and
many zatima.+ Some of the latter he paired, and from these thousands
have been reared and distributed in British collections. It 1s sufficient to
say that at this first inbreeding the characters of the race were strongly
marked and fixed. The fixity of the zatima type in these specimens
was excellently illustrated in the results obtained by Tugwell (Kntom.,
XXvi., p. 247) and Porritt (op. cit., p. 296).

Bateson notes (Sctence Progress, October 1897, January 1898) the
contradictory results observed in the breeding of varieties of Spilosoma
lubricipeda as recorded by Burckhardt (Standfuss, Handbuch, etc., 2nded.,
p- 11), and by South (Entom., 1898, p. 257). He considers this to have
been largely brought about by atavic conditions, and that the results
depended upon the strain employed. With this latter statement we quite
agree. In some strains of S. lubricipeda ab. zatima, used for experimental
purposes, the strain has possibly been more or less inbred for from 25 to
80 years, whilst others have been much crossed with typical forms,
and others recently produced by selection. In other words, the results
depend upon the degree of domestication. He further notes the
crossing of typical Lymantria monacha with ab. eremita, and compares
the results obtained by Standfuss and Fletcher. The forms of S. lubrici-
peda, as occurring in the reared broods in this country, are of little
more than aberrative value, and eremita is distinctly an aberration,
and not a local race. Until selection for some years had been carried
on, one cannot but conceive that the results produced by these crossings
would be largely vitiated by the atavic conditions necessarily arising
in every brood. The following experimental results throw some light
on the points here dealt with :— |

1. SprosoMA ZATIMA S X ZATIMA 2 .—(a) Egesreceived from Harrison
(inbred zatima) in 1892, produced larve and pupe in due course, 27
imagines appearing in April, 1898, ‘every example of zatima (radiata)
type, each true to heredity, varying in intensity, still all zatima
(radiata). (8) Two of these were paired, ova obtained in April, larve
fed up in May and June, and between July 8th and end of September,
the imagines appeared, ‘all again quite true to parental type, some
almost black,{ ete, . . . . the great point of interest being the
remarkable manner in which the offspring followed the type of the
parents . . . . Not one relapsed into the normal lubricipeda
form, although a few were extremely pale, one, particularly, had the
hindwing very closely approaching that of the ab. fasciata, but not

* This history is given so that future workers may know of the uncertainty of
the origin of the parent of some thousands of specimens since bred, and the
descendants of which are in numbers in all our collections.

+ It is to be noted that Harrison (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1892, p. xxix ; Ent.,
xxvi., p. 346) gives what he considers the parentage of the zatima he bred, and that
he took no part in trying to prove their British origin. This was attempted by
Tugwell (Ent., xxvii-, pp. 96-97 ; 129-130; 205-206) and Hewett (Ent., xxviii., pp.
3-8 ; 27-30) whose statements are all purely assumptive. Harrison wrote us that
he obtained pupe from several sources, and, therefore, there appeared room for
error, but that the ‘‘ parentage given he believed to be correct.’’

t We learn (Ent., xxvii., p. 206) that there were 720 eggs in this one batch,
and not one resultant imago went down so low in the series towards the type as
the ab. eboraci (op. cit., p. 205, fig. 3).

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 51

quite identical.” Some of the pupze went over and produced imagines
in the spring of 1894 (Tugwell). (y) Eggs also received from Harri-
son, and 50 imagines bred in May, 1893, all zatuna, approaching
deschanget, with no paler ones. (6) From a pairing of these also, a partial
second brood, again all zatima, appeared in September, 1893, etc.(Porritt).
[The'result was the same everywhere, all those who had eggs in 1892 from
Harrison’s stock reared practically pure zatema. For scientific purposes,
therefore, the insects resulting from these early zatima must be looked
upon as the progeny of a long inbred, highly specialised, race of this
form, and, therefore, very different from those since obtained by
selection in various parts of the country. Later, when crossed with
ordinary lubricipeda, by various lepidopterists, numerous pale examples
—intermedia as well as the type—were produced with the dark forms. |
(<) [Pairing in 1899, from selected specimens inbred for some genera-
tions, parents originally from the Lincolnshire coast. Both parents of
medium zatima forms; fringes and central area of forewings pale; hind-
wings with only the basal and inner marginal areas pale; the undersides
with only fringes, nervures, basal areas, and a few streaks of buff colour
(the female with a broad streak of the pale ground colour, extending from
basal area half across the wings, parallel with, and near, the hind margin
of both wings; thisis absent from forewings of g, well-marked, though
modified, in the hindwings).] Reared 74 gs and 74 92s, of which
1 g and 2 9s were complete, and 1 g and 3 9s partial, cripples,
Using the parents (description above) as standards, the upper wing
characters were classified as follows :—
1. Reversion to lubricipeda form—

ForEwiInGs. HINDWINGS.

A.— 3s with marked tendency to revert ae es —- 6
B.—,, ,, medium ve ne as ws — 3
C.—,, ,, slight i He es ye 5 5
D> 2 very slight’ ,, a 5) 13

[Norr.—One of the specimens in A, as regards hindwings, shows a reverse
(darkening) tendency on forewing, and another specimen in D exhibits the same
tendency. |

A.— ¢s with marked tendency to revert Se se -— a oo

B.—,, ,, medium oP We i ee £F\

C.— 9 9 slight 99 99 ee ee a

D.— ,, », very slight ,, 6 D)
:

[Norr.—T wo specimens in C, and one in De ‘have progressive forewi ings.

2. Progression from lubricipeda form (i.e., darkening to greater
extent than parents)—
A.— és showing increased darkening. . Sa ne 12 Ye 7
B.—¢s 3 a8 20 as 29
[Norz.—Five of the specimens i in A, with progressive forewings, have rever-
sionary hindwings; three of B, with progressive forewings, have reversionary
hindwings. |
The pale hindmarginal streak on the underside of the forewing is
a distinctive character that may be utilised for the purpose of study,
the similar mark on the underside of hindwing is too much confused
with the basal patch. In the brood under discussion the ¢ parent
had not, and the @ parent had, this mark. The details in this respect
are :—
Weaker than in Stronger than
Absent. g parent. in ¢ parent.
1. gs with pale streak .. 19 ar 35 Be Te 17
EPSON a Natl ws p on 28 aaa 39 wictea-akk 5

52. BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

[Note.—A few (3 ¢s and 2¢?s) damaged and crippled specimens could not be
used for the study of this character. ]

It is remarkable how true this brood follows the individual parents.
Only three or four (g's) are suggestive of Jubricipeda, the specimens,
with these exceptions, being of the zatima type, though not equally
dark. The independence of fore- and hindwings with regard to pro-
eression from or reversion towards the lubricipeda form is to be noted.
Also the fact that in the only point of difference noted between
and @ parents there appears to be a marked tendency to cross
inheritance, 7.e., g offspring following 9, and vice versa. (f¢) Four
pairings were obtained, but, owing to neglect in larval stage, com-
parative failure occurred in three instances, and total failure in the
other. In one pairing, between an extra dark g and @, still further
darkening was exhibited in the few specimens reared, a few of the
specimens having the buff areas reduced considerably more than in
either parent (or any specimen of the brood from which they were
selected). From the two other pairings—(1) a dark g and pale °,
and (2) an intermediate g and a normal zatima 9, both darker and
paler forms were produced, but in neither case are the offspring paler
than the parents (Bacot).

2. SPILOSOMA LUBRICIPEDA g X ZaTIMA 2 .—(a) In the spring of
1891, a pairing of this cross resulted in the ? laying about 500 ova.
Only part retained, which resulted in 160 imagines in 1892, of which
about one-third were zatima, and one-third intermedia (Harrison, Proc.
Ent. Soc. London, 1892, p. xxix). (8) In April, 1889, Burckhardt
obtained eggs of this cross, breeding in July* a number of typical
lubricipeda, intermedia and zatima. In July, 1889, a pair of the inter-
media of this brood copulated, and, in 1890, again produced the three
forms. Of these, pairings were effected, and results obtained as
follows :—

a. Spilosoma zatina g x lubricipeda 9 .—Resulted in 4 lubricipeda,
2 intermedia, 8 zatima.

g. Sptlosoma lubricipeda 8 X zatima 2 .—Resulted in 11 zatima.

y. Spilosoma intermedia 3 xX intermedia 9 .—Gave 25 lubricipeda,
15 intermedia, 35 zatina.

5. Sptlosoma intermedia 3 xX zatima 9 .—Gave 2 lubricipeda, 15
inte;media, 85 zatima.

e. Spilosoma lubricipeda § xX lubricipeda @ .—Paired from brood 5
in May, 1891, and produced in May, 1892, 34 lubricipeda and 1 zatima
(almost deschanget).

3. SPILOSOMA FASCIATA g X FASCIATA @ .—Specimens, differing some-
what from the type, in the fasciate conditions of the lines, were selected
by Jackson and other York lepidopterists, for some years, until, between
1880 and 1889, a race was established in which an elongate condition of
the spots was combined with a tendency to form a central band across
the fore- and hindwings. This form is referred to by Carrington
(Entom., xxili., p. 207); Porritt (Nat., 1889, p. 2838; Entom., xxiv.,
p. 296), South (Hntom., xxvi., p. 346), Tugwell (Hntom., xxvii.,
p- 95), etc. By selection, and pairing two marked fasciated examples,

* This domesticated double-brooded condition of a very marked single-brooded
species has already been noted in the broods reared by Tugwell and Porritt (antea,
pp. 50, 51).

3

OT

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA.

Tugwell obtained a modification of these inbred York examples, in
which the fascia is clearly and boldly shown on all four wings, which
he named fasciata, and figured Hntom., xxvil., p. 205, fig. 4. But
even then, in his most successful brood, 50 per cent. came out quite
like the pale typical southern form (op. cit., p. 96).

4. Spruosoma ZATIMA gf X FascraTA ? .—Cross obtained May, 1893,
by Porritt (Hntom., xxvii., p. 206), eggs shared by Tugwell and Porritt.
Tugwell’s results = (1) A few zatimalike the g parent. (2) Most specimens
favoured the @ parent, but not one was a pure fasciata, almost all
being like the race already inbred by Jackson, and known as the York
form, which Tugwell figures and names eboraci (Hntom., xxvi., p. 205,
fig. 2). This specimen is wonderfully near what Standfuss figures (Hand-
buch, etc., pl. vili., fig. 12) as intermedia, Bang- Haas, in the latter, however,
the black marks of the hindwings reach back to the fringes. Many of
Tuegwell’s more extreme eboraci reached Standfuss’ figure in this
respect. Staudinger (Cat., 3rd ed., p. 864) refers intermedia to Stand-
fuss (1896) (not Bang-Haas), and drops eboraci, Tugwell (1894), as a
synonym, which is hardly accurate, Tugwell’s name on these dates
being the older. Jackson’s series of fasciata, of which we possess
photographs, are referred to by Hewett (Hntom., xxviil., p. 28).

ZONOSOMA ANNULATA.—Certainly, with no close similarity in the form
of race developed, avery parallel production of an artificial race, by means
of the inbreeding of a rare natural aberrational form, has taken place
in Zonosoma annulata. This little Geometrid occasionally, in nature,
produces a form without the characteristic ‘‘omicron’”’ in the centre
of the forewings, but with the omicron on hindwings=ab. obsoleta.
In inbreeding this form an aberration without the omicron on fore-
and hindwings occurred=ab. biobsoleta, and, by selection, this, as well
as obsoleta, were both isolated as distinct races. Riding’s experiments
(Ent. Record, x., p. 239; xi., p. 212, etc.) may be summarised as
follows :

5. ZONOSOMA OBSOLETA § X ANNULATA ? .—Three pairings obtained
May, 1898. These broods produced 78 imagines—14 gs and 7 9s=
obsoleta, and 25 gs and 82 ? s=annulata, i.e., 27 per cent. of obsoleta
and 73 per cent. of annulata. There were no intermediates.

6. ZOoNOSOMA OBSOLETA 3 X OBSOLETA 2 .—(a) Five pairings between
June 80th-July 1st, 1898. Larvee from these pupated in early August,
and 15 per cent. of the pupzx gave autumnal imagines, all gs except
one. With one exception also, all were without the omicron on
forewings=obsoleta. One also had the omicron on the bindwings
very imperfect, i.c., intermediate between obsoleta and _ biobsoleta.
The other part of these broods emerged April-June, 1899, all
of the form obsoleta, 16 pup, however, went on to the autumn
(Hint. Riec., x., p. 289; xi., p. 212). (sg) Three other broods
noted, all the progeny being obsoleta (op. cit., xi., p. 212). (y) Another
partial brood recorded, from inbred obsoleta; two had the hindwings
faintly ringed only, most of the rest were biobsoleta (op. cit. Xi., p.
289). (6) From inbred parents, experiments carried on for a con-
siderable time show that obsoleta breeds true. There has been no
reversion to type for several years (Riding, in litt., December, 1904).

7. ZONOSOMA OBSOLETA ¢@ X BIOBSOLETA 9? .—This crossing, from
inbred parents, still yields (December, 1904) a majority of intermediates,
but the omicrons on the hindwings are gradually becoming much less
distinct, being often represented by a few dots only. In most of the

54 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

broods there are some obsoleta, varying from a few to as many as
intermediates (Riding, in Jitt.).

8. ZONOSOMABIOBSOLETA § X BIOBSOLETA 2 .—Onesmall brood(parents
very carefully selected) bred true this year (1904), but this is the only
time they have hitherto done so. [I often have difficulty in getting
the desired selections, the emergences failing to suit, and, fearing to
lose the race, I have to mate with intermediates. I have not crossed
wild annulata with obsoleta for four years, so there has been no new
blood introduced during this time; the imagines, however, keep full
size, indeed, a few are larger than any I have taken with the net or
bred from fullgrown larve beaten from maple.] (Riding, in litt.).
III. Crossiné oF TYPICAL FORMS WITH ABERRATIONS TENDING TO DEVELOP

MELANOCHROIC RACES.

Having noted the recorded results of inbreeding Spilosomalubricipeda
with its domesticated races, we now refer to a certain number of forms,
whose varying environmental conditions are such as to tend, in certain
districts, to the development of a melanic race, side by side with,
or gradually supplanting, the type. The origin of melanic, albinistic,
and analogous races, is, perhaps, outside the scope of this chapter,
yet, without considerable knowledge concerning the environment,
etc., of these, the bearing of experimental work in the direction
of isolating such races, or having for its object the study of their
development, etc., is largely missed, and the experiments them-
selves rendered to a certain extent purposeless. This view we have
already discussed at length (Melanism and Melanochroism in British
Lepidoptera), and simply add here a note recently penned by Bacot,
who considers it a point of some importance that a small patch of pale
colour on the upper (costal) margin of the hindwing occurs in many
Amphidasysab.doubledayaria, this portion being covered by the forewings
in the normal resting-position of the moth. It suggests that the dark
form was evolved later than the type, and strongly hints that the dark
coloration is not due to any sudden discontinuous change or darkening
of the wing-pigment as a whole, but is the outcome of a long course of
evolution in the history of the species, during which the death-roli of
individuals showing minute variations in the direction of darkening was
lower than in the typical form, 7.e., the colour is due to an adjustment to
a eradual darkening of the resting-surface over at least a portion of the
range of the species. Such a change may have originated in a greater
humidity of the atmosphere and denser forests, or, possibly, in part, to
a successive change in the trees, of which the forests themselves were
composed, é.., pine replaced by oak, oak by beech, beech by birch, ete.
Such a succession alone would probably cause considerable change in
the facies of a species without a change in atmospheric conditions,
which, in all probability, however, would be associated with the change,
e.g., 1f 1t be allowed that A. betularia started on its career during the
oak dynasty, the comparative open nature of the wood and the fact
that the trees would hardly be in full foliage at the time of the
emergence of the moths, would be favourable to the development of
the ‘‘ pepper and salt’ pattern. The succeeding beech period would
give a denser foliage, and, as the trees break into leaf earlier, a much
darker forest results at the period when the moths are at large, while
the replacement of beech by birch would again bring in lighter
conditions, accompanied by a paler resting surface. It is probable,
however, that such a series of changes could not produce the extreme

~ — eo

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 55d

forms without the co-operation of additional moisture, or some factor
antagonistic to the growth of lichens. Granted favourable conditions
on the lines above indicated, and the evolution of a stirps of a species
showing dimorphic or polymorphic conditions is only what might be
expected. The apparent discontinuity, due to the absence or extreme
rarity of intermediate forms, would be accounted for by the period of
change being too brief, in comparison with the long periods of
approximate stability that follow, to allow of heredity fixing the
intermediate stages with any degree of firmness in the architecture of
the germinal material. The present appearance and rapid spread of
dark forms, must, on this hypothesis, be explained by (a) the recur-
rence of conditions favourable to the melanic race, putting an
enormous premium on the few dark forms that would appear from
time to time, (b) the desire of entomologists to possess the dark forms
leading to extensive artificial selection and rearing from dark stock,
and the escape of surplus imagines and young larve (Bacot). Such a
view as this would necessarily tend to the rejection of the opinions of
Standfuss, concerning Lymantria monacha and its dark form eremita
(infra), and postulate, for such forms, an _ origin by slow
response to changed environmental conditions, excluding largely the
theory of sudden development by discontinuous variation. Our view
is distinctly in favour of the former, and against the latter explanation
of the origin of such forms. One suspects that all these races are
atavistic, and have the potentialities of producing melanic races (by
selection) within the ordinary variational limits of the species. The
inbreeding of these aberrations, however, has not been carried out in a
sufficient number of experiments to give any sound or reliable data.
Some of the crossings, however, that have been recorded are as
follows :—

1. GRAMMESIA TRIGRAMMICA g X BILINEA ? .—Standfuss records
(Handbuch, etc., p. 318) a cross of this supposed parentage, but ¢
really unknown ; 67 perfect insects resulted, 38 being triyranmmica and
29 bilinea, there being no intermediates. One of the latter he figures
(levi. fis. 10).

2. PoLIA OLIVACEA g X OLIVACEA ? .—Higes laid September, 1891,
hatched May, 1892; larve did well till half-grown, when many died.
Those that pupated and resulted in imagines produced in every case
olivacea. [Two typical chi @s taken in same locality and gs un-
known, produced in each case 75 per cent. chi and 25 per cent. oliracea.|
(Maddison, Hnt. Rec., iv., p. 3).

3. LiyMANTRIA MONACHA ¢@ X EREMITA 9 .—Standfuss, in 1898,
reared a brood from a pair of normal monacha, from near Breslau, in
Silesia. This brood contained one ? eremita, which was paired with a
normal monacha 3, from Zurich. The issue consisted of 22 typical
monacha, 2 6s and 20 9s; 28 eremita, 18 gs and 5 9s, and 6
intermediates, 5 gs and 1 92, in which the characters of the two were
asymmetrically mixed, but with no apparent tendency to gynandro-
morphism. One of these is figured by Standfuss (Handbuch, ete.,
pl. iv., fig. 4).

4. LyMANTRIA EREMITA g\ X MONACHA 9 .—Standfuss found, in 1888,
near Liegnitz, in Silesia, a g eremita paired with a 2? monacha. The
result was entirely different from that of the reciprocal crossing noted
(supra), for the issue contained every kind of transition between
the two parent forms, whilst a few were even darker than the

56 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

parent. [Standfuss explains this by supposing that the two specimens
of ab. eremita, though externally so much alike, possessed entirely
different properties in regard to their power of transmission to
descendants. He looks upon the first evemita as a true sport or aberra-
tion, and in its case, he says, the rule, already formulated, held good
as usual. The second eremita (which did not show the particular
varietal characters so well as some of its own offspring), he considers,
was a link in the chain leading, by slight variations, to a darker, and,
presumably, better protected form of monacha, which, under the influence
of natural selection, is gradually developing itself in certain parts of
the range of the species; it took rank, therefore, he says, not as an
aberration, but rather as a member of a local race, and with this its
behaviour accorded. We consider this a very wide conclusion to draw
on only two experiments. Theimmediate ancestry of the two specimens
of eremita here dealt with may have been entirely different. We are
inclined to dissent strongly from the sport theory of the dark form
and the extensive inbreeding experiments of Fletcher and others (the
results unfortunately not published) suggest a development very
parallel with doubledayaria, etc. | |

Aciia tau.—From 1885 to 1898, Standfuss reared numbers of
Aylia tau, and named the melanistic specimens luyens. So great wasthe
difference in these latter that Bang-Haas called the extreme melanic
form nigerrima, and Thierry-Mieg, the least melanistic ferenigra ; as a
matter of fact this latter only exhibits black on the outer margin of
the wings. Standfuss, in crossing these, notes that he obtained tau
and all the difierent transitional forms of lugens (from fereniqgra to
nigerrima), but nothing between taw and ferenigra* has been so
produced. His experiments work out as follows :—In 1888, Standfuss
crossed lugens gs (inbred for two generations) with tau 9s. From
these more lugens were obtained in 1889, and were used in the follow-
ing pairings: lugens Z x tau 2; tau J xlugens 2; lugens § xlugens Q .
The @ taw were in each case of different ancestry to the lugens stock.
The results were :—

5. AGLIA LUGENS g XTAU 92 .--95 eggs laid, 86 imagines reared,
viz., 14 gsand 28 ¢?s of tau, and 31 gsand 13 @s8 of lugens.

6. Actia TAU g§ XLUGENS 9? .—82 eggs laid, 75 imagines bred,
viz., 13 gsand 25 2s of tau, and 26 gsand1l ¢s of lugens.

7. AGLIA LUGENS g’ XLUGENS ? .—89 eggs laid, 86 imagines bred,
viz. 10 gsand 21 ¢s of tau, and 34 gs and 21 ¢?8 of lugens. In
1890, from this brood, two more pairings of g and ? lugens were
obtained: (a) 117 eggs were laid, giving 102 imagines, viz., 8 gs and
8 9s of tau, and 49 gs and 42 ¢s of lugens. (8) 108 eggs laid,
giving 87 imagines, viz.,3 gsand 7 Qs of tau, and46 gs and 31 2s

* Just as the ¢ of S. lubricipeda ab. intermedia figured by Standfuss (Hand-
buch, etc., pl. vill., fig. 12), appears to us a very slight advance on typical lubrict-
peda, when one considers the character of each parent (e.g., zatima in the cross
of zatima and lubricipeda), so Aglia tau ab. ferenigra appears to run somewhat
close to typical taw when one has to take into account that a strongly-marked
lugens had been one of the parents. There appears little room for what Standfuss
calls intermediates between A. tau and ferenigra, or between S. lubricipeda and
intermedia ; certainly nothing in our opinion that betokens discontinuous variation.
We should say that pl. vill., figs. 12, 11, 13, 14, with a type of lubricipeda in front
of 12; and 5, 4, 6, 7, with a typical ¢ and ¢ of taw following 7, would make a
very fair consecutive series.

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 57

of lugens. These imagines, emerging in 1891, had parents and grand-
parents of the dugens type. It will be observed that the 1889 pairings,
lugens S X tau @? and tau 3 x lugens 2, gave roughly about 50 per
cent. of each form, with a slight preponderance of forms resembling the
g parent—in the first case lugens, in the second case tau. The 1889
pairing of lugens 3 and @ , gave 36 per cent. of taw and 64 per cent. of
lugens, whilst, in 1890, the proportion of taw fell to a little over 11 per
cent. in one, and a little under 11 per cent. in the other. In each of
the five cases about twice as many ?s as gs were of the tau form;
so that it appears to be more difficult to transform the 9 of A. tau
than the 3.

8. AMPHIDASYS BETULARIA f° X DOUBLEDAYARIA ? .—(a) Steinert gives
(Isis, 1892, pp. 424-427) details of a brood resulting from a ? moth found
near Dresden, in June, 1891 (in which he assumes the 3 to have been
of typical form). The result was 80 g and 45 9 betularia, and
34 9 and 56 @ doubledayaria. Two of those classed as betularia
were darker than ordinary, and were the only intermediates. Stand-
fuss thinks that these two need not be regarded as owing their darker
coloration to the cross, but as mere aberrations due to the species
becoming gradually darker in the district (Handbuch, etc., pp.
_ 315-316). Standfuss, in our opinion, is far too much inclined to explain
away intermediates when they occur in these crossings. (8) A typical
g paired. with ¢@ doubledayaria taken in cop. in June, 1902, at
Brentwood. The eges divided between Robbins and Bacot, the latter
from his moiety reared 232 moths in 1908, as follows :—

és 118=typical 56 and doubledayaria 62.
ges 114= 99 67 mr) ) ” 47.

No intermediates were bred. There appeared to be some cross-
inheritance, the majority of the ¢s following the pale g, and the
majority of the dark gs following the @ (Bacot). (y) A senile: pair
taken in copula, at Rugeley, in 1904; most of the larve escaped, but
40 pupz were secured. From these 34 imagines were bred, May-June,
1905, all black doubledayaria (Freer, in litt.). (6) A pairing of
betularia x doubledayaria (at Willington), produced eggs, from which only
15 imagines were finally reared, viz., 7 gs (1 black and 6 typical) and

s (6 black and 2 typical) (Smallwood, Fnt., xxix., p. 222).

9. AMPHIDASYS DOUBLEDAYARIA g\ X BETULARIA 9 .—(«) Forty years
ago, Hdleston obtained a crossing, and the progeny resulted in some
remarkably pretty aberrations, forming a connecting link between
doubledayaria and the type, but far before either as regards beauty
(fint., ., p. 150). (8) A pair taken in cop. in 1888, in Delamere
Forest. The progeny showed 85 per cent. black, 15 per cent. typical
(Arkle, Hntom., xxil., 236). (y) In 1903, a 3 doubledayaria was taken
in cop. with a 2 betularia, at Woodford; the results of the imagines
that emerged in 1904 were as follows :—

YPE. VAR. TYPE. VAR.
gs 22 Ot t= none 20%
gs

| or ©.
~] or
— | bo
~] co
Or |
~t
—
~t

58 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Of the 43 g¢s 22=51%=type, following the ¢ parent.

21=49% =var. 9 of oo)
Of the 61 ¢s 35=57%=type, following the ¢ wae
26 = 43% = var. s

As the result of “assembling ”’ at Woodford, in J The, 1904, it was
found that :
17= ¢ type = 63%
10=var. doubledayaria=37%

27 100
a (Harrison and Main, in litt.)

10. AMPHIDASYS DOUBLEDAYARIA g X DOUBLEDAYARIA 9 .—(a) The
parentage of these two individuals was as follows: g¢—the progeny of
typical 3 (Worthing) x black @ (Hull); ¢@—the progeny of wild
black ¢ from Market Drayton. Of the offspring of this pairing (the
imagines emerging between June 2nd and 27th, 1895)—a very large
number was bred—about two-thirds were doubledayarta, and one-third
typical. There were no intermediates (Bankes, in litt.). (6) Some gs
and °s of this brood were paired, and a large number of imagines
bred in May-June, 1896. All these were unicolorous black, and all were
more or less undersized, not, however, for any lack of food, many
being so small as not to be worth setting (Bankes, in litt.). (y) All the
progeny black, gs and ?s (Newey, Hnt., xxix., p. 222).

11. HemerRopuiia aBRUPTARIA gf X FuscATA @ .—(a) Anab. fuscata
taken in north London paired with typical g¢, May 22nd, 1896.
Larve from this pairing fed up (number not stated) about half
emerging in August, 1896, among which was only one fuscata, the
rest typical, the other half emerging in May, 1897, among which were
only five fuscata, the number of intermediates and typical forms not
being stated (Southey, Ent. Rec., x., p. 122). (8) Two broods with
this parentage, reared by Hamling, in May and June, 1904, gave the
following results :

No. type bred. No. fuscata bred. | |
Broods. |No. pupated. Pupe died.
of 2 of g
iN, 23 7 1 4 4 | 7
18% 32 12 | 6 — 1 13

(y) Another pairing obtained May 26th, 1904. Of the offspring,
18 were reared in August of the year, 10 gs, 5 abruptaria and 5
fuscata, and 8 928, 4 abruptaria and 4 fuscata. The fuscata gs were
darker than the ?s but very small, much less than the light specimens
of the same brood (Harris, Proc. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1904, p. lxxil), two
of the same brood emerged April, 1905, 1 g andl 2? abruptaria (in
litt.). (5) A pairing from Harris’ brood 18a (infra), made May, 1905, of
f abruptaria X 2 fuscata, produced in August, 1905, 19 gs and 14 9s
of fuscata, and 7 gs and 8 @s of abruptaria [14 pupe had not yet
changed on September 25th] .

12. HemEROPHILA FUSCATA g X ABRUPTARIA 2 .—(a) Pair found in
cop. in nature in North London on May 28rd, 1895. The progeny
from these resulted in 30-40 imagines in 1896. The percentage of
typical (pale), intermediate (brunneata), and dark (fuscata) forms not
recorded (Pearce, Ent. Rec., x., p. 121). (g) Four broods of this
parentage reared by Hamling, in May and June, 1904, resulted as
follows :—

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 59

No. type bred. | No. fuscata bred.
No. pupated. | Pupe died.
3 ? | g | 2
1 brood 28 7 Bie Paling 4 8
3 broods 80 10 7 | ol 1y/ 15

(y) A & fuscata paired witha ? abruptaria, May 1905, from Harris’ brood
130 (infra). In August, 1905, 8 gs and 15 9 sof fuscata and 8 gs and
3 98s of abruptaria had emerged (two pupe not yet produced imagines).

18. HemrEropuina FuscATA g X FuscATA ? .—(a) Paired August 12th,
1904 (from brood 11y); larve hatched August 28th and following days, of
which 57 spun up between October 11th and November 5th. Imagines
emerged between March 24th and May 6th, 1905 as follows: ¢s=
12 fuscata and 5 abruptaria, 2?s=16 fuscata and 6 abruptaria. The
remaining 18 did not emerge, although the moths formed in the pupe;
of these apparently 11 would have been dark and 7 pale. Thedark gs
much larger than those of preceding autumn (Harris, i Jlitt., June
28th, 1905). (8) A g and @ of the fuscata from this brood were paired
and fertile eggs resulted ; the larve fed up and pupated, and the
imagines emerged as a second brood in August, 1905. The 67
imagines bred produced 84 g's and 38 Qs, all fuscata, not a light
specimen among them (10 pupe had on September 25th not yet produced
imagines). [N.B.—A § and @? light abruptaria of same brood were
paired, the progeny resulting in nine light gs and nine light Qs,
with no fuscata ; whilst three pupe had not changed.| (y) An inbred
brood this year (1905) produced some 20 specimens, all of the dark
chocolate form, not a trace of the ordinary type among them (Porritt,
in litt., June 28rd, 1905).

GoNODONTIS BIDENTATA AB. NIGRA.—A batch of 146 ova laid by a 9
nigra (§ unknown), taken at Methley, near Leeds, in 1900, produced 136
imagines, 66 being typical, and 70 niyra, in 1901. From this brood
the following experimental crossings were obtained, viz :—

14. GoNODONTIS BIDENTATA g X BIDENTATA @ (niyra strain).—Four
broods bred together. Largely died off as larvee, 77 pupe only resulted;
4 emerged in November, 1901, 3 bidentata and 1 nigra; 64 in May, 1902,
23 nigra, 41 bidentata. The remainder did not emerge. Total, 44
bidentata, 24 niyra.

15. GoNoDONTIS BIDENTATA § XNIGRA Q (from same brood).—Three
broods kept together. Only 60 pupated. Two nigra emerged in
December, 1901, and 23 nigra and 18 bidentata in May, 1902. The
remainder did not emerge. ‘Total, 25 nigra, 13 bidentata.

16. GonoponTIS NIGRA g X BIDENTATA 9 (from same brood).—Three
broods kept together. Only 57 pupe resulted. These produced in
May, 1902, 37 niyra, and 10 bidentata. The rest did not emerge.

17. Gonopontis nigRA gi X NIGRA 2? (from same _ brood).—Four
broods kept together. Only 120 pupated. In December, 1901, and
January, 1902, 9 nigra and 2 bidentata appeared. In May, 1902, 81
nigra, and 4 bidentata. Total, 90 niyra and 6 bidentata.

The results of the last four crossings summarise as follows :—

| Number |Number Cripples. ln;
s . yer ‘ ) ) |
Ova obtained from. Broods. Pee ig te | Tpns. pee oe etn:
t | Bred. | Bred. jab. nigra! Type [~ |

|
oN
|

Typical ¢ x ¢ A I: 25 9 19 ae
type ¢ xnigra 2? .. 3 60 21 8 . a 5 22 |
nigra gs xX type ¢ ..| 8 9 en a | 10
nigra 3 xX Q 4 3 14. =| 3 24

60 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Hamling, to whom we are indebted for these experiments, regrets
that he did not notice the division of the sexes (For further details, see
Transactions of the City of London Entomological and Natural History
Society, 19038, pp. 48 et seq.).

17a. GoNoponTIS NIGRA gf X NIGRA 9 .—A black @? G. bidentata,
captured in 1908, produced about 66 per cent. of nigra, and two inbred
pairings of nigra from these have this year produced 80 per cent. of
nigra (Porritt, in litt., June 23rd, 1905).

18. LAaRENTIA NUBILATA (MULTISTRIGARIA) g X NUBILATA 2 .—(a) Ova,
to the number of 104, obtained March, 1904, from nubilate (the melanic
form of L. multistrigaria) parents. The number of larve pupated=
59. The brood divided as follows:—Typical form 13=8 gs and 5
9s; nubilata 82=17 3s and 15 2s; 14 pupe failed to emerge
(Hamling, zm litt.). (¢) A wild pairing (at Skelmanthorpe) in 1903, of
nubilata x nubilata, resulted in 9 g and 8 @? nubilata, 4 g and 2 9?
multistrigaria, and 2 ¢@s, dull smoky in tint, with the markings
almost obliterated (Morley, in litt.). (y) Captured black females in
1903, near Huddersfield, produced about half nubilata, half typical.
Black pairings from these produced about 75 per cent. black. Black
pairings from these (but mixed with larve from captured black
moths), again produced about 70-75 per cent. black, but no data
available as to what proportion were from the captured, and what
from the inbred, nubilata (Porritt, in litt., June 28rd, 1905).

19. VENUSIA CAMBRICA AB. BRADYI.—K ges from several dark captured
2s, ¢S of course unknown. Only 13 pupe obtained, from these
7 moths emerged, all dark lead-coloured (Porritt, in litt., June 28rd,
1905).

LV. ee OF TYPICAL FORM WITH ABERRATION TRYING TO SET UP
LOCAL RACE.

In the western parts of England and elsewhere Boarmia repan-
data passes insensibly by various gradations into a well-marked banded
form, which is evidently in these localities attempting to supplant
the type. The banded aberration is of the greatest rarity in most
localities. Similar local aberrations are set up in the banded form of
Cidaria suffumata in Kent and Yorkshire, and possibly parallel
developments have taken, or are taking, place in many other
species. These forms are possibly quite analogous in their development
with those last considered, but the racial tendency exhibits different
characters for protective purposes. ‘The only recorded experimental
crossings that we can trace are the following :—

1. BoarMIaA REPANDATA g X CONVERSARIA ? .—(a) A large brood of
moths reared from the eggs of a pair of normal repandata contained
3 gf and 1 2 conversaria. This @ was paired witha wild ¢. repandata,
and produced 10 § and 18 9 repandata and 4 3 and 2 9 conversaria.
Intermediate forms were entirely absent (Standfuss, Handbuch, etc.,
p- 317). (8) From Bristol eggs laid by conversaria 2 (3 possibly typical) ;
19 imagines reared consisted of 10 repandata and 9 conversaria (South,
Proc. Sth. Lond. Ent. Soc., 1885, p. 48, Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1887,
p. xliv). (vy) In 1908, I reared a brood from a wild Devon crossing of
repandata X conversaria ; about ten per cent. only were conversaria.
From these I paired $ conversaria with ° repandata, and in the result
I obtained about 40 per cent. conversaria, whilst from another pairing
of § repandata and the @? conversaria, I got a very similar result,

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 61

Those that were not conversaria were in these broods very typical
(Massey, tn litt., July 13th, 1905).

2. CIDARIA SUFFUMATA 3 X PoRRITTIHT ? .—Paired April, 1891 (F£nt.,
Xxiv., p. 172). Only seven imagines bred, all 9s (five typical, 2
porritti) (South). [Two broods of typical g x typical ? are noted
at same time. From one, 3 g and 4 @ typical examples were
bred, and from the other two typical ¢s only.]

VY. CRossING OF DIMORPHIC FORMS OF A SPECIES WHICH OCCUR TOGETHER
AND RARELY APPEAR TO ATTEMPT TO SUPPLANT EACH OTHER.

Probably the experiments here described as carried out on the red-
banded Coremia ferrugata and its black-banded form wnidentaria are
best considered under a separate heading. ‘Those of Cidaria truncata
are very unsatisfactory, the g not being known for certain in two of
the cases.

CorEemMia FERRUGATA*.—Prout observes (Trans. City Lond. Ent.
Soc., 1898, pp. 27 et seq.) that intermediate colour aberrations are very
rare, suggesting that, in this species, from red to black is the simplest
change, only 14 per cent. of a large number bred being intermediate.
Many others partially intermediate, approach most to red, and are
classed as red. His results are too detailed to be repeated at length.
We note the following :—

1. Coremia wunipENTARIA (black-banded) g Xx FERRUGATA (red-
banded) ? .—A large brood resulted in 89 per cent. red, and 61 per
cent. black, forms.

2. CoREMIA FERRUGATA ¢@ X FERRUGATA 9? .—Nine broods show an
average of about 68°5 per cent. red, and 30 per cent. black, forms,
the rest intermediate; red gs came first numerically, then red 2s,
then black g's, and lastly, black @ s.

3. COREMIA FERRUGATA ¢ X UNIDENTARIA @.—Four broods give
about 46°5 per cent. red, 51 per cent. black, and 2°5 per cent. inter-
mediate, forms. Black gs were most numerous, then red ?s, then
black 9s, and lastly, red g's.

4. CoREMIA UNIDENTARIA § X UNIDENTARIA ? .—Seven broods yielded
98°5 per cent. black, none red, and 1:5 per cent. intermediate. In this
connection it should be noted that 6 of these 7 broods had red 9
grandparent, and in one case both parents were the offspring of a red
2; yet the 1:5 per cent. really represents only a single intermediate
specimen. None of the broods were very large, but two of them
contained 16 specimens apiece without a single intermediate. One of
these two had a strong reddish tendency in the @ parentage, and was
also predominantly red on the ¢ side (g was one of a brood with 22
red to 18 black.)

5. CoREMIA UNIDENTARIA@ X INTERMEDIA 9 .—Produced (to date of
record) three black specimens only.

The actual numbers} reared of 14 of the broods of which both
parents (and both ? grandparents) were known, and which produced
528 specimens, subdivided into—

(a) One brood, red ¢ (red ¢ parent) x black ¢ (black ¢ parent)—giving 17
$sand 10 ¢gsred, 31 ¢sand1l ¢s black, 0 intermediate, specimens.

(b) Three broods, red ¢s (red ¢ parent) x red ¢s (red ¢ parent)—giving 13 ¢s
and 14 ¢s red, 10 (or 11) ¢s and 11 (or 10) ¢s black, 0 intermediate.

* The allied red-banded species is known as C. spadicearia.

+ Incases where these numbers differ from those published in the original paper,
the figures have been supplied by Mr. Prout, and include the later emergences.

62 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

(c) Two broods, black ?s (red ¢ parent)xred ¢s (red ? parent)—giving 28
és and 85 ¢s red, 38 ¢s and 35 ¢s black, 1 ¢ and 3 ¢s intermediate,
specimens.

(d) One brood, black ¢ (red ? parent)xred ¢ (brother to ¢)—giving 5 ¢s
and 5 ¢sred,4 ¢sand3 2s black, 0 intermediate.

(e) One brood, black ¢ (black ¢ parent) xblack ¢ (black ¢ parent)—giving
1 ¢ and 5d ¢s black (rest died in pupal stage).

(f) Three broods, black ¢s (black ¢ parent) x black gs (red ? parent)—giving
0 red, 17 ¢sand 20 @¢s black.

(g) Two broods, black ¢s (red ? parent) xblack gs (black ¢ parent)—giving
0 red, 22 gsand 26 ¢?sblack,1 ¢ and 0 ? intermediate (some still in pupa).

(kh) One brood, black ¢ (red ¢ parent)xblack ¢ (brother to ¢)—giving
Ored, 3 ¢sand1 @¢ black, 0 intermediate.

Actual number of specimens reared in 4 broods in which pedigree
can be traced back, in one direction at least, for three generations,
produced 175 specimens, subdivided into—

(a) Black ¢ [(? ¢ xred ?s) black ¢ x (? ¢ xblack ¢) black ¢] fertilised
by red ¢ (captured)—giving 23 g¢s and 24 ¢s red, 26 gs and 23 ¢s black, 0
intermediate.

(b) Red ¢ [(? ¢ xblack ¢) black g¢ x(? ¢ xred ¢) red ¢] fertilised by red
& [(? ¢xrved ¢) red 3 x(? & xblack ¢) black ? ]—giving 1¢ black, 1 ¢
red (parents closely related).

(c) Red ¢ [(? ¢ xred 2?) red ¢ xred ¢? (same parentage)] fertilised by red
$ (captured)—giving 27 ¢s and 25 ¢s red, 15 ¢s and 6 ¢s black, 0 inter-
mediate.

(d) Red ¢ [(? ¢ xved ¢) red ¢ x(? ¢ xred ¢) red ¢?] fertilised by redo
[? ¢ xred ¢ ]—giving5 gsand1l ?sred,3 g¢gsand4 @¢s black.

Three broods in which the pedigree could be traced back, in one
direction at least, for four generations, produced 72 specimens, and
subdivide into :—

(1) ? ¢ xred ¢ (captured)

red ¢ Xred 2

|
red g (captured) xred ¢ 2? ¢ xyred ¢ (captured)

ter}

(a)

eo

ay
—|— xX

&

(a)

Qu

+0

ig (red) 7 2 (black) ) 3 (intermediate)
(2) ? ¢ xred ¢ (captured) ? ¢ xblack ¢ (captured)
| | | | |
|
black ¢ x black ¢
|
|
2 ¢ xred 9 red 3 (captured) x black ¢
(Vs |
red 3 x red ¢
| |
; | ’ | A |
7 A (red) J (black) 4 ; (intermediate)

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 63

(3) 2G <ieG 2? ¢ xblack ¢

| |
black ¢ x black ¢
| |

red ¢ x black ¢ 2? @ Xred 2?

s 6 (red) : : black) i (intermediate)

(4) Another experiment in-which the pedigree could, in part, be
traced back four generations, was made subsequently—
Ye sel O Wen Seiwail ©

red ¢ x red 9?

? ¢xred ? red ¢ x red ?
| | |
|
black ¢ x black ¢
| |
|

> @ (all black).

(5) One brood in which the pedigree can be traced back, in one
direction for five generations, produced twelve specimens.
ZO reda Saaz oblackas

| |
black 3 x black ¢?

|
red ¢ xblack ?
eS Kineal & |

|
? ¢ xblack ? red x red @

black ¢ x intermediate ?
| | |
oo | 0 3 | 0 3 |
6 9 (black) 0° (red) is (intermediate).

Summarising, Prout notes (op. cit., p. 80) that, in wnidentaria x
ferrugata, and ferrugata x unidentaria, black-banded (unidentaria) forms
preponderateas4:3 . . . . In ferruyata x ferrugata, red-banded
examples strongly predominate, nearly as 7:8. [Reference to Trans.
City Lond. Ent. Soc., 1897, p. 18, will show that continued red
selections steadily increase the percentage.| In crossings of unidentaria
x unidentaria, the red-banded form seems almost entirely unable to
assert itself. Prout further notes that he was much impressed by the
general very direct response to immediate parentage—especially if black—
unidentaria x unidentaria producing black-banded only, irrespective of
ancestry ; ferrugata x ferrugata resulting in over two-thirds red-banded

64 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

examples; whilst ferrugata x unidentaria produced roughly half and half,
or black slightlyin theascendant. . . . The potency of the g and
of the @ parent seems roughly equal, nor does it, so far as the statistics
here show, exert its influence more strongly on one sex than on the
other in the progeny.

6. CrparRta ? TRUNCATA g X COMMA-NOTATA ?.—(a) 41 specimens
reared, 17 followed the ? parent, 24 were of other forms, 13 pale and 11
dark (South, Proc. Sth. Lond. Ent. Soc., 1894, p.74). (8) In June, 1904,
small batch of ova laid by @ comma-notata (g possibly typical, but
uncertain), 12 imagines resulted, 5 g and 1 @ truncata, 4 g and
2 2 comma-notata (Raynor, i litt.).

7. CIDARIA COMMA-NOTATA gf X CoMMA-NOTATA 2 .—In May, 1905, bred
gsand ¢?s of this form were paired, 3 9s giving fertile ova. They
produced very few moths, probably due to inbreeding. The results
were as follows:—(a) 4 moths, viz., 1 russata, 3 comma-notata. (8) 23
moths, viz., 6 truncata, and 17 comma-notata. (y) 12 moths, viz., 6
truncata, and 6 comma-notata. Of the 39 specimens bred, therefore,
18 were truncata and 26 comma-notata (Raynor).

8. ANGERONA PRUNARIA ¢@ X soRDIATA ° .—Zeller reared this and
the reciprocal cross in 1885-1886. (a) A brood of this cross, emerging in
1886, resulted in 6 g¢ and 11 @ prunaria (speckled),and 5 § and 9 @
sordiata (banded). In these there were no intermediates (Standfuss,
Handbuch, pp. 818-814). [Intermediates are also practically unknown
in nature.| Standfuss figures two of these (op. cit., etc., pl. viil., figs.
8-9). (8) Pickett notes (Hnt. Rec., xv., pp. 146-147) obtaining three
broods of thiscross. He reared them altogether and obtained 39 3 and
21 2 prunaria, and 47 3 and 25 @ sordiata.

9. ANGERONA SORDIATA gf X PRUNARIA 2 .—(a) Of this cross, Zeller, in
1886, reared a brood resulting in 51 g and 38 @ prunaria, and 88 g
and 380 @ sordiata. Standfuss notes that there were no intermediates.
[We should add that one would expect none] (Handbuch, ete., p. 314).
(8) Pickett notes (nt. Rec., xv., pp. 146-147) two broods of this form,
which together resulted in 45 ¢ and 23 2 prunaria and 88 ¢ and
Mie sordiaia.

10. AncERONA sorDIATA g¢ X 2 .—Zeller reared among a large brood
from a pair of normal prunaria, 3 f and 29 sordiata*. (a) Pairing a g
and ? of these, Standfuss obtained 8 § and 10 2 prunaria, and 24 g
and 18 @ sordiata (Handbuch, etc., p. 315). (8) Pickett also inbred this
form, viz., 3 broods (light-banded g x light-banded ¢ ), and (y) 1 brood
(dark-banded g x very light-banded ?). The first (3 broods) resulting
in 78 banded gs and 87 banded @s, and the second (1 brood) pro-
ducing 64 dark-banded gs and 36 dark-banded ?s (Ent. Rec., xy.,
pp, 147-148).

11. ABRAXAS GROSSULARIATA 3’ X FLAVOFAScIATA 92 .—The ab. flavo-
fasciata, Huene (=lacticolor, Raynor) is a rare form of the species occur-
ring sporadically with the type. Raynor gives an account of breeding
the same in the Hnt. Record, 1902, pp. 82 et seg. When a 9?
flavofasciata was paired with a 3 grossulariata, no flavofasciata appeared.
When, however, these (in appearance) grossulariata inbreds were paired.

* Tt may be well to observe here that Pickett reared three broods of prunaria
$ xX prunaria ¢, and from them obtained 89 ¢s and 45 2s without a sordiata
among them (Hnt. Rec., xv., p. 147).

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 65

together, several flavofasciata appeared in the progeny. Some of these
were then paired with normal 3 yrossulariata, presumably of different
stock, and again no flavofasciata appeared. In 1904, Raynor and
Doncaster had gone further with regard to the question of heredity
and sex determination in these crosses, and gave the following
summary to date :—The ab. flavofasciata is recessive in the Mendelian
sense, not appearing at all in the first cross. In the offspring of
heterozygotes paired together, half the females are flavofasciata, the
remainder of the females, and all the males, being normal grossu-
lariata, e.y., the numbers bred in one family of this class were 25
normal js, 14 normal 2s, 9 flavofasciata 2s; in another, 22 normal
§ 8,9 normal @ s, 11 flavofasciata 2? s(1). When, however, a flavofasciata
? is paired with a first cross g (namely, '? x G(F)¢), among the
offspring not only some of the females, but also some of the males,
are flavofasciata (2). The numbers available are not yet enough to
determine with certainty what are the proportions; in one family
there were 10 normal and 6 flavofasciata § 8,4 normal and 2 flavofasciata
2s. The facts may be summarised in genealogical tables thus :—
1. Fo xG¢

| |
IF? 1G(F)? 2G¢(=probably 1G(F)¢+1GG<¢)
2. Be xiGe

| >
G(F)3 xF¢
|
| | | |
me Clie — we = Gs

The experiments are of importance in relation to Castle’s hypo-
thesis that gametes bear one or the other sex, and that certain somatic
characters may be coupled with a given sex in the gametes. The
hypothesis, if somewhat modified, is in excellent accord with the facts;
but, until we know the result of the pairing flavofasciata 3 x cross-
bred @, it would be premature to draw far-reaching conclusions.
[Explanation of exhibit at the meetings of the British Association,
Cambridge, 1904. |

12. ABRAXAS GROSSULARIATA AB. FLAVOFASCIATA g X FLAVOFASCIATA
@ .—In July, 1904, 3s of ab. flavofasctata were bred for the first time.
One was paired with a @? of same aberration. Of the progeny, 13
imagines were reared in 1905, all of the ab. flavofasciata (Raynor,
Ent. Rec., October, 1905).

Weal. Gnosene OF TYPICAL FORMS WITH POSSIBLE CONSTITUTIONAL
ABERRATIONS.

These crossings, as may be supposed, appear to fail almost entirely
in carrying on the special aberrational forms apparently due to
constitutional weakness, 7.e., the latter, per se, is not handed on to
the progeny, but must be engendered anew by fresh abnormal and
unsatisfactory conditions. Standfuss notes that the crossing of typical
Issoria lathonia, Gastropacha tremulifolia, and Ayrotis linogrisea, with
aberrational forms of the respective species, resulted in no aberrative
individuals in the progeny (Jnsekten Béorse, xix., p. 163). Other

66 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

experiments noted in more detail, bearing on this phase of the subject,
are as follows :—

1. Mimas tim g XoBsoLETA 2 .—T'wo broods. The first brood
gave 72 imagines, all normal; the second, 65 moths, all normal
(Standfuss, Insekten Bérse, xix., p. 168).

2. Mmras opsoueta g XTILIm 2 .—Three broods. First produced
69 moths, 68 normal, and 1 ¢@ slightly aberrant ; the second gave 52
moths, 51 typical, and 1 ¢@ of the obsoleta form; the third resulted in
81 imagines, 77 being normal, 1 g and 1 @ of the obsoleta form, and
1 g andi1 ¢ intermediate (Standfuss, Insekten Borse, xix., p. 168).

3. ABRAXAS ULMATA (?) g X suUFFUSA @.—[The g may also have
been suffusa. Eges obtained 1897 (Ent. Rec., ix., p.304).| (a) 70 imag-
ines bred—67 typical, 3 slightly suffused, none followed ?. The colour
of ab. swifusa is due to an extension of the bluish-grey scales over the
whole wing area; there are no melanic scales. The aberrations
appear to be caused by disease, or perhaps by certain meteorological
conditions acting on pupe with deficient vitality (Riding, Ent Reec.,
x., pp. 263-264). (sg) The experiment was repeated in 1898, and 40
imagines were bred from sujfusa g xsuffusa 9 parentage. All these
were typical wlmata, not one resembled the @ parent. There were
not even unusual blotches on any of the specimens (Fint. Rec., xi.,
p- 290).

VII. Driorrutsm IN ONE SEX.

Although rather outside the scope of this chapter, we may note
that information is badly needed of the percentages of dimorphic
progeny in those species in which the dimorphism is confined to one
sex. The problem involving the cause of the maintenance of this
dimorphism in one sex, might also, in some cases at least, with
sufficient experimental trials, be more or less satisfactorily solved. In
Spilosoma mendica, this dimorphism is confined to the gs in which
there are two forms—mendica (dark), and rustica (light), but rarely
occurring in the same locality, that is, it is racial, whilst in Dryas
paphia it is the @ that is dimorphic—paphia (brown), and ralesina
(greenish-black), and in Colias edusa also the dimorphism is in the 9
—edusa (orange), helice (white), and in these the dimorphic forms occur
together, i.e., the dimorphism is aberrational. But we have few detailed
experiments giving useful information on the various points arising out
of a study of this dimorphism. At present we can only find the
following :—

1. Cottas EDUSA g XHELICE 9 .—(a) Four @s laid between 850
and 900 eggs in August, 1900. Larve fed up quickly, and pupation
took place in September. The imagines emerged in October, and
totalled 8302 gs and 235 2s=537 of both sexes. Tabulated, these
worked out as follows :—

Hotal specimens... ¢S302 9 s...ses 0s 56°2%
typical.. ¢s 125) 235 23°3%
nehees... 2 Sai gsr 20°5%

537 100-0
Female results..typical125 ~—........ 53°2%
eliee Gs Asie ashes 46°8%

235 100-0

(Frohawk, Entom., xxxiv., pp. 3-5.)

MONGRELISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 67

g. A @ helice, captured in the south of France by Chapman, laid freely
in England, and a long series of imagines was bred by Main and
Harrison, the percentage of the edusa and helice forms of the females
working out as follows :—

Notalespecimensin) Gsi— "Oi te orate 538%
BL aoe sail We 314 ta1%

150 100

Of the ¢ type 19 Sajetsto veer: “27%,

Wewaleiny—= GA socoen5e 13%

ral 100

— —e

PLATE V.

Photo A. E. Tonge.

Eaas or AQpIstip AND PLATYPTILIID PLUMES X 2O.
Natural History of the British Lepidoptera, 1906.

| or explanation see back

Fig
Fig
Fig

Fig.
Fig.

Fig
Fig
Fig

Puave V.

(To be bound facing p. 69.)
Kees or AGpIsTIp AND PLaTypTinin PruMEs x 20.
. 1.—dAdactylus bennett, in sitz on leaf.

. 3.—Platyptilia gonodactyla, in sitz on leaf.
. 5.—Platyptilia isodactylus, in sitt on leaf.

7..—Marasmarcha lunaedactyla, in situ on leaf.
2.—Marasmarcha tuttodactyla, on paper.

. 4.—Capperia heterodactyla, in situ on leaf.

. 6.—Oxzyptilus parvidactyla, in sitté on hairs of Hieracium.
. 8.—Buckleria paludum, in situ on hair of sundew.

iy

rl

*

os ileus
yi P| * 0
A ,
| 5 4 ss) ;

, ha ta) a la he!

Sa) len : e :
7 f 7 7
2 va Rie Ribas
\ Lanne é an

THE SPHINGO-MICROPTERYGID STIRPS.

(Continued from Vol. I., p. 546.)

j

-

70 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Superfamily [Va: ALUCITIDES.
HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES.

Linné, in 1758, first grouped (Syst. Nat., xth ed., p. 296) the
plumes under the name ‘“ Alucitae,”’ which he diagnosed as: ‘“ Alis
digitatis fissis ad basin,’”’ and, on p. 542, quite at the end of the lepi-
doptera, he describes Alucita monodactyla, A. didactyla (in Lonicera
aylosteo),* A. tridactyla, A. tetradactyla, A. pentadactyla and A. hexa-
dactyla. Several authors—Petiver, Ray, Frisch, Réaumur, Résel, ete.
—had previously figured various species, and references to these are to
be found in the synonymy of the earliest writers who used the primi-
tive form of so-called binomial nomenclature, e.g., Réaumur figures
and describes monodactyla (Mémoires, etc., 1., p. 328, pl. xx., figs.
12-15), pentadactyla (p. 322, pl. xx., figs. 1-4), and hewadactyla
(p. 324, pl. xix., figs. 19-21) ; Rosel figures ns. Belust., i., phal. 4, t.
5)—pentadactyla, etc. In the Fauna Suecica, 2nd ed., p.870, Linné, with-
out further diagnosis of the group, mentions as Swedish species—Alucita
_monodactyla, A. didactyla (in Geo rivalt),* A. tesseradactyla, A. tetra-
dactyla, A. pterodactyla, A. pentadactyla and A. heaadactyla, whilst,
in 1767, in the Systema Naturae, xiith ed., p. 899, he mentions A.
monodactyla, A. didactyla, A. tridactyla, A. tesseradactyla, A. tetra-
dactyla, A. pterodactyla, A. pentadactyla and A. hexadactyla. Linné
would appear from this to exclude A. tridactyla as a Swedish insect,
although, strangely, he gives the exact diagnosis of tridactyla from the
Systema Naturae, xth ed., p. 542, for his tetradactyla of the Fauna
Suecica, 2nd ed., pp. 870-871. In 1761, Poda uses (dns. Mus.
Graecensis, p. 94) the Linnean generic name Alucita for pentadactyla,
in his list of the species in the Gratz museum. In 1762, Geoffroy,
for no apparent reason whatever, and in full knowledge of Linné
having named the group ‘ Alucitae’’ (as shown by his references),
renamed (Hist. des Insectes, ii., p. 90) the plumes, “ Pterophorus,”
figuring (pl. xi., fig. 6) pentadactyla as ‘‘ Le pterophore”’ and diagnos-
ing Pterophorus as :

Antenne filiformes. Lingua spiralis, ale ramos, ramis pilosis. Chrysalis
nuda, horizontalis.

He describes three species (without technical names), viz., pentadactyla
(with reference to Réaumur, Mémoires, i., pl. xx., figs. 1-2), mono-
dactyla (with reference to pl. xx., figs. 12-15), and hexadactyla (with
reference to pl. xix., figs. 19-21). In 1768, Scopoli (Hnt. Carn., p.
256) also dealt with the group, referring to Linné’s species, and using
the latter’s name ‘“‘ Alucitae’”’ for it. He maintained, however, Pha-
laena in a generic sense, and described Phalaena didactyla, P. bipuncti-
dactyla, P. pterodactyla, P. tridactyla and P. hexadactyla. In 1764,
Miller gives (Faun. Ins. Fridrichsdalina, p. 59) descriptions of seven
plumes, under the name Alucitae [although, strangely enough, he
diagnoses the group (p. xix) under the name Pterophorus|, viz., Alucita
monodactyla, A. didactyla, A. pterodactyla, A. tesseradactyla, A. tetra-

* This error as to foodplant was corrected in the Fauna Suecica, 2nd ed., p.
370, where ‘‘ Lonicera xylosteo’’ is changed to ‘‘ Geo rivali.”’

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. Jel

dactyla, A. pentadactyla and A. heterodactyla, whilst, in 1771, De Geer
describes and figures (Mém. Hist. Insectes, 1i., p. 260) Alucita didac-
tyla, L., and A. pterodactyla, L., which were renamed by Retzius (Gen.
et Spec. Insect., p. 85), in 1788, albofasciatus and fuscus respectively.
In 1772, Bechmann gives (Linn. Syst. Nat. in Hpit., p. 168) under
Phalaena Alucita—didactyla, pentadactyla and hewadactyla. In 1775,
Fabricius followed (Syst. Hnt., pp. 671-672) Geoffroy, in the use of
Pterophorus, and unaccountably refers some twenty species of Tineina
(sens. lat.) to Alucita. He diagnoses Pterophorus as:

Palpi lineares. Lingua exserta, membranacea. Antenne setacez —Ptero-
phorus monodactylus, P. didactylus, P. tridactylus, BP. tesseradactylus, P.
pterodactylus, P. pentadactylus and P. hexadactylus.

In 1775, Schiffermtiler and~Denis published the Schmett. Wien.
(republished in 1776 as the Systematisches Verzeichniss), and enumerated
(pp. 144-146) under the name Alucitae, the following species :—Alucita
ochrodactyla (Blass réthlichgelbes Geistchen), A. didactyla, L., A.
trichodactyla (Braunes weissgestrichtes Geistchen), d. calodactyla
(Dunkelbraun, und oraniengelbgemischtes Geistchen), A. rhododactyla
(Heckrosen Geistchen, larv. Rosa canina), A. pterodactyla, Li. (Le
Pterophore brun, Geoff., larv. Convolrulo arvensi, pl. ia, fig. 8; pl. 1d,
fig. 8), A. leucodactyla (larv. Pulmonaria officinale), A. meyadactyla
(Weisslichtes braunlichtgeflecktes Geistchen), A. pentadactyla, L., and
A. hewadactyla, Linn. On p. 820, these authors further add A.
chrysodactyla (Braunes Geistchen mit goldglinzen den Querstrichchen),
A. mictodactyla (Flachsbhithfarben, bleichroth und braungemischtes
Geistchen), A. yonodactyla (Braunlchtweisses Geistchen mit einem
dustern Dreyeckfleckchen), A. galactodactyla (Milchrahmfarbenes
Geistchen mit einem diistern Puncte). In 1776, Sulzer described and
figured (Geschichte der Insecten, p. 163) three species—Alucita diptera
(=gonodactyla), A. tetradactyla (=monodactyla), A. paradowa (evidently
not a plume), whilst, in 1777, Scopoli gives (Introductio Hist. Nat., p.
428) the following generic diagnosis :—

_ Alw saltem postice laciniate. Pedes longi—Alucita, Schiffermiiller.
Although Scopoli cites no types, he evidently restricts the genus to
the long-legged plumes, i.e., to the superfamily we are here treating,
and excludes the Orneodids. In 1779, Leske gives (Anfanysqr.
Natury., p. 464) only pentadactyla to illustrate his Phalaena Alucita ; in
the same year Blumenbach notes (Handb. Nat., p. 872) hevadactyla as
typical of Alucita. In 1781, Barbut makes (Genera Insect. Linn., ete.)
pentadactyla, Linn., the type of Alucita, whilst, in the same
year, Goze collected (Knt. Beit., i1., pt. 4, pp. 171 et seq.) the various
species already described, with their synonymy, but he appears to use
no discrimination in the references attached to the same name. He
dealt with 22 names as species. In 1785, Geoffroy, in Fourcroy’s Ent,
Paris., 11., p. 256, named the species he described in 1762 (Hist. des
Insectes, 11., p. 90) pentadactyla and didactyla (=monodactyla). In 1787,
Fabricius followed (Mantissa, pp. 258-259) his species-grouping of 1775
for Alucita and Pterophorus (see supra) but included the following
species in the latter genus, viz., Pterophorus monodactylus, P. ochrodac-
tylus, P. didactylus, P. calodactylus, P. tridactylus, P. rhododactylus,
P. tesseradactylus, P, pterodactylus, P. migadactylus, P. pentadactylus
and P. hevadactylus. We know that, between 1776 and 1787,
Fabricius had been to Vienna and seen the insects in Schitlermiiller’s

2, BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

collection. Among others that he notes as having seen are—ochro-
dactyla, didactyla, calodactyla, rhododactyla, leucodactyla (which he
refers with doubt to his tesseradactyla), pterodactyla, meyadactyla (which
name he writes migadactylus), and hevadactyla. Some of his own
descriptions under these names disagree so absolutely with Schiffer-
miuller’s diagnoses, that one suspects either (1) that Fabricius had no
clear idea of the Alucitid species, and mixed up several closely-allied
ones together, or (2) that Schiffermiller himself had, by this time,
specimens of different species under the same name. The excellence
of one ortwoof Fabricius’ disagreeing descriptions, e.y., calodactylus, ochro-
dactylus, etc., favour the latter alternative. It is quite clear, for example,
that Fabricius’ short description of ochrodactylus has nothing to do
with Schiffermiller’s insect of this name, in spite of the Fabrician
reference, and is nothing but the grey form of monodactyla* ; similarly,
his diagnosis of calodactylus is that of the Amblyptilid species known
so long as acanthodactyla, Tr., whilst Schiffermiller’s calodactyla was
evidently a Platyptiliid, and is so figured by Hubner. The Fabrician
descriptions, therefore, cannot be taken as satisfactorily determining
the identity of certain of Schiffermiiller’s types.

In 1789, de Villers published his Linnaea Entomologia Fauna
Suecicae, etc., and here deals (vol. u., pp. 5380-535) with the Linnean
Alucitids—A. monodactyla, A. didactyla, A. tridactylat+, A. tessera-
dactyla, A. pterodactyla, A. pentadactyla and A. hewxadactyla, giving
critical notes on each, and the species referred to these names by
different authors; he then adds diagnoses of fuscodactyla, de Geer,
bipunctidactyla, Scop., and heterodactyla, Mull., whilst farther on
(vol. iv., pp. 546-547) he adds A. galactodactyla, A. rhododactyla,
A. migadactyla and <A. ochrodactyla. In 1791, Schwarz (New
Raupenkal., i., pp. 146, 336) describes the life-history of Phal. Alucita
pentadactyla. In 1794, Fabricius gave (Ent. Syst., ui., pt. 2, pp.
345-349) another list of the known Alucitid species, which he now
places at 12, viz., Pterophorus monodactylus, L., P. ochrodactylus, W.V.,
P. didactylus, L., P. calodactylus, W.V., P. leucodactylus (now referred
to as a South American species), P. tridactylus, L., P. rhododactylus,
W.V., P. tesseradactylus, L. (=leucodactyla, W.V.), P. pterodactylus,
L., ’. albodactylus, P. migadactylus (megadactyla), W.V., and P. penta-
dactylus, L. The errors of determination made in 1787, and referred
to (supra) appear to be repeated, e.y., ochrodactylus, Fab., does not
=ochrodactyla, W.V.; tesseradactylus, L., is probably not correctly
referred to leucodactyla, W.V., certainly the larva of tesseradactyla, as
later determined, does not feed on Pulmonaria officinalis.

Latreille, in 1796, cites (Précis, p. 148) no species, but gives the
following generic diagnoses:

OrneopEs (Phalaena, Linn., Pterophorus, Geoff., Fab., Oliv.): Antennules

antérieures obsolétes; postérieures longues, recourbées, couvertes d’écailles,
paroissant quelquefois bifides: second article long, le dernier presque aussi long,

* Charpentier found ochrodactyla, Hb., in Schiffermiiller’s collection under
the name ochrodactyla, and we know that many of Hiibner’s figures were made
from Schiffermiiller’s collection.

+ De Villers already draws attention (p. 533) to the difficulty of determining
what species Linné meant by tetradactyla; he quotes the Linnean description of
the Fauna Suecica under this name, and shows that it belongs to the tridactyla of
the Systema Naturae, xth ed., and there leaves it. His pterodactyla is evidently
the whitish form of monodactyla not pterodactyla, L.=fuscus, Retzius.

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 73

nu. Caractéres Habituels: Ailes trés-divisées, formant un éventail autour du
corps; celui-ci court. Pattes fort épineuses.

PreropHorus, Geoff., Fab., Oliv. (Phalaena, Linn.): Antennules antérieures

obsolétes ; postérieures courtes, recourbées, menues subulées, couvertes d’écailles,
de trois articles, dont le premier plus grand, les autres presque égaux. Caractéres
Habituels: Corps étroit, alongé. Ailes trés-écartées du corps, en forme de bras,
étroites, divisée. Pattes trés-épineuses.
This is the first distinct separation of the Orneodids from the
Alucitids. In 1797 or 1798, Cuvier gives (Yabl. Hlémentaire, etc.,
p. 603) pentadactyla as the type of Alucita, Linn. = Pterophorus, Fab.
He writes:

Les Ptérophores (Pterophorus, Fab.), Alucita, Linn., sont de petites phalénes
dont les ailes sont divisées en un certain nombre de digitations semblable 4 autant
de plumes — Ph. pentadactyla.

In 1801, Lamarck cites (Sys. Anim. sans Vert., p. 288) pentadactyla
to Pterophorus, and in the same year, Illiger diagnosed (Sys. Verz. der
Wien., 2nd ed., pp. 126 et seq.) the superfamily as follows:

Auucit=, Linn. (PrERopHorus, Fab.).—Larva pedibus sedecim instructa,

parva, segnis, lata, pilosa. Mertamorpnosis ut Papilionum, tela nulla. Pura
plano alicui filorum duorum opum adherente. Imaco admodum tenuis ac gracilis,
alis, saltem posticis, in plumule (dactylos) fissis, pedibus longissimis—Alucita
ochrodactyla, A. didactyla, A. chrysodactyla, A. trichodactyla, A. calodactyla, A.
rhododactyla, A. nuictodactyla, A. gonodactyla, A. pterodactyla, A. galactodactyla,
A. leucodactyla, A. megadactyla, A. pentadactyla, A. hexadactyla.
Illiger, wrongly we have no doubt, refers ochrodactylus, Fab., to that of
the Sys. Verz., 1st ed. (see antea), he also further suggests that didac-
tyla, Linn., Syst. Nat., xiith ed., p. 899; Fauna Suec., 2nd ed., p. 370,
is not to be referred to didactyla, Linn., Syst. Nat., xth ed., p. 542,
but to rhododactyla, W.V., a conclusion that cannot be accepted. He
further refers Linné’s pterodactyla (fuscus) to the convolvulus-feeding
pterodactyla, Sys. Verz., but rightly points out that Fabricius is in
error in referring Geoffroy’s figures of monodactyla to the didactyla of
Linné, and one suspects his yalactodactyla to be another form of
monodactyla. The foodplant of leucodactyla is again repeated as being
Pulmonaria officinalis, and, if so, the species should be determined
with certainty.

In 1802, Schrank gives (Fauna Boica, i1., 2, pp. 139-140) the
following species in the genus Alucita—A. trichodactyla, W.Y., 145,
no. 8=Schaeff., Icon., 98. 7 (t.e., presumably, didactyla, Linn.) ; A.
pterodactyla, W.V., 297, tab. 1, fig. 8 (v.e., monodactyla,. Linn.) ; A.
megadactyla, W.V., 146, no. 8 (possibly spilodactyla, Curt., although
gonodactyla, W.V., was later figured by Hiibner as this species, and it was
determined as nemoralis, H.-S., by Werneburg) ; A. pentadactyla, W.V.,
146, no. 9 (i.e., pentadactyla, Linn.). It was also, in 1802, that
Latreille made (Histoire Nat., iii., p. 418) the Alucitids, the 6th (and
last) family of his classification. He noted them as follows:

PrrrorHorit.—Ailes divisées, étroites. Deux a quatre palpes. Une trompe.
Antennes simple, sétacées. Corps long. Pattes longues, épineuses.

Genus: Pterophorus.—Palpes guére plus longs que la téte, également écailleux.
Corps fort alongé. Ailes trés-étroites—Pterophorus didactylus, F.

Genus : Orneodes.—Palpes fort longs; le second article garni de grandes
écailles ; le dernier long, presque nu. Ailes divisées en un grand nombre de piéces,
formant l’éventail—Pterophorus hexadactylus.

It may be noted that Latreille, like Fabricius, erroneously uses Alucita
for certain Tineid lepidoptera. In 1805, Latreille (op. cit., xiv., pp.
257-258) rediagnosed the two genera into which he had divided the

74. BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

plumes, and illustrated them by the inclusion of a number of species
as follows:

PrrRopHorus.—Palpes de la longueur de la téte, également fournis d’écailles :
ailes alongées, étroites—P. monodactylus, P. didactylus, P. pentadactylus, P.
rhododactylus, P. albodactylus.

OrnEopEs.—Palpes plus longs que la téte; second article plus grand, garni
d’écailles ; le dernier alongé, presque nu; ailes en éventail—O. hexadactylus.
This grouping Latreille maintained, in 1809 (Gen. Crust. et Ins., 1v.,
pp. 238-4). In 1806, Hiibner (Tentamen, p. 2) gives us the following:

Phalanx IX: AxuciTm.

Tribus L: Indubidatae.

: 1. Pterophore—Pterophora pentadactyla
2. Ripidophore—Ripidophora hexadactyla

but this is only of importance from the fact that it must have been
published long before most of the figures of his plumes in the Hur.
Schmett., Alucitae, pl. i.-vii., figs. 1-88. The exact dates of publication
of these plates are doubtful, but were possibly as follows :

PuatEs 1-2—1804.—Referred to by Laspeyres in his review of Illger’s edition
of the Wiener Verzeichniss, in 1805 (Illiger’s Magazin, iv., pp. 16-68). Also
referred to by Haworth, in 1811 (Lepidoptera Britannica, pp. 475 et seq.).

PuatEs 3-6—1811-1817.—Referred to by Charpentier, in 1818 (Verzeichniss
der europdischen Schmett., p. 92); also noted by Htibner himself in 1822 (Syst.-
alphabet. Verzeichniss).

Puiatr 7—1823.—Not mentioned by Hiibner in his Syst.-alphabet. Verzeichniss,
in 1822, but was offered for sale December 22nd, 1823, in prospectus issued by
Hiibner on that date of the books he had for sale.

The contents of the plates are as follows:—Plate 1: Alucita
pentadactyla, A. galactodactyla, A. mictodactyla (bipunctidactyla), A.
pterodactyla (monodactyla), A. leucodactyla.« Plate 2: Alucita
meyadactylat (gonodactyla), A.calodactyla} (zetterstedtii), A. rhododactyla,
A. trichodactyla, A. hexadactyla. Plate 3: Alucita ochrodactyla, A.
phaeodactyla, A. ptilodactyla (highly coloured pterodactyla=fuscus).

* This is a very doubtful figure. Haworth refers it to one of the lemon- or
sulphur-coloured species (osteodactyla). It is usually referred to tetradactyla and
Hiibner’s own reference of the species (Verz., p. 431) to Aciptilia suggests most
strongly that it was meant for this species.

+ The megadactyla of Hiibner is no doubt the gonodactyla of Schiffermiller
and not the latter’s megadactyla, agreeing exactly with his description of the
former and disagreeing just as completely with his description of the latter which
is noted as ‘‘ whitish’’ in colour. One suspects some mixing of species here, for,
after the de-cription of a white species from the collection, it is noted by Fabricius
as having dark-spotted legs, which gives colour to Werneburg’s conclusion that
the insect might be nemoralis, H.-Sch. The supposition of mixing is further
borne out by Charpentier, who, in 1821, states that Hiibner’s megadactyla
corresponds with the megadactyla of the Vienna collection. Charpentier possibly
makes a slip when he states that Schiffermiiller’s gonodactyla is only a worn
example of the same author’s calodactyla (zetterstedtti, Zell.) (an error that could
easily occur at that time between such closely-allied species as gonodactyla and
zetterstedtit).

{ Calodactyla of Hiibner is undoubtedly a Platyptiliid and agrees absolutely
with Schiffermiiller’s diagnosis ; whilst Charpentier noted (in 1821) that Hiibner’s
figure agrees with the insect in the Vienna collection. On the other hand,
calodactyla, Fab., is described as toothed on the inner margin, and is undoubtedly
the species known as acanthodactyla, Tr., and Hiibner draws both his cosmodactyla
and acanthodactyla with sucha tooth. A specimen of zetterstedtii, Zell., in the Frey
collection is almost identical with Hiibner’s figure of calodactyla, to which species
we have no hesitation in referring the Hiibnerian figure. In the Verzeichniss also,
Hiibner places calodactyla and petradactyla with the untoothed Platyptiliids,
whilst the toothed cosmodactyla and acanthodactyla, he places with the Oxyptilids
under the group name dmblyptiliae.

75

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES.

Plate 4: Alucita tephradactyla (very yellow), A. trichodactyla, A.
carphodactyla, A. scarodactyla. Plate 5: Alucita acanthodactyla
(=punctidactyla, Haw.), A. ptilodactyla (pterodactyla=fuscus), A.
microdactyla. Plate 6: Alucita polydactyla, A. dodecadactyla, A.
hexadactyla. Plate 7: Alucita adactyla, A. petradactyla (= zetterstedtit),
A. cosmodactyla (acanthodactyla, Tr.). It is to be noted that Hiibner’s
calodactyla is placed with meyadactyla (gonodactyla), petradactyla,
ochrodactyla and rhododactyla, in the Verzeichniss, all, according to
the figures, without the inner-marginal tooth, and true Platyptiliid
species. fen

In 1805, Laspeyres (lll. May., iv., pp. 20 et seg.), reviewing
Illiger’s edition of the Vienna Catalogue, offers many criticisms, and
refers to Hubner’s plates i and ii. He observes that (1) The Fabrician
P. ochrodactylus cannot be that of Schiffermuller as the diagnoses dis-
agree. (2) The didactyla of Linné and Schiffermiiller are most probably
different. (8) The Htbnerian megadactyla (fig. 6) is apparently only a
sexual variety of his calodactyla (fig. 7).* He turther notes that the
Hubnerian megadactyla is very different from the Fabrician migadac-
tylus, the description of which would very well fit Hubner’s yalacto-
dactylat (fig. 2), but Laspeyres evidently overlooks the words ‘‘ pedes
albi, fusco maculati’’ in the Fabrician description, which do not fit
galactodactyla, nor, as a matter of fact, any of the truly ‘‘ white”
European species, and renders Werneburg’s reference to nemo-
ralis just possible, though nemoralis is not a “‘ white’’ species in any
sense.

In 1811, Haworth described (Lep. Brit., pp. 475 et seq.) the group
under the name Alucita, as:

Antenne setaceez. Palpiduo lineares. Linguaexserta membranacea. Corpus

pedesque gracilissimé elongati, alis sedentis, expansis; anticis bifidis, rarissime
5-6 partitis : posticis 3-6 partitis, laciniis plumeformibus: volatu tardiore, vespe-
reque—dAlucita pentadactyla, galactodactyla, pterodactyla, fuscodactyla, bipuncti-
dactyla, monodactyla, tetradactyla, tridactyla, leucadactyla, lunaedactyla, palli-
dactyla, migadactyla, trigonodactyla, rhododactyla, calodactyla, punctidactyla,
tesseradactyla, didactyla, heterodactyla, parvidactyla, hexadactyla.
We have already noted that Haworth refers to plates 1 and 11 of
Hubner’s Sammluny Huropiiischer Schmett., and that his other references
suggest that he knew Htibner’s plates well; there is ttle doubt that
Hubner’s plates ili-vi were published after 1811 and before 1818,
possibly in 1816-1817, a most important matter with regard to the
synonymy of some of Haworth’s species.

In 1815, Oken divides (Lehrb. Zool., i., p. 679) the plumes into
two genera :

1. Anucira (Pterophorus)—pentadactyla (described), monodactyla, didactyla,

trichodactyla, pterodactyla, megadactyla.
2. OrnEopES—hexadactyla.

* All the early authors seem to have recognised that calodactyla, Hb. =calo-
dactyla, W.V., is a Platyptiliid, and closely allied to gonodactyla, W.V.=mega-
dactyla, Hb.

+ Long before seeing this criticism of Laspeyres, we had already referred it to
spilodactyla, Curt., a species the latter did not know. Fabricius’ additional remark
about the legs, possibly obtained from another insect (none of the white species
having fuscous-spotted legs), is equally inapplicable to spilodactyla, Curt., and
galactodactyla, W.V., Hb.; besides Schiffermiiller was not likely to describe
galactodactyla twice, first as megadactyla and then as galactodactyla.

76 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

In the same year, Leach gives (Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, ix., p.
135) the following grouping :

Tribe VII: Anuctripes (Pterophorites, Latreille): Wings divided, or formed
of feathers united at their base.

Genus cecelxxiii : Pterophorus, Geoffroy, Latreille, Fabricius. Alucita, Hub-
ner, Schrank, Scopoli.—Sp. 1. Pentadactylus.* 2. Didactylus, etc.

Genus ececlxxiv: Alucita, Hiibner, Scopoli. Pterophorus, Geoffroy, Fabri-
cius. Phalaena (Alucita), Linné, Villers. Orneodes, Latreille—Sp. 1. Hexadac-
tyla, Latr., Fab., Linn., Hb.

Samouelle, in 1819, published (Entom. Useful Compendium, pp.
255-256) the slightest possible modification of Leach’s classification,
as follows:

Fam. XI: Atuctrmm, Leach (PreropHorires, Latr.).—Wings divided, or
formed of feathers united at their base.

Genus: Pterophorus, Geoff., Latr., Fabr., Leach. Alucita, Hiibner, Schrank,
Scopoli. Phalaena-Alucita, Linné.—Palpi small, from their base ascending, not
longer than the head, shortly and nearly equally squamose; anterior wings com-
posed of two, posterior of three, feathers. Pupa naked, suspended by a hair—
Pterophorus pentadactylus.

Genus: Alucita, Hiibner, Scopoli, Leach. Pterophorus, Geoff., Fabr.
Phalaena-Alucita, Linn., Villers. Orneodes, Latr.—Palpi produced much longer
than the head; the second joint very squamose; the last joint naked, erect. Pupa
folliculate—Alucita hexadactyla.

Zincken, in his article “‘ Alucita”’ in Esch and Gruber’s Allgemeine
Encyclopédie, ii., p. 274 (1819), cites only pentadactyla, Linn. =tri-
dactyla, Scop., as an example of the genus. In 1821, Oken alters
(Nat. Schulen, i1., p. 177) the genus Alucita to Pterophorus, without
assigning any reason for the change, and cites pentadactylus to the
genus. In the same year, Charpentier compared the plumes in the
Vienna collection with the descriptions in the Syst. Verzeichniss of
Schiffermiiller, and a series of footnotes has been made by Zincken
as to his determinations. He states (Die Ziinsler, Waickler, ete.,
pp. 174 et seq.) that the calodactyla, rhododactyla, pterodactyla, leuco-
dactyla* , megadactyla+, ochrodactyla, mictodactyla, yalactodactylat, and
_ hexadactyla in the Schiffermiillerian collection are quite accurately
figured under these names, by Hubner, and may be considered as
determining the Syst. Verz. species bearing these names, except in the
case of megadactyla which disagrees with Schiffermuller’s original
description, supported largely by that made from it by Fabricius. He
further notes that pentadactyla was absent from the collection, that
didactylag§ (S.V., p. 145, no. 2) perfectly agreed with chrysodactyla (S.V.,

* This is cited in the index margin, and therefore =Leach’s type.

‘| A. leucodactyla is the tetradactyla of Linné, and must fall before the older
name (Zincken). This is our opinion, the foodplant being wrongly cited as
Pulmonaria officinalis.

+ A. megadactyla, 8.V., is the tesseradactyla of Linné, and when he says the
hindwings are divided into 4 plumules, it is an oversight of the same nature as that
which led him to say the hindwings were divided into 5 plumules (Zincken).
Zincken is wrong—(1) Linné does not say this except by etymological implication.
(2) Linné’s tesseradactyla appears to be quite distinct from megadactyla (=gonodac-
tyla). It is interesting however, as being the first occasion on which tesseradactyla,
Linn., is referred by any author to a known species.

t The larva of A. galactodactyla feeds on Arctium lappa (Zincken).

§ Hiibner’s trichodactyla=Linné’s didactyla, therefore trichodactyla, chryso-
dactyla and didactyla of Schiffermiiller=didactyla, Linné, and must fall as
synonyms thereof, so also must Illiger’s reference (Syst. Verz., 2nd ed.) of didactyla,
Linn., under rhododactyla, which is a distinct species (Zincken). The close
alliance of the Oxyptilids in the imaginal stage suggests caution in accepting this
statement in its entirety.

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. hie

p. 820, no. 11), that trichodactyla (S.V., p. 145, no. 3) also appeared to
aeree with chrysodactyla (S.V., p. 320, no. 11), and that this species is
figured by Hubner (pl. 11., fig. 9; pl. iv., fig. 18) as trichodactyla. He
further states that gonodactyla (S.V., p. 320, no. 13) is a worn example
of calodactyla, another point that illustrates the close alliance of the
two. He also notes that he found a specimen from Silesia, in the
cabinet, labelled by Schiffermuller ‘‘ odontodactyla,’ and that this
agreed with Hubner’s acanthodactyla* (figs. 23 and 24). [Zincken’s
footnotes here quoted were evidently made without a personal inspec-
tion of Schiffermuller’s specimens and must be considered accordingly. |

This is one of the most important and difficult of the papers that come
within our purview. Fabricius and Hubner, before Charpentier, are
both credited with having had access to the Schiffermillerian collection
and to have described and figured species therefrom. The short crisp
diagnoses of Schiffermuller, in the Syst. Verzeichniss, are marvels in
their way, and leave an expert with a very definite idea, in most cases,
of what the author meant. Fabricius, the first author who is credited
with having examined the specimens, might, so far as some of his
descriptions tally with the original diagnoses, as well have performed
the operation with his eyes shut, and, in spite of the excellence of some
of them, one is forced to conclude either (1) that other of Fabricius’
examinations were of the most cursory nature, and hence purposeless,
(2) that he really mixed up allied species which he had no capacity to
distinguish, or (8) that the species were already mixed before he saw
them, and his descriptions of miyadactylus and ochrodactylus bear out
this latter view. The marvellous unanimity that prevails between the
Schiffermullerian diagnoses, the Htibnerian figures, and the Charpen-
terlan notes, suggests that, in almost every case, the insects bearing
the Schiffermullerian names are actually figured by Hubner under the
same name. ‘The only doubtful insect is, as pointed out above, meya-
dactyla, $.V. Schiffermuller’s description and position suggest spilo-
dactyla, Curt., the Fabrician description made therefrom also corrobo-
rates this view, except fora detail in the description, viz., ‘‘ pedes albo,
fusco maculati,’’ which alone would make this determination impossible.
Laspeyres considers the description apphes to yalactodactyla, Hb.,
W.YV., a species Schiffermuller and Fabricius both, however, described.
Hubner figures as megadactyla the dark grey form of yonodactyla, and
Charpentier says that this tallied with the Schiffermullerian specimen he
saw, and this species has lees as described by Fabricius, but is not
white as described by him nor does it agree at all satisfactorily
with Schiffermuller’s diagnosis. Werneburg opines that it is nemo-
ralis, a just possible solution, as the species wears ‘ white,’ and
gonodactyla might easily be confused with it, but the Fabrician
description does not otherwise agree. At any rate, it is quite clear
that when Hubner figured megadactyla he had yonodactyla before him,
that at the time of Charpentier’s examination such a specimen bore
this name in the Schiffermullerian collection, that this specimen was
not the one described by Schiffermiiller, nor that described by
Fabricius under this name. We still believe that the original mga-
dactyla, Schiff., was spilodactyla, Curt., and that this specimen was

* The original specimens from which Hiibner’s figs. 23 and 24 were made are
in my collection (Zineken).

78 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

described by Fabricius, the addition of a worn Platyptiliid (? nemoralis)
to the series in Schiffermiiller’s collection accounting for the ‘‘ pedes
albo, fusco maculati,’ in his otherwise good description, and the
removal of the original specimen (as also that of pentadactyla), and the
addition of Platyptilias in good condition, some years afterwards,
accounting for Hiibner’s figure and Charpentier’s remark of satis-
faction thereon.

We now come to the most important paper written on the
classification of the plumes to date. Hiibner, in 1825, offers (Verze-
ichniss, pp. 428 et seq.) the following detailed grouping of the
Alucitids :—

Phalanx IX. Atnuctrm.—Recognisable by their feather-like wings, long legs,
and slender abdomen.
Tribus I. Inrecra.—The wings entire, moderately broad and long, the
legs delicate, the abdomen long.
Stirps I. Panprerotes.—The wings lance-shaped, scarcely obtuse.
Fam. A. Osnupinm.—The wings shaded with grey.

Coitus 1. Aapistrs.—The wings marked with united dark

spots—Agqdistis adactyla, Hb., Alw., 32-34.
Tribus II. Triripm.—The forewings once, and the hindwings twice,
cleft.
Stirps I. PreropHora.—The wings feather-like, the forewings more
variegated than the hindwings.
Fam. A. Ostusm.—The forewings rather broad at the apex,
almost beak-like, hindwings not uniform.

Coitus 1. Puatyprirtm.—The forewings posteriorly broad
and obtuse—Platyptilia calodactyla et megadactyla,
Schiff., Verz., Alu. A, 4,8; Hiibn., Alu., 7,6. LP. petra-
dactyla, Hiibn., Alu., 37, 38. P. ochrodactyla, Hiibn.,
Alu., 12,13. P. rhododactyla, Schiff., Verz., Alu. A, 5;
Hiibn., dAlu., 8.

Coitus 2. AmpBiypriniz.— The forewings almost gaily
chequered and brightly marked—Amplyptilia* acantho-
dactyla, Htibn., Alu., 23, 24. <A. cosmodactyla, Hiibn.,
dlu., 35, 36. A. trichodactyla, didactyla et chrysodactyla,
Sehiti,, Verz., Alu. A, 3; 2,00; Hubn., Aliv.. Oi elseeeee
phaeodactyla, Hiibn., Alu., 14, 15.

Fam. B. Cuspiprs.—The forewings almost curved and pointed,
cleft nearly half-way.

Coitus 1. Srenoprini1m.—The forewings narrow, speckled
with scattered black spots — Stenoptilia mictodactyla,
Sehiff., Verz., Alu. A, 3; Hubn., Alw., 35¢saepares
dactyla, Hiibn., Alu., 16, 25. S. pterodactyla, Linn.,
Syst., Phal., 458; Hiibn., Alu., 4. 8S. scarodactyla,
Hiibn., Alw., 21, 22. S.tephradactila, Hubus Aline
S. carphodactyla, Hiibn., Aluw., 19, 20. S. microdactyla,
Sehitis, Verz., Alue Ay 12) Eubme. Als omen

Coitus 2. Acrprinia.—The plumes at the tip somewhat
pointed, almost without markings— Aciptilia galacto-
dactyla, Schift., Verz., Alu. 1455 Tata ein eee
pentadactyla, Linn., Syst., Phal., 459; Hiibn., Alw., 1.
A. theiodactyla (leucodactyla), Htbn., Alu., 5.

Tribus III. Movutiripm.— Both fore- and hindwings divided into six
plumules.
Stirps I. RurprmopHorm.—All the wings fanshaped, each six-
plumed.
Fam. A. VarieGat#.—The wings with partly chequered plumes,
and marked with terminal spots.

Coitus 1. Eucutraptm.— The plumules banded with

brownish-grey and blackish-brown, the terminal spots

* This by a lapsus calami is spelt Amplyptilia.

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 79

black—Euchiradia hexadactyla, Linn., Syst., Phal., 460;
Hiibn., Alu., 10, 11 et 30, 31. EH. dodecadactyla, Hiibn.,
Alu., 29. E. polydactyla, Hiibn., Alu., 28.

In 1827, Curtis gave (Brit. Hnt., fo. 161) a short classification of
the British plumes (adding five species to Haworth’s list) under the
group name Pterophorus, which he divides into Sections A and B.
His summary is as follows:

A. Abdominal ray not lobed—tetradactylus, ochrodactylus, pentadactylus,
galactodactylus (albodactylus), spilodactylus, tridactylus, citridactylus, leucodactylus,
pterodactylus, monodactylus, tephradactylus, bipunctidactylus, fuscodactylus,
migadactylus, phaeodactylus, lunaedactylus.

B. Abdominal ray producing a bundle of scales forming a lobe on the internal
margin—didactylus (= heterodactylus), rhododactylus, trigonodactylus, calodactylus,
tesseradactylus, punctidactylus, microdactylus (=parvidactylus).

The type of Pterophorus, he cites as pentadactyla, Linn. Later, in
1833 (op. cit., fo. 471), he diagnoses the genus Adactylus, describing it
in full from the characters offered by bennetti, but citing as type
Alucita adactyla, Hb., whilst in fo. 695 hexadactyla is cited as the

type of Alucita.

In 18838, Treitschke gives (Die Schmett., etc., ix., pt. 2, pp. 225
et seg.) another out-of-date grouping, in the face of Htbner’s well-
known work. He places all the plumes in Alucita, which he divides*
into four families as foliows :

Fam. A.—The imago with entire undivided wings—adactyla, Hb.

Fam. B.—The imagines with broad forewings, cut out sickle-like on the hind
margin, with one short cleft, the lobes drawn close together; the hindwings con-
sisting of three plumules—ochrodactyla, Hb., rhododactyla, Fab., tesseradactyla,
Linn., calodactyla, Hb., graphodactyla, Tr., acanthodactyla, Hb., cosmo-
dactyla, Hb.

Fam. C.—With narrow, more deeply cleft forewings, club-like towards the
hind-margin; the hindwings divided into three plumules—didactyla, Linn.,
brachydactyla, Koll., phaeodactyla, Hb., mictodactyla, Hb., pterodactyla, Hb.,
ptilodactyla, Hb., lithodactyla, Tr., septodactyla, Tr., tephradactyla, Hb., icaro-
dactyla, Tr. (scarodactyla, Hb.), microdactyla, Tr.

Fam. D.—Wings deeply cleft, the forewings into two, the hindwings into three,
plumules—pentadactyla, Linn., galactodactyla, Hb., .canthodactyla, Tr., tetra-
dactyla, Linn.

In 18834, Stephens made an attempt to apply Htibner’s classification
to the British plumes, and grouped (Illus. Brit. Ent. Haust., iv., pp
370 et seq.) them as follows:

1. Undivided wings, short truncate palpi, minute spurs to hinder tibix—
Agdistis (hennetit).

2. Anterior wings divided into two or three feathers, the posterior into three—
Pterophorus.

A. Posterior wings without an appendage on the inner margin.

a, Anterior wings broad, deeply cleft, pale—dAciptilia pentadactylus,
spilodactylus, galactodactylus.

b. Anterior wings narrow, deeply cleft and acute, generally without
any distinct markings—Stenoptilia bipunctidactylus, fusco-
dactylus (pterodactylus), monodactylus, tephradactylus, tri-

YY dactylus, niveidactylus, tetradactylus, carpodactylus, ochro-
dactylus, lewcodactylus, lunaedactylus, pallidactylus, miga-
dactylus, similidactylus.

B. Posterior wings with an appendage on the inner margin.

a, Anterior wings broad and acute—Platyptilia trigonodactylus,
rhododactylus, calodactylus.

* Like Linné, Barbut and the other early authors, Treitschke uses the term
‘“‘oenus’’ in a ‘superfamily ’’ sense, dividing the genus into ‘ families,”’ ete, so
also did Zeller (see posted).

80 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

b. Anterior wings narrow, faleate and varied—Amblyptilia tessara-
dactylus, punctidactylus, cosmodactylus, didactylus, hetero-
dactylus, microdactylus (=parvidactylus).

Stephens, however, in his Appendix to this volume, applies, in detail,
the Hiibnerian classification to the British species, in order to illustrate
(p. 408) the propriety of establishing a larger number of genera, and
then gives (p. 424) the following lst :

Phal. IX. Avcirz.

Tribus 1. InrEGRz. | cosmodactyla
Stirps i. PAanpreRores. : trichodactyla
Fam. A. OBNUBILE. | pheodactyla
Agdistes Fam. B. CuspmipEs
bennetii | Stenoptilia
Trisus 2. TRIFIDz. | ptilodactyla
Stirps i. PrERoPHOR. | pterodactyla
Fam. A. Ostusz. | tephrodactyla
Platyptilia | carphodactyla
calodactyla | Aciptilia
tetradactyla galactodactyla
rhododactyla | pentadactyla
Amblyptilia theirodactyla

acanthodactyla

In 1838, Duponchel fell as far behind as ever, diagnosing (Hist.
Nat., xi., pp. 631 et seq.) the group under the name Pterophorites, which
he divided into two genera—(1) PrrropHorus—P. pentadactylus. (2)
Orneopes—O. hevadactylus—remarking that these differed entirely in
their manner of life and transformations. He then divides his genus
Pterophorus (i.e., the whole superfamily Alucitides) into the following
eroups :

1. Les quatre ailes entieres ou non divisées—adactyla.

2. Ailes antérieures larges, falciformis, briévement, fendues en deux et recouy-
rant les ailes postérieures au repos. Celles-ci divisées en trois parties qui
ressemblent plus ou moins a des plumes—ochrodactylus, calodactylus, cosmodactylus,
rhododactylus, tesseradactylus, graphodactylus, acanthodactylus, pterodactylus.

3. Ailes antérieures étroites, plus profondément bifides que les précedentes,
courbées en crosse, et ne recouvrant pas les postérieures au repos; les trois divisions
de celles-ci en forme de plumes—didactylus, brachydactylus, phaeodactylus, micto-
dactylus, pterodactylus, ptilodactylus, lithodactylus, septodactylus, tephradactylus,

icarodactylus, microdactylus, carphodactylus, aetodactylus, lithoxylodactylus,
zophodactylus.

4, Ailes antérieures composées de deux plumes et les postérieures de trois ;
tout les cing bien distinctes au repos—pentadactylus, galactodactylus, spilodactylus,
zanthodactylus, tetradactylus, ischnodactylus.

He observes that three species—amaurodactylus, capnodactylus, and
miantodactylus-—mentioned by Fischer von Roeslerstamm are unplaced,
because unknown to him.

In 1840, Westwood, apparently ignorant of the work of his imme-
diate predecessors, gives (Introd. Mod. Class. Insects, 11., p. 115) the
following grouping, under the name Alucitidae, Leach (Pterophorites,
Latreille) : .

AepistEs, Hb. (ddactylus, Curt.).—Wings entire—A. bennettii, Curt.

PreropHorus, Geoff. (Alucita, Schr.).—Anterior wings 2-, posterior 3-lobed—
P. dA. pentadactyla, Linn. 27 sp.

. Auucitra, Scop. (Orneodes, Latr.).—All the wings 6-lobed—P. A. hexadactyla,
25/2 SDe

In 1841, Zeller gave (Ists, 1841, pp. 875-888) what appears to be
an excellent review of the literature of the subject to date, preceded
(op. cit., pp. 756 et seq.) by a detailed classification of the superfamily
under the name Ptervphoridae. His grouping worked out as follows:

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 81

PreropHorip®, Zell. (Pterophorites, Latr., Alucitidae, Leach, Stphs., Westd.
Pterophorus, Geoffr., Fabr. Phalénes-tipules, Degeer. Phalaena-Alucita,
Linn., Syst. Vindob.)—Ale anteriores fissee vel partite vel integre fissura
indicata.

I. PrenoPHORIDA: PROPRII.*—Alee anteriores bifide vel integre fissura
indicata..

Genus 1: Apactyta, Zell. (Agdistis, Hiib., ‘‘ Cat.’’ Alucita Fam. A.,
Tr.).—Ale lanceolate integre anteriorum fissura indicata.

Genus 2: PreropHorvs, Geoffr., Fabr., Stphs. (Phalaenae-Alucitae,
Linn. Alucita, Schrk., Tr.).—Ale anteriores bifids, posteriores
subtripartite.

Group 1: Puarypritvs, Zell. (Platyptilia, Hb., ‘‘ Cat.’’).

Sect. a.—P. rhododactylus, 8.V.

Sect. b.—P. capnodactylus, F. vy. R. in litt.

Sect. c.—P. ochrodactylus, Hb.

Sect. d.—P. zetterstedtti, Zell. [with var. gonodactyla, S.V.
(=tesseradactyla, Tr., megadactyla, Hb.), and var.
nemoralis, Zell. (=macrodactyla, Fehr, in litt.). Not. 1.
Phal. tesseradactyla, Linn. Not. 2. Alucita petradactyla,
Hb.], fischeri, Zell. (hemidactyla, Mus. Schiff.), metzneri,
Zell.

Sect. e.-—P. acanthodactylus, Hb., Tr., cosmodactyla, Tr.
[with var. cosmodactyla, Hb. et var. spilodactyla, Kaden.).
Not. 1. Aluc. ulodactyla, Zett.].

Group 2: Oxyprinus, Zell. (Amblyptilia, Hb.).—O. tristis, Zell.,
pilosellae, Zell., obscurus, Zell., hieracii, Zell. [Not. 1.
Phal. Alu. didactyla, Linn. Not. 2. Pteroph. leucodactylus, -
F.], trichodactylus, Hb.

Group 3: PrEropHoxts, Zell. (Stenoptilia, Hb.).

Sect. a.—P. ehrenbergianus, Zell., phaeodactylus, Hb.

Sect. b.—P. miantodactylus, F. v. R., in litt.

Sect. c.—P. mictodactylus, 8.V., Hb., graphodactylus, Tr.,
fuscus, Retz. (ptilodactyla, Hb., Tr.).

Sect. d.—P. lithodactylus, Tr., septodactyla, Tr.

Sect. e.—P. pterodactylus, Linn. (fuscus, Geoffr.).

Sect. f.—P. scarodactylus, Hb. (icarodactyla, Tr.), tephra-
dactylus, Hb., osteodactylus, Zell. (microdactyla, Zett.),
carphodactylus, Hb., Tr., microdactylus, Hb., Tr.

Sect. g.—P. brachydactylus, Koll., Tr.

Group 4: Acrprinus, Zell. (Aciptilia, Hb.).

Sect. a.—A. galactodactylus, Hb., Tr. [Not. Pter. albo-
dactylus, Fab.].

Sect. b.—A. xanthodactylus, Tr.

Sect. c.—d. obsoletus, Zell.

Sect. d.—A. xerodactylus, Metz., in litt., baliodactylus,
F. v. R., in litt., tetradactylus, Linn. (Aluc. leucodactyla
et Acipt. theiodactyla, Hb., Phal. didactyla, Scop.).

Sect. e.—A. ischnodactylus, Tr.

Sect. f.—A. pentadactylus, Linn., Hb., Tr.

Sect. g.—A. paludum, Zell.

II. Auucrrina.—Alex singule sexpartite.

Genus 1: Auvucira, Linn., 8.V., Hb., Stphs. (Pterophorus parte,
Geoff., Fab. Orneodes, Latr., Tr. Huchiradia, Hb.).—A. grammo-
dactyla, Zell. (hexadactyla, Hb., figs. 10, 11 ?), hewadactyla, Linn.,
Hb., Tr., polydactyla, Hb., Tr., dodecadactyla, Hb., Tr. [Not-
Aluc. poecilodactyla, Stphs.].

In 1845+, Duponchel maintained (Cat. Meth., pp. 380 et seg.) the
old grouping. He subdivides his Pterophorites into (1) Pterophorides,
(2) Orneodides. In the first section only two genera are given :

* In spite of this comprehensive subdivision Zeller describes all the species of
this group in detail under the two generic names—dAdactyla (hiibneri) and
Pterophorus (all the other species).

+ Wrongly dated 1844, published 1845.—L. B. Provur.

§2 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

1. Apactyna, Zell.—Les quatre ailes entiéres—A. huebneri, Curt. (adactyla,
airs):
2. Pterophorus, Geofi.—Ailes supérieures divisées en deux branches, et les
-inférieures en trois—P. rhododactylus, capnodactylus, ochrodactylus, zetterstedti,
etc.

In the second group he has only one genus :

1. Orneodes, Latr.—O. hexadactylus, O. polydactylus, O. grammodactylus,
O. dodecadactylus, O. poecilodactylus.

In the Isis for 1847, Zeller gives (pp. 88-39 and pp. 902-909) further
notes on various species, but still maintains the same classification,
In 1852, however, he revised the superfamily (Linn. E'nt., vi., pp. 819
et seq.). He got no further, however, with his classification than his
suggestions of 1841, although he dealt more fully with the synonymy,
and altered many of the names he had previously used. He still
called all his large divisions ‘‘ genera,” subdividing them, however, into
named groups, many of which are biologically of subfamily or tribal
value. His extended work summarises as follows—

I. PTEROPHORINA.

1. Aepistis, Hb. (Adactyla, Zell.).—A. frankeniae, Zell., meridionalis,
Zell., heydenii, Zell., adactyla, Hb., paralia, Zell., bennetii, Curt.,
tamaricis, Heyd.

2. PrrropHorvs, Geoff. (diucita, Schrank, Tr.).

A. Puaryptitia, Hb. {Platyptilus, Zell.).—P. rhododactylus, S.V.,
capnodactylus, F.v.R., ochrodactylus, Hb., isodactylus, Zell.,
gonodactylus, S.V., zetterstedtit, Zell., nemoralis, Zell., fischeri,
Zell., metzneri, Zell., acanthodactylus, Hb.

B. Oxyeriuus, Zell. (Amblyptilia, Hb.).—O. kollari, Mann in iitt.,
Stn., tristis, Zell., distans, Zell., laetus, Zell., wahlbergi, Zell.,
caffer, Zell., pilosellae, Zell., hieracti, Zell., ericetorum, Zell.,
trichodactylus, Hb., obscurus, Zell., marginellus, Zell.

C. PrreropHorus, Zell. (Stenoptilia, Hb.).

Group a.—P. ehrenbergianus, Zell., phaeodactylus, Hb., nian-
todactylus, F.v.R., mictodactylus, S.V., serotinus, Zell.,
loewii, Zell., aridus, Zell., coprodactylus, Sta., plagiodac-
tylus, Sta., graphodactylus, Tr., fuscus, Retz., stigmato-
dactylus, Zell., mannii, Zell.

Group b.— P. lithoductylus, Ty.

Group c.— P. pterodactylus, L.

Group d.—P. scarodactylus, Hb. (?), Zell., lienigianus,
Zeil., tephradactylus, Hb., inulae, Zell., carphodactylus,
Hb., microdactylus, Hb., osteodactylus, Zell.

Group e.—P. brachydactylus, Koll.

D. Acipriuia, Hb. (Aciptilus, Zell.).

Group a.—d. galactodactylus, Hb.

Group ).—A. spilodactylus, Curt. (obsoletus, Zell.), 4.
xanthodactylus, Tr., xerodactylus, Mtzn., baliodactylus,
F.v.R., tetradactylus, L., malacodactylus, Zell., isehno-
dactylus, Tr., pentadactylus, L., albidus, Zell., nephelo-
dactylus, Eversm.

Group c.—(Diacrotricha).—A. fasciola, Zell.

Group d.—A. paludum, ZGell., A. siceliota, Zell., A. bapto-
dactylus, Zell.

3. Dreurerocorus, Zell.—Ale anteriores semitrifide (=bifide, lacinia
inferiore bifida). Posteriores tripartite, digito tertio abbreviato, etc.
—D. tengstroemi, Zell.

II. Anucrrimna, Zell.

1. Auucrta, Linn., Zell.

Group a.—d. grammodactyla, Zell., polydactyla, Zell.,
dodecadactyla, Hb.

Group b.—4A. zonodactyla, Zell., desmodactyla, Zell., palo-
dactyla, Zell., hexadactyla, Linn., cymatodactyla, Zell.

In 1855, Herrich-Schiffer diagnoses (Sys. Bearb., v., pp. 361

HISTORICAL’ ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 85

et: sey.) the superfamily under the name Pterophorina. He refers to
Zeller’s work, points out the isolated character of the superfamily,
and the analogy presented by certain Crambids. He throws doubt on
isodactylus, sxerodactylus, mannii, marginellus, laetus, kollari, inulae,
metznert and bennetii, and considers that Zeller’s Kuropean species can
be reduced to 54, although, by the addition of cosmodactyla, lutescens,
distinetus, confusus and ayrorum, he makes a total list of 59 European
species. He asserts the unreliability of many of the early species, and
specially singles out the work of British authors as being particu-
larly badly done. His criticism appears to be based, less on his first-
hand knowledge of these authors than, on Stainton’s most unsatisfactory
Catalogue of 1854, in which, with every possible chance of referring to
the collections of Stephens, Curtis, Wood, etc., and comparing their
species with the descriptions, he preferred to sink many of their
species, ¢.y., pterodactyla, bipunctidactyla, etc., and to rename others,
e.g., calodactyla, etc. Herrich-Schiiffer’s synopsis of the genera reads

as follows:
I. Wings undivided . BiG 56 ae .. AGDISTIS.
II. Forewings bifid, hindwings trifid.
1. Only the apical third of the forewings divided, both the
lobes with a wide border and projecting anal angle,
the innermost lobe of the hindwing with tooth of thick
black scales on the middle of its inner margin . PLATYPTILUS.
2. The terminal half of the forewings divided, the inner-
most lobe of the hindwings, with thick, black scales,
at its end on both sides (or in O. tristis in the middle
of its inner margin as in the preceding genus) . OXYPTILUs.
3. The apical third of the forewings divided, the two lobes
tolerably pointed with very oblique outer margin and
rounded off anal angle. ‘The lobes of the hindwings

without any distinct marking by scales. .. PTEROPHORUS.
4. The great part of the outer half of the forewings divided,
the lobes of all the wings similarly linear sce .. ACIPTILIus*.

Herrich-Schiiffer then gives the following groupings of the species
in the various genera :

Genus I. Agpisris, Hb., Verz., Zell., Linn. Ent., vi., p. 321.

1. Ale anteriores ciliis costalibus albis, margine interiore cano—adactyla,
Hb., heydenii, Zell.

2. Ale anteriores albidioribus, margine interiore non albidiore.

A. Cilia vix pallidiore; puncta costalia et punctum plicx posterius
obsoletissima—meridionalis, Zell.
B. Cilia fundo magis -flavescentia; puncta costalia et plice bene
expressa—frankeniae, Zell., tamaricis, v. Heyd.
Genus II. Purarypririvus, Zell.

1. Lobus alarum posteriorum interior medio albus, pone medium den-
tatus; alarum anteriorum cilia basalia solum in apicibus loborum
amborum fusea—rhododactylus, W.V.

2. Lobus alarum concolor, pone medium dentatus, alarum anteriorum
cilia basalia undique nigra—capnodactylus, F.v.R., metznert, Zell.

3. Lobus alarum posteriorum interior concolor, ante medium aut in medio
dentatus.

A. Palpi et fasciculus frontalis capite duplo longiora—ochrodactylus,
Hb.
B. Palpi et fasciculus frontalis vix capitis longitudine prominuli.
a. Cilia alarum anteriorum linea dividente integra—nemoralis,
Zell., zetterstedtii, Zell., gonodactylus, Schitf., fischeri, Zell.
b. Ciliorum alarum anteriorum linea dividens in lobo interiore
bi-, in anteriore semel-interrupta—acaunthodactylus, Hb.,
cosmodactylus, Hb.

* Spelt Aciptilius, p. 3638, and Aciptilus, p. 381.

84 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Genus III. Oxypritus (with detailed description)—trichodactylus, MUb.,
ericetorum, Zell., hieracii, Zell., pilosellae, Zell., obscurus, Zell., tristis,
Zell., distans, Zell., marginellus, Zell., laetus, Zell., kollar1, Mann.

Genus IV. PrrRopHorus, Zell.

1. Fasciculus frontalis conicus—miantodactylus, F.v.R.
2. Frons squamis compressis, subquadrata.

i. Palpi squamis appressis triangulares, ale anteriores apice acuto,
puncto ante fissuram pallidius ciliatam simplici aut gemino nigro ;
punctis limbi loborum amborum nonnullis.

A. Cilia basi alba, punctis nigris, uno (duobus in P. loewii) in angulo
anali anterioris, duobus versus apicem interioris.
a. Lobus anterior innotatus.
a. Cilia costalia lobi anter. alba—fuscus, Retz., loewit, Zell.,
mannii, Zell., stigmatodactylus, Zell.
B. Cilia costalia lobi anter. alarum anter. non alba—
aridus, Zell., serotinus, Zell.
b. Lobus anterior lineola longitudinali nigra.
a. Margo anterior innotatus—mictodactylus, W. V., plagito-
dactylus, F.v.R., lutescens, H.-Sch.
GB. Margo anterior lineola alba ad 2—coprodactylus, Zell.
B. Cilia dimideo basali acute fusca —graphodactylus, Tr.
ii. Palpi subcylindrici, articulo tertio lineari, prominulo.
A. Tibiz mediz medio et apice nigro incrassatee—lithodactylus, Tr.
B. Tibiz mediz simplices.
a. Cilia base indeterminate pallidiora, anguste obscurius secta—
phaeodactyla, Hb., agrorum, Led.
b. Cilia fundo paullo obscuriora, ale anteriores puncto ad
fissuram.
a. Griseus, gilvus, griseo-cinnamomeus corpore concolore—
pterodactylus, Linn.
B. Flavidogriseus, corpore albidosulphurea — distinctus,
H.-Sch.
+. Lutescentes fusco-irrorati, corpore, concolore—lieni-
gianus, Zell., inulae, Zell., tephradactylus, Hb.
6. Pallide sulphurei, corpore concolore—microdactylus, Hb.,
carphodactylus, Hb., osteodactylus, Zell.
C. Cilia alarum anteriorum albo-secta, basi non obscuriora; tibie.
mediz simplices—brachydactylus, Koll.

Genus V. Actptiuus, Zell.

1. Fuscus, ciliis alarum anteriorum albo-sectis—siceliota, Zell., paludum,.
Zell.

2. Fuscus, alarum anteriorum lobo interiore niveo—baptodactylus, Zell.

3. Pallidi, ciliis fusco-sectis—aanthodactylus, Tr., spilodactylus, Curt.,.
confusus, H.-Sch., galactodactylus, Hb.

4, Straminei, alis posterioribus et ciliis obscurioribus.

i. Corpus sulphureum—tbaliodactylus, F.v.R., tetradactylus, Linn.,.
malacodactylus, Zeli.

ii. Corpus alis concolor—ischnodactylus, Tr.
5. Niveus—pentadactylus, Linn.

In 1856, Frey divided (Die Tin. und Pteroph. der Schweiz, pp. 897 et.
seq.) the plumes into two families, the Pterophoriden and the Alucitiden,,
but, as the genus Agdistis was not then known to be represented in
Switzerland, he included all the true plumes in the genus Pterophorus
which he diagnosed as follows :

Capilli appressi, interdum in conulum frontalem producti; ocelli nulli ;.
antenne breves, filiformes, articulis elongatis, infra ciliatis, basali longo, claviformi;
- haustellum longum, nudum ; palpi labiales mediocres vel breviusculi, porrecti,.
subporrecti vel adscendentes, ‘articulo medio magno (interdum squamis hirsutis),
tertio brevi. Als anteriores elongate, plus minusve bifide ; posteriores subtri-.
partite, mediocriter vel longe ciliate ; anter. cellula discoidalis, elongata vel
mediocris, perfecta aut imperfecta vel nulla; vena subcostalis in laciniam anteriorem
ramos quinque vel quatuor emittit aut simplex exit; mediana trifida in laciniam
posteriorem (interdum bifida) ; poster. in digitum primum exeunt rami duo vel
unus, in secundum tres vel duo, in tertium unus (interdum duo)—Pterophorus:

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 85

rhododactylus, S. V., ochrodactylus, Hb., gonodactylus, S. V., zetterstedtii, Zell.,
bollii, Frey, fischeri, Zell., acanthodactylus, Hb., cosmodactylus, Hb., distans, Zell.,
pilosellae, Zell., hieracii, Zell., ericetorum, Zell., obscurus, Zell., phaeodactylus,
Hb., serotinus, Zell., coprodactylus, Zell., plagiodactylus, F.v.R., graphodactylus,
Tr., fuscus, Retz., lithodactylus, Tr., pterodactylus, L., scarodactylus, Zell.,
tephradactylus, Hb., carphodactylus, Hb., microdactylus, Hb., osteodactylus. Zell.,
brachydactylus, Koll., baliodactylus, F.v.R., tetradactylus, L., pentadactylus, L.

In 1859, Doubleday issued the 2nd ed. of his Synonymic List, which
has no real value to us except so far as his settlement of certain points
of nomenclature, ¢.g., the reference of pallidactyla, Haw., to ochrodactyla,
Hb., of monodactyla, Haw., doubtfully to isodactylus, Zell., of calodac-
tylus, Stphs., to acanthodactyla, Hib., of cosmodactylus, H.-Sch. to
punctidactylus, Stphs., of heterodactyla, Haw., doubtfully to hieracti
(=teucrii), Sta., of similidactylus, Dale, to lithodactyla, Tr., etc. With
regard to the specially British species, he possibly knew some of the
original types, and, of the others, he would at least know what names
were in common use in British cabinets for certain species. Stainton’s
grouping (Manual, 11., pp. 489 et seq.) is, in every sense, unsatisfactory.
With a full knowledge of the work done by Hiibner, Zeller, and
Herrich-Schiaffer he could give us nothing better than the following :—

1. With undivided wings—ApactyLta—A. bennetit.

2. Forewings with the hind margin more or less deeply cleft; hindwings almost
divided into three—PrrropHorus—P. rhododactylus, ochrodactylus, isodactylus,
trigonodactylus, zetterstedtii, acanthodactylus, punctidactylus, parvidactylus, hieracit
(teucrii), pilosellae, phaeodactylus, bipunctidactylus, loewti, plagiodactylus, fuscus,
lithodactylus, pterodactylus (=monodactylus), lienigianus, tephradactylus, osteodac-
tylus, microdactylus, brachydactylus, galactodactylus, spilodactylus, baliodactylus,
tetradactylus, pentadactylus, paludum.

In 1862, Wallengren published (Konyliya Svenska Vetenskaps
Akademiens Handlingar, ii1., pp. 1-25) his well-known paper in which
he still divided all the plumes into two family groups :—

1. PrrropHoripm—Forewings with merely indicated cleft, or divided into 2

or 3 lobes.

2. Auucttina— All the wings six-lobed.

He gives a very good summary of the Scandinavian species, dealing
with the synonymy of the Linnean species and adding the following
generic tabulation :—

I. The lobes of the wings dissimilar, the anterior ones broader than the hind

ones.

A. Forewings at rest entirely concealing the hindwings, the dorsum being
rolled under and receiving them throughout its length, sometimes
even the costa similarly incurved.

1. All the tibize slender.
a. The ¢ antenne finely dentate; those
of ¢ indistinctly ciliated. The cilia
of the last (i.e. dorsal) lobe of the
hindwing unusually long. The
spurs of the hind tibiz of distinctly
different length PTEROPHORUS.
b. Antenne shortly ciliated, at least in
$. The cilia on last, t.e., dorsal,
lobe of the hindwings normal, rather
short. The spurs of hind tibie of
equal length LEIOPTILUS.
2. All the tibize at apex, and all the tarsi in
middle, thickened. The antenne of
both sexes ciliate Om®MATOPHORUS.

B. Forewings at rest covering the hindwings flatly,
sometimes enfolding them by the margin of the
inner (z.e. dorsal) edge being bent down.

86 - BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

- 1. The scales of the frons produced into a
more or less elongate cone or tuft. (The
tornal lobe of the forewings distinct.)
a. The inner (i.e., dorsal) edge of the
forewings entire, not toothed.
Antenne ciliate AMBLYPTILUS.
b. The inner (i.e., dorsal) edge of the
forewings entire, not toothed.
i. Forewings in repose covering the
hindwings flatly throughout. 5
The palpi evenly cylindrical. ’
Antenne ciliate PLATYPTILUS.
ii. Forewings in repose enfolding the
hindwings by the bending under
of the extreme dorsum. Palpi
with the median joint enlarged.
The antenne of the ¢ ciliate MIM#SEOPTILUS. .
2. The hairs on the frons appressed not
forming any conical projection. (An-
tenne ciliate.)
a. The lobes of the forewings with
noticeable posterior angle. The
palpi (joints) of uneven thickness ;
the median joint thickened with
hairs. Tarsi short, the hind tibie
thickened CN MIDOPHORUS.
b. The anterior lobe of the forewings not
angulate. The third lobe of the
hindwing towards the apex with
black seale-cilia. The median joint
of the palpi at most with a short
hair-tuft beneath OxyYPTILUs.
II. The lobes of the wings elongate, very narrow, of
almost even width ACIPTILUS.

The species included in the various genera are as follows :

1. Cn=mmopHorts, Wallgrn.—C. rhododactylus, W.V.
2. Puatyprinus (Hb.), Zell.
a. Frontal tuft rather long. Palpi with the terminal joint rather long,
somewhat drooping. Tibie slender—P. ochrodactylus, Hb.
8. Frontal tuft short. Palpi with the terminal joint rather short,
porrected. Tibiw with the end rather thickened—P. zetterstedtit,
Zell., P. nemoralis, Zell., P. gonodactylus, W.V., P. tesseradactylus,
Linn.
3. AmsiypTinus, Hb.—A. acanthodactylus, Hb.
4, Oxyprtiutus, Zell.

I. Forewings with white markings on the upperside. Hindwings with
the underside of the first plumule furnished with a white spot at the
apex.

a. The tips of the cilia on the hinder margin of the first lobe of the
forewing dusky—O. pilosellae, Zell., O. hieracii, Zell., O.
ericetorum, Zell., O. obscurus, Zell.

8. The tips of the cilia on the hinder margin of the first lobe of the
forewings white—O. didactyla, Linn.

II. Forewings with dull yellowish markings on the upperside. Hindwings
with the underside of the first plumule unspotted at the tip—
QO. bohemanni, Wallgrn.

. Mimzsroptints, Wallgrn.—l/. mictodactylus, W.V., M. serotinus, Zell.,

M. pterodactylus, Linn., M. paludicola, Wallgrn.

. OnzxmMatToPHoRts, Wallern.—O. lithodactylus, Treits.
. PreropHorvs, Geoff.—P. monodactylus, Linn.
. Letoptiius, Wallgrn.

I. The anal angle of the hind lobe of the forewings indistinct, obtuse,
and hardly visible—L. scarodactylus, Zell., L. tephradactylus, Hb.,
L. microdactylus, Hb., L. osteodactylus, Zell.

Or

@ ~1 o>

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 87

II. No trace of the anal angle of the hind lobe of the forewings—L.
brachydactylus, Koll.
9. Acretitus, Hb.—A. tetradactylus, Linn., A. pentadactylus, Linn.

In 1869, Jordan gave (Hnt. Mo. Mag., vi., pp. 119-125, 149-152) a
translation of the generic diagnoses of Wallengren’s Skandinaviens
Fjddermott, and referred the British species to the following genera :—

CnzMIpoPpHORUS—C. rhododactylus.

Pratyptitus—P. dichrodactylus,bertrami,isodactylus, zetterstedtu, gonodactylus.

AMBLYPTILUS—A. acanthodactylus, cosmodactylus.

Oxypritus—O. pilosellae, teucrit, obscurus, laetus (=distans).

Mimzsroptitus—M. plagiodactylus, serotinus, hodgkinsoni, loewii, fuscus.

? genus—phaeodactylus.

O1pEmMATOPHORUS— O. lithodactylus.

PrEeropHorus—P. pterodactylus (=monodactylus).

Let1ortinus—L. lienigianus, tephradactylus, microdactylus, osteodactylus, bra-
chydactylus.

Acretinus—d. galactodactylus, spilodactylus, baliodactylus, tetradactylus, penta-
dactylus.

? genus—paludum.

He also includes Chrysocorys festaliella in the group.

Staudinger and Wocke (Cat., 2nd ed., pp. 341 et seq.) gave the

following grouping : :

Aepistis.—dA. frankeniae, Zell., meridionalis, Zell., heydenti, Zell., manicata,
Staud., adactyla, Hb., paralia, Zell., tamaricis, Zell., bennetw, Curt.

Cnm=mipopHorus.—C. rhododactylus, S.V., cinnamomeus, Staud.

Puatyprinia.—P. capnoductyla, Zell., ochrodactyla, Hb., bertrami, Roess.,
similidactyla, Dale, gonodactyla, Schiff., farfarella, Zell., zetterstedtii,
Zell., nemoralis, Zell., tesseradactyla, Linn., metzneri, Zell.

AMBLYPTILIA.—A. acanthodactyla, Hb., cosmodactyla, Hb.

Oxyptitus.—O. kollari, Sta., tristis, Zell., distans, Zell., laetus, Zell., pilo-
sellae, Zell., hieracti, Zell., maculatus, Const., ericetorum, Zell., didac-
tylus, Linn., brunneodactylus, Mill., hofmannseggii, Moesch., parvidac-
tylus, Haw., marginellus, Zell., bohemanni, Wallern.

Mimasropritus.—M. ehrenbergianus, Zell., agrorum, H.-S., rhypodactylus,
Staud., phaeodactylus, Hb., miantodactylus, Zell., pelidnodactylus, Stein,.
serotinus, Zell., zophodactylus, Dup., islandicus, Staud., aridus, Zell...
coprodactylus, Zell., nolckeni, Tegstr., plagiodactylus, Sta., Jlutescens,.
H.-S., graphodactylus, Tr., pterodactylus, Linn., paludicola, Wallgrn.,
stigmatodactylus, Zell., mannii, Zell.

(EpEMATOPHORUS.— (Mh. lithodactylus, Treitschke, giganteus, Mann.

PrrropHorus.—P. monodactylus, Linn.

Leiorrinus.—L. scarodactylus, Hb., lienigianus, Zell., tephradactylus, Hb.,
distinctus, H.-S., inulae, Zell., carphodactylus, Hb., microdactylus, Hb..,
coniodactylus, Staud., pectodactylus, Staud., osteodactylus, Zell., brachy-
dactylus, Tr.

Acteritta.—A. semiodactyla, Mann, galactodactyla, Hb., spilodactyla, Curt.,
phlomidis, Staud., confusa, H.-S., caspia, Led., volgensis, Moesch.,
subalternans, Ld., xanthodactyla, Tr., scarodactyla, Zell., decipiens, Led.,
icterodactyla, Mann, baliodactyla, Zell., calcaria, Led., parthica, Led.,
tetradactyla, Linn., malacodactyla, Zell., chordodactyla, Staud., ischno-
dactyla, Tr., desertorum, Zell., olbiadactyla, Mill., nephelodactyla, Ey.,
pentudactyla, Linn., paludwm, Zell., siceliota, Zell., baptodactyla, Zell.

In 1877, Heinemann and Wocke (Die Schmett. Deutsch., iii., pt. 2,

pp. 780 et sey.), define the group under the name Pterophorina, which
they divide into the following genera without any intermediate sub-
divisions :—

Aaepistis, Hb.—A. adactyla, Hb., tamaricis, Zell.

CnamiporHorus, Wallern.—C. rhododactylus, Fab.

Puatypritia, Hb.—P. ochrodactyla, Hb., bertrami, Réssl., gonodactyla, S.V.,
farfarella, Zell., zetterstedtii, Zell., nemoralis, Zell., isodactylus, Graaf,
metzneri, Zell., tessaradactyla, L.

Ambiyprinia, Hb.—A. acanthodactyla, Hb., cosmodactyla, Hb.

88 BRITISH LEPIDOPTEKRA.

Oxypritus, Zell.—O. kollari, St., tristis, Zell., distans, Zell., pilosellae, Zell.,
hieracii, Zell., ericetorum, Zell., didactylus, L., parvidactylus, Haw.
Mimzseortitus, Wallgr.—M. phaeodactylus, Hb., pelidnodactylus, Stein,
serotinus, Zell., zophodactylus, Dup., aridus, Zell., coprodactylus, Zell.,
plagiodactylus, St., lutescens, H.-Sch., graphodactylus, Tr., pterodactylus,

Linn., paludicola, Wallgrn., stigmatodactylus, Zell.

O1zMatoPpHorts, Wallgrn.—oO. lithodactylus, Tr., rogenhoferi, Mann.

PreropHorus, Wallgrn.—P. monodactylus, Linn.

Letoptitus, Wallgrn.—(a) L. scarodactylus, Hb., lienigianus, Zell., tephra-
dactylus, Hb., distinctus, H.-S. (b) L. inulae, Zell., carphodactylus, Hb.,
microdactylus, Hb., osteodactylus, Zell., pectodactylus, Staud. (c) L.
brachydaciylus, Tr.

Acrptitia,Hb.—A. galactodactyla, Hb., spilodactyla, Curt., confusa, H.-S.,
zanthodactyla, Tr., baliodactyla, Zell., tetradactyla, L., malacodactyla,
Zell., ischnodactyla, Tr., pentadactyla, L., paludum, Zell., baptodactyla,
Zell.

Meyrick, in 1886, gives (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., p. 6) the following
generic tabulation—

1. Wings entire... ae ae se ae .. AGDISTIS.
», fissured .. te a ia = a
2. Hindwings bifid ae a a os .. CENOLOBA.*
re trifid fe Ss ae ate ee hee
3. Forewings quadrifid .. am Lie me .. HEPTALOBA.
on trifid . . xe ae on = .. DEUTEROCOPUS.
re bifid . a ie ae
4, Forewings with vein 9 present 56 SS ye
. absent.. oe epee: ll)
D. Hindwings with black scales in dorsal cilia... eo
ne », Without a - He ue LS
6. Forewings with vein 3 present oe is .. PLATYPTILIA.
oe », absent o ae
Ve Forewings with vein 10 stalked with 11. .. SPHENARCHES.
e a Pamiets) ue .. OXyYPTILUS.
8. Forewings with vein 10 present ee Ra .. MIM2SEOPTILUS.
- », absent ave =
9. Forehead with cone of scales.. a wis .. MARASMARCHA.
Me without ss a A oA .. LIoprinus.
10. Forewings with vein 7 present ome 6 6 ad.
ae », absent A Ess io 12
1 Posterior tarsi tufted above on joints re .. PTEROPHORUS.
ne not tufted ie bs ae .. OEDEMATOPHORUS.
12. Forehead with cone of scales ss ae .. DoxostTERES.
i without a - ae ae Prom ed (5)
13. Wings without cell Be ie at ee .. CosmocLostis.
5 45 _ or oe ae 55 a0 a4
14, Forewings with vein 11 from near 8, long, ea TRICHOPTILUS,
a - AS absent or rarely from point .
a 8 short divergent se ACIPTILIA.

In 1890, Meyrick included the Alucitides in his ‘“‘ Classification of
the Pyralidina of the Kuropean fauna” (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1890,
pp. 429 et seq.). This paper is most remarkable for the ex cathedra
manner in which the phylogenies of the various subdivisions are
asserted with no detailed proof in support thereof. With this we
propose dealing later. His tabulation of the genera reads as follows :—

1. Wings entire .. ae aA se ne .. AGDISTIS.
ca) issued: 2
2. Hindwings with more or less developed tooth of
black scales in dorsal cilia . sé
Hindwings without black scales in dorsal cilia reg
3. Forewings with veins 7 and 9 absent a .. TRICHOPTILUS.
» ” 9 1 », present

* Since referred to the Pyralides (Durrant).

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 89

4. Forewings with vein 10 rising out of 8 are .. OXYPTILUS.
” separate .. Me -- PDLATYPTILIA.
5. Forwings ‘with all veins present ae su .. STENOPTILIA.
a one or more veins absent .. 2"
6. Forewings with vein 10 separate .. ie wk NE
aS ,, out of 8 or absent .. ates.
fe Forewings with vein 7 out of 8 oie os .. GYPSOCHARES.
i‘ », separate Se i .. ALDCITA:
8. Forewings with veins 3 and 7 absent Be .. PTEROPHORUS.
», present ae ae
9: Forewings with vein sl out of 8 ns oe .. CRASIMETIS.
ae 3 PP ys separate Sg , MARASMARCHA.

The species placed in the various poner | are as s follows:

TrRicHoPTILUS—T. siceliota, Zell., paludum, Zell.

Oxypritus—O. laetus, Zell., distans, Zell., tristis, Zell., kollari, Sta., pilosellae,
Zell., hofmannseggii, Mbsch., parvidactylus, Haw., bohemanni, Wallgrn.,
marginellus, Zell., ericetorum, Zell., maculatus, Const., hieracii, Zell.,
teucrti, Greening, didactylus, L.

PuatyptTitia—P. cosmodactyla, Hb., acanthodactyla, Hb., tesseradactyla, L.,
farfarella, Zell., gonodactyla, Schiff., metzneri, Zell., zetterstedtii, Zell.,
similidactyla, Dale, nemoralis, Zell., isodactyla, Zell., bertrami, Réssl.,
ochrodactyla, Hb., capnodactyla, Zell., rhododactyla, F.

Agpistis—A. satanas, Mill., adactyla, Hb., manicata, Staud., heydenit, Zell.,
meridionalis, Zell., frankeniae, Zell., paralia, Zell., tamaricis, Zell.,
bennett, Curt.

STENoPTILIA—S. miantodactyla, Zell., pelidnodactyla, Stein, serotina, Zell.,
zophodactyla, Dup., islandica, Staud., arida, Zell., coprodactyla, Zell.,
nolckent, Tegstr., plagiodactyla, Sta., lutescens, H.-S., graphodactyla,
Tr., pterodactyla, L., paludicola, Wallgrn., stigmatodactyla, Zell., mannii,
Zell.

Axucitta—A. lithodactyla, Tr., gigantea, Mn., rogenhoferi, Mn., constanti, Rag.,
monodactyla, L., scarodactyla, Hb., lienigianus, Zell., tephradactyla,
Hb., distincta, H.-S., inulae, Zell., carphodactyla, Hb., coniodactyla,
Staud. , pectodact) yla, Staud., osteodactyla, Zell.

Marasmarcna—WM. ehrenbergiana, Zell., agrorum, H.-S., rhapodactgtar Staud.,
trimmatodactyla, Christ., phaeodactyla, Hb., cinnamomea, Staud., micro-
dactyla, Hb.

GypsocHarEs—G. baptodactyla, Zell.

Crasimetis—C. brachydactyla, Tr., amurensis, Christ.

PreRoPHoRUS—P. caspius, Ld., volgensis, Méschl., spilodactylus, Curt., galacto-
dactylus, Hb., subalternans, Ld., phlomidis, Staud., pentadactylus, Linn.,
confusus, H.-S., punctinervis, Const., xanthodactylus, Tr., xerodactylus,
Zell., decipiens, Lid., baliodactylus, Zell., calcariuws, Ld., parthicus, Ld.,
semiodactylus, Mn., marptys, Christ., tetradactylus, L., malacodactylus,
Zell., chordodactylus, Staud., icterodactylus, Mn., ischnodactylus, Ty.,
desertorum, Zell., olbiadactylus, Mill., nephelodactylus, Ev.

In his 1895 grouping of the British species (Handbook, pp. 480 et
seq.) he gives a very similar tabulation of the genera into which he

divides the group termed by him Pterophoridae. This reads as
follows :—

1. Wings entire .. ac a ae a -- 9 AGDISTIS,
», fissured . ak
2. Hindwings with black scale- tooth in dorsal cilia .. 3
is without black scale-tooth ae a 5
3. Forewings with 7 and 9 absent we eh .. 1 TricHopriuvs.
8 »» present
4, Forewings with 10 out of 8 2 Oxyprinus.
“3 10 separate 3 PLATYPTILIA.
5. Forewings with all veins present a -. 8 Srenoprrra.
i one or more veins absent .. = 6
6. Forewings with 10 separate .. s .. 7 Auverta.
10 out of 8 or absent a a’ 7
ik Forewings with 3 and 7 absent ¥ ce .. 4 PrrropHorts.

0 at oh », present ai sie ie 8

90 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

8. Forewings with 11 outof8 .. we ps .. § PSELNOPHORUS.
5 53 11 separate .. ae oe .. 6 MARASMARCHA.
The species placed in these genera are as follows—

. TricHopritus —T’. paludum.
. OxypriLus—O. CPE: pilosellae, parvidactr ae? hieracii, teucrit.
gonodact yla, zetterstedti,

igadlagioila. bertrami, ochrodactyla, iaroonnne:

. PreropHorus—P. tetradactylus, baliodactylus, pentadactylus, galactodac-

tylus, spilodactylus.

. PseLnopHorus—P. brachydactylus.

. MarasmarcHa—WM. phaeodactyla, microdactyla.

. Atuctra—A. osteodactyla, tephradactyla, lienigianus, monodactyla, litho-
dactyla.

8. Srenoprinia—S. pterodactyla, zophodactyla, bipunctidactyla.

9. AapisTIs—A. bennetii.

Hofmann gave, in 1895 (Die deutschen Pterophorinen, pp. 28 et seq.),
the best generic tabulation of the superfamily that we have seen. It
reads as follows: —

I. All the wings undivided .. .. Agpistis, Hb.
II. The forewings once, the hindwings twice, cleft.
A. The third feather of the hindwing with only
one vein (stem a). The discoidal cell of the
forewings closed by a vertical or only
slightly outwardly inclining cross-vein.
Feathers of hindwings differently shaped,
or, if shaped alike, with two bands across
tips of forewings.*
1. The tips of forewings with only one
transverse band or without such;
feathers of hindwing differently
shaped. Forewings cleft to one-third.
Lobes of forewings similarly shaped,
i.e., both having an anal angle.
a. The third feather of hindwing with
a black scale-tooth in the inner
marginal fringe close to the apex EucNEMIDoPHORUS, Walsm.+
b. The third feather of the hindwing
with a tooth or streak-like tuft of
black scales in the centre of the
inner-marginal fringe.
a. Palpi long and slender, with
long terminal joint, forehead
with a very long or some-
times rather short scale-tuft
(occasionally very short) .. Puaryprinia, Hb.{
B. Palpi laterally compressed
with very short terminal

“I Oz Or He WOW

joint; forehead with a
smooth-scaled conical pro-
tuberance as a .. AmpuypTinia, Hb.

c. The third feather of hindwing
without black. scales and hind
marginal fringe.

* Nervure (stem) IT of the forewings, in all the genera of group A, has five branches,
except in Marasmarcha, Trichoptilus, and sometimes exceptionally in Oxyptilus, in
which there are only four branches. Stem IV of the hindwings has, in all genera,
with the exception of T'richoptilus, three branches, and, even in this genus, IV is
sometimes present, even if very slender. (Hofm.)

+ This is an error, Wallengren is the author of this name.

{ In the genus Platyptilia the black scales of the inner marginal fringe of the
third feather are very transient, being lost in flight, or are sometimes altogether
wanting ; in such cases, however, the long frontal tuft will serve to recognise the
genus Platyptilia (Hofm.).

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 9f

a. Palpi laterally compressec,
second joint enlarged up-
wards, forehead with a coni-
cal, smooth-scaled protuber-

ance .. kde oe .. STENopPTILIA, Hb.
B. Palpi strikingly short and
slender : . Marasmarcua, Meyr.

2. The lobes of the forewings with two pale
transverse bands; feathers of hind-
wings similarly shaped. Forewings
cleft to 4; lobes of torewings difter-
ently shaped, upper one pointed, lower
with obtuse anal angle, or of similar
shape, and then both pointed.
a. Vein II of forewings with 5
branches.* In the cilia of the
costa and inner margin of the
3rd plumule differently shaped
accumulations of black scales .. Oxyprinus, Zell.
b. Vein Il of forewings with 4 branches
as branch II, is wanting. In the
cilia of the inner margin of the 3rd
plumule not any or only a very
insignificant accumulation of
black scales+ : . TricHopritus, Walsm.
B. The 3rd feather of the hindwings with two
veins (stem V and a). Upper corner of
discoidal cell acutely extended, cross-vein
oblique, running downwards and inwards.
Feathers of hindwings shaped alike, no
‘transverse bands ‘across the tips of the
forewings. tf
1. The branch II, arises still from the cross-
rib close to vein II, ; both branches
run divergingly ; forewings cleft to 3.
Upper and lower lobes differently
shaped, the former acute, the latter
with obtuse anal angle Auucita, Meyr.
a. Middle tibix in the centre and at the
end thickened with scales. Hind
tibiz with or without scale thick-
enin (EpEMATOPHORvS, Wlign.
b. Middle tibiae thickened only at the
end, hind tibise without scale

thickening.
a. Middle spurs of the hind tibiz

of unequal length .. . PreropHorus, Wallgrn.
6. Middle spurs of the hind tibiee

of equal length ae . Leroprimus, Wallgrn.

2. The branch II, arises far distant from
the discoidal cell, joining branch II,,
or is quite absent. Forewings cleft
from over 4 to 4. Upper and lower
lobes of similar form, running to a
point, never with any trace of an
anal angle.

a. Stem II with 3 branches towards

- Reesptibitaliy there are only 4 branches of vein II present, but then II, is
ulways absent, not II, (Hofm.).

+ The only German species of this genus (7’. paludum) has no black scales in
the inner marginal cilia of the 3rd feather (Hofm.).

t Several genera of the group B have on the forewings of stem II only 4 or (in
Aciptilia) still fewer or not any branches; on the hindwings stem IV has alwi ays
only two branches (Hofm.).

92 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

the costa. Forewings cleft to not

quite one-half. Second feather

of hindwing with a broad white

dash in the inner marginal fringe PsrELNopHorus, Wallgrn.
b. Stem II with only 1-2 short and

quite faintly expressed branches

towards the costa, or without any ;

forewing cleft to4, the lobes very

narrow, linear; second feather of

hindwing without any distinction Acrpriuia, Hb.

The excellent work done by Fernald (Pterophoridae of North
America, 1898) should have carried him farther than a slavish following
of Meyrick, ¢g., comparison of the descriptions of the larve of
kellicotti (p. 49), monodactyla (p. 51), and paleaceus (p. 46) should have
prevented the species being lumped together in Pterophorus, and other
details provoke similar criticisms. After defining (p. 13) the super-
family under the name Pterophoridae, he gives the following generic
Synopsis :

1. Hindwings with a cluster of black scales in the
fringe of the third feather ..
Hindwings without a cluster of black scales in the

fringe of the third feather . : Ae
2. Anal angle present in second lobe of forewings oo 8

oe », absent ,, a .. TRICHOPTILUS.
3. Anal angle absent in first lobe of forewings... .. OxXyYPTILUS.
», present ,, PLATYPTILIA.
4, Feathers of hindwings similar and tapering uni-
formly 40 .. ALUCITA.
Feathers of hindwings ‘unlike in form sis
5. Anal angle present on first lobe of forewings .. MSTENOPTILIA.
ns », absent ,, .. PTEROPHORUS.

TRICHOPTILUS—T. pygmaeus, Walsm., , ochrodactylus, Fish, lobidactylus, Fitch.

Oxypritus—O. periscelidactylus, Fitch, delawaricus, Zell., ningoris, Walsm.,
tenuidactylus, Fitch.

PratypTinia—P. pica, Walsm., cosmodactyla, Hb., acanthodactyla, Hb.,
edwardsii, Fish, carduidactyla, Riley, percnodactyla, Walsm., shastae,
Walsm., fragilis, Walsm., orthocarpi, Walsm., albida, Walsm., albidors-
ella, Walsm., grandis, Walsm., cooleyi, Fernald, modesta, Walsm.,
petrodactyla, Walk., adusta, Walsm., albiciliata, Walsm., albicans, Fish,
tesseradactyla, Linn., marginidactyla, Fitch.

Auuctta—A. walsinghami, Fernald, belfrageit, Fish, montana, Walsm.,
cinerascens, Walsm.

PrreropHorus—P. fishii, Fernald, homodactylus, Walk., brucei, Fernald,
elliottti, Fernald, swbochraceus, Walsm., helianthi, Walsm., stramineus,
Walsm., angustus, Walsm., sulphureodactylus, Pack., mathewianus,
Zell., paleaceus, Zell., agraphodactylus, Walk., inconditus, Walsm.,
parvus, Walsm., kellicottit, Fish, grandis, Fish, rileyi, Fernald, monodac-
tylus, Linn., cretidactylus, Fitch, ewpatorii, Zell., guttatus, Walsm.,
cineraceus, Fish, baroni, Fish, gratiosus, Fish, lugubris, Fish, grisescens,
Walsm., inquinatus, Zell.

SrEenoprinia—S. pumilio, Zeil., pterodactyla, Linn., exclamationis, Walsm.,
mengeli, Fernald, semicostata, Zell., coloradensis, Fernald.

Dyar’s grouping (List of North American Lepidoptera, pp. 44 et seq.)
is nothing more than a reproduction of Fernald’s work. He has in no
wise attempted to allow his knowledge of the great differences
presented by the earlier stages to prevent him from lumping Oidaemato-
phorus, Wallgrn., and Letoptilus, Wallgrn., into Pterophorus, Geoff.,
which genus, therefore, becomes, in the American lists, a hotch-potch
of species of widely divergent character.

In Staudinger and Rebel’s Catalogue, 3rd ed., pp. 70 et sey., the crudest
possible divisions are adopted, and all Meyrick’s errors, e.g., the use of

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 93

the American genus Trichoptilus, the lumping of Oidaematophorus,
Wallgrn., Leioptilus, Wallgrn. and Pterophorus, Geoff., into one
genus, etc., are perpetuated, in spite of the fact that an examination of
Hofmann’s work should have prevented this. The whole of the
group is placed in the family Ptcrophoridae, which is, without sub-
division into subfamilies and tribes, divided directly into the following
genera :—

Tricuoptitus, Walsm.—T. paludum, Zell., siceliota, Zell.

Oxyptinus, Zell.—O. kollari, Sta., tristis, Zell., distans, Zell., pilosellae, Zell.,
hieracit, Zell.,? maculatus, Const., ericetorum, Zell., didactylus, Linn.,
leonuri, Stange, teucrit, Jordan, parvidactylus, Haw., ? marginellus, Zell.,
bohemanni, Wallgrn.

Pratyprinia, Hb.—P. rhododactyla, Fab., cinnamomea, Staud., capnodactyla,
Zell., ochrodactyla, Hb., *bertrami, Rossl., chapmani, Tutt, isodactyla,
Zell., gonodactyla, Schiff., terminalis, Ersch., farfarella, Zell.,
zetterstedtit, Zell., nemoralis, Zell., tesseradactyla, Linn., metzneri, Zell.,
acanthodactyla, Hb., seeboldi, Hofm., moerens, Snell., cosmodactyla, Hb.

Atocita, Linn.—A. semiodactyla, Mn., galactodactyla, Hb., spilodactyla, Curt.,
phlomidis, Staud., nephelodactyla, Ev., pentadactyla, Linn., caspia, Ld.,
volgensis, Mésch., tuneta, Staud., subalternans, Ld., xanthodactyla, Tr.,
probolias, Meyr., ? apollina, Mill., adamas, Const., decipiens, Ld.,
icterodactyla, Mn., punctinervis, Const., raphiodactyla, Rbl., baliodactyla,
Zell., marptys, Chr., calcaria, Ld., parthica, Ld., tetradactyla, Ld.,
malacodactyla, Zell., acarnella, Walsm., chordodactyla, Staud., wernicket,
Wocke, ischnodactyla, Tr., desertorum, Zell.

PsELnopHorvs, Wallgr.—P. brachydactylus, Tr., amurensis, Chr.

MarasmarcHa, Meyr.—WM. ehrenbergiana, Zell., agrorwn, H.-S., rhypodactyla,
Staud., trammatodactyla, Chr., phaeodactyla, Hb., fauna, Mill.

GypsocHarEs, Meyr.—G. baptodactyla, Zell., olbiadactyla, Mill., hedemanni, Rbl.

PrrropHorus, Geofir.—P. lithodactylus, Tr., rogenhoferi, Mn., constanti, Rag.,
giganteus, Mn., monodactylus, Linn., scarodactylus, Hb., ltenigianus,
Zell., tephradactylus, Hb., innocens, Snell., distinctus, H.-S., inulae,
Zell., carphodactylus, Hb., pectodactylus, Staud., osteodactylus, Zell.,
microdactylus, Hb.

Srenopritia, Hb.—S. miantodactyla, Zell., pulchra, Chr., pelidnodactyla, Stein,
pinarodactyla, Ersch., coprodactyla, Zell., ? lutescens, H.-S., ? nolckent,
Tegstr., zophodactyla, Dup., bipunctidactyla, Haw., islandica, Staud.,
caesia, Snell., hedemanni, Snell., vaccilana, Snell., luteocinerea, Snell.,
graphodactyla, Tr., pnewmonanthes, Schleich, pterodactyla, Linn.,
paludicola, Wallgrn., mengeli, Fern., stigmatodactyla, Zell., mannit,
Zell., emarginata, Snell.

Aepistts, Zell.—A. frankeniae, Zell., meridionalis, Zell., heydenii, Zell., ingens,
Chr., adactyla, Hb., canariensis, Rbl., satanas, Mill., paralia, Zell.,
tamaricis, Zell., bennetii, Curt., staticis, Mill.

Summarising the literature here reviewed, from the point of view
of settling the generic nomenclature, it is quite clear that Pterophorus,
Geoff. (1762), was created as a synonym of Alucita, Linn. (1758), to
include exactly the same species, and in full knowledge of Linné’s
prior name. Poda’s mere inclusion of Alucita pentadactyla, in the
list of species in the Gratz museum, has less restrictive force than
Scopoli’s action, in 1777, when he retained Alucita for the “ long-
legged’ plumes, whilst in 1779, Leske, and, in 1881, Barbut, took
pentadactyla to illustrate Alucita, and thus fixed the type. Other
contentions, more or less valid, have recently been brought forward
(Nomenclature of Lepidoptera, 1896, p. 380) with the idea of fixing
pentadactyla as the type of Alucita. In 1796, Latreille separated the
“fan-winged ’’ plumes under the name of Orneodes, from the ‘ long-
legged’ plumes, under Geoffroy’s synonym, Pterophorus, the latter
group having been already determined as Alucita by Scopoli, and its
type fixed by Leske and Barbut. The next step is taken by Hiibner,

94 _ BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

who, in 1806, maintained pentadactyia as the the type of Pterophora
(which we have shown falls as a synonym of Alucita) and cited hexa-
dactyla as the type of Ripidophora (which thus becomes synonymous
with Orneodes). Oken, in 1815, correctly divided the plumes into
Alucita (type pentadactyla, described) and Orneodes (type hexadactyla)
whilst in the same year, Leach cited their synonyms—Péterophorus
and Alucita—with the same types. Before the publication of Hubner’s
Verzeichniss, therefore, only two generic points were determined, wiz.,
Alucita type pentadactyla and Orneodes type hexadactyla. Hubner, in
this work, fixed adactyla as the type of Avydistis, and created the
heterotypical genera Platyptilia, Amblyptilia, Stenoptilia and Aciptilia.
As Aciptilia contained pentadactyla, the type of Alucita, it falls as a
synonym of the latter, whilst Huchiridia (type hevadactyla), also
newly described here, falls as a synonym of Orneodes. In 18838,
Curtis created Adactylus, describing the genus from, and founding
it on, bennetit, although he cites huebneri (adactyla, Hb.) as the
type. Neither Stephens in 1834, nor Zeller in 1841, did anything
in the way of fixing generic types, although the latter restricted
Amblyptilia to acanthodactyla, Hb., and cosmodactyla Hb., and
created Oxyptilus for the other section of Hutbner’s Amblyp-
tilia. He also altered the spelling of Platyptilia to Platyptilus, and
Aciptilia to Aciptilus, the latter automatically falling before Alucita.
In 1852, he retained these Zellerian names, as also, in 1855, did
Herrich-Schiffer, but with subfamily values, the groups being divided
and subdivided into sections of modern tribal and generic values.
Zeller also created Diacrotricha (type fasciola) and Deuterocopus (type
tenystroemt). In 1862, Wallengren created Cnaemidophorus (type rho-
dodactyla), Oidaematophorus (type lithodactyla), Mimaeseoptilus (for the
pterodactyla group of Hubner’s Stenoptilia), and Leioptilus for the
tephradactyla group of the same genus. As, however, Meyrick, in 1890,
limited Stenoptilia to the first of these two groups, Mimaeseoptilus fell as
a synonym of Stenoptilia. Wallengren also fixed acanthodactyla as the
type of Amblyptilus (ilia), Hb. He further maintained Platyptilus
(lia), Hb., for the group of species without a tooth on the inner
margin of the forewing, followed Zeller in using Oxyptilus for the
pilosellae group, which, however, he was advanced enough to divide
into three sections. In 1864, Walker erected two genera, Sochchora
(type donatella), Utuca (type ochracealis), and in 1865, a third,
Paelia (type Jlunuliyera), whilst, in 1880, Walsingham created
Trichoptilus (type pygmaeus), and Wallengren altered the pre-
occupied Cnaemidophorus to Eucnaenidophorus and created Pselno-
phorus (type brachydactyla). The later genera will be readily followed
in the generic summary attached hereto. We will only add that, in
1890, Meyrick made one of the most retrograde steps in the classifica-
tion of the group. He appears to have been absolutely ignorant of
the details of their early stages, and, on certain imaginal characters,
lumped together the most diverse species. He maintained the Ameri-
can genus T'richoptilus, Walsm., for paludum and siceliota; placed all
the species of the Plaptyptiliinae and Amblyptiliinae in the genus
Platyptilia, Hb., joined under the generic name Alucita, Linn., the
whole of the Oidaematophorinae and Leivptilinae, created Marasmarcha
for species as divergent as lunaedactyla (phaeodactyla) and microdactyla
(leaving scarodactyla with Nienigianus in Alucita), created Gypsochares

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 95

for baptodactyla and Crasimetis for brachydactyla, which thus fell before
Pselnophorus, Wallgrn., whilst all the species of Alucitinae are lumped
together under Pterophorus, Geoff. It is most unfortunate that Rebel
should have followed in his and Staudinger’s Catalogue, 3rd ed., such
an unsatisfactory scheme. In the Hnt. Rec., xvi., p. 37, we suggested
twelve new generic names for use in this work. The following appears
to be (to date) a complete list of the generic names proposed for the
Agdistid, Alucitid, and Orneodid moths :—

1758. Atucrta, Linné.—Restricted by Scopoli, in 1777, to the long-
legged plumes (thus excluding Ovneodes). Type fixed as pentadactyla
by Leske in 1779. [In Walsingham and Durrant’s opinion the type
was fixed as pentadactyla by Poda in 1761.|
1762. PrerorHorus, Geoffroy.—Created for same species as Alucita,
Linné. Type fixed as pentadactyla by Geoffroy in 1762. Falls as a
synonym of Alucita, having same conception and same type.

1796. Orneopes, Latreille-—Created by Latreille for the plumes,
with ‘“‘many feathers’? inthe wings. ‘Type fixed by Latreille, in 1802,
as hevadactyla.

1806. RierpopHora, Hubner.—Type fixed by Hubner, in 1806, as
hexadactyla, therefore falls as a synonym of Orneodes, Latr.

1806. PreropHora, Httbner.—Type fixed by Htbner, in 1806, as
pentadactyla, Linn., therefore falls as a synonym of Alucita.

1825. Acpist1s, Hibner.—Created by Hubner, for adactyla, which
is therefore the type.

1825. Pruatyprimia, Hubner.—Restricted by various authors to the
true Platyptiliids as now understood. ‘Type never having been fixed, is
now named as gonodactyla, W.V. (=meyadactyla, Hb.).

1825. Amprypriim, Hibner.—Evidently, from the plural form used,
a misprint for Amblyptilia. Restricted by Zeller to acanthodactyla,
Hb., and cosmodactyla, Hb. Type fixed, in 1862, by Wallengren as
acanthodactyla.

1822. Srenopritia, Hubner.—Restricted by Meyrick and others to
the ‘ pterodactyla (fuscus)”’ and ‘ bipunctidactyla’’ groups. The type
never having been fixed, is now named as pterodactyla, Linn. (=ptilo-
dactyla, Hb.).

1825. Actprmsra, Hibner.—This is a synonym of Pterophora, Hb.,
1806, since it contains pentadactyla, Hibner’s type of the latter
eenus. It falls with Pterophora as a synonym of Alucita.

1825. Eucurrapia, Hiibner.—Contains hevadactyla, type of Hubner’s
Ripidophora, which he givesa higher than generic value in 1825. It, there-
fore, falls before Ripidophora, with which it sinks asasynonym of Orneodes.

1833. Apacrytus, Curtis.—Type stated by Curtis to be huebneri
(=adactyla, Hb.), of which he only knew the figure. All the cha-
racters of the genus are described from, and the genus is founded on,
the newly-described bennetit, which must be considered the type.

1841. Pxuaryprinus, Zeller.—Created as an extension of Platyptilia,
Hb., to include, in addition to species of latter genus, a part of
Hubner’s Amblyptilia. Type fixed now as yonodactyla, W.V. (=meya-
dactyla, Hb.), so that it falls as a synonym of Platyptilia, Hb.

1841. Oxyprinus, Zeller.—Created by Zeller for the Oxyptilid
section of Hiibner’s Amblyptilia. Type now fixed as pilosellae, Zeller.

1841. Acieritus, Zeller.—Created by Zeller as an extension of
Hubner’s Aciptilia. Type now fixed as pentadactyla, so that it falls
with Aciptilia as a synonym of Alucita.

96 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

1852. Dtacrorricua, Zeller.—Created for fasciola, which is there-
fore the type.

1852. Deutrrocopus, Zeller.—Created by Zeller for tengstroemi,
. Gell., which is therefore the type.

1862. CxzuiporpHorus, Wallengren.—Created by Wallengren for
rhododactyla, which is therefore the type. |

1862. OmzMatorHorus, Wallengren.—Created by Wallengren for
lithodactyla, which is therefore the type.

1862. Mimmsroptinus, Wallengren.—Created by Wallengren for
the ‘‘ pterodactyla (fuscus) ’’ and ‘‘ bipunctidactyla’’ group of Hubner’s
Stenoptilia. The latter was limited by Meyrick in 1890 to the same
group, thus making Mimaeseoptilus a synonym of Stenoptilia.

1862. Leioptirus, Wallengren.—Created, in 1862, by Wallengren,
for the Leioptilid section of Hubner’s Stenoptilia. Type now fixed as
tephradactyla.

1864. SocucHora, Walker.—Erected for donatella, which is named

the type.

1864. Uruca, Walker.—Erected for ochracealis, which is named
the type.

1865. Pata, Walker.—Erected for lunuligera, which is named the
type.

1880. Tricnoptizus, Walsingham.—Created by Walsingham for
pygmaeus, which is therefore the type.

1881. EvucnzuipopHorus, Wallengren.—Name created by Wallen-
eren to replace the preoccupied Cnaemidophorus ; type, rhododactyla.

1881. PsetnopHorus, Wallengren.—Created by Wallengren for
brachydactyla, which is therefore the type.

1885. Hepratopa, Walsingham. — Created for argyriodactylus,
Walker, which is therefore the type.

1886. Marasmarcua, Meyrick.—Created for two species. Type
fixed, in 1892, by Tutt as phaeodactyla, Hb. (=lunaedactyla, Haw.).

1886. Cosmoctostis, Meyrick.— Erected for a single species,
aglaodesma, which is therefore the type.

1886. SpHenarcuis, Meyrick. — Erected for a single species,
synophrys, which is therefore the type.

1886.—Doxosterses, Meyrick.—Erected for a single species, aenalis,
Walk., which is therefore the type.

1887. Terrascuauis, Meyrick.—EKrected for arachnodes, which is
therefore the type.

1890. Gypsocuares, Meyrick.—Created by Meyrick for baptodactyla,
which is therefore the type.

1890. Crasmetis, Meyrick.—Created for brachydactyla, which is
therefore the type. Sunk by Meyrick, in 1895, as synonymous with
Pselnophorus, Wallgrn.

1891. Aromopreryx, Walsingham.,—Erected for doert, which is
therefore the type.

1891. Ocuyrotica, Walsingham.—Erected for fasciata, which is
therefore the type.

1891. Srecanopactyta, Walsingham.—Erected for two species, of
which concursa is noted as the type.

1891. Grpertia, Walsingham.—Hrected for eques, which is named
the type.

1891. Karamacuia, Hampson.—Erected for auxantidactylus, which

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF THE ALUCITIDES. 97

is therefore the type.

1891. EKuronoza, Walsingham.—Created for fuscicostata, which is
noted as the type.

1896. CrocyposceLus, Walsingham.—Created for ferrugineum,
which is named the type. ;

1905. Gittmerra, Tutt.—Ochrodactyla, Schiff. (dichrodactyla,
Muhlig), cited as type.

1905. Frepericina, Tutt.—Calodactyla, Schift. (zetterstedtii, Zell.),
cited as type.

1905. Carperia, Tutt.— Heterodactyla, Mull., de Vill. (teucrit,
Jord.), cited as type.

1905. Apxinia, Tutt.—Bipunctidactyla, Scop., Haw., cited as type.

1905. Ovenventa, Tutt.—Septodactyla, Tr. (lienigianus, Zell.), cited
as type.

1905. Buckueria, Tutt.—Paludum, Zell., cited as type.

1905. Apatna, Tutt.—Microdactyla, Hb., cited as type.

1905. Heutinsta, Tutt.—Osteodactylus, Gell. (leucadactyla, Haw.),
cited as type.

1905. Emmetina, Tutt.—Monodactyla, Linn., cited as type.

1905. Merrirretpia, Tutt.—Tridactyla, Linné (tetradactyla, auct.),

cited as type.

| 1905. Porrirria, Tutt.—Galactodactyla, Schiff., cited as type.

1905. Wuerteria, Tutt.—Spilodactyla, Curt., cited as type.

1868. Srenoprycua, Zeller.—Created for coelodactyla, which is
therefore the type.

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES.

Réaumur, in 1784, gave (Mémoires, etc., 1., p. 322) the insects belong-
ing to this superfamily the name of ‘‘ plumes’’—“ Les papillons dont les
ailes imitent fort celles des oiseaux ; elles paroissent composées de veri-
table plumes.’’ Hesays; ‘‘ Nous les avons mis a la suite des phalenes,
ils en ont un des caracteres par leurs antennes a filets-coniques; mais
on ne laisse pas de les voir voler pendant le jour; et d’ailleurs, la
transformation des chenilles d’ou ils viennent, se fait de la méme
maniere que celle des chenilles des papillons diurnes, comme nous l’ex-
pliquerons ailleurs. Ils pourroient donc aussi appartenir a la classe
des papillons diurnes ; mais de tout cela, il resulte qu’on les peut
regarder comme une classe particuliere que nous placerons pourtant ici
. la suite des phalenes.”’

A superficial examination of the “‘plumes”’ might lead one to suppose
‘that they formed a small group that might be divided into a genus
or two, and this, indeed, has been done by many authors, as has been
already shown. Small, however, as is the group, the divergence
exhibited is exceedingly great, and there are few of the largest super-
families that exhibit so varied structures in the larval, pupal, and, to a
less extent, wing characters. In habits, too, they differ exceedingly—
hybernating as imagines, larve, and, in the case of Oidaematophorus, at
least, in the egg-stage (the larva fully formed within the egg), whilst the
larval habits vary from purely internal feeders, the larve with simple
tubercular structures, to exposed feeders, the larve with wart-like
tubercles almost as complicated as those of Arctiids or Lymantriids,
Like the latter, too, they carry over, in some cases, the wart-like
structure to the pupal stage, this character being even more pronounced

98 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

in some instances than in Lymantrid pupe. The plumes, using the
term in the broadest sense, fall into two very characteristic groups,
which we have treated as superfamilies, in order to show that the
Aydistides equal in biological value the Alucitides, under which title we
eroup the rest of the plumes. For our general considerations we have
discussed the two together in order to contrast their differences and
compare their resemblances in the various stages.

The pupal and larval features are very important from the point of
view of grouping the species inter se, and a study of these stages is abso-
lutely necessary to form a sound basis for the generic divisions, whilst the
characters found in these stages often separate widely species in which
the neurational characters are very similar. Thus the Amblyptiliid
pupa not only shows how distinct is Amblyptilia from Platyptilia, with
which Meyrick erroneously unites it, but suggests a close alliance with
Marasmarcha (lunaedactyla), which is usually placed in a quite different
group, whilst a detailed knowledge of the life-histories must have
prevented the same author from lumping into the same genus, such
divergent species as Marasmarcha lunaedactyla and Adaina microdactyla,
which have no point of contact in any stage—ege, larva, pupa or
imago. The soundest work yet done on the classification of the
plumes is undoubtedly that of Hofmann (‘Die deutschen Ptero-
phorinen,’’ Berichte des naturwiss nschaftlichen Vereines zu Regensbury,
v., 1894-1895), with the general arrangement of whose work we are in
close agreement. His knowledge of the early stages of many species
has led him to avoid the oreater pitfalls into which Meyrick has fallen
through being unable to check the results obtained from a study of the
imago by those obtained. from study of the larve and pupe. Taking
his two main divisions (op. cit. separ. pp. 23 et seg.) as our Aydistides
and Alucitides, and his two chief subdivisions of the latter as our
Platyptiliidae and Alucitidae, we believe that his genera are well placed,
yet he has no appreciation of the amazing difference of such larve and
pup as those of Letoptilus tephradactyla and Adaina microdactyla, which
he places in the same genus, nor of the gulf that exists between Porrittia
yalactodactyla on the one hand, and Alucita pentadactyla on the other,
or between both these and Wheeleria meyadactyla (spilodactyla) and
Merrifieldia tridactyla.

It may be well, however, before entering into further detail, to
consider at length the various stages of the Alucitids, so that the
general morphology of these insects may be properly appreciated.

The Alucitid egg gives very little clue to the affinities of the super-
family; it is exceedingly simple and not a highly elaborated egg, and
might have relationship with those of any of the more generalised
superfamiles of lepidoptera; it is, however, very different from the
imbricated eges of Tortricids and many Pyralids. The egg is flat,
roughly oval in outline, one end broader and thinner than the other,
the narrower and thicker end being squared off, and carrying at its
somewhat flattened end the micropyle; the shell is thin and trans-
parent, the upper surface somewhat flattened or sunken, and practically
devoid of ribs, pitting, and almost entirely of any structural surface
modification, there being merely the slightest trace of a polygonal
reticulation. Chapman notes (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1896, p. 145}:
«The ovum is of oval section in every direction, a form that may most
easily be described as that of an ordinary bird’s egg, if laid on its side

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. 99

and then flattened. Those examined vary in size and in the proportion
of their different diameters, but all have this general form; they are
smooth, bright and polished, and have faint markings of a network
tending to a hexagonal mesh. In some cases the narrowing towards
the eral end is not so evident, and in others, ¢.y., Adkinia bipuncti-
dactyla, the egg might almost be called cylindrical. . . . Although the
Alucitid egg thus varies within wide limits, there is not the remotest
suggestion in its structure of the Chrysocoridid egg (Trans. Ent. Soc.
Lond., 1896, pl. vi., fig. 3), with which group an alliance has been
supposed to exist. It is horizontal, but with sufficiently smooth surface
to give some support to the idea that it belongs to the Anthrocerid stirps.”
The eges are pale green or yellow in colour when first laid, and usually
the oval stage is a short one, although Otdaematophorus lithodactyla
hybernates in this stage (teste Chapman), the young larva developing
rapidly in the shell and living therein until the spring. Roughly, the
two main subdivisions into which the Alucitids fall exhibit their own
oval peculiarities; those of the Alucitines have a flatter egg, more oval
in outline, those of the Platyptiliines are rather larger, more cylindrical,
with the micropylar end rather more truncate, whilst the allied Agdistid
ego hasan almost brick-shaped appearance, the micropylar end flattened
and rather depressed, the nadir rounded; the margin of the square
micropylar end being further specialised by having a raised and beaded
border. Chapman gives the following tabulation “of the sizes of egas
which he measured in 3 diameters :—

LENGrH. WipTH.* HicuHtT.*

Adactylus bennetir A was ‘Timm. | °30mm., °40mm. | :30mm., -28mm.
dAdkinia bipunctidactyla { nae eae ae
Stenoptilia pterodactyla be -49mm. | -25mm., :16mm. | -2lmm., ‘15mm.
Amblyptilia cosmodactyla (acan-

thodactyla) .. bie eee ‘46mm. | -27mm., -23mm. | -23mm., -20mm. |
Marasmarcha lunaedactyla |

(phaeodactyla) a Ne -56mm. *34mm. ‘28mm. |
Buckleria paludum .. ‘38mm. *24mm. ‘24mm. |
Capperia heterodactyla (teucrii) °40mm. “28mm. | ‘21mm.
Platyptilia gonodactyla AS ‘60mm. ‘36mm. ‘30mm.
Platyptilia isodactyla .. : ‘54mm. ‘33mm. | *27mm., -2lmm.
Fredericina calodactyla (zetter- f | |

sted tit) 3 ot ae *52mm. *30mm. | -26mm., ‘18mm.
Oidaematophorus lithodactyla i anes enna, aes | or eran:

‘48mm. | °32mm., 30mm. | -25mm., -22mm.

Leioptilus tephradactyla fe ‘41mm. | *28mm. | *20mm.
Ovendenia septodactyla (lienigi-

anus) .. vd oe *35mm. -22mm. | ‘17mm.
Adaina microdactyla a an “35mm. *24mm., | ‘17mm.
Porrittia galactodactyla tye *42mm. ‘28mm. *24mm.

. ) Sie} 22 «)2

Alwita pentadactyl bk Saag ee
Wheeleria megadactyla (spilo-

dactyla) one sf cn ‘45mm. *30mm. ‘24mm.

* This tabulation of egg-sizes takes account also of form. When two dimen-
sions are given the outline is not oval, but ovoid. The points at which measure-
ment has been made are not at places definable for all eggs, but are (1) widest, (2)
at a point where the measurement is still side to side and not on actual end— largely
® matter of guess and varying with each ege.

100 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Hofmann observes (Die deutsch. Pterophorinen, etc., pp. 14 et seq.)
that the head, mouthparts, antenne, and ocelli of the larva show (without
microscopical examination) no deviation from the forms usual in
lepidopterous larve. The globular or heart-shaped head is usually
very small, and can be easily withdrawn into the prothorax; the
antenne are very short, and the labium is often prolonged into a long
spindle. The chitinous prothoracic shield and anal plate are very
frequent in young larve, and, in some groups, are retained throughout
life, whilst in others they disappear with the last moult. The spiracles
are small but particularly noticeable, on account of their being placed
much higher dorsally than is usually the case with other larve. The
true legs are fairly normal; the prolegs, however, are very variable, in
some groups long and thin, recalling those of certain Pyralids; the
hooklets are arranged in a semicircle, the number of which vary in
different species, ¢.g., Oxyptilus hieracii, O. pilosellae, etc. ; in some species
the modification towards obsolescence in the prolegs is most marked,
e.g., Adaina microdactyla. He further notes that much of this larval
diversity appears to depend less on a great generic difference, than
on the mode of life of the larve ; thus the allied hieracit and pilosellae
on the one hand, and scarodactyla and tephradactyla in another direction,
offer quite different larval types.

The plume larve present very great variation—from nearly smooth
to very hairy—and this stage furnishes many excellent characters for
classification, although, at present, it must be confessed the differences
are not too thoroughly understood, and many of the adult larve are
highly speciahsed. The more marked characters (not necessarily
specialised or particularly Alucitid characters) that early force themselves
on the notice of the student are: (1) The raised spiracles, a most striking
feature, and a very constant one throughout the superfamily, but still
subject to great variation. (2) The highly-developed covering of
spicules (of course a generalised character) which is found pretty
generally throughout the group, after the first moult, but is subject to
ereat modification.* (8) The great difference in the position of the sub-
spiracular tubercles in the Agdistids compared with those of the Alucitid
larve. (4) The great difference in the character of the tubercles,
varylng from simple single-haired chitinous buttons, to complicated
many-haired warts, or tall horn-like processes on which the sete are
borne. (5) The presence of accessory or secondary tubercular hairs,
distinct from the usual tubercular groups, and the wart-like structures
they generally form. (6) The presence of scattered skin-hairs (another
character found in widely different superfamilies).

The peculiar raised character of the larval spiracles is most note-
worthy. Those on the prothorax and 8th abdominal segment
resemble those of other lepidopterous larve in being much larger than
the others, and presenting the special peculiarities, therefore, more
visibly. In most Alucitid species, the spiracles present a smooth,
conical mound of some height, with the spiracle proper at the apex.
This feature is more conspicuous, perhaps, in the Platyptiliime (smooth)
than in the Alucitine (hairy) section of the group. This is not,

* The absence of spicules is unusual in lepidopterous larve, still their general
absence in the first instar, and their well-developed character in the later instars, in
this superfamily, is interesting.

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. 101

however, without marked exceptions, for Wheeleria meygadactyla (spilo-
dactyla) has a chitinous cone whose base is nearly three times the
width of the actual spiracle at top, and it stands up from the surface
to a height quite equal to twice the diameter of the spiracular opening.
In Leioptilus tephradactyla the height is greater, though the width of
the base of the cone is proportionally less, despite the fact that it
stands on a rather large chitinous plate. In Ovendenia septodactyla
(lienigianus) the construction is very similar. In Alucita pentadactyla
the opening of the spiracle is very large, but it is rather less raised.
In Merrifieldia tridactyla (tetradactyla) the cone is short and narrow.
In Porrittia yalactodactyla itis very similar, but rather higher. In
Oidaematophorus lithodactyla the spiracle is not unlike that of Adkinia
zophodactylus, but the base is very transparent and colourless. In
A. zophodactylus the raised base is hemispherical rather than conical,
with the darker spiracle on top, hardly more in width than one-third
the diameter of the hemisphere ; this is most marked in the thoracic
spiracle. In Stenoptilia pterodactyla the cone is only about twice the
width of the spiracle; in Marasmarcha lunaedactyla (phaeodactyla) the
cone is wide and not so steep, approaching that of Adkinia zophodactylus,
whilst that of A. bipunctidactyla is very similar to that of Stenoptilia
pterodactyla. Amblyptilia cosmodactyla (acanthodactyla) has rather a
wide lumen, and a narrow but fairly high cone; Hwucnemidophorus
rhododactyla has also a wide opening and narrow cone. In Capperia
heterodactyla, the spiracle is on a rather sharp, narrow cone, usually
dark in colour. In the Platyptilids (sens. strict.) the cone is narrow
but tall for its width. In Hmmelina monodactyla, strangely enough,
the spiracle is very similar to that of Platyptilia (yonodactyla and
isodactyla). In Adactylus bennetii the spiracles are characteristic, the
conical base being rather dark tinted. The larva of Adaina micro-
dactyla has very large prothoracic and 8th abdominal spiracles on
high, wide, dark cones, the others smaller and less marked. This
species illustrates to a remarkable degree how the spiracle may be
modified in the younger stadia. In the first stadium, 7.c., the newly-
hatched larva, each spiracle is a very large structure nearly half the
width of the segment in diameter, and standing out from the surface
for an even greater distance. It has a rather narrow neck, and beyond
this expands into a large cup-shaped mass with fluted sides and a
rather flat top. It has something the appearance as if the spiracle,
as it exists in the adult, was represented by the portion to the top of
the neck, and the portion beyond was a special development, and
possibly this is so (Chapman).

The skin of the plume larve is finely spiculated, and these minute
skin-points appear, as a rule, to be developed in the second stadium,
and are usually present in some one or other form of development in
most of the species. They seem to be universally distributed on the
larval skin, and are often sufficiently well developed to lead one to
assume that, with very little stimulation, they would develop into
hairs, but even in the most highly developed spicules there is no joint,
the spicule being continuous with the epidermal cell beneath. This
spiculation is usually absent in the first instar, the newly-hatched
larva being smooth, although larve of Merrisieldia tridactyla, and
Adactylus bennetii, etc., have it marked more or less strongly in this

102 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

stage, and that of Oidaematophorus lithodactyla has it sufficiently
developed to give the larva quite a second stage appearance.

The gradations and variation exhibited in the secondary hairs,
tubercles, and warts of Alucitid larve, has led Chapman to point out
the following details (in litt.). He remarks: ‘ From the primitive
primary hair or tubercle, we find all sorts of gradations; we have the
primary hair with or without a plate, with or without an elevation ; we
find it accompanied by one or more hairs that are distinctly secondary ;
we find the primary hair accompanied by one or more that cannot be
distinguished from it, as well as by undoubted secondary hairs, and
we find warts and bosses that are quite similar to those of Arctias.
We further find various modifications of this, such as the hair-carrying
wart being a more or less globular expansion at the summit of a
narrow neck. Hverything that we have here added to the primary
hair is ‘secondary.’ Another group of secondary hairs (or tubercles) is
formed by those that appear to be of precisely the same character as
the primary ones, occurring at very definite situations, and differing
from the primary ones only in not being of universal occurrence, but
nevertheless appearing in species of widely different groups in the same
situations. Of these, the plumes present several examples, especially
those on two tubercles posterior to the spiracles on the abdominal
segments of many species. The third class of secondary hairs are
those distributed over the general skin-surface, without special
reference to the tubercles proper, and often, apparently, in quite a
haphazard and entirely asymmetrical manner.”

iv, v and vii) it is to be noted that they vary from Sea single.
haired chitinous buttons to complicated warts. Above the spiracles
are three primary tubercles on each side, which are called i, 1 ©
and ii, and there are also two minute points which are probably of
as generalised a character as are the primary tubercles, a very minute
one, close to, and in front of, the spiracle. which may be called A, and
another, very minute, in front of 11, which may be called O; 1 and u
are, as usual, situated as anterior and posterior trapezoidals, 1 nearer tne
central line; 1111s supraspiracular. The position of the primaries 1v and
v, 18 below the spiracle, where they are placed not only pretty close to-
gether, but usually on the same plate or forming a conjoined wart. In
the Agdistid larva they are rather more widely apart, nearly at a level,
with a distinct tendency in some species for the posterior, iv, to be the
higher, whilst in the Alucitid larve the anterior, v, is always above
the posterior iv (at an angle one to the other of about 45° to the larval
resting-place). Besides these are vi (appearing after the first moult,
and not a primary tubercle) and vii, below each other, and beneath
iv-++-v, and there are, besides, one (or two) other accessory, post-
spiracular groups—B, and B,*, towards the back of each abdominal
segment. ‘The addition of extra hairs to the primary tubercles change
them, in many species, into highly-specialised tubercular warts, and
there appears in the larval tubercular structure of the Alucitids to be
every intermediate stage in these tubercles between a single-haired
tubercle and a very complicated many-haired wart. The only sub-
primary tubercle present, on the abdominal segments, is vi; this is

* Dyar’s iiia and iiib (infra).

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. 103

not present in the newly-hatched larva, but appears in the second
instar and remains throughout larval life, often undergoing similar
development to the primary.

In addition to the subprimary tubercles, there are, in a certain
section of the plume larve, accessory tubercular hairs, that are to be
found (1) Posterior to the spiracles, B, and B,, (2) Behind the dorsal
warts of the meso- and metathorax. These are certainly not present
in the first instar, and not always developed in the second, but are to
be found in the third or fourth instars in those species that develop
them. In rank they are inferior to the subprimary sete, and are, when
developed, easily differentiated from the scattered secondary skin-hairs,
for they are usually mounted on a raised skin area, after the manner of
the primary and subprimary tubercular sete, and like these may be
developed into warts. Occasionally one or other of the areas, in
which they are usually developed, gives rise to a small group of little
hairs. The postspiracular accessories consist of two groups—(a) On
the flange, slightly lower than the spiracle in level=B,, (b) Rather
above the spiracle in level=B,. In some species the upper one only
is developed, in others, only the lower, whilst a number of species
have both, although one is then usually weaker than the other, the
lower being usually less wart-like than the upper.

The modification of the primary and secondary tubercles into warts,
in some species, is very remarkable. From the simple chitinous-based
seta of Platyptilia yonodactyla, to the many-haired wart of Capperia
heterodactyla, is a far cry, still farther to that of the beautiful warts of
Porrittia yalactodactyla and Alucita pentadactyla. There can be no
doubt that there is a close connection between the character of the
tubercles and the environment, and that whilst the internal-feeders
have their primary and secondary tubercles reduced to the simplest
forms, those of the external-feeders, varying, however, in degree, have
the most complicated structures. The warts are essentially formed of
the primary spiculated seta, surrounded by a number of short, smooth,
bulbed secondary hairs,* very similar to the ordinary surface-hairs.
The peculiar excrescences in Agdistid larve are, however, somewhat
different in structure, the basal area, and not the hairs borne thereon,
being the most modified. The hornlike processes of Adactylus bennetii,
developed on the prothorax and 9th abdominal segment, are to be
compared carefully with those of the other Agdistid larve (described
postea). In this species the prothoracic horns are extended forward
over the head, and the caudal horn rises from the 9th abdominal
seement, the whole ensemble of the larva being that of a miniature
Spbhingid. Itis to be noted that the caudal horn does not rise from the
8th abdominal, as in the latter, the sete of 1 and 11 of this segment
being in front of the horn, and in their correct position with regard to
the spiracle.

In the Alucitid larve, the primary tubercular hairs are usually

* Somewhat similar hairs, with expanded tips, are not uncommon in other
superfamilies of lepidoptera. Packard states (Bombycine Moths of North America,
p- 12) that the Alucitid larve are spiny, and their peculiar excretory sete, the
‘* Driisenharchen ”’ or glandular hairs of Zeller (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 356) are similar,
as Dimmock has observed, to the glandular, or long, hairs of plants; Miss Murtfeldt
adding (Psyche, iii., p. 390) that ‘‘there is a very close imitation in the dermal
clothing of the larve of Leioptilus sericidactylus to that of the young leaves of
Vernonia, on which the spring and early summer broods feed.”

104 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

long, pointed and tapering, finely spiculate along their shafts, whilst
the secondary hairs are usually short, smooth, and somewhat clubbed
at their tips, and, as we have noted, they surround the primary
tubercular setze when the tubercles are modified into wart-like struc-
tures. In some cases the primary hairs take on the smooth, clubbed
character, usually supposed to be peculiar to the secondary hairs, and
are difficult to distinguish therefrom. Apart, however, from the
primary and secondary hairs arising on, and around, the tubercular
structures, there are a number of secondary scattered hairs, variable in
their development, that arise from the general skin-surface, apparently
quite independently of the tubercles, and more or less irregularly,
although usually more frequent in those parts that appear to want
protection, and where there would appear to be a special stimulus to
their growth. They may thus vary from a few irregular scattered
hairs to an evenly-distributed coat, occupying the greater part of the
skin-surface. They would appear to form a somewhat generalised
feature, for they are found in all the Platyptiliine larve (except Fredert-
cina calodactyla = zetterstedtii), whilst only the Merrifieldiid tribe of the
Alucitines has them, all the other tribes, represented in Britain, on this
side of the plume stirps, being without them. This character alone (apart
from other important structural ones) raises Alucita pentadactyla and
Porrittia galactodactyla tar above Wheeleria megadactyla (spilod actyla), W.
niveidactyla (baliodactyla), and Mervifieldia tridactyla, with which they
have long been generically grouped, the three last-named presenting these
secondary hairs (although they have almost disappeared in M. tridactyla),
whilst the others are without them. Chapman further notes (i litt.)
that, in the Platyptiliine larve (except that of F’. calodactyla which has
none), the secondary hairs are a kind of glorified skin-points—short,
conical, without jointed base, and evenly distributed over the whole
surface; in nearly all others the secondary hairs are hairs, and have
limited and special distribution. The Stenoptiliids (as represented by
Adkinia bipunctidactyla) are the most like Platyptiliids, but the hairs are
clubbed. It is not surprising that, as soon as these characters were
recognised, they should be utilised to get a wider view of the relation-
ship of the Alucitids inter se, than that presented by a study of the
imagines. Hofmann published (Die deutsch. Pterophorinen, pp. 12 et
seq.) & somewhat detailed description of the larval tubercles, but grouped
the larve on the superficial character of form into five types, which he
described as follows :—

1. Larve of compressed form, short and thick, back little arched, attenuated
in front and behind, with a small retractile head, and scarcely noticeable lateral
flange—EucnEMIDOPHORUS.

2. More elongated form, not unlike certa'n Tortricid larva —-OXYPTILIDI.

3. Markedly shortened forms, back strongly arched, resembling certain |
dipterous (T'rypeta) larvee —Aparnipt.

4. Larve compressed from above downwards, flat, with a strongly developed
lateral flange; rests closely appressed to the leaves of the foodplants—PorRiTT1A.

5. Larve furnished with tall fleshy humps—AGDISTIDES.

He adds (op. cit.) a detailed note on the structure of the skin and its
armature, distinguishing between the tubercular sete and warts, and
the hairs on the general body surface. He particularly notes the
ventral warts, which he says ‘‘ stand on both sides of the median line
of the venter only on those segments unfurnished with legs, and are
very small and simple, rarely double.’’ He further remarks the change

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. 105

that occurs in the tubercles in the various stadia of certain Oxyptilids,
e.g., he observes that, ‘in the young larva of Oxyptilus tristis, they are
small and single-haired, whilst in the fullgrown larva they are large
and stellate-haired.’”’ He follows Schroeder in his nomenclature of
the longitudinal lines, calling them respectively—dorsal, subdorsal,
supraspiracular, spiracular, basal and subbasal stripes. _
Dyar also made some suggestions in this direction (Int. Rec., x1.,
p- 40, pl. 1., figs. 1-6) and gave the following table:
I. Warts present—hair-tufts instead of single
tubercles.
1. Secondary (i.e., single scattered)
hairsalso present. Wartsiand ii
united (pl. i., fig. 1).. Type1. Tricnoprinus* (lobidactyla).
2. No secondary hairs, though small
secondary warts (ilia or iiib, or
both iia and iiib) may be present.
a. Warts functional (pl. i.,

1018, 7) oo .. Type 2. Anucrrat (lithodactyla).
b. Warts degenerate (pl i.,
fig. 3) .. .. Type 2. Preropyorvust (kellicotti).

Il. Warts absent—primary hairs single.
1. Secondary hairs present, iiia some-
what more distinct than the
others (pl. i., fig. 4).. Type 3. Puatyprintas (rhododactyla).
2. No secondary hairs, all tubercles
primary (pl. i., figs. 5 and 6.)
Type 4. Marasmarcua\| (microdactyla),
OrneopEs (hexadactyla).
Dyar makes the further remarks that (1) Trichoptilus has the same
structure as Oxyptilus, and (2) Type 1 is the highest and Type 4 the
lowest in degree of specialisation.

Dyar’s grouping calls for many remarks. The union of the larva
of microdactyla, in some respects the most highly specialised Alucitid
larva, with hewadactyla, the type of the Orneodids, a quite distinct
superfamily, discounts the grouping at once. The specialised degrada-
tion of warts in Adaina has nothing in common with the typical
tubercular Orneodid larval structure. One observes, however, that on
this slender material, Dyar has obtained the essential larval structures
which distinctly upset Meyrick’s suggested phylogeny (Handbook,
p. 430), and support that of Hofmann. In our system his Type 1 is
Platyptiliine; Type 2 (both forms) is Alucitine; Type 3 is Platyptiliine;
Type 4 is also Platyptiliine. Orneodes is of course quite outside the
superfamily.

Hofmann followed up (Zeits. fiir Hnt., ii. pp. 129 et seg.) his
previous work, with a paper “ Ueber die Anordnung der borsten-
tragenden Warzen bei den Raupen der Pterophoriden,’’ with an illus-

* Trichoptilus, as here used, is evidently a very near ally, if not identical
with, Oxyptilus. Trichoptilus, as used in Britain for paludum, has a somewhat
’ different structure. We place paludwm in Buckleria.

+ Alucita here of course equals Oidaematophorus, Wallengren.

t The descriptions of the larva and pupa of this species (Fernald, Pteroph.
North America, pp. 46-47) suggest that this species belongs to the Leioptilids,
possibly to Hellinsia. The larva has certainly nothing in common, except that
both are Alucitine with that of menodactyla, with which Fernald and Dyar place it.

§ This genus is of course Eucnemidophorus, Wallengren.

|| The genus (ddaina) to which microdactyla belongs, is Alucitine, Maras-
marcha is Platyptiliine.

106 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

trative diagrammatic plate, on which the tubercles* of a typical
abdominal segment of tbe adult larve of Hucnemidophorus rhodo-
dactyla (fig. 4), Aciptiliat tetradactyla (fig. 5), Leioptilus carphodactylus
var. buphthalmi (fig. 6), Oxyptilus leonuri (fig..7), Platyptilia yonodactyla
(fig. 8), and Leioptilus distinctus (fig. 9) are exhibited. He also shows
a typical abdominal segment in the 1st larval stadium of Pterophorus
monodactyla (fig. 12), etc. His figures, at any rate, broadly support
his grouping, based on general characters. He further figures the
tubercles of a thoracic segment of Stenoptilia pelidnodactyla (fig. 10),
and of Platyptilia gonodactyla (fig. 11). His details of the Alucitid
larval tubercles (op. cit., iil., pp. 151 et seq.) are worthy of study.

Weare indebted to Bacot and Chapman for the tabulation embodying
the chief larval characters inserted here on separate sheet.

The fullfed larva, in preparation for pupation, rarely spins a
definite cocoon, although this is done in the case of certain Platyp-
tiliids, e.g., Platyptilia yonodactyla and P. isodactylus, and also by at
least one of the Leioptilids, viz., Adaina microdactyla. Generally,
however, the pupa is quite exposed, a silken pad alone being spun by
the larva, into which the cremastral hooks are later fastened. Chap-
man gives (Hntom., Xxxiil., pp. 82 et seq.) a most interesting account
of the pupal suspension of the Alucitids. They may be suspended in
all attitudes, e.y., with the head upwards or downwards, on a vertical
surface, the dorsum downwards under a horizontal one, etc. The
suspension is made by the cremaster only, there is no silken belt, and
the attachment is made to a silken pad by means of the cremastral
area, consisting of two portions, a forward portion on the 8th
abdominal segment, and a hinder portion on the 10th, the latter, how-
ever, stretching forward until the anterior cremastral hooks on the
10th appear to meet the posterior ones on the 8th segment. The larve
of Porrittia (Aciptilia) galactodactyla pupate beneath a leaf, the pupe
are, therefore, often inverted, and pupation takes place after two days’
quiescence. When the moult takes place, the larva holds on by the
anal prolegs only, the props of the ventral prolegs standing out stiffly,
but with the hooks free from, although touching, the silk.{ The
moulting is done rather rapidly, within about 15 minutes from the
first efforts noticed. The rhythmic movements, beginning at the last
segments, at first push the abdominal segments, about the 2nd to 6th,
forwards within the larval skin, as evidenced by the tracheal threads,
very plainly seen through the transparent skin being withdrawn from
the pupal spiracles ; when the larval skin has passed backwards about
one segment, all the abdominal trachez are withdrawn more or less,
the first not quite a full segment’s length; the thoracic segments are

* These must be considered as purely diagrammatic, and none too accurate.
Compare Dyar (Ent. Rec., xi., pl. i., fig. 4) with Hofmann’s fig. 4 as here
indicated. .

+ Generic synonymy as used by Hofmann retained here.

t Chapman writes (Hnt., xxxili., p. 83): ‘‘How this happens I did not
ascertain. In many Pierids the body hangs arched away from the silken pad,
preventing the ventral prolegs from touching it; but I do not know how this is
managed in the Pierids, Papilionids, and Lycenids, where the prolegs touch the
pad, as they certainly do in Aciptilia (Porrittia) galactodactyla. The anal prolegs
hold well, so that they must be managed differently from the ventral ones. It is
less difficult to understand how all the prolegs take no hold, as in pup in cocoons,
ete.”

'R OF IV AND VY.

SSS SS

ACCESSORY POST-SPIRACULARS.

CHARACTER OF VI.

Smald at base.

set
|

|
litto
ato a wart.

|

|

litto

| Both present, but weakly |

Absent.

Upper one only, and this ill-
developed. |

Both upper and lower present.

Single-haired.

ditto

Small wart.

ditto

PRoTHORACIC PLA’

Table of Larval Characters as shown in the last instar of Alucitid larvee.

(To be bound opposite p. 106.)

Want. Makxincs. SuTURE.
TADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS .. Absent. | Black mark, dark dots, lenti- | With dark dots.
: | | cles. |
| |
BIPUNCTIDACTYLA ditto | Black mark, dark dots, no ditto
| | lenticles.
STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA(FUSCUS) | ditto | Black mark, dots, lenticles. | ditto
|
| |
MARASMARCHA LUN-EDACTYLA (PHE0- ditto | Black mark, far back, trace | Present.
DACTXLA) .. : 3 56 of lenticles. |
AwpLyPTmntA cosMopacryns (acaN- | ditto | Black mark, dots, and lenti- | With dark dots.
THODACTYLA) | cles.
EvcNeMmporpHoRts RHopopactyns | ditto | Absent, Present.
GILEMERIA ANTENA) ditto | Coloured patch. Skin points, suture indistin-
| guishable.
OCHRODACTYLA Be: .. | ditto Trace of colouring and of ditto
3 | lenticles.
PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA . | ditto Coloured patches, several Present.
| lenticles. p
| |
ISODACTYLUS. ditto | ditto | Marked.
| i}
FREDERICINA caLopactyLA (zET-| ditto | ditto Present.
TERSTEDTH) |
BuckKLERIA PALUDUM ditto | Faint dark mark. ditto
|
i}
CappERIA HETERODACTYLA(TEUCRM) | ditto Doubtful dark mark. | With dots.
|
OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA . . ditto | Dark mark and dots. Distinct with dots.
WHEELERIA MEGADACTYLA (spruo- | Present. Not visible. Faint suture with dots.
DACTYLA) so |
oe
BALIODACTYLA . - |) ditto | ditto Not visible.
|
| |
MERRIFIELDIA TRIDACTYLA (TETRA- | ditto | ditto Not visible.
DACTYLA) ac | |
OmZMATOPHORUS LITHODACTYLA.. ditto ditto Not yisiblt, but black dots
present.
EMDIELINA MONODACTYLA .- 4 ditto ditto Not visible.
LEIoPTILUS TEPHRADACTYLA ete | ditto ditto ditto
OVENDENIA SEPTODACTYLA (LIENI- ditto ditto ditto
GIANUS) .. a 2S <.
ADAINA MICRODACTYLA -. | Absent. | ditto Present.
HELLINSIA OSTEODACTYLA . . 3 ditto ‘Two small lenticles. ditto
PoRRITTIA GALACTODACTYLA Present. | Not visible. Not visible,
‘| ALvciTa PENTADACTYLA .. on ditto ditto Faintly seen.
oF ditto ditto Not visible,

of tetradactyla and m
and some others,

SeconDAry Hairs oR SKIN-POINTS.

Hairs,

None.

Six or seyen secondary each
side.

About twenty-six secondary
| each side.

| Several (varying) secondary
| on hind margin.

hind margin.

None.

No hairs, skin-points.

| No hairs, skin-points.
|

| None.
| None.
None.

| None.

Secondary abundant.

| None.

| Secondary abundant.
|

Many secondaries.

| P
| Some broad, tipped secon-
daries.

None.

| None.
ditto
ditto

Points as small plates.

ditto
None.
ditto

ditto

Four or five secondary on |

| Fringe in front, five warts.

lactyla (spitodactyla), but, in

| Usual six.

ditto

ditto
ditto
ditto
|
|

ditto

ditto

ditto

ditto

ditto
ditto
ditto

ditto

ditto

Six hairs distinct, but with
many secondaries.

Front fringe, five warts.

ditto

ditto

ditto

ditto

| Usual six.

Three behind, four in front
row.

Fringe and five warts.

Twelve to sixteen in fringe,
others behind.

Fringe and five warts.

Apparently absent.

Apparently present.

| Absent.

DEPRESSION.

Sxin-Pornts.

Present, dark.

Present, black.

Present, pigmented.

Inconspicuous, rave-
ly pigmented.

Present, black. |

Some tinting.

Faint puckering.

Tinted and puckered.

Present.
ditto
Pigmented spot at

position of.
Absent.

Dark mark.

Depressed black spot.

Apparently absent.

Absent.

Absent.

Absent.

Absent.

Absent.

Absent.

Absent.

Absent.

Small, spiny, closely-
Set, rather linear.

ditto

ditto
ditto

Smaller, and more
delicate than in
bipunctidactyla.

Small,
points.

chitinous

Fairly developed, a
certain proportion
are enlarged and
noted in next
column.

ditto

ditto

Comparatively weak.
Fairly developed.
Fine rather lineay.

Strongly developed.

Well developed.

ditto

ditto

Rather coarse chitin-
ous points.

Very fine.

ditto

Fine and rather

weak.

Fine and pale.

Coarse and dense,
forming small
plates dorsally.

ditto

Very fine, and trans-
parent,

Extremely minute
and weak,

None.

Srconpary Sxin-Harrs.

Few in number, patchy, very
short, markedly knobbed.
|

slightly thorned, knobbed.

ditto
but fewer in number.

Smooth, very knobbed at tip,
still fewer than in ptero-
dactyla.

Smooth, swollen at tip; less
numerous than in bipuncti-
dactyla.

Numerous, scattered, very
short and thick, knobbed
tips.

Very numeyous, short,

thick, tapering to
point.
g
4 |
2 /ditto, but rather longer.
re Generally slender and
= | fairly long.
Wanting on pale areas.
None.
None.

Numerous and scattered, tips
knobbed, not thorned.

None.
Rather fine and slender,
knobbed at tip, fairly

numerous and scattered.

Variable in size, knobbed at
tip, very few, restricted to
thorax and lateral area of
abdominal segments.

Very few, chiefly on thoracics
and beneath, expanded at
tip.

Absent.

ditto

ditto

ditto

ditto

ditto
ditto
ditto

ditto

ee! t e last instar, they are definitely separate, there being between them a strip of spiculated skin-surface.
© are fully aware that this sep ration of tubercles in the last instar, alter being conjoed in the earlier ones, is an unusual and remarkable phenome;

Numerous, long, slender, very |

| Wants.

Incipient.

ditto

Small warts de-

veloped.

| Slightly less
veloped than
pterodactyla.

de-
in

| Incipient.

No warts.

No warts.

ditto

ditto

| ditto
ditto
ditto

Strongly developed.

Single hair.

Wel developed and
raised, skin area
chitinised.

Well developed, with
a larger chitinised
skin area than in
spilodactyla.

Well developed.

Well developed.

ditto
Fairly developed.

ditto
None developed.

ditto

Well developed and
regular.

Strongly developed.

ditto

PRIMARY Harrs (senx).

| Smooth, blunt, open:topped,

slightly knobbed.

| Smooth, rather blunt.

|

| Smooth; slightly swollen
before pointed tip, ii long,

| slender and sharp.

| Smooth, blunt at tip, ii long,

| slender and sharp.

Smooth, slightly swollen just
below pointed tip.

! Smooth and tapering, il

truncate, blunt.

Smooth, short and tapering.

| ditto

| Hairs medium, shorter than

in pallidactyla.

Slender; shorter than in
gonodactyla.
ditto

Smooth.

| Smooth, blunt, slightly bifid

tips, some sharp.
Smooth, slender, sharp.

Edges slightly serrated (not
thorned), tip pointed.

Edges more markedly serrated
than in spilodactyla, but
not thorned

Well-marked
hairs,
Rather blunt.

serrations on

Thorned (not serrated), taper-
ing to point.

Coarse, irregularly serrated
(rather than thorned),
bifid at tips, not evenly
pointed.

Thorned, very fine serrations
also; large hairs pointed.

Large thorns, serrations not
noticeable.

Simple hairs, pointed.

ditto

Pointed and
thorned.

serrated, not

Pointed, minutely thorned or
strongly serrated.

Pointed, slightly thorned,
bifid tips.

| Somewhat

|

ditto

ditto

Short tubes enlarged
at base.

Short tubes.

Quite low.

Quite low, truncated
cones.

ditto

ditto

ditto

A little higher than
gonodactyla.

Low tubes.

Tube of medium

height.
Conical.

Medium tall tubes,
tapering upwards

from base.
|

Hardly as pro-
nounced as in
spilodactyla, butof
same type.

Medium tall tubes
tapering upwards
from base.

Liow down.

Rather more raised.

Not much raised.

Raised into tall

tubes.

yaised,
prothoracic and
8th abdominal
conspicuous.

Slightly raised.

Tall.

Much raised.

Very tall.

he observation requiring a good deal of care, and our materials being defective,
mon (Bacot and Chapman).

{Conjoined on thorax ; trape- j

RELATION OF I AND 11,

Bases conjoined on thorax,
usual trapezoidal arrange- |
mentin abdomen, well apart.

ditto |

|
Joined into single wart on |

|

| thorax; trapezoidals on

| abdomen, well apart.

| ditto

| |
ditto

Bases conjoined, ov nearly so, |
on thorax ; trapezoidal, on
abdomen, well apart.

Bases near, in transverse line |
on thorax, trapezoidals on
abdominal, well apart, but
bases more chitinous.

ditto

| Bases united on thorax, well

|
apart on abdomen. |

ditto |
ditto |

| Conjoined on thorax; almost
| so at base on abdominals.

United into single many-
haired wartonthoraxandab- |
domen, 2specially longhairs. |

Close together but not united.)
|

}Large compound wart on |
thovacics, trapezoidally |
placed warts wellapart from |
each other on abdominals, *

fLarge compound wart on |
thovacics, bases adpressed
but not united in ab- |
dominals.* |

{Large compound wart on |
thorax; bases apart in |
abdominals,* by interseg- |
mental incision. |

Large conjoined warts on
thoracics ; near, but
separate, on theabdominals.

Large conjoined warts on
thorax 5 trapezoidally |
placed on abdominals, but
not far apart.

+Conjoined on thorax; but |
with subsegmental incision |
between abdominals. |
+Conjoined on thoracics; trape- |
zoidal but quite close on
abdominals in same longi- |
tudinal line, i smaller.

Slightly trapezoidal on thor-
acic, widely separated on |
abdominals. -

}

ditto

{Conjoined on thorax; bases
almost touching on ab-
dominals. |

zoidal but close together on
abdominals, ii small.

Conjoined on thorax, trape-
zoidal fairly separate on
abdomen, but variable,
secondaries yery weak. ii
and iii about equal.

CHARACTER OF III.

|

About equal to ii. |

ditto

ditto

About equal to i. H

|
Between i and ii in |
size.

Usual strength.

Like i or ii,

ditto

ditto

ditto
ditto
Between i and iiin
size.
Wart nearly equal to
i+ii.

Single long hair.

Large wart, equal to |

i or il.

ditto

ditto

ditto

ditto

Single hair. |

Small weak wart. |

Single haiy (an addi-
tional minute hair
near). |

ditto

With numerous
hairs but weak.

Larger than i or ii,
nearly equal to
iv+v-

Stronger than i or
il.

CHARACTER OF ly anp y, |

ACCESSORY PosT-SPIRACULARS.

CHARACTER OF YI.

Conjoined at base.

ditto

|

|

\

|
United intoa wart.
|

ditto
|

Conjoined bases,
1 ditto

| Separate bases.

| On one plate.

ditto

ditto
ditto

Rather apart, but on
; same plate.

Conjoined
| single wart.
|

Close, but not con-
| joined.
Compound wart.

ditto

ditto

ditto

ditto
Large compound
wart, Which with |
the accessory
formsafan of hairs.
Large compound
wart.

ivy separated from v, |
vy very weak. }

y weak.
Conjoined wart
greatly developed.

Conjoined wart.

Large conjoined
wart.

|
|
|

into

|

—

Absent. |
|

|

Upper one only, and this ill-
developed.

Both upper and lower present. |
Both present,

but weakly |
developed.

Both present, lower weak.

Single-haired.

ditto

Small wart.

ditto

ditto

| (two hairs only in

Both positions occupied by
greatly -deyeloped secon-
| dary hairs.

| Absent, no enlarged secon- |

daries. |
|
| Absent.
| ditto
| ditto
ditto
|
|
| Absent.

| skin-hairs not
strong warts.

Absent.

forming

Both present, the upper a
small but well-defined
wart.

Both present as warts, the

Groups of enlarged secondary |

3rd skin)

Single-haired.

Two-haired.

Two- or three-haived.

| Generally two acces-

sory, but some-
times only one
and even four.

One or
sories.

two scces-
Two-haired
Single-haired.

Small wart.

Moderate hair.

Wart, two hairs,
other smaller ones.

| lower the larger and better-
| defined wart.

Wart, two strong
hairs, others
smaller.

j Both present as warts, the | One strong hair,

lower the larger.

Both present and weak, the
lower the stronger.

Rather weaker than in litho-
dactyla.

Lower only, developed into
wart of medium size.

Lower only, a weak wart.

Absent.

Absent.

Lower only, below level of
spiracle, half size of iii.

Absent.

Lower present, directly be-
hind iy and y.

many smaller
hairs.
Large wart, three

strong hairs.

Small Arctiid - like
wart, three or four
strong and five
weak hairs.

Single fan wart.

Small
moderate.

wart,

two
acces-

Single hair,
moderate
sories.

Good hair, several

moderate
sories near.

fcces-

Well-developed wart.

Modest wart.

Fan wart.

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. 107

now crowded forwards, and the stretching of the larval skin raises the
front part of the larva from the surface in a curve. Shortly it is seen
that the anal segments of the pupa still occupy those of the larva, and
the skin, as it is pushed backwards, gathers in a roll on the 8th
abdominal segment. The skin splits dorsally down the head and
thoracic segments, but not quite to the hind margin of the 3rd one.
The uncoiling of the antenne from within the larval head is easily seen.
The crest of hairs on the pupal wing enables it to be seen occupying
its own segment in the larva, and rapidly expanding as it assumes its
pupal direction and position: When once the skin splits it slips back
rather rapidly, and one has to be alert to see what is happening; it
continues to form a roll round the 8th abdominal segment. Just before
the posterior margin of the opening reaches here, the 9th and 10th
segments are seen within the larval skin to be actively directing the
extremity of the pupa dorsally, and pushing the dorsal part of the roll
of larva-skin backwards; the pupal extremity thus curls forwards, with
a definite step at each vermicular movement, and, before one quite
expects it, it appears through the opening dorsally. It is not the stiff
spike one knows in the mature pupa, but contorts itself as actively as
the same segments in the most lvely Tortricid or Tineid larva,
bending not only at the incisions of the segments, but in their length.
It then stretches and pushes over the side of the larva-skin, and reaches
the silken carpet; the remainder of the pupa then leaves the larva-
skin and pushes it away.” The larval skin accumulates round the 8th
abdominal segment and ventrally remains there, whilst dorsally, as
noted above, it is pushed further back by the 9th and 10th segments,
which thus escape from the dorsal slit in the larval skin, and find the
silken pad to which the cremastral hooks on the 10th abdominal
segment become fixed . . . . The cremastral hooks on the under-
side of the 8th abdominal segment, which, like the anal ones, are
already stiff and chitinised, stand out like a brush and form an obstacle
to the further progress of the larval skin backwards. One specimen,
arrested at the critical moment when the cremaster was freed. had these
hooks in a sort of pocket of the larval skin, of which the anterior lp
was the roll of larval skin, the posterior the margin of the slit in the
larval skin, and in some degree the roll of dorsal skin behind this and
the inside of the bases of the anal prolegs of the larva. It has been
noted that the last segments are very soft and mobile; and the under-
surface of the 8th abdominal, being sharply curved and made very
convex by the dorsal movements of the 9th and 10th, spreads the
cremastral hooks of its armature in a radiating manner, so that,
taken together, they form a sort of knob in the pocket of larva-skin,
and hold the pupa firmly and safely. It is evident that, when the
end of the pupa seizes the pad of silk and the pupa then straightens
itself, the radiating hooks will fall together and easily free themselves
from the pocket. There is, however, a second string to the bow. One

* Chapman notes (loc. cit., p. 84): ‘* The larva of A. galactodactyla has
many stiff hairs, and it seemed that the larva, when inverted, maintained its
position, and did not swing free, like a Vanessid, by the pressure of the hairs of the
last segments posterior to the prolegs, against the surface of suspension. This
does not explain, however, how the problem is met in the smoother larva, if,
indeed, these do assume so difficult a position. Agdistis, for instance, takes
usually a vertical attitude with head downwards.”’

108 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

pupa was so interfered with that it did not secure a grip with the
hooks of the 10th abdominal, and then got the hooks under the 8th
from their pocket; the pupa, nevertheless, did not fall, but was sus-
tained by the adhesion of the thoracic larval skin to the front of the
5th and 6th abdominal segments, and was so sustained for a consider-
able time till the pupa reached the silk. It did not, however, do so
very satisfactorily, and the hooks of the 8th segment failed to get a
proper hold. It would seem that the proper use of this adhesion is to
increase the pressure of the hooks of the 8th abdominal against
the margin of the pocket, and, after the terminal hooks are engaged in
the silk, to steady the pupa, whilst those of the 8th segment are freed
from the larva-skin and fixed on the silken carpet.* We may here
add that, different as are the Agdistid larve from those of other
Alucitids, the pupe are suspended in the same manner as those of all
other Alucitids, z.e., by the two cremastral groups, one of which is
terminal, the other under the 8th abdominal segment. It is true the
real place under 8 is difficult to make out, but seems to be the same
in all. .

The plume pupa is remarkable for its slenderness, the great length
of the second and third pairs of legs, which are quite free from the
abdominal segments, and which stand out, when it throws back the
head and thoracic segments till the head is directed backwards, as it
does when disturbed. Its general characters are very constant through-
out the group, and are quite suc generis, so that there can be no doubt
as to an Agdistid or Alucitid pupa when one has once observed its
peculiarities. It is highly specialised, yet retains several of the most
definite characters of the more primitive form of ‘‘ the pupa-incompleta,”’
e.g., the § pupa has four (4-7) free abdominal segments, and the ?
three (4-6),+ yet it is so attached as to be incapable of progression,
being fixed by a cremaster that is developed on the 8th and 10th
abdominal segments, the only other pup so far described, attached in
this manner, being Hypercallia and Anchinia, which, however, are
obtect pup of comparatively high type, and in no way related to the
Alucitids. The Alucitid pupa has scarcely any capacity for lateral
movement, yet it can bend itself completely over, so that the head
points directly backwards. .

As to the actual structure of the pupa, it is to be noted that it has
a wide prothorax, no maxillary palpus, the antenne and maxille adhere
to the small frontal headpiece, separating from the other parts on
dehiscence, the eyecovers going with the dorsal headpiece. The pupa

* Chapman adds (loc. cit., p. 85): ‘‘In Hypercallia and Anchinia the method
of pupal suspension is precisely the same as in the Alucitids (Pterophorids), and, in
these, the anal hooks are supplemented by some on the ventral aspect of the 8th
abdominal segment in like manner. There can be little doubt that their use is the
same as in the Pterophorids, both to secure safety at the time of moult and stiffness
in the pupal position afterwards. Are these instances of the separate origin of
complex apparatus and functions, in unrelated species, or is there any possible rela-
tionship? The pupe are certainly otherwise so very different that such relationship
must be distant.”’

+ Chapman observes that the number of free segments of the pupa, being
four in the ¢ and three in the ?, agrees with that in the Tortrices. This, how-
ever, is not to be considered as evidence of near relationship, but only as implying
that both have reached the same stage of pupal evolution, still it leaves it quite
possible that such relationship does exist.

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. 109

possesses a very special and elaborate set of terminal hooks, supple-
mented by a separate little group on the 8th abdominal segment, by
means of which it fixes itself to a httle pad of silk, and has thus
acquired a habit which no other generalised pupa presents, v7z., it
attaches itself by this cremaster and has no power of progression,
although it may be noted that the peculiar cremaster of the Alucitids,
consisting of an anal and a forward portion, is paralleled in Hlachista
and Yponomeuta, although it does not seem to indicate an alhance,
whilst Hypercallia and Anchinia have the same habit of pupal attach-
ment.

There is great variety in the surface of the pupa, some pupe
being quite simple and smooth, with a plain and delicate pupal skin,
e.y., Adkinia zophodactylus, others have various elaborate hooks,
processes, and recurved spines, e.y., Marasmarcha lunaedactyla (phaeo-
dactyla) and Amblyptilia cosmodactyla (acanthodactyla), whilst yet
others have a most confusing panoply of hairs, eg., Wheeleria mega-
dactyla (spilodactyla). On the whole, the first two forms appear to
belong to the Platyptiliine, the last to the Alucitine, side of the stirps.
Apart from the thorough-going micro characters of the Alucitid pupa,
it is separated not only from Orneodes, but also from Chrysocorys, by
the extreme reduction of the dorsal headpiece. So reduced is this that
its presence would be doubted in some species, but that, as stated
above, it carries with it the eyecovers, as in typical micro dehiscence
(Chapman).

The pupa, in other ways, affords many characters that are most
unusual in lepidopterous superfamilies, although here and there
paralleled, perhaps, in groups with which the Alucitids can have no
really near relationship. Some of the most important of these points
are: (1) The remarkable manner in which the larval tubercles are
carried over into the pupal stage. In this particular the tendency is
even greater than that exhibited in certain Lymantriid moths. (2)
The carrying over of the peculiar raised larval spiracle to the pupal
stage; sufficient variation, occurs in this to make it possibly of
classificatory value. (8) The constancy with which certain trans-
verse striations or corrugations are developed, more particularly on the
dorsum of the larger abdominal segments. These also are subject to
considerable modification, and are undoubtedly of classificatory value.
(4) The mode of attachment of the pupa by the anal segment,
supported by special development of the 8th abdominal segment. (5)
The relations existing between the simple form of the larval and pupal
tubercles and the larval habit of feeding within the foodplant, whilst
connected with this are the cocoon-forming habits of Hucnemtidophorus
rhododactyla, Platyptilia gonodactyla, Adaina microdactyla, etc. (6)
The presence or absence of hair-frmges on the wing-nervures and
antenna-cases of the pupa. (7) The occurrence of secondary hairs
(other than the primary tubercular hairs) on certain pupal areas, the
corresponding areas of the larva not possessing hairs. These may not
be true hairs, but dermal developments related to the hornlike processes
developed in some of the pup from the general skin surface. (8) The
development of dorsal and lateral ridges, either by the structural
development of the dermis, or by the spreading of the hairs into a fan
lying in a single plane. The classificatory value of these may be
great; the lateral ridges are apparently more stable than the dorsal,

110 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

and possibly of greater value. It is remarkable that those of Porrittia
galactodactyla with, and Alucita pentadactyla without, these, would be
sufficient, apart from other characters, to put them into different
sections, although they have so long been included in the same
genus. One surmises that pupal colour is of little classificatory value,
and is more or less the result of response to environment, as most of
the better-known species show a considerable range of variation. Hven
the spring larve of Platyptilia yonodactyla, which can be looked upon
as internal-feeders, produce pups which exhibit a wide difference in
the intensity of the colour and markings, as may be seen by reference
to our detailed description of the same.

The Alucitid pupe then fall roughly into two groups, the“ smooth” and
‘‘hairy,” the former being essentially characteristic of the Platyptiliine
group, the latter of the Alucitine. The only marked exception is that
Capperia heterodactyla (teucrit), towards the top of the former group, has a
pupa that is so far specialised in the matter of hairs as not to be unlike
that of Alucita pentadactyla, one of the most specialised of the latter.
The characters derived from the other stages lead one to assume that
this must be due to parallel development rather than any really close
relationship. It must not be overlooked that C. heterodactyla is quite
external in its larval and pupal habits.*

The Stenoptiliid pupa, as represented by Adkinia zophodactylus, is
an extremely filmy delicate pupa, with the tubercles i-vii arranged in
somewhat generalised form, each bearing a single minute clubbed
baton-like hair. This pupa varies much in colour from green to deep
red, as well as in the way in which these tints are combined, probably
related to the position of the pupa on the stem or amongst the flowers
of its foodplant. It is almost invariably inverted. It shows clearly
the double dorsal flange (from prothorax to ii of 3rd abdominal) which
is so marked in Platyptilia, and wanting or only to be found by some
constructive looking for in most “hairy”? pupe.

In many respects Marasmarcha is closely allied to the Stenoptiliids,
but in its pupa it is exceedingly remarkable, a highly-specialised dorsal
ridge being present, and showing almost the same characters as in Am-
blyptilia ; the ordinary tubercles are black and single-haired; the
trapezoidals are well-developed on great halbert-shaped spines,
a longitudinal ridge running down them to the 3rd abdominal; the
spines are part of this ridge, and the tubercles are on the spines, but
are not the spines. It would appear on pupal grounds that a close
alliance exists between Marasmarcha and Amblyptilia. In the pupe of
both British species of Amblyptilia there is a highly-developed double
dorsal ridge, lofty on the mesothorax, and passing down and culminating
in a great hooked process (that carries the dorsal tubercles) on the
3rd abdominal segment, the hook being more marked in a forward
direction in A. cosmodactyla (acanthodactyla) than in A. punctidactyla.

In spite of the exceptional hairiness of the pupa of Capperia hetero-
dactyla (teucri), it affords strong evidence that the Oxyptilids are not
far removed from the group just considered, the pupa presenting a

* The distribution of pupal hairs and the development of the tubercular struc-
tures, considered alone, give some curious results. They tend to associate Alucita
pentadactyla, Emmelina monodactyla, Wheeleria megadactyla (spilodactyla), etc.,
with Capperia heterodactyla; whilst Leioptilus tephradactyla and Porrittia galac-
todactyla are very similar.

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. 111

strong longitudinal ridge as far as, but not beyond, the 3rd abdominal
segment, but it is continued by the dorsal tubercles (i and ii) on the
other segments, the hairs on the tubercles being arranged throughout
in a fan-shape in a vertical antero-posterior plane. The Oxyptilid pup
are more varied than those of any other group, or rather they include
or combine characters that seem distinctive elsewhere, even to the
extent of being characteristic as distinguishing Platyptiliine from
Alucitine pupe. The dorsal flanges (thorax to 3rd abdominal) are
usually well-marked; some species are absolutely without secondary
hairs, others have them on the wing-covers as markedly as in any
Alucitines ; several species have the dorsal tubercles raised as humps
or spines that are not very different from those of Amblyptilia (cosmo-
dactyla) and Marasmarcha (lunaedactyla). The pupa of Capperia (hetero-
dactyla) reminds one of such a pupa as Wheeleria megadactyla (spilo-
dactyla), whilst that of Buckleria (paludum) is not remotely different
from Hucnemidophorus (rhododactyla), yet, imaginally,. B. paludum
is furthest from H. rhododactyla, from which such species as Oxyptilus
didactyla are (imaginally) much less distant.

The pupa of Hucnemidophorus rhododactyla, shows the laterodorsal
ridge carrying the combined trapezoidal tubercles, each with two hairs,
one directed forwards and one backwards, whilst the setz of 111, iv-++-v
(double), vi and vii are also present. With the true Platyptilids
(sens. strict.) we find the smoothest pupe; in that of Platyptilia iso-
dactylus* the tubercular hairs are microscopic, but longer than in the
other species and are true pointed hairs, as also are the very minute
ones of F’redericina calodactyla (zetterstedtit). On that of Gillmeria palli-
dactyla (bertramt) they are equally small, but are baton-like as in Aydistis,
but, to the naked eye, it is as smooth as an Agdistid pupa; in that of
P. gonodactyla also, there are no sete except the minutest microscopic
ones. The pupa of Gillmeria pallidactyla is so smooth that care is
required to avoid concluding that the tubercular bristles are absent.
The pupa of Platyptilia isodactylus and P. yonodactyla are peculiar
in having no cremastral hooks on the 8th abdominal segment,
correlative, no doubt, with their cocoon-making habits. Gillmeria
pallidactyla (bertramt) and G. ochrodactyla have cremastral hooks on
the 8th segment. The forward portion of the cremaster in these pup
has the appearance of being on the 9th, and not on the 8th, segment,
and to arise, in fact, from the genital protuberance in that segment.
(We have not collated these with the pupz of which we observed the
pupal ecdysis.) F'redericina calodactyla (zetterstedtii) has also forward
cremastral hooks (Chapman).

On the other side, we have the Alucitine or ‘hairy’ pupe, of
which that of the ‘ meyadactyla” (spilodactyla) group is_ possibly
the least specialised. The pupa of Qidaematophorus lithodactyla is
characterised by the development of the hairs arising from tubercles
i and 11 into the form of a longitudinal fan-structure, set up vertically
on the dorsum, a second standing out horizontally and forming a
subspiracular fan-ridge by the development of the hairs on iy and y.
The pupa of Ovendenia septodactyla (lieniyianus) is almost of the same
type as that of O. lithodactyla; the two dorsal ridges, nearly the whole
length of the pupa, support vertical fans, also a similar lateral fan-

* The hairs of this pupa are much like those of the Agdistid pupe for size.

ae BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

ridge formed by the hairs along the wing-costa, and the fan-hairs of
iv and v are modified into a similar fan development. It is remarkable
that the pupa of Porrittia galactodactyla is of the same type as that
of Oidaematophorus lithodactyla, the only differences being that the dorsal
tubercles are more distinct, and the hairs arising therefrom not so
definitely in a vertical plane, and, therefore, form less distinctly the
fan pattern; the lateral (subspiracular, formed of iv and v) fan-ridge
is, however, equally well-developed with that of O. lithodactyla, the
wing-edge having also a strong row of hairs. The pupa of Wheeleria
megadactyla (spilodactyla) has no dorsal or lateral flanges, but there
are many secondary hairs, especially along the hind margin of the
segments, forming a ridge; tubercle 1 has two hairs (except on the
2nd and 8rd abdominal segments where it is large and carries several
strong hairs) ; i is single-haired ; 111 has two large and other smaller
hairs, whilst iv-+-v forms one circular boss of hairs; hairs are also found
on the wings, antenne and legs. The pupa of Alucita pentadactyla
is a hairy one, but of an entirely different type from that of O. litho-
dactyla ; the tubercles have the hairs disposed in all directions and
not fanwise, and ili is an important tubercle. The wings and antenne
have several rows of hairs, and, except the wing-row of hairs, there is
no tendency to the formation of a lateral ridge or flange.

As to the evolution of the Alucitid pupa, Chapman notes (anted,
il., p. 96) that the Alucitids are very exceptional in their pupe. As
we have noted, they rarely have a cocoon from which to emerge, and
attach themselves by cremastral hooks to a silken pad that is paralleled
only in a family with obtect pupe, viz., that consisting of Hypercallia,
Anchinia, and their allies. They have preserved three free segments,
either because they have never had occasion to lose them, but more
probably because it enables them to make that remarkable somersault
movement backwards, a movement no doubt useful in repelling
or frightening enemies. They, as well as the Hypercallias, have
cremastral hooks on the 8th abdominal segment, as well as the usual
10th, giving an extended and solid hold of the silken pad, and affording
a special means of meeting the difficulties of the pupal moult. The
Agdistid pupe are typically Alucitid in the head sculpturing, in the
free segmentation, in the method of attachment, and in dehiscence
(the dorsal headpiece carrying the eyes, etc.) ; they differ, however, in
being smooth and very elongated. The Alucitid pupz, on the other
hand, appear always to be short, very blunt forward, and often to be
rough. ‘There is a strong tendency to a longitudinal subdorsal ridge
in the line of the trapezoidal tubercles, and this carries either bundles
of hairs, or great horns of pupal tissue, the former being more common
in those species with hairy larve, the disposition of the hairs on the
larve and pupe being much alike, the horned pupe being more
common in those species whose larve have simple tubercles. The
pupa is usually fully exposed and generally fixed with its head down-
wards, although, in some species, it is enclosed in a puparium, e¢.y.,
Platyptilia gonodactyla, whilst the pupe of both broods of P. isodactyla,
and the summer brood of Adaina microdactyla, lie free in the hollow made
at the end of the tunnels in which they have been feeding. Chapman
further adds (in litt.) that the important point that the pupal structure
brings out, as regards the position of the family, is that the allies of
the Alucitids are to be found among those with similar incomplete

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. 1138

pupal structures, that it has, for example, attained no higher stage of
pupal evolution than the Tortricids and other generalised groups with
pupz-incomplete.

The imaginal characters are exceedingly important. The divided
wings are supposed to form the most prominent character, but there
are many ‘plumes’ whose wings are not divided, and we suspect the
specialised legs to be as characteristic of the stirps as the wings.
The evolution of the wing has not yet been worked out, nor is the
material available for such a study, although Walsingham’s descrip-
tions and figures (Mnt. Mo. Mag., xxvii., pp. 216-8, 241-4, 259-62 ;
Novitates Lepidopterologicae, pl. xii.) of “‘New Genera of Agdistidae and
Pterophoridae”’ are highly suggestive that among the plumes with
undivided wings considerable variety may prevail, and, further, that
those with divided wings have developed independently in more than one
direction, and that the whole of the undivided-wing species at present
known, except that they satisfy the definition that ‘‘ the wings are not
divided,’ do not all belong to the Agdistids, as Walsingham here
suggests, eg., the genus Atomopterysw may be a primitive form of
Agdistid, but one feels that Ochyrotica and Steganodactyla are not in
any strict sense Agdistid. Walsingham practically recognises this (op.
cit., p. 217), for he notes that ‘‘ Ochyrotica, although it has only seven veins.
in the hindwings which partake somewhat of the form of those of
Aydistis, differs widely from it in the form of the palpi, in the posses-
sion of bifid scales with which the head is tufted, and in the distinctly
spurred and tufted hindlegs, a character found in Hucnemidophorus,
Cosmoclostis, and Oxyptilus,” and adds that he ‘‘ cannot but regard it
as a connecting link between these genera and Aydistis, to which its
affinities are more nearly inclined.”’

It must be assumed that the “ divided’ has sprung from the ‘ un-
divided’ wing, and, if this be so, we presume that Walsingham’s
statement that “‘ Steyanodactyla (op. cit., p. 241) differs from Aygdistis and
Ochyrotica in the very distinctly excavate margins of the hindwings,
which, unless we are dealing with a separate and parallel line of
development, would appear to indicate a retention of some indication of
the lines of fissure represented in the true Pterophoridae,’’ will, in the
idea italicised, hardly be accepted, the excavate areas indicating
possible future lines of fissure, rather than the retention of indications
of actual lines of fissure.

So far as hinted above, the plumes with undivided wings are refer-
able to one of two types. (1) The Agdistid type, well illustrated by
Adactylus bennetii, and of which Atomopteryx, judging by its neuration
as figured by Walsingham (Nov. Lepidopterologicae, pl. xii., tig. 1), may
be a primitive form, although it is most risky to form a critical opinion
on the most accurate drawing.* The neuration of Atomopterye is, how-

* It is to be noted that, in 1863, Zeller described a genus Stenoptycha (Stett.
Ent. Zeitg., 1863, p. 154) for coelodactyla, from Venezuela, rightly treating the
genus as belonging to the ‘‘plume”’ stirps. Dyar has confused the Pyralid genus
Stenoptycha, Hein., with this, and wrongly refers Stenoptycha, Zell., to the Pyralid
stirps (List North Amer. Lepidoptera ,p. 430). In 1873, Zeller further described
(Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, xxiii., pp. 327-329) the genus Scoptonoma for two
Texan species integra and a closely-allied species, interrupta, which he also referred
to the plumes. Guencée had already described contortalis, from Texas, under
the name Lineodes, asa Pyralid. These three species Dyar unites in the same genus
(List Nth. Amer. Lep., pp. 394-395), and places the latter among the Pyralids.

114 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

ever, certainly very primitive. The essential character of the undivided
Agdistid wing is the naked fringeless space found on the forewings in
the position of the cleft occurring in the more normal members of the
group, and the presence of a wedge-shaped area much more sparsely
scaled than the rest of the wing, the area being formed by a line
drawn from the apex of the wing to the base of the median nervure,
and another from the base to the outer margin (at about one-half
between the apex and anal angle). (2) The Platyptiliid type as
illustrated by Ochyrotica and Steganodactyla.

On the other side, we have the genus Heptaloba (Ent. Mo. May.,
Xxi., p. 175), described for the Cingalese species aryyriodactyla, in
which the forewings are divided into two lobes to beyond the middle
of the wing, the anterior and posterior lobes being then subdivided,
the upper to half, the lower to more than half, its length, the fringes
of the topmost division of the upper lobe running to a point at the
apex, those of the three other divisions ending more abruptly. Wals-
ingham says that it appears to be allied to Amblyptilia, having the
first pair of spines on the hindlegs equal to each other in length as in
that genus. Deuterocopus, created (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 402) by Zeller,
for tenystroemt, a Javan species, has three lobes to the forewings, the
wines being described as ‘“ semitrifid, ¢.e., bifid with the lower lobe
bifid; the hindwings divided into three digits, the third shortened.”’

The wing evolution in the Palearctic plumes, is not too simple.*
The Stenoptilids have a cleft forewing, the general form and outline
of which is not unlike that of a divided Agdistid wing, the upper and
lower lobes having an apical and anal angle developed, and, in this
respect, it agrees with the Platyptilids (sens. lat.), in which, however,
the apical and anal angles are much more strongly developed, in
Gillmeria becoming almost falcate in the upper lobe at apex, and in
Amblyptilia, etc., having the anal angle of the lower lobe specially
prolonged downwards; so marked are these characters that one almost
suspects an independent development from a form represented by Stegano-
dactyla rather than Agdistis. The forewing of the Oxyptilids 1s cer-
tainly a Platyptiliid (sens. at.) derivative, specialised in the direction of the
first lobe becoming narrowed, somewhat curved at the tip and termi-
nating in a point, without a well-defined anal angle, whilst the excavate
hind lobe has the apex somewhat produced, and a prominent anal angle.
Trichoptilus and Buckleria appear to be extremes in this direction, the
lobes being very slender, diverging, and without the anal angle on either.

But Walsingham notes (Ent. Mo. Mag., xxvii., p. 216) a possible alliance of
Atomopteryx with these genera, stating that though ‘‘ this genus is undoubtedly
allied to Agdistis, it approaches Stenoptycha, Zell., and Scoptonoma, Zell., not only
in neuration, but also in the form of the palpi, which are less abrupt and rather
more developed than in Agdistis. In the forewingsthere is an elongate triangular
fold extending inwards from the apical margin, but much less transparent than in
Stenoptycha, this character, as well as the shape of the forewings and the structure of
the posterior legs, show that Atomopteryx may fairly be regarded as a connecting
link between Stenoptycha and Agdistis.’’ It is to be observed that Atomopteryx
(in Walsingham’s figure) has no naked fringeless space where the cleft of the
anterior wings normally occurs in the group, and which is found in the Agdistids
(sens. strict.).

* A parallel development in the Australian genus Cenoloba, now referred by
Walsingham to the Pyralidina, as an Oxychoreutid, led this careful worker to
describe the genus (Ent. Mo. Mag., xxi., p. 176) as an Alucitid, the forewings being
cleft into two lobes nearly to the middle, whilst the hindwings are widely cleft to a
little more than half their length, also into two lobes.

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. a

The outline of the forewings of the Oidematophorids and Leioptilids
does not appear, superficially, to be very unlike that of the Stenoptiliids.
Really, however, there are many marked and characteristic differences,
of which one may notice the tendency for the angular points to become
obsolete, the upper lobe linear, and the fringes to extend far round the
apices and the anal angles, and into the cleft, whilst, at the same time,
the cleft tends to become deeper and the lobe more feathery, this type
culminating in the beautiful and highly specialised wing of Alucita
pentadactyla. The forewing of Merrifieldia is of the same type as that
of Alucita, but is slightly modified so that the upper apex turns up
sickle-like. It is to be noted that the more generalised wing-shape on
this side —Hinmelina (monodactyla), etc.—folds into a tube when the
insect is at rest, very like that of Agdistis, and one suspects that the
rolling may have produced weak lines in the folds that may have
ygiven the first step towards division. The development of the
remarkable faleate apex in Uroloba (Nov. Lep., pl. xii., fig. 8), a genus
from Valparaiso, in which the short fissure is pushed up, as it were,
close under the apex of the wing, is quite unique in our experience ;
the genus is apparently allied to the Leioptilids.

The evolution of the hindwing is such that it tends to divide into
three plumules, the wing breaking up so that the apical (radial) and
cubital areas are separated by a fissure, and the cubital and anal by
another fissure, the latter being usually much more deeply cleft than the
former. The first fissure, therefore, is caused by the obsolescence of the
outer part of the median area (as in the forewing), the second by the
obsolescence of the comparatively bare folded portion just above the
anal area of the wing; the absence of nervures here may have
produced an easier line of cleavage than in the median area, and this is
evidently the first cleft formed. Of the known plumes with undivided
hindwings, those of the Agdistid and Atomopterygid species are ap-
parently on a distinct line of development, when compared with the
Ochyroticid and Steganodactylid species. In the former, the outer margin
is regularly concave, and the folds, marked by the future fissures, are well
defined, whilst the hindwings of the latter have two more or less
defined concave marginal hollows, suggesting already some progress
towards suppression of the wing-areas that finally become fissures. We
have already (antea) pointed out that the forewings, palpi, and structure
of the legs, indicate Agdistid and Platyptilid affinities respectively.
Even in Ochyrotica and Steyanodactyla, as illustrated by fasciata on
the one hand, and concwrsa and conneviva on the other, there is consider-
able difference (Walsingham, New Genera of Agdistidae and Pterophoridae,
1892, pl. xii., figs. 2, 3, 4), for the Steganodactylid species show much
more scalloping than the Ochyroticid. In both, however, the seven
nervures of the hindwings are separate. The deep scalloping is in the
correct position of the clefts, viz., between the median and eubital
areas and the cubital and anal.

Kxamination of the Stenoptilid hindwing shows, not only that
the plumules are dissimilar in form, but that the first and second
have both distinct apical points and anal angles, whilst the fissure
between them is very wide but not very deeply cleft; the two corres-
ponding feathers in the Platyptiliids are not dissimilar except that the
apex of the first plumule is considerably cut back on the costa, the
fissures are very similar in both groups and the neuration practically
identical ; the Oxyptilid wing, has, however, been much modified, the

116 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

plumules being much narrower, and the fissures rather more deeply ,

cut, the neuration, however, is of the same type except that the

modification of the wing has thrown the points at which some of the |

nervures reach the margin into rather different positions. In the

Trichoptilids, apparently, the most extreme modification on this branch —

occurs, the plumules being so slender as to be almost filiform. Side by

side with this development in the character of the hindwing plumules in ~
the Platyptiliids and Oxyptilids is the peculiar and characteristic appear- _

ance of the bunch or bunches of black scales on the third plumule.
They are restricted to this side of the phylum, and little is known. of
their character and function. They do not appear so low down as the
Stenoptiliuds, and they are lost again by the time they reach the most
specialised Trichoptilids, e.g., Buckleria (paludum). In the Oidemato-

phorids on the Alucitine side of the phylum, the first fissure of the hind- _
wings is more deeply cleft and the plumules more linear than in the ©
Stenoptilid and Platyptiliid genera, showing a less generalised form than ~

the latter, whilst in the Leioptilids they are still more lneated. In the
Alucitines (e.g., Alucita pentadactyla) the plumules are of the same linear
form, and the neuration is modified accordingly; the Alucitid branch
carries two nervures into the third plumule, the Platyptiliid branch only
one. Walsingham observes (Hint. Mo. May., xx1., pp. 175-176) that the

hindwings of Heptaloba (argyriodactyla), the forewings of which have —

already been noted (anted) as possessing four lobes, have the normal
three lobes,* the upper cleft extending very slightly beyond the middle,
the lower cleft reaching nearly to the base, the posterior lobe being
toothed with projecting tufts of scales on the inner margin.

One of the most important structural features of the Alucitid imago is

the frenulum. Weare indebted for our detailed knowledge of this organ

in the Alucitids to Griffiths, who has discovered that the whole of the
plumes divide up sharply into two sections, viz., (1) The ? with one
spina or ‘‘ the one-spina group,” (2) The ? with two spine or “the
double-spina group.” The former contains the Agdistids, Stenoptiliids,
Oxyptilids, Amblyptiliids and Platyptilids; the latter the Merrifieldids,
Oidematophorids, Leioptilids and Alucitids. On this point, Griffiths
writes (in litt.): ‘‘ The normal development of the frenulum in lepidoptera
consists of a spina, single in the g, but double, at least, in the 9,
many species having in the latter sex a number of small and weak
spine. In the Alucitids we find that, in numerous species, the ? has
a single spina, as in the g’, whilst in other species the spina is double.
It, therefore, becomes possible to divide these interesting insects into
two groups; those in which the spina of the @ is single, and those in
which it is double. The measurements of the spina, given below, have
been made with a micrometer ruled to hundredths and thousandths of
an inch, and those for the length have been made under a Zeiss A.A.
object glass, whilst those for diameter have been carefully made under

a Geiss C objective. It may be, however, that differences may occur’

both in length and thickness of the spina in individual specimens, there-
fore the comparison of these details might not in all cases be sustained
if a large number of examples were examined. Where the spina of the

* Walsingham also observes (op. cit.) that ‘‘ the first plumule of the hindwings
does not ‘become wider from the base to the tip,’ as asserted by Walker, and there
is more than one small squamous tuft on the posterior lobes of the hindwings.”

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL CHARAOTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. ily;

3S is not referred to below, it must be understood that there is nothing
abnormal or noteworthy in its development.”

SINGLE-SPINA GROUP.

Lenetu. | DIAMETER.
ADACTYLUS BENNETII: ue short but strong .. oy in. gk in.
ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA: ¢ spina slender, deeply grooved oy ato
ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS: ? spina very slightly shorter and
more slender than in bipunctiductyla .. sis 56 als aso
STENOPTILIA PTEKODACTYLA: ¢? spina longer but more
slender than in bipunctidactyla, deeply grooved and
sometimes slightly divided at the point. The grooving
of the spina seems to indicate that the single form has |
been more recently acquired than in some other species,
and this conclusion is ee by the occasional
division of the points... oe ay os | wae
MARASMARCHA LUNEDACTYLA; spina long and strong ais _ | zhs
OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA: ? spina similai in length to
heterodactyla but more slender .. on os ate 3s | ghy
OXYPTILUS ERICETORUM: ¢ spina shorter and more slender sy obs
OXYPTILUS PILOSELLH: @ spina very long and slender .. ay eevee!
OXYPTILUS DISTANS: ¢ spina shorter than in piloseilae but
similar in thickness ae aa ae ato
OXYPTILUS TRISTIS: @? spina longer and stouter than in
ericetorum .. “is 38 aa Ha re ae oe shy
OXYPTILUS DIDACTYLA: ¢ spina longer and stronger than |
in most species of the genus... 210 So a sk | gto
OXYPTILUS HIERACII: ¢ spinw both longer and stronger
than in distans.. ss : oe a A ote 7+
CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA: @ spina shorter and stronger
than in the above species of the genus; it is also
deeply grooved* .. we os ails
BUCKLERIA PALUDUM: ¢ spina very short and weak, deeply
erooved+ .. A ods ne Lo tiso
BUCKLERIA SICELIOTA : 2 spina ‘short and weak, but not fo)
much so as paludwm a : a ts ak sto
AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA (acanthodactyla) : ? spina still
shorter, but stronger than in rhododactyla .. ae ots | gy
AMBLYPTILTA PUNCTIDACTYLA: ¢ spina longer and thicker :
than in rhododactyla a nas ee as ia || ot ihe
EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA: ¢ spina shorter and ; | “
more slender, slightly grooved .. re me ~ ah vhs
GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA: ¢ spina both long and strong, | Po
securely locked between strong scales on the costal and
median nervures .. Hs ate ae ah ty she
GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA: @ spina Jong and strong, dark | i
miecolour ~.. oe “fe i ee aA ay cl is ths
PLATYPTILIA FARFARELLA: @ spina shorter and more | : .
slender than in other spezies of the genus se sf 3h sty
PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA: @ spina slightly longer and } ss
thicker than in pallidactyla (bertrami).. ais oral ty ty
PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLA: ¢ spina thick at base but | x
quickly tapering and becoming slender eae eel sy an
FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA: @ spina moderately long and : ‘
strong ve a we i“ iis sik pai | ay sts
FREDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA: @ spina shorter than in |
_many | other Species of the tribe .. aN os <i “ ie

* A @ specimen in my collection is remarkably abnormal, having on one
hindwing a single spina and on the other three more slender r spinae (Griffiths).

if In Buckleria paludum the & spina is very Lise grooved, the Sassy ulum a
mere bunch of scales upon the costal nervure. Length .4, diameter cro (Grifliths).

118 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

DouUBLE-SPINA GROUP.

LenectH. | DIAMETER.

MERRIFIELDIA TRIDACTYLA (tetradactyla): ¢ spinae short,
closely adherent to each other .. a He oe sis
WHEELERIA NIVEIDACTYLA (baliodactyla): ? spinae much
twisted, short, but much thicker than in tetradactyla ay
WHEELERIA MEGADACTYLA (spilodactyla): 2 spinae long
and white in colour, clearly separated from each other is
ALUCITA PENTADACTYLA: ¢ spinae long, nearly equal in
length and very closely adherent to each other se. 1
PSELNOPHORUS BRACHYDACTYLA: [3 has a well-developed | |
retinaculum.| ? spinae slender and of equal lengths ay |
PORRITTIA GALACTODACTYLA : 2 spinae shorter than mega-
dactyla, and much more slender oe | ss |
Om#MATOPHORUS LitHopactyLa: [ ¢ spina strongly: dev eloped |
and long, the retinaculum strong.| ¢ spinae long,
equal in length, this species has longer spine than any |
other British plume re $5 46 oy eae is
EMMELINA MONODACTYLA: [ ¢ spina fairly thick, and locking |
into a strong cluster of scales on the median nervure. |
? spinae strongly developed .. sh. |
LEIOPTILUS TEPHRADACTYLA: @ spinae much twisted, not |
so slender as in septodactyla ee oe: | sy
OVENDENIA SEPTODACTYLA (leinigianus) : ? spinae slender,
closely adhering eae | sr
HELLINSIA OSTEODACTYLA: 2 spiae of equal length, ‘shor ter
and more slender than those of tephradactyla os
ADAINA MICRODACTYLA: @ spinae slender and most closely |
adherent to each other, the two members being of equal |
length and impossible to separate under a low power. |
With C objective and application of neers on the | |
cover-glass they may be discriminated . | 3k
ADAINA SCARODACTYLA: [ ¢ spina deeply erooy ed, bright
brown in colour, retinaculum well-developed as two |
separate rings on costal nervure.| @? spinae bent in |
contour, but the points closely adherent, pressure of |
the cover-glass of slide was needed to separate them ; |
they are very slender, short, but of equal length .. | ois [ss

sin
| on|

|
OI
oy

a
ie
cx

o
Oe
[o)

ol
Ole
|

o|
forme
a

uI
tole
cal

| o|
ore bole
l=) |

cz
at

|
Ores
S|

This is a marvellous result, because it gives us a dichotomous
division of the superfamily agreeing with our Platyptiliinae and
Alucitinae, the Agdistids in this respect suggesting a branch of the
former.

Meyrick states (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1886, pp. 5-6) that
“The structure of the antenne is practically almost identical through-
out the family.”’ A suggestive note, however, by Chapman (Proc. Sth.
Lond. Ent. Soc., 1899, p. 15) tends to show that this is not altogether
so. He writes: ‘“‘ The Pterophorids, in a few cases, e.g., Alucita penta-
dactyla and Marasmarcha phacodactyla, have antennal hairs between the
scales dorsally, as in Plutellids, etc. In the majority of species examined,
however, the hairs are dwindled and out of sight, or absent, so that the
form is practically that of Obtecte. The presence of the lower forms,
however, adds to the improbability, already very great, that the Alucitids
arise from any Pyralid, or other, form with obtect antenne. The form
in A. pentadactylaisa very unlikely one to be reached by further evolution,
and is almost certainly ancestral from more generalised predecessors.”’

Meyrick has also stated (Zvans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1886, pp. 5-6)
that, in this superfamily, “the neuration presents the best characters
for generic definition.”” This would probably be true if the characters

GENERAL. BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS OF THE ALUCITIDES. £19

of neuration in the group were not so wholly dependent on the modifica-
tion of the wing-shape, but, as a matter of fact, Meyrick’s results, as tested
by other characters (especially those derived from the early stages), show
that the neuration taken alone (or not properly interpreted) may be a
most misleading character, as witness the union of two so divergent
species as microdactyla and lunaedactyla (phaeodactyla) in Marasmarcha.
As to the actual neuration of the Alucitids, Meyrick notes (Trans. Ent.
Soc. Lond., 1886, p. 8) that ‘it is necessary to examine the older and
more ancestral genera, in which the fission of the wings has not
proceeded far, to distinguish the Pyrald type of neuration,’* and
adds that ‘‘in the more advanced form is found a rapid degradation,
causing the obsolescence of most of the nervures, so:that the affinity of
these forms, if they stood alone, could not possibly be demonstrated.
The progressive obsolescence of the veins takes place as follows, all the
stages occurring in different genera: The fission of the wings,
occurring opposite the middle of the cell, causes 5 and 6 in both wings
to become very short, but these veins, with the transverse vein, though
becoming very indistinct and feeble, do not disappear, except in the
extreme type Cosmoclostis, where the fissure extends more than two-
thirds of the length of the wing. In the forewings, 2 and 8 then
become gradually coincident with 4, and 7,9, 10 and 11 with 8; in the
hindwings 8 becomes coincident with 4, and, in the extreme type, 2 also
coincides with 4 and 8 with 7. The neuration is thus finally reduced
to four simple independent veins in the forewings and three in the
hindwings,” ete.

The “long and slender legs are very characteristic, the spurs
being particularly noticeable. The fore tibie are provided with a
tibial epiphysis on the inside towards the lower end, while the
middle tibiz have a pair of spurs at the end, and the hind tibize
two pairs, one at the bottom, the other some distance up. The
scaling, however, is sometimes a very marked feature, and the scales are
sometimes collected into tufts around the bases of the spurs. The most
extreme modification in this direction, however, is that presented by
Crocydoscelus ferruyineum, Walsm. (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1897, pl. 1i.,
fig. 1), described (op. cit., p. 85) as having “the anterior pair with
a wide tuft at the end of the tibize; middle pair with a similar tuft;
posterior pair with three outspreading fan-like tufts, the first small,
near the base of the tibiw, the other two much larger, arising above
the base of the spurs; the inner spurs much longer than the outer,
shehtly clothed ; the outer spurs densely clothed.”’

As a summary of the chief characters and features of the Alucitid
imago, we quote Fernald’s excellent description (Pterophoridae of North
Ameri ica, pp. 9 et seq.):

They are small, slim insects, with long slender legs and long narrow fore-
wings, cut by a fissure extending in from the middle of the outer margin between
veins 4and 7, to from one-fourth to one-half of the length of the wing. The parts
on each side of the fissure are called lobes, the anterior one being called the first, and
the other the second, lobe. In some of the genera these lobes are narrow and
pointed, while in others they are well-developed and present two well-marked angles
on each, which are called the apex and anal angle. The normal number of veins
in the forewings is 12, but this number is reduced in many of the species. Vein 1
is feebly forked at the base, at least in some of the species, and the cross-vein and
veins 5 and 6 are very weak, often uray invisible; 5 and 6 at equal distances

* A criticism of this view is narlicned in the olewiie crane ( posted, p. 123).

120 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

from each other and from 4 and 7, extending to the fissure which ends between
them. Veins 8 and 9 are stalked, and 10 sometimes arises from the same stalk, but
is occasionally wanting. The hindwings have two fissures, the first extending in
from the outer margin between veins 4 and 7 to about the middle of the wing; the
second, between the inner margin veins and vein 2, extends to about the basal
fourth. These divisions are called feathers (or plumules), the anterior one being
called the first feather, the middle one the second feather, and the posterior one the
third feather. The first feather in some species is somewhat spoon-shaped, rounded
at the outer end, widest near the middle and narrower near the base. The costal vein
bends down near the middle of its course, approaching very near to the subcostal.
The costal vein ends in the costa when this feather tapers gradually to a point, and
vein 7 ends in the point. When this feather is broad at the outer end, and has two
angles corresponding with the apex and anal angle, the costal vein usually ends in the
apex and vein 7 in the anal angle. The frenulum is single in the ¢ and divided in
the ?. The second feather in some species is widest towards the outer end, which
is very oblique, but in others it is of the same form as the third feather. The
median vein runs into this feather, giving off vein 2, which ends in the hind
margin, vein 3 which ends in the anal angle of this feather, and vein 4 which ends
in the apex. In the narrow tapering forms, vein 4 is wanting, and 3 runs to the
end of the feather. The cross-vein, and also veins 5 and 6, are exceedingly fine,
and scarcely visible under the most favourable circumstances. The third feather
tapers gradually to the more or less blunt outer end, but, in some species, it
has a very obtuse and rounded angle on its hind margin, which represents the anal
angle of the wing. This feather has a strong vein running through the middle to
the end, which is undoubtedly vein 1b. In some species, a weak vein may be seen
above lying very near the edge of the feather, and in others a shorter vein below
running to the hind margin of the feather a little beyond the anal angle. This,
without doubt, is vein la, and, therefore, the three internal veins are represented
in the Pterophoridae, but all three do not occur in any one species. The fringes
are long and arranged along both sides of the feathers, giving them a strong resem-
blance to the feathers of a bird, thus making more complete organs of flight. In
some species there are clusters of dark spatulate scales in the hind fringe of the
third feather, and similar scales occur along the median vein on the underside of the
wing. The basal part of the median vein on the upperside of the hindwings is not
provided with a row of fine hairs, as in some families of moths. The head is of
medium size, with the front smooth and vertical in some species, but more or less
conical in others. The labial palpi are either porrect or curved upward and closely
scaled, or more or less bushy. The maxillary palpi are entirely wanting. The
proboscis is about as long as the head and thorax, and not clothed with scales at
the base. The eyes are nearly hemisphericai, naked, and without lashes or cilia.
The ocelli are absent. The scales of the head lie smooth over the surface, giving it
‘an even appearance; but in some species they forma more or less cone-shaped tuft,
extending forward from the front. The antenne are fine, filiform, and about two-
thirds as long as the costa of the forewings. The basal segment is much larger
than those beyond, and covered with scales, which sometimes form a pointed tuft
at the end. The remaining segments are finely ciliated, those in the males being
stronger than in the females. ‘The thorax is of medium size, and its covering of
scales smooth, without any indication of tufts or other characters. The tegule are
of medium length, without long scales, hairs, or other unusual characters. The
abdomen is long and slim, of nearly uniform size throughout in the ¢, but some-
what fusiform in the ?. The genitalia of the ¢ consist of a pair of long, compara-
tively thin and broad exserted claspers and a prominent uncus. The legs are long
and slim with cylindrical segments, except the femora which are somewhat
compressed. The coxe are about as long as the thorax, and stouter than the
remaining segments of the legs. The fore tibie have a tibial epiphysis on the inside
near the end, the middle tibiz have a pair of unequal spurs at the end, and a similar
pair at the outer third. The tarsi consist of five segments with a pair of claws at
the end. There are no spines on any of the segments of the legs, but they are
covered by scales that lie smooth and close to the surface. In some species, however,
the scales are raised, forming an enlarged ring around the middle and hindlegs at
the base of the spurs, and a similar ring occurs around the end of the fore tibie.
In one species (monodactylus) there is a small tuft of scales on the hind tibiae,
opposite and within the middle spurs. The ground colour of the Pterophoridae is
generally white, yellowish-white, or some shade of brown, occasionally without
darker markings, though the forewings most frequently have a dark triangular spot

THE PHYLOGENY OF THE ALUCITIDES. ~ Gal:

resting on the costa and extending down to a point just within the end of the fissure.
One or two light lines cross the lobes obliquely, and there is a dark spot on the cell
a little before the middle of the wing, and another on the fold still nearer the base
of the wing. The hindwings are of one uniform colour, and seldom have spots or
lines of other colours.

There are many interesting facts relating to the habits of the

Alucitids which might be noted here. In their hybernation they
appear to be, on the whole, very uniform in their habits, the greater
number hybernating as larve, and falling into three distinct groups:
(1) The Platyptiliids (sens. lat.), which appear mostly to hybernate in
the second stadium. (2) The Alucitids, which appear mostly to hybernate
in the fourth stadium. (8) The exceptional Leioptilids—Adaina (micro-
dactyla), Hellinsia (osteodactyla), and possibly one or two other allies—
which hybernate fully grown. The first group, ¢.e., those that hybernate
as very small larve, are, so far as 1s at present known, all in their
early larval stages, i.e., preceding hybernation, internal feeders, boring
as soon as hatched into the foodplant and forming a hybernaculum
within the stem when fullfed in the second instar, e.g., Stenoptilia ptero-
dactyla, etc. It would appear, however, that the Platyptiliines do not so
fully hybernate as some of their congeners—latyptilia isodactylus being
inclined to feed all the winter, in suitable weather, and P, gonodactyla mak-
ing a start in the very earliest days of spring, etc.—yet they appear to go
into winter-quarters in their second stadium. ‘The second group has
larvee that are external feeders, when young, and most of these appear
to pass the winter at about the fourth stadium ; the young larve appear
to eat furrows into the leaves without making an actual burrow, and
hybernate on these, in some instances, ¢.g., Porrittia galactodactyla,
when they have fallen to the ground, for, strangely enough, they
mostly feed on plants that die down in the winter. The third group
is exceptional, Adaina (microdactyla) hybernating as a fullfed larva in
the cavity that will become its puparium in spring ; Hellinsia (osteo-
dactyla),on the other hand, making a hybernaculum among the foodplant,
but apparently leaving this (without, however, domg any more feeding)
for pupation in the spring. One species, Oidaematophorus lithodactyla,
hybernates in the egg-stage, but the young larva is developed within
the egg very shortly after the latter is laid, and really the species
hybernates as a young larva within the eggshell. The embryonic
larva of this species is remarkable in having a highly spiculate skin-
surface (resembling those of other species in their second or third
instars), not that no other newly-hatched larva is spiculated, for those
of ddaina microdactyla, Merrifieldia tridactyla (tetradactyla), Adactylus
bennetii, etc., have some traces thereof, but in none of these is it so
developed, even in the second instar, as in the newly-hatched larva of
OQ, lithodactyla. ‘There appears to be no plume that hybernates as a
pupa, but two allied species on the Platyptiliine phylum (Amblyptilia
cosmodactyla and A. punctidactyla), and one on the Alucitine phylum
(H’mmelina monodactyla) hybernate as imagines. The peculiar resting-
habits of the imagines, e.v., the hanging Platyptiliid, the doubletinger-
post Emmelinid, ete., will be dealt with in our notes on the imaginal
habits of the various species.

DEES Poy LOGAN Y OR tn n ALUGLRI DES.

The position of the Alucitids and their phylogenetic relationships
are problems that are still unsolved. From the time of Linné, they

2, BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

have been connected with the Orneodids, a conclusion which Chapman
(Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1895, pp. 184 et seq.) was the first to challenge. ~
Jordan suggested (Hnt. Mo. Mag., vi., p. 152) their connection with
the Pyralids (sens. lat.), and Meyrick (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1886,
pp. 1 et seq.), Packard (American Naturalist, 1895, p. 563), Fernald (Péter.
North America, p. 12), Staudinger and Rebel (Catalogue, 3rd ed., pp.
70 et seq.), have followed this view, the first-named having done con-
siderable research work with the imagines in order to prove this
supposition; nor has the genus Chrysocorys, which has also been
treated by various authors as coming within the superfamily, any
apparent relationship with the Alucitids, and Chapman states that the
Alucitids present, as pup, no point of connection at all near to
Chrysocorys, Orneodes and Hpermenia, with which they have been at
one time or other associated. All these little groups Chapman finds
more or less closely allied, structurally, with the Pyraloids, but not
with the Alucitids, the only common point in structure being that the
Alucitid and Chrysocorydid pupe have three free segments in the 9
and four in the g, but as they show this, in common with many
divergent superfamilies having pupe-incomplete, the point is not of
much value. The Orneodid pupa agrees with those of the Pyraloids,
in that the 7th abdominal segment of the g pupa is fixed, but it offers
an important point of difference from the Pyraloid pupa in that
it has no trace of the maxillary palpus. It diverges, therefore, some-
what from the Pyraloid pupa, to which, however, it is much more
closely allied than to the Alucitids, with the pupe of which it agrees
in this particular. The Alucitid and EKpermeniid pupe agree in that
they are the only known pupe with the free 7th abdominal segment that
do not emerge as pupe from the cocoon. They differ, however, in the
fact that the Alucitid pupe have acquired the habit, which no other
sroup with pupe-incomplete has acquired, of attaching themselves by
a cremaster.

As to the want of connection between the Alucitid pup and that
of Chrysocorys, Chapman points out that the latter has a small
maxillary palpus, a very narrow prothorax, and a fairly large head-
piece (two Tineid characters), has the power of emerging from its
cocoon, whilst no Alucitid pupa (in spite of the great variety exhibited)
is at all like that of Chrysocorys, with its combination of hooked spines,
recurved hairs, and projecting spiracles. The larval characters of
Chrysocorys, too, are not suggestive of an Alucitid alliance, except by
the approach of tubercles 1 and 11, and iv and vy, so as to become almost
united on either side; this character, however, is by no means common
to all Alucitid larvee. The peculiar, specialised, upright, Chrysocorydid
egg is entirely different from the flat, smooth, generalised Alucitid egg,
and removes the two groups far from each other. On the other hand,
the egg of Adactylus bennetii 1s somewhat modified in the direction of
a greater amount of surface sculpture. The structure of egg, larva
and pupa, suggests strongly that the Alucitids are a very isolated
eroup, and Chapman points out that ‘‘it seems impossible to derive
them from the Adelid series at all, even if one starts as low down as
the Micropterygids (=Eriocraniids) to allow for the divergence.” So
far as the true Pyralids are concerned, the pup of the Alucitids are
exceedingly different. The former have a pupa that is true Macro in
dehiscence, that has the abdominal segments 5 and 6, and only these,

THE PHYLOGENY OF THE ALUCITIDES. is

free, with 7 fixed in both sexes, has a dorsal headpiece, and maxillary
palpi. The latter has a pupa that is a true Micro in dehiscence, has
abdominal segment 4 free, and 7 also in the g, the dorsal headpiece
is evanescent, and it has lost the maxillary palpi. Chapman concludes
_ from these facts that “it is impossible for one of these forms to be derived
from the other, and impossible for them to have a common ancestor
higher up in the series than the Tineids (sens. lat.), more probably the
ancestral form was much lower.’’ As to the want of relationship of
the Orneodids and Alucitids, Chapman says that the routes of their
pupal evolution ‘‘have obviously been divided for so long a period that
it is justifiable to describe them as in nowise related, less so, probably,
than any two families of Macros.”’ He summarises this (nt. Rec.,
vil., p. 270) by asserting that “between the Orneodids and Alucitids
there is no relationship. Thelatter has not followed the line towards
the Macros that has been taken by the Pyralides, but has struck out
an entirely separate line of its own, and still retains nearly all the
features of a Micro pupa. An interesting point, however, in connection
with the Orneodid pupa is, that the one Micro character which the
pupa of Orneodes has preserved and exaggerated, viz., the large cephalic
dorsal plate, happens, in Alucitid pups, to have taken precisely the
contrary direction. In the latter it hardly exists, and is difficult to
see, yet it does exist, and that so effectually, that, as in nearly all
Micros, it carries the eye-cover with it on dehiscence.”’

It is chiefly on the neurational characters, as outlined by Meyrick,
that the Alucitids have been attached to the Pyralids, but his own
doubts (infra) are very curious, and Chapman observes that the neuration
affords no stronger ground for associating them with the Pyralids
than with the Tortricids. In Pyralids the hindwings present three
inner nervures, in the Alucitids there are only two. The subcostal
nervure of the hindwing is, as in Tortricids, Pyralids, and various
other groups, the strong, front, nervure that, with the cubitus, supports
the wing. The median is present, but exceedingly weak, till beyond
the cell. The only point that seems really common to the Pyralids
and Alucitids, is the forking of 8 and 9 of the forewing. In the
Tortricids, and many other groups, the forking that occurs in this
part of the wing is that of 7 and 8. The Agdistids, among the plumes,
and some species among the Tortricids, show that, in the lower forms
of both Alucitids and Tortricids, there is no forking. Some apparent
relationship might be shown with the Gracilariids, which form, however,
in some respects, a higher group than the Alucitids, but, although the
points of similarity might suggest a far-distant common ancestry, the
idea is only brought forward as offering an alternative that is open to
fewer objections than that of the Pyralids.

Meyrick’s details on this point were published in 1886 (Zrans. Ent.
Soc. Lond., pp. 1 et seq.). He states the opinion that the Alucitids
(Pterophorids) constitute a family of the Pyralides, of similar value
with the Botydidae, and other ailied families, and that it might be
placed together with the Tineodidae and Ovwychirotidae, next the
Crambidae and Scopartidae.”” He further shows that Chrysocorys is an
Elachistid, and not to be included in the Pyralids (sens. lat.). He gives
the following characters as uniting the Pyralids with the Alucitids
(Pterophorids) :—

Forewings with normally 12 veins, la and 1b present, 1b almost always simple

124 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

at base, 5 belonging to system of lower median, 6 from middle of transverse vein,
independent, 7 belonging to system of upper median, 8 supra-apical, 8 and 9
stalked, 12 free. Hindwings with normally 8 veins, la, 1b and le present, 5
belonging to system of lower median, 6 belonging to system of upper median, 8 in
part closely approximated to 7, usually anastomosing with it beyond cell, posteriorly
divergent.

Omitting theabove characters shared by the Alucitids (Pterophorids)
with the Pyralids, the following is given as a definition of the Ptero-
phorids :—

No ocelli. No maxillary palpi. Abdominal uncus in ¢ well-developed. Fore-
wings with vein 7 separate or absent. Hindwings with vein 6 separate from 7, 8
free but closely approximated to 7 on cell, lower median not pectinated. Wings
usually fissured.

As bearing on the phylogeny of the group, Meyrick says (op. cit.,
p- 4): ‘* The development of the uncus shows that the Alucitids are
not derived from the Botydids, and the separation of vein 7 of the fore-
wings, that they are not derived from the Pyralds, whilst the absence
of any pectination of the lower median vein of the hindwings indicates
that there is probably no immediate connection with the Crambids or
Phycitids. From the other families they mostly differ by vein 8 of
the hindwings not anastomosing with 7, and it is, therefore, probable
that they do not originate from any known existing form, but from an
external type closely approaching the ancestral form of the Pyralidina,
and now apparently more nearly represented by the Tineodidae.”’ This
criticism would suggest that, even on neurational structure, the
alliance with the Pyralids, even in the eyes of its supporters, is not
very cogent.

Hampson’s suggested alliance (Ann. May. Nat. Hist., 6, xiv., p. 258)
with the Ageriids, Orneodids, and Tineids (sens. lat.), appears to be
based on a much too general character (apart from his want of defini-
tion as to what is meant by the Tinetdae). He diagnoses this rather
heterogeneous group thus:

Forewing witb vein lc absent.

Forewing with vein 5 from the middle of the discocellulars, the other veins
given off from the cell arising at nearly even distances on each side with it.

A close study of the early stages of the Alucitids, Ageriids,
Orneodids, and Tineids (even in the strictest sense), offers no sub-
stantiation of this grouping, on the contrary, all the details combine
to disprove the suggestion of any real connection between them.

Bodine points out (Trans. dim. Hnt. Soc., xxili., p. 35) that the
antenne of the Alucitids (Pterophorids) and Orneodids show a wide
difference in their structure, and adds: ‘‘ Those of the former family are
distinctly of the Pyralid type, while the latter are just as distinctly of
the Tineid type. I believe a further study of the characters of other
organs will prove the Orneodids to be more closely related to the Tineids
than to either the Pyralids or the Tortricids. The surface-markine
is Tineid in form, and the scape has the long and shghitly clavate
shape so common among the Tineids.”” The antenne of the Alucitids
differ from those of the Pyralids, etc., in having hairs among the
scales (see anted, p. 118).

If the imaginal characters are unsatisfactory in helping to
determine the phylogeny of the superfamily, the pupal characters
(already discussed anted, pp. 108 et seq.) are still more so, and, as we have
noted, the pupal structure is so peculiarly sui generis, that it appears to
be closely allied to no others, whilst its general structure, with four
free segments in the g , and 3 in the 9, is such that its allies must

THE PHYLOGENY OF THE ALUCITIDES. 125

be among those with incomplete pupe#, and shows it to be, in this
important factor, no higher than most of the superfamilies with pupe-
incomplete. Its specialisations—carrying hairs, cremastral structure,
etc.—have analogies in widely different superfamilies, where there can
be no question of relationship. That the superfamily Lithocolletides
is the only known group with pupe-incomplete, except the Alucitids,
and in some degree the Anthrocerids, in which the eye-collar is
difficult to detect in the pupa (Trans. Knt. Soc. Lond., 1893, p. 106)
does not appear to carry much weight as suggesting any alliance
between these superfamilies, but there seems to be a great many
analogies (if not homologies) between the Alucitids and Anthrocerids,
two groups united by Dyar, and coming within the hmits of Chap-
man’s ‘‘ Micros whose larve are external feeders.’”’ In these sub-
families there is a free mobility of the pups, except in the Alucitids,
which are fixed by a cremaster, and yet remain typical ‘‘ Micros”’ in
the freedom of the 7th abdominal segment in the g pupa, in their
dehiscence, ete.

The evidence to be gleaned from the larval structure is as unsatis-
factory from the phylogenetic standpoint as that of the pupal. The
position of the primary tubercles shows the superfamily to be
moderately low in development, whilst the wart specialisation suggests
that few superfamiles have undergone more modifications in this
stage. Chapman was the first to show (Trans. Mint. Soc. Lond., 1894,
pp. 835 et seq.) the analogies that existed between the families that were
external feeders in the larval stage, and he noticed certain similarities
which he considered important, without assuming real affinities, and he
drew attention to the parallelism that existed between the Alucitids and
the Anthrocerids, another group of the external-feedine lepidoptera
with a pupa-incompleta. As to the position of the tubercles, we find
that, in the Aedistids, iv is higher than v, whilst in all the rest of the.
superfamily the anterior v is always higher than the posterior tv, at
an angle one to the other of about 45° to the larval resting-place. In
this character the Alucitids agree with the Tortricids, and, strangely,
the Pyralids (teste Chapman) split into two great divisions on it, vz.,
the Crambid section (comprising the Pyraustids, Scopariids and
Crambids) which have iv the higher, and the Pyralid (comprising the
Pyralids and Phycitids) which have v higher as in the Alucitids
and Tortricids. The rest of the primary tubercles are in the usual
position for the more generalised groups, and one suspects that, on
larval characters, there is little that can be determined of their
immediate relatives outside the superfamily. We have already given
(antea, vol. 1., pp. 116-117) Dyar’s larval tabulation, by means of
which the Alucitides fall within the limits of his Anthrocerina, and
our own critical remarks on this follow, and there is no need to repeat
the tabulations which we have there given. Suffice it to say that the
evidence appears to us as sound now, in the face of our later studies,
as it was at the time that these were published; neither are we in a
position to seriously question the grouping, and think it as satisfactory
as any phylogeny yet suggested. The evidence offered, so far as
the phylogeny of the plumes is concerned, is distinctly negative rather
than positive. We are in a position rather to prove that they cannot
possibly be allied with certain groups which have been suggested as
relatives, than to prove with what they are alhed, and, in conelusion,
can merely draw attention to the details already stated. We have already

126 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

(antea, vol. 1., pp. 106-7) criticised Packard’s suggestion (as set forth
in an elaborate table, American Naturalist, 1895, p. 803) as to the
derivation of the Pyralids from the Alucitids and the Alucitids from
the Orneodids, a result which Chapman has shown to be pupally
ee (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1896, pp. 129 et seq.; Ent. Record,

, pp. 268 et seq.). Chapman makes (op cit., p. 145) the Epermeniids
ee Orneodids typical members of the Pyralo- Eriocraniid stirps,
whilst he excludes the Alucitids entirely from this series, and adds
(see anted, 1., p. 110) that there is much in the structural characters of
the larve that leads one to acquiesce in the claim made by Dyar for
an alliance between the Alucitids and the Anthrocerids. The smooth
Alucitid egg, he says, also supports very strongly the suggested alliance
with the Anthrocerids. The development of the Alucitid cremaster,
he considers, marks the Alucitids as one of the highest of the super-
families in the Jncompletae, and the reduction of the eyecollar (which
is remarkably well-developed in the lowest superfamilies of the
Sphingo-Micropterygid stirps) in the Alucitid and, to a less extent, in
the Anthrocerid pupa, is another character that places them moderately
high in the stirps. Our final reasons for placing the superfamily in
this stirps are not perhaps altogether satisfactory, but, so far as they
20, are infinitely superior to the off-hand opinion given by various
lepidopterists without any facts relating to the structure of the insects
under discussion to support them, that the Alucitids are related to the
Pyralids, which, indeed, the structure of the superfamilies in all their
stages suggests they are not, and, in finally placing them here, we
will again quote Chapman, who states (Trans. Hint. Soc. Lond.,
1896, pp. 186-187): “ Dyar places the Alucitids with the Anthrocerids
and Cochlidids, and, both in structure and habits, the larva falls
into that division as readily as into any other, at any rate it is
almost certainly not a member of the Adelid, i.e., the Pyralo-
Eriocraniid series. Further, there are great differences in the pupe
of Alucitids and Pyralids, the latter having a pupa that is a true
Macro in dehiscence, the 4th and 7th abdominal segments fixed
in both sexes, and possessing no Micro characters except a dorsal
headpiece (a character that goes very high up), maxillary palpi, and,
in some families, appendages that project beyond the 4th abdominal
segment. The Alucitid pupa, on the other hand, is a true Micro in
dehiscence, has the 4th abdominal segment free in both sexes and the
7th also in the g, the dorsal headpiece is evanescent, and it has lost
the maxillary palpi.” As Chapman concludes that “it is impossible
for one of these forms to be derived from the other,’ we consider
ourselves more than justified in deriving the Alucitids from a low point
on the Sphingo-Micropterygid stirps.

Within the group itself the evolution is not too certain. There can
be little doubt that the Agdistides are of equal value to all the rest of
the plumes (Alucitides) so far as we know them from the Palearctic
area. It is characterised by a large egg with specially elaborated
structure at the micropylar end; by larve that do not specialise in the
direction of the hairs of the tubercles, but in the development of fleshy
tubercles.associated as bases with the tubercles. The pupa is especially
long, smooth and slender, and throws off almost all tendency to the
humps that affect the larve. The remaining plumes, the Alucitides,
divide more or less distinctly into two divisions, marked by definite

AGDISTIDES. 1947;

characters in all their stages. These we have called the Platyptiliidae
and Alucitidae, and they may be roughly separated on the following
characters :

1. Puaryprinip®.—Egg: More cylindrical. Larva: Shorter, thicker, more
cylindrical; thoracic plate simple-haired; tubercles more simple and generalised ;
i and ii more or less separated; iv and v comparatively simple on common plate ;
supernumerary tubercles behind spiracles absent or illdeveloped; scattered secon-
dary skinhairs abundant. Pupa: Smooth; tubercles usually points with simple
sete. Imago :Forewings with apical and hind angle to each lobe; hindwings with
the first cleft not deeply cut; ¢ with single spina to frenulum. In hindwing the
anal nervure only into third plumule.

2. Auuctiripm.—Kgg: Flatter, more oval. Larva: Longer, flatter; thoracic
plate abundantly haired, extra central tubercle at back; tubercles forming compli-
cated warts; iand ii tending to approximate or fuse ; ivand v, awarton common base;
supernumerary tubercles behind spiracles usually present ; scattered secondary skin-
hairs few or absent. Pupa: Hairy; tubercles carried over as warts. Imago: Fore-
wings with apical and hind angles of lobes obsolete or approaching obsolescence ;
hindwings with first cleft deeply cut; ¢? with double spina to frenulum. In hind-
wing another nervure as well as anal nervure into third plumule.

The larve of the first group are distinguished by the great tendency
of the tubercular armature to remain simple, and for the development
of abundant secondary hairs; whilst, in the second group, the
tubercles tend to form complicated warts, and secondary skin-hairs are
very rare or altogether absent. These qualifications are subject to
certain modifications due to habit, e.y., the external-feeding Oxyptilid
larvee (Capperia heterodactyla, etc.) on the Platyptiliid branch have well-
developed warts, whilst the internal-feeding Leoptilines on the Alucitid
branch (Adaina microdactyla, Hellinsia osteodactylus, etc.), are without
them; Chapman, however, asserts the structure of the prothoracic
armature as a critical larval distinction between the two groups. In
the pupal stage the distinction between the two groups is even more
pronounced. The Platyptilids have comparatively smooth pupe,
although the peculiar skin-processes of Marasmarcha and Amblyptilia,
and the almost definite armature of certain Oxyptilids, may appear to
offer some exception, whilst the Alucitids are hairy and carry over, to a
great extent, the complicated larval armature to the pupal stage; the
latter possess, in addition, rows of hairs alone some of the nervures
of the wings, these are entirely wanting in the Platyptiliids. The
characters presented by the frenulum and the anal nervure of the hind-
wing appear also to be quite conclusive in separating the imagines of
the species belonging to the two groups.

Superfamily [Va: AGDISTIDES.
Family: Acpistipe.

The Agdistids appear to separate from the remainder of the plumes
as a group equal to the rest. This Agdistid section is characterised by
(1) A large egg with specially elaborated structure at the micropylar
end. (2) Larve that specialise by the formation of fleshy pro-
tuberances on the tubercular bases, the number of segments on which
these are developed varying greatly in the different species. (3) An
especially long, slender, and smooth pupa, that throws off nearly all
the tendency to humps that so curiously affects the larva. —[ ddactylus
tamaricis and A. bennetii often show some remains of the larval humps.

This separation is particularly warranted by the larval structure, not
only by the development of the tubercular protuberances already noted,

128 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

but also by the structure exhibited by the thoracic tubercles i and ii (which
are nearly transversely arranged in both sections, and often, apparently,
absolutely so in Adactylus bennetii and Gillmeria pallidactyla). These,
usually in the Alucitids (sens. lat.), are placed slightly trapezoidally ;
in the Agdistids, however, they are not only very small, but are equally
spaced, 7.e., 1 and i, i and ii, and ii and iii are about the same distance
apart, whilst in the Alucitids i andi are widely apart, i and ii are close
together (and usually conjoined), 11 and ii widely apart, and so on,
that is, whilst in the Agdistids the tubercles are individually and
separately placed, in Alucitids they occur on each side as four pairs
(omitting special notice of the accessory tubercles).

Hubner, in 1825 (anted, p. 78), made the Agdistids equal in value
to the rest of the plumes (rightly excluding the Orneodids) calling
them Integrae and the rest of the Alucitids Tvifidae. He also gave
the tribal name Agdistes (the oldest plural nate) to the group from
which we have taken our own superfamily name, and diagnosed them
(Verzeichniss, p. 428) as having—

The wings whole, moderately broad and long, the legs delicate, the abdomen
long; both the wings lance-shaped, scarcely obtuse, shaded with grey—dgdistis
(adactyla).

Careful examination of the various stages leads one to assume that
the Agdistids may come nearer to the Platyptiliid than to the Alucitid
(sens. rest.) branch of the Alucitides. It is among the Platyptiliimes one
finds other plumes with ‘‘undivided wings’; these also have a
specialised frenulum of similar structure; there is also rather more
alliance in the general larval and pupal characters, and the egg is of
the more cylindrical form.

It is almost impossible, in the present state of our knowledge, to
differentiate the various characters on which the superfamily should
be subdivided, for, at present, we have little detailed knowledge of the
various species in their early stages, and practically no comparative
studies have been made of them except those noted (infra) of the larve
and imagines. Thesuperficial resemblance of the imagines has led authors
up to the present time to place almost all the Palearctic Agdistids into
one genus, but the larval characters suggest that there is considerable
subdivision possible within the family. These characters have been
worked out on the larvee of certain species at considerable length by
Chapman, who summarises his facts as follows:

I. All hairs clubbed.
1. Tubercles iv and v level.—ApactyLin1.
A. Dorsal humps only on the prothorax and 9th abdominal segment
—Adactylus bennetit, A, staticis,* larva from Harn er Salahin
(Walsm. coll.).
B. ene processes on thorax—larva from Chiclana (Walsm.
COLl.).
2. Tubercles iv and v moved backwards and iv raised—AgpIsTIDI.
A. Curious buttons on abdominal trapezoidals—Hrnestia lerensis.
B. Tubercles i and ii on large conical or other processes.

a. On all abdominal segments — Agdistis adactyla, A.
frankeniae, A. heydenit.

* Chapman notes that Adactylus bennetti and A. staticis, which have been con-
sidered by some authors to be geographical races of the same species, exhibit
considerable difference in their larval structure.

AGDISTIDES. 129

b. On certain segments; an azygos tubercle on prothorax—
Herbertia tamaricis.
II. Hairs setiform, very long.
1. Tubercle iv level with spiracle}+—? satanas.

In other respects Adactylus bennett and Herbertia tamaricis
are peculiarly specialised, ¢.y., the larvae of these species have the
caudal horn single; those of all other species examined have it
double; also, H. tamaricis has a central horn on the prothorax, a
development found in the larva of no other species. Chapman,
who made a special study of the Agdistid larve at Cannes in 1897,
and has since made a critical examination of those in the Walsing-
ham collection, has given us considerable detailed information.
He observes that the larva of Agdistis heydenit is very warty, and
shows the nature of the tubercular protuberances. In this species, on
the meso- and metathorax are two protuberances (as in H. tamaricis),
which each carry two hairs, with two smaller haired processes (? ii
and iv) in line below them to spiracular level. The two hairs on the
large tubercles are situated one before the other, pointed backwards,
knobbed, and placed on transparent globes; the abdominal segments
have regular trapezoidal tubercles (i and 11) with hairs directed back-
wards, on opaline globes (which contrast with the terra-cotta colour of
larva). On the 8th and 9th abdominals, tubercles 11 are approximated
and form tall horns, which are quite distinct and separate, the larva
thus having four horns. In A. tamaricis, the front horns (double)
remain on meso- but are lost on metathorax; 1 and 11 are small on the
abdominal segments, and approximated except on 2 and 5, where they
form peculiar processes like those seen on some Pyralid pupe, e.y.,
Botys ruralis (verticalis); on the 8th abdominal, i and i1 are more
pronounced, forming four black tubercles, whilst, on the 9th, they form
a horn constricted at about half its leneth, after a swelling which
represents two tubercles, and has a hair ait each side, the horn has a
second pair of hairs at its tip. Hach of the two tall mesothoracic
horns carries three tukercles, slight elevations with whitish tips, viz.,
a higher anterior, a posterior, and a lateral one. On the abdominal
segments, i111 (immediately above spiracle), iv (a good way behind and
rather below spiracle), and v (much below spiracle) each forms a small
white point (?short hair). The anal segment has eight longish bristles.
In the larva of Adactylus staticis the caudal horn, like the prothoracie,
is double, the larva being otherwise free from warts, protuberances,
etc. The spiracles of H. tamaricis are large and prominent, especially the
prothoracic and 8th abdominal, which are set on small yellow knobs.

The detailed resemblance exhibited by the Agdistid larve to their
foodplant for protective purposes is very striking. In the young larva
of Herbertia tamaricis, the 2nd and 5th abdominal segments are brown,
and the mesothorax partly so, the rest green with a brown dorsal mark,
and so mimicking the tamarisk, as do a bug and a Curculio—with green
and pink. In H. tamaricis the brown larva has usually traces of a
reddish or orange spiracular band, and, occasionally, a fullfed larva
retains the green coloration, reminding one very much, both in colour
and protuberances, of the larva of Geometra papilionaria when it
assumes its spring clothing. a has a yellowish- white subspiracular

ii Bounded on a single fee in Tene W siunenany s collection, possibly
satanas, but just possibly not even an Agdistid (Chapman),

1380 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

band, only marked at the incisions, except on the forward and hinder
segments, and interrupted by rich brown patches, especially on the meso-
and metathorax, and more or less to 5th abdominal. The 2nd and 5th
abdominals are rich red-brown, and the humps on the mesothorax and
8th and 9th abdominals are brown, the front humps of the 2nd and 5th
abdominals nearly black; there is a darker dorsal line, edged with paler,
almost yellow. The general effect, however, is of a greenish larva
with reddish markings, which imitates closely the colouring of the green
twigs of Tamaris, just as the brown form does the older twigs on which
the fullgrown larve usually rest. This imitation of the foodplant is
equally “strong in the other two species observed, e.g., the larva of
Adactylus staticis is brown, of just the colour of the stems of Statice
cordata, which are brown, with a somewhat smooth shining surface and
without much irregularity. In A. staticis the protuberances are
reduced to the small double tail horn (on 9th abdominal). The surface
has numerous little points that give a shining aspect to it, and, in effect,
the stem and larva are extremely alike. The larva of Aydistis heydenti
again imitates the general tone of the Atriplex halimus to an extra-
ordinary degree, a whity-buff colour with the peculiar glaucous
colouring of the plant, enhanced by the minute opaline or transparent
balls at the bases of the hairs, so that, seated on a not too old stem or
petiole, it is hardly visible. A large Noctuid larva imitates the same
glaucous tone by colouring that seems very odd in a Noctuid larva. I
suppose this to be Mamestra chenopodiphaga. The interest lies largely
in the same effect being so successfully attained by these two larve in
such different ways, the one with a tuberculated and bristly surface,
the other with a quite smooth skin. The ‘quite smooth skin”’ is
really very minutely tuberculated with pale spots on a greenish, and
later on a brownish, ground. The halfgrown larve are greenish-white,
like the foliage, the fullgrown larva has some brown tints, and no
doubt affects the twigs rather than leaves. Chapman has also described
in detail the Agdistid larve in the Walsingham collection, and given
us the following resumé thereof :—

1. ApAcTYLUS* BENNETII.—See posted in our detailed account of the species.

2, Larva From Ham Es Satautnf (taken on a Statice, apparently S. limoniwm).
—Intermediate between larve of bennetit and staticis. The front horns rather
smaller, and a vestige of the horn behind them can be traced. The horn on the
9th abdominal has a wide single base, and this carries two separate little horns.

3. ADACTYLUS sTATIcIs.—Differs very little from larva of A. bennetii, the chief
difference being that the caudal horn is divided, so that the two terminal hairs of
A. bennetii are in A. staticis each on a separate small horn, side by side and quite
distinct from each other, whilst the lateral hairs on the horn of d. bennetii are each
on a minute horn, in front of the chief one on its own side, the bases of these small
horns, however, being not quite distinct. The prothoracie horns are rather shorter
than those of A. bennetii, and have a minute horn behind each.

The following species exhibit greater developments of the fleshy horn-
like protuberances bearing the tubercles. Of these, however, some have
the horns confined in some degree to the thoracic sezments :—

* These three larve are very close, and it may be noted that the few larve of
A. bennetiiin the Walsingham collection show variation in the prothoracic horns, viz.,
(1) The two simple horns. (2) Traces of second horns behind these. (8) The four
horns on a definite ring-like ridge. This latter is a deviation from normal A. bennetii
greater than that shown in the prothoracic structure of A. staticis. [These variations
are also to be observed in Essex larvee.] (Chapman).

+ The spelling on this label is very doubtfnl. It is the larva noted antea,
p. 128 (Chapman).

AGDISTIDES. 131

1. Larva rrom Cuicnuana (feeding on Limoniastrum).—This possesses two great
mamuille on margin of prothoracic plate, a third smaller colourless one below (in
front of spiracle), each carrying a hair; in same row as these are other clubbed
hairs similar to those on mammille (probably primary, as secondary hairs are else-
where scarce or wanting) ; immediately above the spiracle is a small boss and hair,
and another larger one at base of leg, this has a constricted neck, reminding one of
the dorsal tubercles of Hrnestialerensis. The mesothoracic tubercle i is large, globular,
with neck, and has two hairs (one front, one back); ii is much the same, but
smaller, and with one hair; these (i and ii) are placed transversely across dorsum ;
below ii but quite in front is a still smaller boss (? iii), another tubercle (? iv)
without boss, between this and one at base of leg (vii) which is smaller than,
but resembles, that on prothorax. On metathorax the hairs are as in meso-
thorax, but on the flat surface. On the 9th abdominal are four hairs on reversed
trapezoidal bosses, whilst on the 10th are two comparatively long hairs (perhaps
0-llmm.) on distinct bosses at margin of anal plate. On the intermediate segments
iis a convex shield with hair, ii is a little further out and smaller, iii close above
spiracle. There are two subspiraculars at same level, widely apart, one (v) as far
in front as the other (iv) is behind spiracle ; a lower one (vi) is placed before those
(vii) at base of prolegs are reached. The secondary tubercles take the form of
white (? in living larva) circular or oval plates, rather numerous about spiracle, and
especially large and conspicuous on dorsum in front of i.

2. ERNESTIA LERENSIS.—In this larva, horns only occur on thoracic and 9th
abdominal segments, on the intermediate segments the tubercles are developed in
a remarkable way, really, no doubt, the same as the horns, except in size. The
prothorax has on either side two prominences at front margin of plate and one a
little further out, one larger one further back, and another outside this, just above
spiracle; each of them carries one clubbed hair. On the mesothorax, i consists of
two conjoined towers, one in front of the other, whilst ii, rather smaller, is further
out; each tower carries an Indian club-shaped hair, its sides are rough, and
studded with the same abundant secondary hairs that cover the whole surface in a
scattered way; lower, and near the front of segment, is another small boss (iii),
whilst a tubercle (iv) without boss is at front margin of segment lower down; vii,
with boss, is a little way above leg. On the metathorax, i is as on mesothorax, but
a little smaller, ii is further back instead of nearly outside i, iii is in middle of
segment and without boss (instead of at front margin and mounted); iv and vii are
as in mesothorax. On the 9th abdominal, the two horns are well apart, and, as it
were, on a transverse ridge. On the intermediate segments, i and ii are wide apart,
nearly at corners of square (i.e., only slightly trapezoidal), not very large, but of
peculiar construction, e.g., they have a narrow neck, then swell out wide and flat,
and on top of this a rough thickened structure, with a hollow on summit from
which the hair arises. (They vary a little, but the upper surface and margins are
always rough, with fine but irregular beading.) Tubercle iii has a small mammilla,
it is close above, and a little in front of, spiracle; iv is well below the spiracle and
somewhat behind ii; there is also one (vii) at base of proleg, but these (and
probably others) have very little base, and carry such small hairs that they cannot be
determined on some segments, and others are lost. The general surface has numerous
fine transparent secondary hairs, clubbed (and often serrated) like the primary sete,
and only differing in size.

3. AGDISTIS FRANKENI® (from Biskra).—[Appears at first sight very close to
Ernestia lerensis, but the general surface is smoother* ; closer examination, however,
makes it really much closer to Herbertia tamaricis.| The prothorax has a posterior pair
of very tall pillars, whilst in front there is, on each side, four eminences bordering the
anterior margin, each with hair, and another pillar just above spiracle ; between these
last is a hair without base; another marginal one at base of leg. On each side of the
mesothorax is a double pillar, a smaller pillar lower and forward, and two lateral tlat
tubercles, one at the middle of segment and the other at base of leg. On the
metathorax there is a smaller double pillar on each side, of which the front element
is the lower; a posterior shorter pillar further out, and laterally, three tubercles
without raised bases, the first median, the next poster or, and the third at base of leg.
On all the abdominal segments the dorsal tubercles are like those on the 2nd and 5th
of H. tamaricis, the anterior a short pillar slightly bent backwards, the posterior a

* The larva examined is much covered with some powdery substance, which
seems to be a sort of natural exudation of the larva, it is consequently difficult to
be sure of in some points of structure (Chapman).

132 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

longer and more slender one much bent forwards (forming an arrangement like the
double hooks through which ropes are run out from a ship); the others are small
and very difficult to see, but iii is very close above spiracle; iv is well behind the
spiracle and above v, which is only slightly forward of a position immediately
below spiracle.

4, AGDISTIS HEYDEN (from Cannes).—Remarkable from the fact that the
tubercles form short pillars and carry comparatively long hairs (0°5mm.) directed -
straight backwards from their bases; they are slightly curved, and end in a slight
knob or club.* On the prothorax, the hairs are erect, on four dorsal tubercles
placed somewhat trapezoidally, below the front one is another (with a baseless hair
between them), below the spiracle on front margin another, and between the
spiracle and posterior edge is yet another tubercle; these are all on tall swollen
bases. On the mesothorax, the dorsal tubercle on either side is formed by the
confluence of three, viz., a tall pillar with backward directed hair, and on the front
of the pillar, and again on the outside, a round protuberance, each carrying hairs ;
below this is a less prominent boss (iii) with a forward hair; and below this again
a pair almost level (with a forward and backward hair) ; again a similar pair, and
finally one at base of leg. The mesothoracic tubercles are the same, except that
the outside boss of great tubercle is fairly separate and the anterior one nearly so.
On the abdominal segments, the dorsal tubercles (i and ii) are well apart, trapezoid-
ally placed, each is a rounded boss almost a ball, with a long hair nearly parallel
with surface of larva and directed backwards; ili is rather behind and not very
close to spiracle; iv is higher than v and well behind spiracle, v but little in front
of it. The bent pillars of i and ii get smaller backwards, till, however, on the
8th abdominal, ii is on each side a great hump; on the 9th abdominal i is absent,
ii forms a considerable pillar on each side, and iii is well-pronounced; the 10th
abdominal segment has four smaller bosses along the posterior marg‘n of anal plate
(two on each side), really the centre of these is on the plate, and there is an ordinary-
looking hair on margin behind it.

5. HERBERTIA TAMARICIS.—In many respects, this is the most specialised larva of
those considered, the subspiracular tubercles in particular being of different pattern
from those already described, viz., iv (?) is high up and directly behind spiracle, v
below, but a little behind, spiracle. The prothorax carries four trapezoidally-placed,
humped, low and rounded tubercles; also a central one at posterior margin of
segment (with twin hair-base but no hair); three small tubercular bosses in line
with the front trapezoidals, one above and two below spiracle; another small one
above spiracle (apparently on a segmental element between those of dorsal
tubercles, but to which spiracle belongs). The mesothorax carries two large tall
pillars (apparently the twin pillars of E. lerensis, but further conjoined, so that only
their tops are distinct, and with a third tubercular boss on its outer posterior aspect,
so that the pillar represents three tubercles) ; below these on either side is another flat
tubercle, and lower two others at approximately similar levels; a small one at base
of leg. The metathorax has a dorsal tubercle with two hairs but no prominent
boss; below this is a small one, and two others lower, the posterior a little the
higher of the two. On the abdominal segments i and ii are distinct, but very close
together; iii is close above the spiracle. The 2nd and 5th abdominals have
the curious prominences curved over to each other and carrying iandii. On these
and the other abdominal segments the minute hairs have the same backward
direction that gives so marked a peculiarity to A. heydenii.

To complete our summary of these larve, we quote Hofmann’s
description of that of A. adactyla (Die deutsch. Pteroph., p. 29), made
from a living specimen at Potsdam :—

6. AGDISTIS ADACTYLA.—12mm. long. On the back of the 1st segment (prothorax)
are four cone-shaped elevations with a strong brown bristle at the apex; the 2nd
and 3rd segments have each two elevations with two bristles each, the hind one of
which is directed backwards. The elevations on the 2nd segment are far taller
than those of the 3rd. On each segment from the 4th to the 10th stand four bifid
laterally compressed tall warts (elevations), arranged in a quadrangle, the anterior
point carries a short bristle directed forwards, and the posterior point a long curved
bristle directed backwards. On the 11th and 12th segments the four warts have ~

* No other larve have such long hairs except A. satanas, where, however, they
have quite another character. As in d. frankeniae, the surface is covered with a
ereat deal of a similar powdery secretion (Chapman).

AGDISTIDES. 133

gathered close together and are no longer bifid, but cone-shaped ; the posterior pair
is much taller and stronger than the anterior. The anal flap (13th segment)
-bears four simple, strong, brown bristles. The flange is very strongly expressed,
and bears on each segment an elongate bipartite larger wart, one of its two bristles
is directed forwards and the other backwards. The remaining lateral warts are
very small and bear one bristle; on the belly no distinct warts are observable.
Ground colour grey-brown; the markings consist of an indistinct, thin, black,
sometimes obsolete, dorsal line, a spiracular line composed of detached oblique black
streaks, and a black undulating basal line. The flange is lighter than the ground
colour, almost whitish. Spiracles small, ringed with black, very difficult to see.
Head small, retractile, rough and bristly, grey-brown. Above each pair of the
thoracic feet, but below the flange, lies an elongate roll set with brown scales and
white clubbed hairs; underneath each are two small warts set obliquely. The
thoracic feet are grey-brown, the last joint is whitish with a black apex. Ventral
and anal claspers like the belly itself, somewhat lighter coloured than the upper-
side. The ventral claspers exhibit on the inner sole a double row of hooklets, of
which the outer are very long whilst the inner are very short. The larva is very
inactive and slow, and when touched assumes a peculiar condition of rigidity, when
the 2nd and 3rd segments are elevated in a characteristic manner (Stange, Stett.
Ent. Zeit., 1889, p. 318). It lives at the beginning of June on Artemisia cam-
pestris, much concealed.

The following species has remarkable developments of the sete, the
hairs reminding one much of those of Agdistis heydenii, but almost more
of such Alucitid larve as that of Porrittia galactodactyla, the long hairs
being directed backwards with a sweeping curve, and supplemented by
what appear to be secondary hairs, all of which are of the usual bristle-
like pattern and not of the clubbed form as in other Agdistids. This
does not, however, refer to the secondary hairs proper, with which the
skin generally and the tubercular pillars are crowded, and which also
carry a certain quantity of secretion; these hairs are colourless and,
though tapering, blunt-ended. It seems somewhat hopeless to describe
the larva in detail :—

7. AapisTis saTanas.*—The chief tubercular pillars are tall, carry a long hair,
0:8mm. to 0'9mm., black, curved and pointed; the surface of the pillar is covered
with a wealth of secondary hairs, usually longer than those of the body-surtface,
and some of them almost true hairs like the tubercular ones (this applies chiefly to
the dorsal tubercles). On the prothorax are two great cones (one on each side) in
front, and behind each of these, and a little further out, a rather larger one; along
the margin below the first are three smaller ones, and another one at base of leg;
there is also a small one above spiracle. On the mesothorax, the dorsal tubercle,
i, is very large and carries two hairs, one in front and one behind ; outside this is
a smaller cone (ii) with hair, then a single one again, then a pair level, again a
pair, and one at base of leg (the latter almost a pair by reason of a very strong
secondary hair some way behind it). ‘The metathorax is almost exactly the same.
On the Ist abdominal segment, i and ii have not such large bases, but i has the
true tubercular bristles upright and then sweeping backwards, and a strong hair
directed forwards like a brow-antler; ii is much the same, but the brow-antler is
stronger, and there is a similar hair behind supplemented by a slighter one ; iii is
quite simple, a good way above spiracle ; iv is some way behind spiracle and about
on a level with it, and has a very strong hair and a good brow-antler pointing
forwards; v is directly below spiracle, its primary hair is not so strong and there is
nearly as strong a secondary hair behind it; below iv is a strong cone with strong
hair, below thisagain isa tubercle and hairin middle of segment, and there is no other
till those on the proleg are reached. The remaining abdominal segments are the
same, the cones and hairs diminish a little backwards, but are still well-developed

* This larva was swept by Milliére, and what it is, is merely a matter of con-
jecture. That such masters in knowledge of these larve as Lord Walsingham and
Milliére suggest it may be satanas carries much weight. It appears to me to be
certainly a plume larva, and with great probability an Agdistid, but it differs so
much from all the others as to give room for some doubt. Whatever it is, it isa
most remarkable form (Chapman).

134 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

on the 9th abdominal; there is no accentuation on either the 8th or 9th. The
prolegs have large swollen hairs. [The remarkably high position behind spiracle
of iv, as in H. tamaricis, and less so in some others, makes it fairly certain that this
is an Agdistid.]

As we have already noted, the Agdistid pupa is long and slender, but
in its general features and mode of attachment is quite of the Alucitid
type. We note that the second and third legs project as one column quite
free beyond the wing attachment to the 3rd abdominal segment, the
column containing at its base laterally a point (really the apex) of the
wings, and extending to the end of the 6th abdominal segment. A
trace of the labial palpi is seen centrally between maxille, and there
is a space (possibly femoral) between the maxille and first leg.

Meyrick gives (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1890, p. 486) the following
diagnosis of the structural peculiarities of the Agdistid imago :—

Face with more or less developed horny prominence; ocelli distinct; tongue
developed. Antenne four-fifths. in ¢ filiform, shortly ciliated. Labial palpi
moderate, ascending, second joint with rough projecting scales beneath, terminal
joint short. Maxillary palpi obsolete. Tibiew simple, outer spurs one-half inner.
Forewings entire; vein 2 from near angle, 3 and 4 approximated or stalked, 5
widely remote from 4, from near middle of transverse vein, 7 from near 8, 8 and 9
stalked, 10 from near 8, or sometimes 8 separate, 9 and 10 stalked, or all three
separate. Hindwings entire, on lower margin of cell beneath with a pecten of dense
scales in disc, and inner margin roughened beneath with scales; vein 2 from
middle of cell, 3 and 4 approximated at base, 5 absent, 6 remote from 7, 8 shortly
approximated to 7, posteriorly divergent.

To this Hofmann adds (Die deutschen Pteroph., p. 27):—“<On
the forewings an unicolorous and thinly-scaled discal field may be
differentiated ; this commences broadly on the outer margin.and runs to
a pointed end at about two-thirds the length of the wing, while the costa
and inner margin are much more thickly scaled. The markings consist
of small dark points or little streaks in special situations, namely, 3-4
in the costal fringes and one each in the apex of the discal field, in
the middle of the lower margin, and in the upper, as well as in the
lower, angle of the discoidal cell. Hindwings without markings. On
the underside of the forewings the pale costa with the dark points is
visible; the apex of the forewing and of the hindwing as far as III,,
and the folding part of the hindwing, thickly scaled with black and
white, because these parts are exposed to the hght when the wings are
folded. Abdomen from the 3rd segment with two small black spots
in the median line on the hind margin of each segment. Legs without
markings.”

Meyrick appears to have recognised, on imaginal characters, that
there was room for considerable subdivision within the group, for he
remarks (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1890, p. 486) that the Agdistid
‘species are very similar superficially, but they include remarkable
variations in structure . . . The occasional separation of veins 8 and 9
of the forewings is only paralleled in this group in the Siculodidae . .
The differences in the frontal prominence, which are considerable, are
of value in specific distinction.”’* These differences he does not work
out, it would be interesting to know if they coincided with the larval
differences.

* Meyrick, having got so far as this, asserts that ‘‘ there is no necessity for
generic subdivision,’’ because he thinks the divergent forms ‘“ will eventually be
connected by transitional forms,’’ a very lame conclusion it appears to us.

ADAUTYLUS. 35

Hofmann gives the following specific tabulation of the three
German Agdistid species (Die deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 28-29):

1. Forewings blackish slate-grey, dusted with whitish on the inner margin and
sometimes also on the costa. The fringe on the outermost third of the costa white
with small black spots, which, however, never reach the apex of the wing.

(a) The white fringes of the costa with four small black spots, which represent
the ends of nervures of I, then II,, I1,, and Il,*—<A. adactyla, Hb.

(b) The white fringes of the costa with three black streak-like spots, repre-
senting the ends of nervares I, II,, and II,*—A. satanas, Mill.

2. Forewings bright brownish-grey finely dusted with brown at the base, on
the costa and the inner margin. Fringes on the outermost third of the costa
bright yellowish-grey, with four small black spots, divided at the apex of the wing
by a dark brown line—A. tamaricis, Zell.

Genus: Apactryius, Curtis.

Synonymy.—Genus: Adactylus, Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,’’ fo. 471 (1833); Wood,
“Ind. Hnt.,’ Ist ed., p. 234 (1839); Curt., ‘‘Gen. Brit. Lep.,’”’ pl. xv., fig. 193
(1858). Agdistis, Stphs., ‘‘Illus.,’’iv., p. 370 (1834); Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,”’ vi., p. 324
(1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 364 (1855); Staud., ‘‘Cat.,’’ 2nd ed.,
p. 341 (1871); South, ‘‘ Ent.,”’ xvi., p. 27 (1883) ; Leech, “Brit. Pyral.,’’ p. 50,
Preah one. 1 (1886): Puts, “Young Nats,” x., p. 163 (1889); “* Pter. Brit.,”7
p. 14 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,”’ etc., p. 441 (1895) ; Staud., ‘‘ Cat.,”’ 3rd ed.,
p- 77 (1901); Barr., ‘‘Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ pl. 431, figs. 1-1b (1903). Agdistes,
Stphs., ‘‘Illus.,”’ iv., app., p. 424 (1834); Westd., ‘‘Classfn.,’’ etc., iil., p. 115
(1840); Monerf., ‘‘ Ent.,’’ v., p. 321 (1871); Richdsn., ‘‘ Lep. Faun. Portld.,” p. 4
(1890); Barr., ‘‘Lep. Br. Isles,” ix., p. 341 (1904). Adactyla, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,”
770 (1841); Sta., ‘‘Man.,”’ ii., p. 440 (1859); Porritt, ‘‘ Buckler’s Larve,” etc.,
ix., p. 335 (1901).

The genus Aduactylus differs from Agdistis and the allied genera,
particularly in the larval stage, the peculiar tubercular processes being
restricted to the prothorax and 9th abdominal segment. The earliest
generic diagnosis made from bennetii as type, was that of Curtis, in
1833, under the above name, but he stultified his description by citing
adactyla, Hb. (which he renames huebnert) as the type. As, however,
he evidently knew only Hubner’s figure of adactyla (huebneri), and his
description was entirely based on the structure of bennetii, we have no
hesitation in asserting that the latter is the true type of the genus. His
diagnosis reads as follows :—

Adactylus bennetit (The seaside plume). [Type of genus: dAlucita adactyla,
Hb. dAdactyla, Curt. Alucita, Hb., Tr.]—Antenne inserted on the crown of the
head close to the eyes, rather short and slender, composed of numerous joints
clothed with scales above, and very pubescent beneath in the male (fig. 1 ¢); less so
in the ¢. Maxillee slender spiral, and nearly as long as the antennee (fig. 3). Labial
palpi curved, densely clothed with scales and truncated, giving them a triangular
form towards the apex, with the third joint just visible (fig. 4); triarticulate, basal joint
long, broad, second short and broad, sublunulate, third minute, ovate and truneated
obliquely. Head smail, subelobose, with a conical tubercle on the forehead thickly
clothed with short scales (fig. 7). Eyessmall, lateral and orbicular. Thorax small,
globose and trilobed. Abdomen very long, linear in the ¢, with the apex thickened
and lobed; stouter in the ¢ and subfusiform, being narrowed at the base and some-
what conical at the apex. Wings plaited together and erected when at rest,
lanceolate, inferior the smaller. Legs slender. Coxelong. Thighsshort. Tibia,
anterior the shortest, clavate, with a short spine and brush of scales on the inside
near the apex, the others spurred at the apex, posterior very long, with a minute
pair of unequal spurs below the middle. Tarsi very long, five-jointed, basal joint
very long, eighth not very short. Claws minute but distinct (fig.8+ hindleg). Bennetti,
Curt., Guide Gen., 1039. author's: cab. . i «tz ddactylus is distinguished from
Pterophorus by its undivided wings, the form of the palpi, which are obtuse and

* These little spots are to be seen more distinctly on the underside of the wing
(Hofmann).

136 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

densely clothed with short scales, the very minute spurs to the hind tibie, and
several other minor differences (British Entomology, fo. 471).

Curtis appears to have been entirely ignorant that Htibner had already
(Verz., p. 429) created the genus Agdistis for his adactyla. The next
year, 1834, Stephens redescribed the genus under Hiubner’s name, with
bennetti as type (Brit. Ent. Haust., iv., p. 370).

The imagines of this genus, in common with all other Agdistids,
are characterised by the absence of the cleft of the anterior wings
present in the British Alucitids, although the point on the edge of the
wing, where it normally occurs in Alucitids, is without a fringe, whilst
the posterior wings are not divided into plumules. The ovum is
a very specialised structure (judged from that of A. bennetii), for,
although laid as a flat egg, the micropylar end is circular with crenate
edge, the crenulations giving rise to longitudinal flutings that suggest
strongly an urceolate ege turned over on its long side, the pronounced
flutings, however, owing to the egg being on its side, give the egg
somewhat the form of a brick (roughly not unlike an Ennomid egg).
The larva has the characteristic Alucitid tubercular arrangement on
the abdominal segments, i (on 1st subsegment), nearer mediodorsal line
than ii (on the 2nd subsegment), 11 (on 1st subsegment) supra-
spiracular, iv and v (on 1st subsegment), both subspiracular and above
the lateral flange, vi (single) and vil above prolegs, the subsegmental
divisions being lost below the flange.

ADACTYLUS BENNETHU, Curtis.

SyNonyMy.—Species: Bennetii, Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,’’ fo. 471 (1833); app. p.
494; Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,’’ iv., p. 370 (1834); Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,’’ 1st ed., p.
234, pl. li., fig. 1625 (1839); Zell., -‘Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 324 (1852); Curt., ‘‘Gen.
Brit. Lep.,’’ pl. xv., fig. 193 (1858) ; Sta., ‘‘Man.,’’ ii., p. 440 (1859) ; Staud., ‘‘ Cat.,”
2nd ed., p. 341 (1871); 3rd ed., p. 78 (1901); Moncreaff, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ v., 321 (1871);
South, ‘‘Ent.,” xvi., p. 27, pl. i., figs. 3-3c (1883) ; Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,”’ p. 50, pl
xvi., fig. 1 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘Young Nat.,” x., pp. 163, 197 (1889); ‘* Pter) ‘Bene
p. 15 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ 1890, p. 487 (1890); :‘ Hand-
book,”’ etc., p.441 (1895); Richdsn., ‘‘Lep. Fauna Portland,”’ p. 4 (1890); Snellen,
‘‘ Tijds.,’’ xl., p. 363 (1897) ; Porritt, ‘‘ Buckler’s Larve,’’ ix., p. 335, pl. elxiii.,
fig. 1 (1901). Bennettii, Westd., ‘‘ Classfin.,”’ etc., ii., p. 115 (1840); H.-Sech.,
‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 365, supp. fig. 1 (1855); Barr., ‘‘Lep. Brit. Isles,” ix.,
p. 341, pl. 431, figs. 1-1) (1904). Bennetti, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,’’ 1841, p. 772 (1841).

OricInaL DEscRIPTiIon.— Adactylus bennetti, , 2. Length 64-741,
breadth lin. Reddish-cinereous, sometimes with an ochreous tint; eyes
black; superior wings with four dark spots upon each = one towards the
base, another nearer the middle, and two beyond it approaching the
posterior angle; abdomen of 2 with five or six pairs of black dots
down the back* (Curtis).

Imaco.—25mm.-29mm. Anterior wings entire, much arched near the
apex, which is pointed; colour shining grey, the costal and inner
margins much sprinkled with white scales, a line drawn from the apex
of the wing to the base of the median nervure, and another from the
base to the outer margin (at about one-half between the apex and anal
angle) would enclose a wedge-shaped space, much more sparsely scaled
than the rest of the wing, and not sprinkled with whitish scales similar

* Curtis figures the species with a plant, and notes :—‘‘ The plant is Carex
limosa (Green and Gold Carex); communicated by C. J. Paget, Esq., from a bog
at Belten, Suffolk.”? One suspects that the plant was simply added for artistic
purposes, and that neither plant nor locality had anything to do with the moth.

ADACTYLUS BENNETII. 137

to those on the costal and inner margins; in the costal area are two or
three short blackish streaks, and directly along the base of the fold are
four black dots stretching longitudinally across the wing; fringes
rather lighter and mcre shiny than the ground-tint of the wing.
Posterior wings entire, the same colour as the forewings, the nervures
rather darker, no markings, fringes paler, very shiny, and distinctly
marked with a dark line passing through it parallel to the hind
marein.

Varration.—There is considerable variation in the tint of the
ground-colour of both fore- and hindwings and the quantity of black
markings. ‘The various forms that we have noticed are:

(1) Unicolorous whitish-grey, without black markings=ab. grisea, n. ab.

(2) Whitish-grey, with four black dots on the dise=ab. grisea-typica, n. ab.

(3) Whitish-grey, with the usual dots and short black costal streaks=ab.
grisea-lineata, n. ab.

(4) Whitish-grey, with ochreous costal and inner margins=ab. ochrea, n. ab.

(5) As 4, but with four black dots on disc = bennetii, Curt.

(6) As 5, but with short black costal streaks=ab. ochrea-lineata, n. ab.

Only one local race of the species has been described, viz., from
Portland, where the species lives on a different foodplant, and has a
different habitat from the saltmarsh form. This form we call :—

a. var. portlandica, n. var. Bennetii var., Richdsn., ‘‘ Lep. Fauna of Portland,’’
p- 40 (1890); ‘‘ List Portld. Lep.,”’ p. 171 (1896).—Rather lighter coloured and about
one-eighth smaller than the specimens taken on the saltmarshes of the Isle of Wight.
At Portland the insect occurs on cliffs by the sea, and the larve feed on Statice
‘binervosa, and not on its usual foodplant S. limonium, an inhabitant of saltmarshes.
Although the latter plant grows on the Chesil Beach, A. bennetii has not yet been
taken there (Richardson).

In his “ List of Portland Lepidoptera,” p. 171, Richardson adds
that ‘‘The insect is common in all stages on Statice awriculaefolia
(binervosa), rather small and ‘dark’ compared with the saltmarsh form.”’
In his original description he noted the form as “lighter coloured .
than Isle of Wight specimens.” The later note he says was a laps.
cal. for ‘‘ hight coloured.”

Keciayinc.—In captivity eggs were laid June 6th-7th, 1899, on
the underside of fresh and withered grass leaves, over which some ?s
had been enclosed; no foodplant was available (Bacot). On June 3rd,
1905, eggs were laid freely on the small central leaves of the foodplant,
usually on the underside, a little way from the edge and near the
bottom of the leaf (Ovenden). A ? was busy egglaying June 15th,
1905, when spring larve were still feeding, about halfgrown in last
stadium (Chapman).

Ovum.—The egg when laid is green, with whitish opalescent tint,
according to light. Its length is 0'74mm., its greatest width 0-40mm.,
its greatest height O:°30mm. Its form is remarkable, laid on a rather
flat side, one end is nearly circular, about 0-380mm. across, approxi-
mately flat; the margin of this end is raised into a set of beads, paler
than the rest of the egg, pearly white, about twenty-six in number;
they are crenulations of the margin, and might be described as belonging
to the top or sides of the egg, the beads, however, do not overlap the
sides, v.e., they do not project beyond the lines bounding the sides,
though the sulci between them just mark the end of the sides,
inside the beads; the top bulges a little, so that its middle is nearly
level with the crenated margins that stand up round its edge. The
circular (?) margin of this end is faintly angulated, so that a little way

138 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

from it, ridges arising from the angles give the cylindrical (?) egg a
somewhat quadrangular section, viz., two short sides and a wider top
and bottom; really, the lower angles bounding the attached face of the
egg are poorly marked at this end of the egg, the upper ones are very
distinct, and have not gone far before they are definite ribs, marking
out a top surface. At the circular end of the egg, this surface is about
0-30mm. wide, about two-thirds or three-fourths of the way to the
other it has widened to 0-40mm., and then it narrows off rapidly to a
rounded end, where the lower pair of ribs also meet. This end of the
ege 1s decidedly thinner than the other, 0-25mm. near the end, but the
rounded end of the egg is so shaped that, if it were only more
pronounced, it would be pointed and wedge-shaped. ‘There is a
certain amount of wavy sculpturing of the surface that is not, or is
not distinct enough to be described as, cellular. The flat top surface
usually shows a slight longitudinal median ridge, if there were a
similar one below, which is not detected, the section of the ege would
be hexagonal instead of quadrangular. As the ege matures, it exhibits
some faint reddish spots and a red tinting of the flat end. As it gets
nearly ready for hatching, the egg generally loses the red spots and
becomes of a sickly amber tint, but with the red in the end area even
more pronounced, and finally this end of the egg becomes quite black
(head of larva). When the larva leaves the ege, it emerges by a very
small hole in the flat end, or almost in the crenate border, and so
inconspicuous that, till looked for, it is difficult to believe that such a
hole exists. The empty egg retains its form perfectly, and the sculp-
turing is now much more easily seen; the beaded border stands out
conspicuously, and the m'cropylar area is seen more easily. There is
a small central circle, in diameter one-eighth or one-tenth of that of
the flat end or even a little less; in this may be seen three dots that
may represent the micropylar pores. Between this and the beaded
border are radially arranged narrow cells, not, however, closely packed,
and without a central rosette, but still in stellate manner (Chapman,
June 20th, 1904).

Hasits oF LaRvA.—The small green autumnal larve feed on the
leaves of Statice limonium, and, after hybernation, may be found in
April and May resting on the foodplant, from which, however, they fall
on the slightest disturbance. At rest, they so much resemble the Statice
in colour that it is only by searching the plants that show signs of
being eaten that they are to be discovered. ‘The young autumnal larve
feed on until late in October; on October 12th, 19038, larve were still
feeding, eating on either side of the leaf, but apparently the upper by
preference, not quite the full thickness of the leaf, pieces about
1-5mm.-2:Omm. across, and variously waved and branching ; even now,
the colour of the larvee seems to vary a great deal, some being almost pale
green, others of a fuller green, whilst others are of a tint rather nearer
brown than green. During the winter, the larve, in their haunts on the
marshes of the Medway, must be fully exposed, for where the larve are
to be found abundantly in early spring, there is not a square yard that
is not covered with water at nearly every tide. Traces of feeding may
be found as soon as the leaves begin to appear, but the feeders are
difficult to find until from the commencement to middle of April, when
they are very variable in size. It is possible that hundreds of larve
must perish every winter, and probably this accounts for the rarity of

ADACTYLUS BENNETII. 139

the early summer (June) compared with the later (August) brood in
most seasons. When the larve are first to be found in April they appear
to be of variable size, and to be in at least three different stadia; they
attack the leaves in various ways; often a piece is eaten clean off the
apex, at others a slice is taken out of the side; frequently the space
eaten in the latter case is just about the size of the body of the larva
both in length and width, the larva frequently resting along the eaten
portion where it is very inconspicuous, although, certainly, they are more
frequently found near the centre of the leaf, and are especially at this time
fond of basking in thesun. Ovenden observes that, although they perforate
the leaves in confinement, they never appear to do so in nature when
young, yet Gardner says that, on the Greatham Marshes, the larve are
not uncommon, making small holes through the leaves in May and
June, the holes betraying their presence on the Statice limonium.
Chapman notes that larvee found on May 7th, 1899, on the saltmarshes
near Southend, were of different sizes, from nearly fullerown green
examples to small rusty-coloured ones, less than a quarter-of-an-inch
long; of those taken, only one was on the upperside of a leaf, the rest
all beneath, on the newly-grown leayes, generally low down on, or close
to, the petiole, whilst Meek notes that, although they rest on the leaves
when young, they later get down close to the roots of the plant and
are just the colour of the leafstalk on which they then rest. Ovenden
observes that, on May 13th, 1904, larve were still to be obtained in all
sizes, from the winter (hybernating) skin up to the full-grown, not at all
uncommonly, at rest on Statice, and fairly easy to find when once their
habits were known. He says they now feed and rest exposed, but many
get beneath a leaf; and whilst some larve make perforations in the
leaves, others clear along the edge as they go, and when a nearly fullgrown
larva gets hold of a young rolled-up leaf, he will clear it down to the
petiole. The larve are to be found most freely on solitary plants,
growing amongst the other herbage which appears to offer some protec-
tion; such Statice plants are usually much larger and more succulent.
Where the leaves are found to be eaten, and no exposed larve are to be
detected, then carefuily turn back the leaves, when the larve will generally
be found on the underside ; if this fail, acareful search of the herbage and
grass culms just near will often be rewarded with success, for the larva,
although somewhat sluggish, is easily disturbed ; it feeds both by night
and day. The length of the larval life of the winter brood varies much.
Ovenden had larvee, collected at Strood, commence to pupate on May 9th,
1904, whilst other larve were still small, and Whittle found hybernated
larvee still feeding at Benfleet as late as June 8th of the same year. The
larvee of the summer brood hatch normally between mid-May and theend
of June, and, quite contrary to the long larval life of the winter larve, have
a very short existence in this stage, the pup being usually abundant from
the middle of July until the middle of August. They are to be found in
the greatest abundance from mid-June to mid-July, again in September
and October, being much less abundant in April and May after hyberna-
tion, although usually still common. lLarve have been recorded as
taken on May 22nd, 1890, at Greatham Marshes (Bower); August 1st,
1890, at Portland (Richardson); May 20th, 1892, at Shoeburyness
(Bower); May 15th, 1898, at Canvey (Whittle); common during the
first fortnight of May, 1899, near Southend (Whittle); abundant at
Strood, from April 15th continuously until May 19th, 1904, the

140 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

earliest pupating May 9th, and others not doing so until the end of the
month, many pup, however, being found on May 19th (Ovenden);
throughout the spring until June 8th, 1904, at Benfleet (Whittle) ;
larve again abundant at Strood, June 24th, 1904, and continued so
for nearly a month (Ovenden).

Larva.—First instar (newly-hatched) : The newly-hatched larva is
about 1:3mm. long, and about 0:16mm. wide; head very little larger than
body, black. The colour of the larva is a light yellowish-green, thickly
covered with dark (black ?) skin-points, producing a general effect of
dirty olive-grey. The most curious point about the larva is that it
appears to have no tubercles. It is, however, just possible to make
out i, 11, 111, iv and vy, as definite circles rather larger than the skin-
points, and the hairs are found to be very minute, clubbed like a little
triangle, hardly broader than high, attached at one angle; tubercle vii
bears, however, a well-developed hair, about 0°02mm. long, directed to
the surface on which the larva rests. On the prothorax, this tubercle
exists and a rather larger hair above it (the prespiracular). The 10th
abdominal carries six hairs on either side, two down on the proleg, or
nearly so, and four on the anal plate, of which two are rather long, nearly
0:05mm. Tubercles iv and v are well apart, as in the adult larva. The
anal horn 1s a well-developed mammilla, a little wider and shorter, but
otherwise much like that in the fullgrown larva, it carries two of the
small triangular clubs well apart. There is a distinct subseementation
into two nearly equal portions, each of which has about eight rows of
skin-points, ‘‘ about’ because they are not so definitely in rows as to
be so described with accuracy, but are approximately so. There are no
prothoracic horns, but towards the outer end of the anterior margin of
the prothoracic plate is, on each side, a triangular baton, much larger
than any other, although one on the hind margin nearer the middle is
almost as large. The head carries various hairs, and on each side (at
least) two triangular batons; the eye-spots are large, five in an arch and
one central. The prolegs have short cylindrical props with nine
hooks, forming a complete circle, hardly broken on outer side. Anal
claspers have 7 (or 8) larger hooks. The spiracles are large, or rather
are short projecting tubes at the summit of a considerable mammilla,
the first and last much the largest. The true legs carry a very large,
scimitar-shaped, battledore palpus, that looks at first like the claw,
which is, however, only half its length (Chapman, June 24th, 1904).
First instar (full-grown): Head much larger, in proportion to body,
than is that of adult larva; rounded, black, surface very rugose, thick
and heavy-looking. Body of even thickness; skin much wrinkled ;
segmental incisions distinct but not deep. The skin covered with
a coat of sparse, but coarse, dark-coloured spicules. Spiracles
prominent, larger in proportion to size of jiarva than in adult; they
are prominently stalked, or mounted on chitinous tubes. The pro-
thorax bears two frontal processes, but these are short and blunt-
ended, not conical as in the adult. The 9th and 10th abdominal
segments are very large, the 9th nearly as long as the 8th, and the
10th somewhat longer; the 9th bears a short flattened horn, neither
so tall nor circular in section as in the adult larva, although there is
some variation in size. The sete at anus, simple, fairly long and
tapering; on the head they are short and club-ended, apparently just
as in adult. The primary tubercles appear to be no better developed

ADACTYLUS BENNETII. 141

than in adult, and are very inconspicuous (Bacot, June 20th,
1899). 2 Third or Fourth instar : 45mm. long, and about O-7mm.
thick in thoracic and first two or three abdominal segments, thence
tapering very slightly to last segments. Colour, a green very close to
that of the leaves of the Statice, with two red prominences on prothorax,
projecting forwards over head, and one caudal on 9th abdominal pro-
jectinge backwards—the head and Ist thoracic and the 9th and 10th
abdominal are reddish, or strongly marked with pink, giving a very
marked character to the larva, with the double front horn and the
single one behind. The head is carried in the manner we are familiar
with in drawings of the larva of Apatura iris, the vertex thrown
forward, the mouth retracted, so that the horns on prothorax (on head
in A. iris) are pointed directly forward and project in front of the head.
These horns have each a tubercle at apex and one on outer flank.
They are short hairs, Indian club-shaped, as are more or less all the
others. The caudal horn (on 9th abdominal) has two tubercles at its
extremity, or one might say at the lateral margins of the rounded end,
and one other on each side near its base. The prothorax has, just
below and behind the bases of the horns, which occupy the whole
dome of the segment (much of the area often covered by the prothoracic
plate), a large, dark, conical prominence, carrying on its summit the
first spiracle, marked by several alternate white and black rings, some
possibly the effect of reflection from a polished surface. Well below
and in front of this is a black tubercle, with a true bristle, about three
times as long as the clubbed hairs, and quite unlike them, but like
those on anal plate. The head is yellow, with a network of red lines of
smallish mesh, the lines themselves comparatively broadish. On the
head are a good many slightly clubbed bristles. ‘The ocelli are five in
a semicircle (the three lowest rather perhaps in line) with a sixth
centrally placed. ‘The other spiracles are placed on dark, raised,
smooth mammille, smaller, however, than that on first thoracic, that:
on 8th abdominal, however, nearly as large. The whole scale is micro-
scopic, but either extremity looks something like a vertebrate head, with
the horns for snout, or upper jaw of an open mouth, and the spiracles
as eyes. The 10th abdominal (anal plate) has four marginal bristles
nearly equal to that on prothorax, seated on slightly raised bases; it carries
an ordinary tubercle above (just behind the horn of the 9th abdominal);
there isa bristle nearly equal to these on the outer aspect of the base of the
clasper. The whole surface of the larva has, besides the spiracles and
tubercles (yet to be noted), a large covering of hair-points of two kinds.
Certainly most of these do not carry any sort of hair, but some appear to
terminate in a sharp point. Theone kind are white or porcellanous, look-
ing like raised polished buttons, of which there are perhaps 80, between
dorsum and spiracular level, on one side of an abdominal segment.
They can be seen with a hand lens as minute white dots tending to
fall into transverse rows. The others are much more numerous and
only about 4 to + the diameter of the white ones, and are black,
though a few are rather paler, and some of the ground colour, but still
prominent little buttons. These black points are convex polished
projections, like the white ones, tend to fall into transverse and
oblique rows, and are about their own diameters apart. There may
be, perhaps, 250 on the area from spiracle to dorsum of an abdominal
segment. Below the spiracles is a paler whitish band, this has a

142 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

paler ground-colour, the black points are less coloured, and the large
white ones are more numerous, 15-18 to a segment. Each segment is
divided into two very distinct subsegments by a depression passing
across dorsum from just behind spiracle. The posterior of these
(rather the smaller) is again less markedly divided into a smaller
posterior, and larger anterior, subsegment. The white points tend to
run into a transverse line at the anterior border of the segment, but
neither they, nor the smaller, seem to give any aid in making out
subsegments, since they are ranged (so far as they are ranged) into 25
or 80 transverse rows; though these rows are often for some distance
separated by sulci, it is impossible to follow any individual row for more
than a short distance. In calling the processes of the prothorax and
of 9th abdominal horns, an erroneous impression may be given, since
they are very wide at base and blunt. Those on prothorax might be
described as being an anterior projection of the margin of prothorax over
the head, not very dissimilar to that in larve of Lycenids, Anthrocerids,
or Lymantriids, but with the front margin deeply indented medially.
The two sides of each horn are at an angle to each other of about 60°.
The tail-horn is more raised, ?.e., more vertical, at an angle of about 45°
from the horizontal. The 9thabdominal segmentis very narrow ventrally,
but is dorsally, from anterior border to end of horn, about equal in length
to the €th; the horn is half this dorsally, ventrally one-third of the 8th.
The sides of the horn are at an angle of about 30° to each other, the upper
and lower surfaces being so rounded that any angle may be quoted ; they
may even be called parallel. One chief point is that their surfaces are
not in any way differentiated from the rest of the surface, so that they
are rather warts, humps, or processes, rather than horns, as for example,
those of Sphingid larve, etc., are. The tubercles on an (say 4th)
abdominal segment are—i, which differs from all the others in haying
as base a finely shagreened circular area, 0-O9mm. across, the tubercle
in the centre being, “much as the others, a raised chitinous ring with a
short colourless (slightly spiculated) club, about 0:03mm. in length;
this tubercle is near the middle lne and on Ist (broad) subsegment;
tubercle ii, on anterior portion of 2nd subsegment (or on middle of its front
half, if these further divisions be recognised), alittle further out than 1, with
no special base, butitschitinous mammilla about twice the diameter of the
white points, baton as in 1; tubercle iii about in line (transversely) with 1,
just above and slightly forward of spiracle, structure as 11, but base
slightly smaller. Below the spiracle are two tubercles, iv and v, on a
slightly raised and rounded eminence (flange, subspiracular portion)
occupying anterior half of segment; one of these (the anterior, vy) is
about twice as far below, as ili is above, spiracle, and nearly twice as
much in advance of it, the other (the posterior, iv) is not so far below the
spiracle as the anterior, but is further behind it, than the other is in front;
vi? is another quite similar tubercle that lies about the middle of segment
(from back to front) and about half way from spiracle to prolegs. On
base of prolee are three tubercular hairs set triangularly, rather larger
than the others, and decidedly bristles and not batons or clubs; the (1st)
longest is posterior, the other two are—one well above the others and
to front of 1st, the other a little below the 1st, and a little in front of 2nd;
on the 2nd abdominal (and those segments without prolegs) only the 1st
and 2nd of these seem to be present; there is also a minute tubercle inside
proleg, which is present also on the segments without prolegs. The

. ee -

ADACTYLUS BENNETII. 1438

ventral prolegs consist of a base so short that the surface of the body
touches the surface on which the larva rests (perhaps correlated with the
glabrous leaf surface on which it lives, and contrasting with the pedicels
of the prolegs of species onhairy or woolly leaves), and carries a circle
of fifteen hooks disposed round the inner, anterior and posterior
portions, but wanting on the outer (slichtly anterior) fourth. The
anal prolegs have much the same structure, the hookless portion of
the circle being, however, more anterior. The central hooks are larger
than the others. There are two long bristles, low down on the bases of
the claspers, and four smaller ones higher up. On the 2nd and 8rd
thoracic segments are four tubercles between dorsum and spiracular
level, almost in a row down the middle of the seement, but the lowest
a little forward. Of those on the marginal flange, one is at upper
marein of flange (about spiracular level), and nearly below the 4th of
upper set, a second some way behind this and triflingly lower,
another well below it and a trifle in front; lower still, at base of true
legs, are two, tolerably near together and at about same level (Chap-
man, October 12th, 1908). Penultimate instar: Small larva, 0°26 in.
long, is reddish-brown in tint, but really seems to have a green
interior with a warm rosy pink skin, varying to pink only on two
front horns and tail horn, dotted all over with white points, which
are the larger of very numerous hard-looking tubercles covering the
whole surface, the smaller of which are black or self-coloured (colour
of skin ?). Caudal horn carries two hairs, each front horn carries one,
the head is usually retracted to be beneath these. The Sphinx-like
character of the anal horn is increased by finding that it carries two hairs
at its extremities, but any real relationship is contradicted by its being on
the 9thabdominal segment instead of on the 8th asin Sphinges. There is
a faint suggestion of a yellow subdorsal line (Chapman, May 11th, 1904).
Final instar (just moulted): A larva of A. bennetii was observed on
May 1st, 1904, at about noon, that had evidently just changed its
skin. The old skin was stretched almost at full length by the side of
a large hole eaten out of a leaf of the foodplant, and had lost its colour
of bright green with purplish-red tinge at head and anal end, which
responded so excellently to the coloured edges of the leaves of the
foodplant, where it apparently likes to rest, and was of a semitrans-
parent blackish-grey, the empty head-case, however, being quite
elassy-looking and transparent. The larva was now 9:4mm. in length,

of a more yellow-green tint, and the interseemental incisions were
quite yellow, the head and prothor vx alone being of the previous fuller

ereen tint; the mouth-parts are now tinged w ith brown and the ocelli
brown-Dblack ; the double pointed prothoracie cowl is of a delicate red ;
the horn on the 9th abdominal segment is also red to its base and
bluntly pointed. The pro- and mesothorax show signs of three

subsegments, but the abdominal segments 1-9 show two subsegments
of which the anterior is wider and carries the spiracle, the anterior of
the 9th abdominal carries the horn, but the posterior subsegment is
very distinctly marked below the horn. The yellowness of the eround
colour is due to the large size and abundance of the shagreen tubercles,

although the segmental incisions and the anal segment are indepen-

dently ‘yellower in colour than the rest of the body. The cowl and
anal horn are also heavily shagreened. The spiracles are as striking
as ever, those on the prothorax and the 8th abdominal being especially

144 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

well-developed. There is also a well-developed pale subspiracular flange
starting on either side from one of the prothoracic points, and ending
with the anal flap. There is the slightest trace of a mediodorsal line
(2 depression) from the mesothorax to the caudal horn, and the
primary tubercular sete, although exceedingly minute, are traceable,
and there are two long setw, one on either side of the anus stretching
back posteriorly, apparently the only long hairs on the body. The
true legs are pale green, as also are the prolegs (of the same tint as
the venter). The latter are short and strong for a plume larva,
and very different from the long slender prolegs characteristic
of so many Alucitid larve. The venter is flattened, and the larva as a
whole less cylindrical than the larve of the Platyptiliids. At this time,
in confinement, the larva loves to bask on the upperside of a leaf,
coiling itself in an U-form, or stretched at full length (Tutt, May 1st,
1904). Final instar (fullgrown): About 18mm. long, 1:6mm. wide at
broadest part, viz., across meso- and metathoracic segments, the body
tapering rapidly from here to head, and very gradually to anus, which
is usually blunt and rather square-ended. The larva is, on the whole,
cylindrical and even in thickness, 7.e., the divisions of the segments,
though clear and well-marked, are not deep, and the segments do not
swell out in the centre as is often the case (e.g., in Arctiid larve). The
larva as a whole is bright green (apple-green) in tint, very closely
resembling the leaves of its foodplant. It has a broad, but rather faint,
paler lateral stripe, placed rather high up its sides, and a faintly-marked
dark mediodorsal line. The skin is speckled and looks shagreened
like that of an Amorphid larva. The short dorsal horn on the 9th
abdominal (not 8th), and the pair of small dorsal projections on
prothorax are tinged with red. The spiracles are small, placed on a
brown elevated chitinous button, and are situated just above lateral
band very high up the sides, almost at the subdorsal area. The legs
are short and small, very pale brown at the horny joints, but so pale
as not to contrast sharply with the green of the sides. The head is
small, rounded, but deep from crown to mouth, and forms in outline
a broad, flat-sided oval. At rest, it is rather retracted and hidden by
prothorax, which is much larger than the head, and projects forward
over it like a hood or cowl. At rest, the crown of the head is much
anterior to the mouth, which is drawn close in to the first pair of legs,
the face being subventral (reminding one of Poulton’s drawing of the
larva of Aglia taw). Antenne rather noticeable; the division of lobes
of the head distinct; the clypeus smali, and not extending more than
about half-way from mouth to crown; the surface of the head rather
rough, with scattered hairs, a few of those nearer to the face are
tapering, those higher up nearer the crown tend towards being club-
shaped (? glandular), all rather short; the head is slightly darker towards
the crown on its sides and angles; the ocelli very distinct, black in
colour, all six in a small group (rather compact); there are a few small
shagreen-like spots on head. The prothorax small, compared with
the meso- and metathorax, much longer dorsally than ventrally, where it
is merely a narrow strip, consequently it overhangs and produces the
hooded appearance; on the anterior edge of prothorax there are two
cone-shaped tubercular projections, one on either side of median line;
these are reddish-tinged towards the top, and bear a short glandular
hair at the summit. The 9th abdominal segment, which is now not

ADACTYLUS BENNETII. 145

very distinctly separated from the 8th, although the division can be
easily seen if looked for, bears a short cone-shaped horn (fleshy-looking)
at its posterior margin in central dorsal position. The horn slopes
backwards over anus (it much resembles the horn of an adult larva of
Amorpha populi), and bears two small glandular club-shaped hairs, one
on either side just below the apex. In addition to these two hairs near
the summit of the horn, there are two, one on either side, near the base
of the horn, club-shaped and similar to those near the summit. The
skin is studded all over its dorsal and lateral areas with small brown
chitinous buttons, it is also speckled with less numerous and larger
pale yellowish spots, these two characters together producing the effect
of shagreen-spots, one of the chief features of its resemblance to the
Sphingid larve. The prolegs are smalland beara ring of hooks; so far as
can be seen, however, these are ill-developed on the outer portion of the
ring; the anal claspers have an incomplete ring, not quite half a circle.
The hairs are short, club-shaped, of a semi-transparent white (? of a
glandular nature). Tubercles i and ii are in trapezoidal position, far
apart, due, perhaps, to the great length of the segments, 11, however, not
greatly further from the centre than i, but far enough to be discerned; i1i
is present, situated just above the spiracle ; the two subspiraculars are
present, iv below and posterior to spiracle, v further below and anterior
to spiracle. The sete on the thoracic segments differ from those on
the abdominal segments, 1 and 11 being placed transversely and not as
trapezoidals. A sheht pit or scar is present on the meso- and metathorax
in about the position of the spiracle on the abdominal segments; this
is the more noticeable on account of the absence from the skin, at this
point, of the ordinary chitinous button (Bacot, May 18th, 1899). The
fullgrown larva, 14mm. long, is green, covered with very fine black points,
suggestive of a darker dorsal line, which is, in reality, the dorsal vessel,
or rather the absence of fat bodies over it. There is a pinkish tinge
towards the terminal segments. The horn is directed backwards with
two points (the hairs). The anal plate has three pairs of hairs, which
are large and obvious as compared with others. The frontal horns
(prothorax) projecting over head, each carry one very minute hair,
nearly as long as those on the 9th abdominai. The spiracles are like
small bronzy metallic shields, the actual spiracie being at the summit
of the boss. In the living larva the supraspiracular tubercle (iii) can be
detected, but the trapezoidals (i and i1) are indistinguishable from the
small bosses that are pale and inconspicuous in this larva, but noted
as white points in another larva, 0:26in. long. On all the younger
larvee these white points are conspicuous. This one may be near
pupation. The larva looks very smooth and rounded, very like Sphina
ligustri, due to there being no evident hairs, bristles, or tubercles. The
hooks of prolegs are 8-10 on an inner rather forward semicircle. One
of the most remarkable peculiarities of this larva is that tubercle i,
especially on the posterior segments, has a remarkable arrangement
of skin-processes all round it, precisely as if it were surrounded by
ordinary wing-scales, but only the tips of these, with four to six sharp
teeth, are visible. These he like scales with the points facing
posteriorly (Chapman, May, 1904). The larva is also described by
Monereaff (Hnt., v., p. 3821), and also by South (Fnt., xvi., pp.
27-28). Buckler figured the larva of this species (Larvae, ete., ix., pl.
elxii., fig. 1) on April 29th, 1871.

146 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Puration.—The fullfed larva crawls to the top of a leaf or rests
on the leaf-stalk, spins across it numerous silken threads to which it
attaches itself by the anal claspers, and, in this position, remains about
two days, the skin gradually becoming brown, and assuming a
shrivelled appearance; in this quiescent stage preceding pupation,
the larva is much shortened in length, the head is slightly retracted,
the meso- and metathorax are remarkably swollen and very ‘‘ Sphinx ’”’-
like, the abdominal segments also being somewhat shortened, the
head and venter inclining to a slightly orange tint, the dorsum still
green. Moncreaff says the final change is gone through very suddenly ;
a few minutes suffice to throw off the old skin, which remains in a
little heap on the leaf, and the pupa then hangs freely suspended by
the anal hooks (including those on the 8th abdominal segment), being
attached by its cremastral fringe of fine hooked bristles on the ventral
area to the slight silken pad spun by the larva. The colour of the
newly-formed pupa is green, but it changes to its normal darker
coloration in from 24 to 48 hours. A pupa that was formed on May
9th, 1904, had, on May 12th, the abdominal segments of a purplish-
brown tint, the thorax being dorsally of the same colour; the pro-
jecting beak also black as well as the wings and the appendages, the
latter standing out quite free at their extremities and ending at the
5th-6th abdominal incision; the conspicuous frontal beak, the raised
mesothorax, the distinct interseemental abdominal incisions, and the
striking anal spike, as well as the peculiar concave curve at the dorsum
of the 2nd-4th abdominal segments, are among the most marked
features of this remarkable pupa. Buckler’s figure of the pupa (Larvae,
etc., pl. clxiii., fig. la), made May 10th, 1871, is almost unrecognisable
owing to the bad reproduction. ,

Pupa.—This is an almost typical Alucitid pupa differing only from
the more usual Alucitids in being long, slender and of very uniform
size from end to end as compared with most of them, and, as compared
with some, exceedingly smooth, but this feature also occurs in ordinary
Alucitids. It has the same method of attachment, the same
number of free segments, a similar backward extension of the leg-
cases—it only differs in degree. The length is about 15mm., the width
(at the free abdominal segments) about 1°5mm., thicker thoracically,
and tapering from the last four or five segments to a sharp point.
Close to the vertex are, on either side, two bristles, rather far apart
from each other to be both antennal basal hairs (as in most pupe), but
probably so. Further down on the cheek is another hair. On the
clypeus is another. There is another just in the centre of the glazed
eye area, close to the first leg, and another just on the inner margin
of the eye area, at base of what looks like the mandible, but has no
trace of suture. These hairs, like all the others in the pupa, are very
minute (about 0-03mm. long). The labium is a rounded lappet from
above, in outline very similar to the jaw-like projections from each
side. The glazed eye is very large and well-marked; there is the
semicircular glazed line, dividing the area into an inner and an outer
portion of about equal width, the inner portion being bounded by a
curve parallel to the glazed line, and formed by the maxille, mandi-
bles (2), base and cheek; it is marked by radiating lines, and has the
already noted hair. The inner portion has series of dots (eye-facets)
inside the glazed line in tolerably regular rows, which fade out at

ADACTYLUS BENNETII. 147

about the fifth or sixth row, whence radiating lines or ridges proceed to
the centre. The antenne extend down either side and reach to very
nearly the ends of the wings. Their markings of transverse wrinkles
are very like, and not seemingly more special than, those on the legs.
The maxilla (proboscis) occupy the middle of the front below the
head; for the first millimetre they are rather wide (each 0°43mm.),
then narrow rather quickly to half the width, till about two-thirds of
the way to the end of the wings they become extremely narrow, or
even invisible, not by actual lessened bulk, but by being covered by
the first legs; on the specimen being carefully observed, there is,
however, a portion exposed to their very extremities; beyond the first
legs they are similarly overlaid by the second legs, and disappear a little
before half-way between the ends of the first legs (and wings) and the
second. The first legs begin rather widely, against the antenne, and
narrow very slightly and gradually, finally tapering rapidly to a point
level with the ends of the wings. The second legs begin between the first
leo and antenna, close to the upper end of first legs. They widen out
decidedly just beyond the end of the antenna, to fill up as it were the
extra space available, and end about 3°6mm. beyond the wings opposite
the 6th or 7th abdominal segment (according to the degree to which
the pupal segments are extended). Here they form a stiff process in
conjunction with the ends of the maxille and the third legs, which
appear from beneath the wings, and are so much behind the second,
that they might escape notice; they extend fractionally beyond the
second pair. This stiff process is quite free, and applied to the pupal
surface when at rest, but when the pupa throws itself back, Alucitid
fashion, it stands out prominently. The prothorax has the hairs too
evanescent to be accurately determined. The mesothorax is large and
prominent, it has the trapezoidal hairs, and laterally are two hairs one
above the other; there is a curious hollow in the wing-base, just in
line with the posterior margin of the mesothorax. The wings are
marked by minute, transverse, compound wrinkles, along which the
colouring is more intense; there are indications of the neuration. The
wings are attached down to their pointed extremities, ending at the
posterior margin of the 8rd abdominal segment. Dehiscence causes
splitting of the mesothorax to a point short of its posterior border. The
metathorax has a dorsal keel or carina; in the specimen examined
there is a hair near the middle line in front, and another near the outer
anterior angle, and, on each side, there is a third, but on one side it
les parallel with, and a little outside, the first; on the other side
it is more than half-way to the outer one. The hindwing is a broad
short strip, ending rather abruptly opposite the spiracle of the 2nd
abdominal segment. The 1st abdominal segment is a square dorsal
piece and has the four trapezoidals disposed widely apart, in nearly
a square, but the posterior a little further out as if to occupy the
whole segment as commandingly as possible; there is another
tubercle, which hardly escapes being covered by the hindwing and just
in line with 1; the hairs of the trapezoidals are distinctly of the
Indian club-shape common on the larva. The 2nd abdominal segment
is longer than broad, tubercle i two-fifths of segment from front edge,
ii slightly further out, about four-fifths, iii just above spiracle and
amongst the longitudinal wrinkles bordering the wing; just behind
the spiracle is a rugosity, that is more marked in the following segments,

148 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

where it looks as if, when the segment was doughy, a finger (size of
spiracle) had been used to give a backward drag. The 3rd abdominal
is much like the 2nd as regards the trapezoidals (i and ii) and iii; the
spiracle hasjust escaped the wrinkling against the wing, and further back
there is a hair close to edge of wing, and, therefore, below and behind
spiracle ; the wing ends here in a very slender transversely wrinkled tag.
The 4th abdominal hasi, ii and iiias before, there is the finger-mark behind
(and a little below) spiracle, whilst above this is a specially smooth
patch of similar size; the rest of the dorsum at this level has, as has
also the 3rd, 5th and 6th, to about the same degree and others less,
fine transverse ridges widening here and there into minute pits or
lacune (about size of spiracle) ; at some distance below the spiracle are
two hairs at the same level, and one in front and one behind spiracle,
so as to form with it an equilateral triangle; some distance below the
posterior of these is a hair, and again, nearly as much further, another
hair followed by the scar of proleg, in front of which are two more
hairs (the upper one anterior), these two nearly (but hardly) fall into a
group with the preceding one. The 5th and 6th segments are not
quite so wide, but are nearly identical with the 4th. The 7th is a good
deal narrower, i, 11, 111 the same, and of iv and v, the anterior (v) is the
lower (begins to be so a little on the 5th); the tubercle at proleg (vii) is
represented by two hairs, the posterior the lower. The 8th abdominal is
much the same as the 7th, the trapezoidals are quite square, but the
lower (proleg) set of tubercles is wanting and replaced by a portion of
the cremastral hooks. On the 9th abdominal there is a very definite
prominence or horn, carrying two hairs, and outside this another hair
(i1i?). The 10th abdominal is not very clearly marked off from the 9th,
and has no hairs except the very abundant cremastral hairs. There
is a slight hiatus between the maxille close to the base, and whether
the labial palpi can be said to be visible here or not depends
somewhat on the imagination, also as to whether anything and what
occurs between the maxille and the first legs, where (in Sphinges and
other pupe) portions of the first femur are sometimes visible (Chapman,
May 1904). At first bright apple-green in colour, gradually (in the course
of two or three days) turning to a dull leaden-green hue, grey-green on
the dorsal area, leaden-green on the leg- and wing-cases. The pupa is
very long and slender, 14mm. in length, of even thickness on abdomi-
nal segments, save for the anal tapering, which commences at about
the 8th abdominal segment, about 1:6mm. in diameter, but rather
deeper and wider at the mesothorax, where, dorsally, this segment
runs up into a pyramidal hump at its posterior end, the greatest width
of the pupa being just at the junction of the forewings. It tapers
rapidly and sharply from mesothorax to head, which ends in a sharp
beak or nose-horn. The spiracles are yellow, raised and prominent,
especially those on the 2nd abdominal, which show up very clearly
just against the margin of the wings; the wing-cases of the primaries
extend to the end of the 3rd abdominal segment, and of the secondaries
to spiracle on the 2nd abdominal segment. The antenna-cases extend
just on the 4th abdominal segment, one pair of leg-cases extends to the
end of the 4th, while the other two pairs extend uncemented to the
end of the 7th, abdominal segment, one pair (presumably the 3rd)
being immediately beneath the other pair (presumably the 2nd). The
anal armature consists of a row or fringe of fine semi-transparent bristles,

“ADACTYLUS BENNETII. 149

with yellow-coloured hooked tips; these run down either side of the
ventral area of anal segment; a pit or depression on ventral area at
junction of the 8th and 9th abdominal segments has a group of
similar hooked bristles rising from its bottom. The skin of the pupa
is much wrinkled and roughened or shagreened, the rough points being
pale or whitish. A few short hairs are present, so far as I can distin-
euish, in same position as the primary larval sete, but the hairs
themselves are simple and not clubbed, as are those of larva (Bacot,
May 28th, 1899). South’s description (Hntom., xvi., p. 27) of the
pupa is unsatisfactory, but Barrett (Lep. Brit. Isl., 1x., p. 342)
seems to have paraphrased South’s description, without acknowledg-
ment, so that the pupa becomes ‘“ green, dusted with white, and
shaded with violet-brown; wing- and limb-cases deeper green,’ the
paraphrase carrying a somewhat erroneous impression of the pupal
colours.

VaRIATION oF PpuPA.— [Living pupe May 18th, 1904.) The hving
pup vary much in colour from a pale greenish form to a deep brown
that may be almost called black. The two commonest forms are
rather darker than the palest, and not quite so dark as the darkest.
These two forms match, apparently, the green of the growing plant and
the sombre tints it has when dead—either dry or decayed. The green
pup look as if they owed their colour to the thinness of the pupal
shell, allowing the green tissues within to be seen, but, as the brown
ones give equally an impression of the underlying tissues as well as
the skin being brown, such a conclusion is doubtful. In both cases,
white, or at least pale, points that represent apparently the pale skin-
points of the larva, and dark shadings, especially in the appendages,
are abundant, but are most clearly distinguishable in the pale green.
To take one of these green ones in a little more detail, the back is olive-
ereen, becoming paler towards the head and darker for the last few seg-
ments. Hach segment is crossed by numerous fine ridges, 30 to 40 in
number, having much the aspect, but on a much smaller scale, of
subsegments, each ridge being rounded above, and pressed closely against
its neighbour, and many of them only running a certain distance before
they narrow and disappear, allowing their neighbours which they had
separated to meet. It is on these ridges that the pale (hardly white)
raised dots are disposed. The darker markings are very fine marblings
tending to range themselves into longitudinal lines, and not definitely
confined to the ridges. They are darker green than the ground colour,
and it is their darker colour that overpowers the pale green ground
colour and gives the olive-green effect. This darker green seems the
result of a pigmentation that looks as if it would be black if there
were only enough of it. The anal horn is pale brownish. Laterally
and ventrally the surface, when not hidden by the appendages, agrees
substantially with that of the dorsum. The actual venter, however, is
green, free from either white dots or dark marbling, and is consequently
pale having on the 4th, 5th and 6th abdominal segmentsa kidney-shaped
darker mark on either side, that looks like scar of proleg, but can hardly
be so, the fine transverse ridges passing across it without any structural
changes. There is a certain amount of ruddy tinting of the incisions,
especially laterally. The appendages (wings, legs, etc.) are definitely
very dark green, and this appears to be due to pigment, as, towards the
head, dots and islets of pale green appear where it is wanting; the beak is

150 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

also dark, but the rest of the head and prothorax are freer from dark
markings than any other part of the pupa. In the dark form the
appendages are nearly black, but are, perhaps, more strictly dark green
or brown-green, the head and prothorax more nearly resemble the
pale form than any other portion of the pupa, with a good deal of
green and white over the pro- and mesothorax. The rest of the pupa
is a deep ruddy brown, as if the colour of the incisions of the pale
form had here spread and overwhelmed everything. The white dots
are still paler along the fine ridges, but the dark marblings are
wanting at first view, yet exist as two anterior (close) and two pos-
terior (further apart) dark spots dorsally, and two subdorsal wavy lines
(one below the other) on each side, with other less definite markings.
The posterior half of the dorsum of each segment (2nd-7th abdominal) is
paler than the rest, and so shows up more definitely the two posterior
dark spots which it encloses, and the upper of the subdorsal bands
which bound it laterally.

FooppLants.—Statice limonium (Bower), Statice binervosa (auriculae-
folia) (Richardson).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—The species is doublebrooded, occurring in
late May to mid-June, and again in late July-September. The first
British specimens were taken at Tollsbury at the end of July, 1832
(Curtis). The following dates will give an idea of the variation of the
time of appearance of each of the broods in different years :—The end
of August and beginning of September, at Freshwater (Riding) ; June
17th, 1876, at Middlesboro’ (Sang); end of July, 1878, at Sheerness
(Walker) ; bred July 30th, 1882, from larve collected at Yarmouth,
Isle of Wight (Bankes); imagines caught August 20th-31st, 1883, at
Burnham (Bower); bred June 20th-28th, 1884, from larve obtained at
Yarmouth; June 19th, 1884, imagines captured at Yarmouth,
and August 18th-19th, 1884, also at Yarmouth (Bankes); June 16th,
1884, at Greatham (Sang); August 6th, 1884, at King’s Lynn (Atmore) ;
June 15th, 1885; June 16th, 1886; also bred from July 29th-August
5th, from larve taken on June 16th, 1886; also captured August 9th,
1887, at Yarmouth; and June 15th, 1887, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes) ; July 24th, 1887, at Shoeburyness (Sheldon) ; August 16th,
1888, and July 20th, 1889, and following days at Hartlepool (Robson) ;
June 13th, 1889, at Yarmouth (Bankes); July 25th-August 14th,
1889, on the banks of the Yar near Freshwater (Tutt); imagines
captured July 29th-August 28th and bred October 4th, 1889, at
Portland (Richardson) ; imagines August 9th-30th, 1889, at Hunstan-
ton (Porritt); June 9th, July 25th, 1890, at Benfleet (Whittle) ;
August 1st, 1890, imagines at Portland (Richardson); August 12th,
1890, at Freshwater (Sheldon); June 16th, 1891, at Yarmouth
(Bankes) ; August 1st-15th, 1891, at Freshwater (Hodges) ; imagines
August 22nd, 23rd, 1891, at Shoeburyness; June 6th, and again July
30th, 1892, at Canvey; May 24th, and again August 1st, 1898, at
Canvey; May 19th, and again August 17th, 1894, at Canvey;
June 3rd, and again July 28th, 1894, at Southend (Whittle); July
31st, 1894, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ; imagines August 8rd,
1894, at Yarmouth, Isle of Wight (Watts); June 1st-22nd, 1895, at
Canvey (Whittle) ; May 29th, 1896, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ;
June 26th, 1896, at Canvey; June 24th, 30th, 1897, at Canvey (Whittle) ;
August 28th, 1897, at Maldon (Raynor); June 12th, and again on

ADACTYLUS BENNETII. 151

July 18th, 1898, at Canvey; June 22nd, July 2nd, 14th, 1898, at
Shoeburyness (Whittle); one captured June Ist, 1899, at Benfleet
(Edwards) ; July 4th, 1900, at Maldon (Raynor) ; June 2nd, 1901, at
Benfleet (Whittle); July 18th, 1901, at Northey Island (Raynor) ;
July 21st-24th, 1902, at Benfleet (Whittle) ; first imagines of the year
observed May 80th, fully out from June 8th-15th, 1904, at Strood ;
imagines of second brood already out July 17th, and became very
abundant, the last imago being taken August 17th, 1904 (Ovenden).
Hasits.—In spite of Carrington’s statement that ‘the imagines
may be disturbed from among the foodplant throughout the day,
especially during fine calm afternoons,’’ we would suggest that it is
next to impossible to disturb them in the daytime. Barrett also says
that the moth sits among its foodplant during the day, having its
forewings rolled round the hind into a cylinder, slightly raised and
thrown forwards in such a manner that it resembles a letter “ Y.”
He adds that it flies if disturbed, but only to another part of the bed
of sea-lavender, again to swing by its long legs and assume the
curious rolled-up form which renders it so difficult a creature to set out
after death. Our experience is that they appear naturally on the wing at
dusk, often simultaneously, in great numbers, the time of flight for the
June brood being as nearly as possible 8.40 p.m., and lasting for about
30-40 minutes, after which the imagines are only to be obtained by
searching (Ovenden), that of the second brood from about 7.30 p.m. to
8 p.m., in late July and August, fluttering up the stems of the plants
growing in their habitat, and taking short flights among the herbage,
and from flower to flower of their foodplant, the 2 s, at this time, probably
engaged in the work of oviposition. They fly thus actively for rather
less than three-quarters of an hour, ¢.e., until darkness has fully set in,
and may then be found resting on the herbage, by means of a light, but
comparatively few in number so that one suspects many are still actively
onthe wing. Those at rest are to be found standing on the grass and reed
culms, or on flowers in the vicinity, with the wings rolled up tube-like in
the Y-like form above described, as if to occupy the least possible space,
and so exactly resembling a piece of dried grass as to be perceived with
the greatest difficulty. Moncreaff states (Knt., v., p. 321) that the
imagines fly abundantly over Statice limonium in June and July in the
saltmarshes around Portsmouth. Curtis noted their peculiar mode of
rest when he first discovered the species at Tollsbury, and says that the
mothsassumeda most singularattitude, and resembled so much the dead
pieces of grass that the eye did not readily distinguish them until they
took flight. Sheldon observed them flying at dusk at Freshwater;
Hodgson saw them commonly at the end of July flying at dusk over
S. limonitum at Sheerness. Whittle records examples at sugar at
Shoeburyness, and Morley at electric light in August, 1895, at Ipswich.
Hasirar.—Curtis claims (British Hntom., fo. 471) to have discovered
this species in England, among the grass and seashore plants growing
on the salterns at Tollsbury, on the coast of Essex, in July, 1882.
The haunts of this species are the marshes by the sides of almost all
tidal rivers around our eastern and southern coasts, where the Statice
limonium grows. It haunts such localities along the estuary of the
Thames, and along the banks of the small rivers that open out on the
shores of Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk and Durham, of Kent, Hampshire
and Dorset. It abounds on the marshes at the mouths of the

152 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Thames and Medway; on Portsea Island, the banks of the Yar in
the Isle of Wight, and similar localities. Whittle has observed it in
abundance on saltings about Southend and the salt-marshes at Shoe-
buryness, Raynor on those at Maldon, and Porritt on the salt-marshes
among Statice limonium at Hunstanton. In Durham and Yorkshire it
occurs on the salt-marshes around the mouth of the river Tees, and it
is recorded also from Caithness. Richardson, however, states (Lep.
Fauna of Portland, p. 4) that, at Portland, the species occurs on the
cliffs by the sea, the larve here affecting Statice binervosa (auriculae-
folia) and not the ordinary saltmarsh species, S. limonium. It has
only occurred in the marshes of Holland outside this country.

LocaLitIEs.—Exceedingly local, but possibly still overlooked in many
counties. CarrHness: Bilbster near Wick (Dunbar). Dorsrer: Purbeck—Wych
(Bankes), Portland (Richardson). DurHam: Hartlepool (Robson), Greatham
(Sang). Essex: Benfleet, Shoeburyness, Southend, Canvey (Whittle), Northey
Island, Maldon, (Raynor), Tollsbury salterns (Curtis), St. Osyth (Harwood),
Burnham (Bower). Hants: Isle of Wight—Yarmouth (Bankes), Freshwater
(Sheldon), the banks of the Yar near Freshwater (Tutt). Kent: Medway marshes
—Strood, ete. (Tutt), Sheerness (Hodgson), Sheppey (Walker). Norrotk: Hun-
stanton, common (Porritt), King’s Lynn (Atmore). Surroztx: Ipswich (Morley),
Woodbride (Waller), Southwold (Cruttwell). Yorxs: Middlesborough, near Redcar
(Sang).

Disrripution.—The species at present has only been recorded from
Britain and Holland.

Hontanp: Zeeland near Zurikzee (Fokker).

Superfamily: ALUCITIDES.
CoMPaRISON OF THE PLATYPTILUDH aND ALUCITIDA.

This superfamily, as already noted, includes the whole of the
Palearctic Alucitids in which the forewing of the imago is divided into
two lobes by a fissure on the outer margin in the median area, and
extending almost to the discal cell, and in which the hindwing is divided
into three distinct plumules or feathers separated by two fissures, one
dividing the radial and cubital areas, the other the cubital and anal
areas, the latter fissure more deeply cleft than the former. The
plumules, therefore, are only united towards the base of the wing. We
have already noted (antea, p. 113) that there are exotic Alucitid
genera that have undivided wings, e¢.g., Ochyrotica and Steyanodactyla,
others that have more than two lobes to the forewings, e.g., Heptaloba
(with four) and Deuterocopus (with three).

The Alucitid egg is flat, oval in outline, not markedly truncate at
the micropylar end (as is the Agdistid egg). The Platyptiline egg,
however, is more cylindrical and truncate than the Alucitine, although
there is much variation in the extent of this difference.

The Alucitid larve, in spite of a general similarity, exhibit two
marked varieties of form, (1) the cylindrical (or Platyptiliine) and (2)
the flattened (Alucitine). They vary, however, greatly in the arrange-
ment and character of the tubercles, some larve being almost naked and
exhibiting the primary tubercles as single-haired sete, others having
them modified into complicated warts. In the Platyptiliine section,
there is a tendency to simplification in the tubercular structures, in the
Alucitine a tendency to complication.

The Alucitid pupe are particularly uniform in their general appear-
ance, their mode of attachment, and capacity to perform a peculiar
somersault movement by turning the anterior segments backwards over

PLATYPTILIIDE. 153

the attached posterior segments. They also carry over the larval
tubercular structures in a more or less modified form into this stage.

As we have already pointed out, the oval, larval, pupal
and imaginal characters suggest the division of this superfamily
into two main family divisions—the Platyptiliidae and Alucitidae.
These have already been diagnosed (anted, p. 127). The Platyptilud
ege is larger, fuller, and more cylindrical, with the micropylar end
somewhat flattened; the Alucitid egg is flatter, the two ends more
alike, and the outline more markedly oval. The Platyptiliid larve
are, when young, and sometimes throughout life, internal feeders, of a
form that is fairly cylindrical, whilst those of the Alucitines are chiefly
external feeders, and considerably flattened. The Platyptilid larve of
Marasmarcha, Stenoptilia, etc., although external feeders after hyber-
nation, retain a very typical cylindrical outline, whilst the Alucitine
larvee of Hellinsia, and, to a certain extent, Adaina (an internal feeder
throughout life), are a little flattened. The Platyptiliine (sens. strict.)
larvee, too, have enlarged unjointed secondary skin-points, those of the
Alucitines being, except in a few cases, entirely without them.

The Platyptiliid pupa is, compared with the Alucitid, smooth, the
latter being usually abundantly supplied with complicated wart-like
structures carried on from the larval stage; the former, too, 1s longer
and more cylindrical, the latter somewhat shorter and more flattened,
whilst the fringes of fine hairs, found on the wings, legs and antenne
of the Alucitine pupa, ¢.g., Oidaematophorus (lithodactyla), Ovendenia
(septodactyla), Porrittia (yalactodactyla), etc.,are entirely wanting in most
Platyptiliid pupe, eg., Hucnemidophorus (rhododactyla), Platyptilia
(isodactylus), etc. The fine regular transverse wrinkles, seen in the
Agdistid pupa, are also present, and hardly more irregularly, in the
Platyptiliine pupa, whilst in the Alucitine pupa, markedly in that of
Oidaematophorus (lithodactyla), they are much larger and coarser.

In the Platyptiliid imagines there is a general tendency towards a
triangular shape of the forewing, with somewhat pointed angular apex,
considerable length of outer margin, and marked development of anal
angle, the outer points of the fissure also showing distinct angulation.
In the Alucitine forewing, the plumules are more linear, the apical
and anal angles obsolete, and their edges strongly fringed for some
distance along the costal and inner margins. The Platyptiliid hind-
wing is usually less deeply fissured than that of the Alucitines, and,
whilst the outer margin of the plumules still retains some distinct sign
of the hind-marginal outline of the wing in the former, that of the
Alucitine plumules is obsolete and the plumules more lineated. The
most characteristic imaginal feature, however, is the structure of the ?
frenulum, this character being, indeed, quite critical as between the
two families, that of the Platyptiliid imago with a single, and that of
the Alucitine with a double, spina. In this respect the Agdistids show
alliance with the Platyptiliids and not with the Alucitids.

Family: Puatyprimups,

The family name for this group is founded on Platyptiliae, Hb., the
first coitus of Hiibner’s family Obtusae (Verzeichniss, p. 429), the other
coitus of the group being Amblyptiliae. In this family there are
apparently four distinct subfamilies, the Platyptiliinae, the Ambly-
ptiliinae, the Stenoptiliinae, and the Ovwyptilinae, although the
second and third are very closely allied. Of these, on many

154 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

characters, the Stenoptiliines appear to be the most generalised, the
Oxyptiliines the most specialised. Chapman considers, however, for
various reasons, that the Platyptiliines are-the most generalised of the
family. He bases his opinion on the following details: (1) The larval
tubercles in structure and arrangement come nearest to those of
the Agdistids. (2) The pupa is nearest to the Agdistids in smooth-
ness, form, etc., also, though it has the dorso-lateral keels very
highly marked, they are of the simplest structure and carry no special
developments of the tubercles on them. (3) The imago has the most
marked hind-margins, their ancestors, no doubt, had good hind-
margins; these fail a good deal in the Stenoptiliids, more so in the
Oxyptiliids, where they are sometimes very like the Alucitines.

_ Throughout the family, as already noted, the ovum tends toa rather
cylindrical outline. The larve, too, both internal-feeding and external-
feeding, have a more cylindrical form than those of the Alucitids.
In the Platyptiliines the larval tubercles are of a very simple character,
comparatively so also in the Amblyptiliines and Stenoptiliines but
these develop into more or less complicated warts in the Oxyptilines,
in which, in its highest forms, i and ii form a single dorsal wart,
and iii, iv, v and vil are also complicated wart-structures. In the
Platyptiliids, too, the larve are characterised by a very general
clothing of enlarged secondary skin-points or skin-hairs. The simple
arrangement of the tubercular hairs is of a very generalised character.
One of the peculiarly Platyptiliid structures is that, on the prothoracic
plate, the tubercular hairs show three sete along either side of its
anterior border, whilst behind each half of this row are three other
sete, not in a row, the internal one being well in front of the posterior
border of the plate, the middle one, which is the strongest, being
further back, but nearer the middle line than the middle hair of the
front row; the third rather towards the extreme end of the plate
than part of a posterior row, and being generally the weakest. In
Capperia (heterodactyla) it looks as if each hair had subdivided and
formed a little group of hairs without distribution; it is also to be
observed that the larva of this species has. no central hairs (?) on the pro-
thorax, thus following the Platyptiliid type ;* also that, in the larva of
this species, we find the pale central line (characteristic of the Platyp-
tiliids) that divides the prothoracic plate, all of which characters
suggest the Oxyptiline connection with the Platyptiliid stirps. Its
tubercles, however, are modified (as in the Alucitids) into real warts.
On the other hand, the larva of Capperia has a secondary tubercle
behind i and ii on the meso- and metathorax, a very unusual
character in Platyptiliid, and very usual character in Alucitid, larve.
In fact, with the exception of a suspicious mark in Stenoptilia ptero-
dactyla (fuscus) in this position, which, however, carries no hair, it
appears not to be present in any Platyptiliid larva examined. It may
be associated with an external-feeding habit (Chapman).

The Platyptiliid pupe are smooth, and more rounded and cylindrical
than the Alucitine form. It shows a waist if viewed laterally, but
has the marked ventral curve at the anal end; in fact, it shows a
marked tendency in this direction towards the striking Agdistid pupal

* It is remarkable that the larva of Alucita pentadactyla is the only Alucitine
species of those examined without these central hairs (Chapman).

PLATYPTILIIDE. 155

characters. The smoothness is varied in the more or less external-
feeding (in the larval stage) species by the presence of remarkable dorsal
projections (Amblyptiliines), or armed processes (Oxyptilines), but still
the pupxareessentiallysmooth. The Oxyptiline pupe havea particularly
hairy appearance. It is to be noted that Marasmarcha (lunaedactyla),
Amblyptilia (cosmodactyla, ete.), and Capperia (heterodactyla) possess the
most exposed-feeding larvee of the family. The processes just referred to
as present in the more specialised pupal forms are remarkable develop-
ments of a dorso-lateral ridge, carrying hooked structures on which the
trapezoidal tubercles are placed. Marasmarcha, belonging perhaps to
the Oxyptiline section, has an almost identical pupa with Amblyptilia,
whilst the Oxyptilines themselves have a similar structure on the
anterior part of the dorsum only, on the posterior part the ridge is
modified into a structure almost identical with the dorsal fan-ridge of
certain Alucitid pups. The Stenoptiliine pup, with no armature
except the simple generalised setz carried forward to this from the
larval stage, are paralleled by pupe of equally simple structure in the
Platyptiliines. The pupa of Hucnemidophorus shows the commencement
of the latero-dorsal ridge which carries the trapezoidal tubercles, and
which is so remarkably developed in Amblyptilia and Marasmarcha, so
similar is it in these that one is left in doubt as to whether the latter
is really Amblyptiliine or Oxyptiline, and ends in our supposing that
it is an offshoot of the former, that has already developed certain
imaginal characters (chiefly neurational) belonging to the latter.
Chapman notes (in litt.) that Marasmarcha is an Amblyptiliid genus
that has specialised its imago without carrying the larva on.
Although of little service for detailed structural purposes, reference
to Buckler’s figures of some of the different forms of Platyptiliid pupe
(Larvae, etc., pl. elxiii., figs, 2c, 3b-3c, 4b and Ye), representing four
distinct types, may prove interesting. Of these, that of KH. rhodo-
dactyla (2c) appears to be the most like those of the Alucitids, the
frontal beak being but little developed ; that of Gillmeria ochrodactyla
(3b-3c), on the other hand, is remarkably developed, being exceptionally
elongated frontally with an outward and downward, somewhat ventral,
curve. That of Platyptilia isodactylus (4b) tends in the direction of
the last, but is much less markedly developed, whilst that of Adkinia
bipunctidactyla is less pointed frontally than that of P. csodactylus.

The imaginal characters of this family are most marked. These
have already been dealt with (anted) and may be briefly noted as—(1)
The angulated outline of forewing. (2) The less highly developed
fissures of the hindwing. (8) The anal nervure alone entering the
third plumule of hindwing. (4) The discoidal cell of the forewing
closed by a vertical (or only slightly outwardly inclined) transverse
nervure. (5) The @ frenulum with only a single spina. (6) The
plumules of the hindwings differently shaped. (7) The frequent
presence of scale-tufts on the third plumule of the hindwing.

The Palearctic Platyptilids, with very few exceptions, hybernate
as larve in the second stadium. At this stage they are all internal-
feeders, z.e., miners, although many feed more or less exposed after
hybernation. Typical among these are Adkinia bipunctidactyla,
Stenoptilia fuscus, Platyptilia gonodactyla, etc. Some of them,
however, must do little real resting once the foodplant has begun to
grow, witness the size of some larve of P. gonodactyla, P. isodactylus

156 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

and Adkinia bipunctidactyla, in the earliest shoots of their focdplants,
although it must be confessed that they grow very rapidly in their final
stadia and are also double-brooded. The size of the larva of P.
calodactyla (zetterstedtiz) in spring also suggests a possibility of very early
spring- (if not winter-) feeding. Still the larve all appear to go into
winter-quarters in their second instar. On the other hand, the larve
of Stenoptilia fuscus, Marasmarcha lunaedactyla, etc., appear to remain
quite tiny until comparatively late in the spring, and then to feed up
pretty quickly. Amblyptilia cosmodactyla (acanthodactyla) and A.
punctidactyla are striking exceptions to this rule, hybernating as
imagines and laying their eggs apparently in May and June of the
following year.
Subfamily: Piatyprinunz.
Tribe: Puatypriniupt.

This tribe is readily recognised in the imaginal stage, by the
squared outline of the apical area of the forewings, the two lobes of
which are so far similarly-shaped that each has a distinct and well-
developed anal angle. In the hindwings the plumules are differently
shaped, the first fissure being markedly less than the second, whilst
the third plumule usually carries a tuft of black scales on its hind-
margin.

Whether we are accurate in treating these as the most generalised
of the Platyptilids or not may be open to question. In the larval stage,
this tribe most distinctly has the least specialised tubercles, and the
sete are of the simplest form. It is possible that the earliest plume
species had larve that were miners, and that Agdistines and Alucitines
have specialised farthest away from them as external-feeders in different
directions, whilst the Stenoptiliids, etc., retain the habit in the early larval
stages and specialise in their tubercles towards the Alucitines in the later
stadia; the Oxyptilids retain, within their limits, larve of internal-feeding
habit when young and external when older, and others that are entirely
external-feeders. Among the Platyptiliids (sens. rest.) we have those
that have remained miners and have remained simple in their armature
_ In consequence. Then, with regard to the secondary hairs, one also
finds the Platyptiliids differing from the rest; in the other groups
these (whether scattered on skin or supplementary in tubercular warts)
are true hairs, whilst in the Platyptilias they are merely enlarged skin-
points and not true hairs.

It is to be noted that the larve of Hredericina have no secondary
skin-hairs, in that of Platyptilia (isodactylus) they are wanting on the pale
areas, whilst in Gillmeria (pallidactyla) they are numerous. Another
very important larval character is that, on the meso- and metathorax,
tubercles i and 11 have separate hairs, and ‘are placed in transverse line
across thorax, as in Agdistids, whilst in all the other Platyptiliines
(Eucnemidophorus, Amblyptilia, etc.), 1 and 11 are conjoined on thorax
on either side of median line; again, iv and v present separate hairs
on a single plate, not showing the conjoined bases of Hucnemidophorus,
Amblyptilia and Adkinia, nor the further developed wart-like structure
of Stenoptilia ; further, the accessory post-spiraculars are both absent
throughout the Platyptilias, nor are there any enlarged secondary
hairs, whilst the assumed higher Platyptiliids present at least some
traces of them, being least developed apparently in Adkinia zopho-
dactylus.

PLATYPTILIIDI. 157

Jordan states (Hint. Mo. Mag., xvill., p. 74) that the Platyptiliid
species (sens. rest.) have larve that are generally internal-feeders in
composite plants; according to Walsingham, the larve of P.
carduidactylus are gregarious in the heads of thistles (reminding one of
the feeding-habit of the spring-feeding larvee of P. gonodactyla, although
those of the latter species live singly), whilst those of P. orthocarpi feed
on the buds and flowers of Orthocarpus, one of the Scrophulariids.

It is interesting to observe that this group presents larve that still
retain a certain remnant of the cocoon-forming habit, ¢.y., F'redericina
(calodactyla), Platyptilia (isodactylus, yonodactyla) ; 1t appears, however,
to have been lost in Gillmeria. Here it is probably the remnant of a
former ancestral habit. On the Alucitid side, in Adaina (microdactyla),
on the other hand, the puparium is a comparatively recent acquire-
ment, and may be more properly regarded as not really a cocoon at all,
but the hybernaculum, used later for pupation.

The pupa of Platyptilia is apparently little specialised. It is
short and thick, that of the Stenoptiliids being decidedly more long
and slender, after the style of the Agdistids, smooth and with simple
sete, and is, as far as regards tubercles, the most primitive of all the
Platyptiliine pups, indeed, so minute are the primitive sete that they
can only be discerned with a powerful lens; the Stenoptiliines are
somewhat close, and so also is Hucnemidophorus, but the former lead
on to Marasmarcha and Amblyptilia, and, although not presenting the
remarkable developments exhibited by the latter, are, however, already
considerably specialised.

We have already noted the peculiarity of the wing form; in
addition we may note that the apex of the forewing is also sometimes
drawn out so as to be slightly hooked. We have further drawn
attention to the pecuharly Platyptiliid wing-form exhibited in the
undivided-wing genera Ochyrotica and Steyanodactyla, and, indeed, .
except for the fissures, there is little difference in the outline of these
and the strict Platyptiliid species. Little is known of the course of the
development of the scales on the third plumule of the hindwing.
They really characterise the whole family, Platyptiliidae, and their
absence in this group seems rather to be a suggestion of specialisation
than otherwise; thus Gillmeria (ochrodactyla), Buckleria (paludum),
Stenoptilia (pterodactyla), etc., appear to have lost them. Chapman
suggests that, theoretically, in Platyptiliids (including Oxyptilids and
Stenoptiliids) these black scales exist all along the margin, but are more
developed at particular points more or less different in each species.
It is oftentimes, of course, not the same patch developed in all species
or the same little group. 6. paludum, which has practically lost them
still occasionally shows traces of them. Chapman has an example
with traces of them on one side only, and another with traces only on
the other side. Again, as between the Stenoptiliids and the Platyp-
tiliids, 1t is to be noted that the latter have the neuration of the fore-
wings, as represented by the nervure forming the upper boundary of
the discoidal cell, more generalised than the former (see Hofmann, Die
deutsch. Pteroph., pl. 1., fig. 1, for Platyptiliid form). It is noticeable
also that the Platyptiluds, that mine in the larval stage, have traces
of the more usual wing-markings, a character largely lost in those
assumed to be of more specialised wing-structure. It may be worthy
of remark here that, in all these considerations, one has to ealeulate
on cross-characters, t.e., specialisations in certain directions and not in

158 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

others, e.g., the Alucitines (as represented by Alucita pentadactyla) have a
highly specialised wing-form compared with any Platyptiliine, whilst
there can be no doubt whatever that the ‘‘double spina”’ of the frenulum
of the former is more generalised than the “single spina” of the
frenulum of the latter.

Our tribe Platyptiliidi, as the genus Platyptilus, is thus diagnosed
by Wallengren (Kong. Svensk. Vaten. Akad. Handl., iii., p. 11) at
length :
~~ Antenne of both sexes with very short cilia. Forehead adorned with a more
or less elongated tuft. Palpi longer than the head, rather rounded, slightly
ascending, with the last joint more or less elongated, sometimes a little drooping.
Legs longer, slender, the tibie sometimes thickened towards the apex. First pair
of spines on the posterior tibie slightly unequal, second pair almost equal, shorter
than the shortest spine of the first pair. Anterior wings not divided to the third
part of their length, the segments broad, the posterior segment almost hatchet-
shaped, the posterior angle of both segments well-marked. The segments of the
inferior wings more slender, the third division with the anal angle sufficiently
marked but nearer to the base. The anterior wings flat, covering the inferior when
at rest. The veins of the anterior wings ten in number; first and second separate,
coming from the base, the third from the posterior margin of the cell, all running
into the posterior segment, the sixth coming out near the anterior angle of the cell, and
running into the posterior angle of the anterior segment, the seventh two-branched,
coming out from the anterior angle of the cell, and running into the apex of the
anterior segment, the eighth and ninth coming out from the anterior side of the
cell and running into the anterior margin of the wing, the tenth coming from the
base and ending almost in the middle of the anterior margin. The cell well
marked, with a very slender little transverse vein, almost straight, closed. Veins
of the posterior wings three in number, the first coming from the base, two-
branched, running into the anterior segment, the second three-branched, running
ee the second division, and the third simple, running into the third division. No
cell.

Hofmann gives (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 36 et seq.) a further
excellent diagnosis of the group. He notes the neuration as being not
different from that of Hucnemidophorus, and adds the following account
of the general character of the markings to be found in the group: “‘ The
costa and inner margin of the forewing are rather darker than the central
area; the former is usually sprinkled with fine white dots; behind the spots
or the streak at the fissure, a paler area may usually be seen which ex-
tends faintly over the upper segmentor lobe, but sometimesalso passeson
to the lower segment, thus forming a pale, though indistinct, transverse
band just before the fissure; a fine bright transverse line often runs
across both the segments; on the underside, the lighter area behind
the costal triangle and the transverse line across the two segments are
noticeable. The 1st segment of the hindwings often has a bright
spot or transverse line, straight or diagonal, before the apex; the Ist
and 8rd segments are often dusted with white, the 2nd segment, on the
other hand, is always unicolorous. The fringes of the segments of the
forewings have a dark, more or less thick, basal line, which penetrates
sometimes more and sometimes less deeply into the mouth of the
fissure, and also runs round the anal angle of the lower segment. On
the inner margin of the forewings, below the fissure and beyond the
centre, there is a small black tuft of scales in the fringe. At the place
where the anal angle of the 3rd segment of the hindwing would be,
there is a tooth-shaped, or stripe-like, collection of black scales in the
hind-marginal fringe. The posterior part of the thorax and the Ist
segment of the abdomen are mostly whitish, or whitish-yellow in
colour. The front and middle tibie somewhat thickened at the ends

PLATYPTILIIDI. 159

with dark scaling, the pale hind tibie, as a rule, ringed with darker
colour in the centre and at the ends.”’

The same author (op. cit., p. 38) also gives a detailed account, with
figures, of the g genitalorgans. Hesays that, in the different Platyp-
tiliid species, the various parts (pl. 111., figs. 1a-c) show little or no differ-
ence. The dorsal plate of the ninth segment consists of two symmetrical,
nearly square, parts, which become somewhat narrower behind, and
have rounded corners and are bent inwards slightly at the sides; they
have their exterior margins bent downwards; a strong, mostly hairy,
uncus (representing the tenth dorsal plate), bent decidedly downwards,
arises in the median line between the two halves of the ninth dorsal
plate. The genital claspers are extended, over-reaching the uncus, and
strongly concave on their inner surface. The ninth ventral plate is
small, square and emarginate behind, or oval and furnished with a

short point behind.
When at rest, the wings are held horizontally, flat, and at right

angles to the body, so as to form a straight line; the hindwings drawn
up under the forewings; the insects cling by the front and middle
legs, whilst the hind legs stand out behind and away from the body,
or otherwise have the tarsi crossed over the tip of the abdomen. A
similar habit prevails in Hucnemidophorus, Amblyptilia, etc.

Hofmann gives the following diagnostic table of the Platyptiliid
species found in Germany (Die deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 39 et seq.) :—

I. The third plumule with a dark tuft of scales on the inner margin near the
apex—metzneri, Zell.
II. The third plumule with a dark tooth- or streak-like tuft of scales in the
centre of the inner marginal fringe (sometimes only very faint or even quite absent).
A. Palpi and frontal tuft about as long as the head, or somewhat shorter ;
frontal tuft more or less exceeded by the tips of the palpi.
1. With only one light band across both lobes (as the pale spot before the
cleft is never developed into a complete transverse band).
a. With dark costal triangle*.

a. Expanse 12mm. Forewings grey-brown,

with little yellowish mixture, strong

white scaling, and not sharply defined

darkening of the inner tip in contrast with

the rest of the wing surface; the dark

basal line of the outer marginal fringes of

the fore-tip interrupted by a white spot ;

the black scales of the inner margin of

the third feather form only a short streak
or spot ; . gonodactyla, Schiff.

B. Small, 9°5mm. -10mm.., , dark ereyish- brown

with little white scaling ; ; the dark basal

line of the outer marginal fringes of the

fore-tip not interrupted. The scale-spot

in the inner marginal fringes of the

third feather very small .. ‘ . farfarella, Zell.

y. Large, 14mm.-15mm., ochreous- yellow; first

feather below unmarked (rarely with an

indication of a fine yellowish transverse

line before the apex). The dark basal

line of the outer marginal fringes of the

fore-tip not interrupted. Costal triangle

curtailed below. The accumulation of

black scales in the inner marginal fringes

of the third feather streak- like and rather
long .. : . .. nemoralis, Zell.

* The four species a- 3 have similarly formed genitalia in the é (Hofmann).

160 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

6. Small, 10mm.-11mm., ochreous-yellow; first
feather below invariably with a white
transverse line before the tip (sometimes
indistinct). Basal line of the outer mar-
ginal fringes of the fore-tip mostly inter-
rupted in the centre. Costal triangle
running to a point below. The shading*
of the hind-tip sharply defined against the
yellow ground colour; scale tuft in the
inner marginal fringes of the third

feather dot-like .. .. zetterstedtii, Zell.
. Without dark costal triangle—isodactylus, Zell. (stmilidactyla, Dale,
by error. {)

2. With two bright transverse lines, one just before the cleft and a second
across the centre of both lobes—tessaradactylus, Linn.

B. Palpi and frontal tuft much longer than the head ; frontal tuft reaches
to the tips of the palpi; upper lobe very acute. Fringes with darker
basal line. Yellow species.

1. Ochreous-yellow, with mostly very distinctly

expressed brown markings . .. ochrodactyla, Hb.
2. Almost unicolorous, rusty yellow, without clearly
expressed markings .. : .. bertrami, Ross.

We give this tabulation simply because oF its value in discriminating
the species; as being of scientific value in showing the alliance of the
groups it is poor enough, although the separation of metzneri, on the
one hand, and ochrodactyla and pallidactyla (bertrami) on the other,
appears to be sound.

The natural subdivisions, details of which will be given in our
consideration of the separate genera, appear to us to be as follows:

A. Palpi or frontal tuft as long as; or shorter than, the head.
I. With the black scales markedly collected in a small patch near the apex of
the third plumule—Mariana metzneri, Zell.
II. With the black scales markedly collected in a small patch near the centre
of the third plumule.

a. With dark costal triangle, and two transverse lobal lines, or bands, more
or less clearly defined, one before fissure, the other across lobes—
FREDERICINA tesseradactyla, L., calodactyla, Schiff., nemoralis, Zell.

8. With dark costal triangle, and one clearly defined (external one) lobal
transverse line—Puatyptiiia farfarella, Zell., gonodactyla, Schiff.,
isodactylus, Zell.

B. Palpi and frontal tuft longer than the head.
I. With the black scales on the third plumule absent.

a. With the dark costal triangle obsolete—Ginumenria ochrodactyla, Hb.,
pallidactyla, Haw.

Genus: FRrepericina, Tutt.

Synonymy.—Genus: Fredericina, Tutt, ‘‘ Ent. Record,”’ xvii., p. 37 (1905).
Alucita, Schiff., ‘‘Sys. Verz.,’’ 1st ed., p. 146 (1776) ; 2nd ed., p. 128 (1801);
ibs es ure Schmett., PONS Nise TlBey atk, 7 (1804), pl. vii., figs. 7. 38 (1823) ;
Zett., ‘‘Ins. Lapp.,’’ p. 1012, var. a-b (1840). Platyptilia, Hb., “* Verzeaame
429 (1825); Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,” vi., p. 333 (1852); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,”’
2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ iii., pt. 2, p.
785 (1877) ; Frey, ‘‘ Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 428 (1880); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,”’ x., p.
163 (1889); xi., p. 179 (1890) ; ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 48 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent.
Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 486 (1890); Hofmann, ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ p. 48 (1895) ; Meyr.,
‘‘ Handbook,’’ p. 434 (1895); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 72 (1901).
Pterophorus, Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,” xi., p. 652, fig. 9 (1838) ; Zell., ‘Isis,’ p. 777

* In several specimens of gonodactyla and zetterstedtii there is no shading of
the hind-tip, in which case only the grey-brown or yellow coloration of the hind-tip
is respectively distinctive (Hofmann).

+ Similidactyla, Dale=lithodactyla, Tr., and has nothing to do with this
genus. -Hofmann is here possibly dealing with isodactylus, Zell., under the name
of similidactyla, Dale. The species often has a fairly developed costal triangle (Tutt).

a ee eee

Ce eee

PLATYPTILIUDI. 161

(in part) (1841); Dup., ‘‘Cat. Meth.,” p. 381 (in part) (1845); Tgstrm., ‘‘ Finl.
Fjar.,’”’ p. 154 (1847); Frey, ‘‘ Tin. und Pter.,’’ p. 403 (1856); Sta., ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,’’
ii., p. 44 (1856); ‘‘Man.,”’ ii., p. 441 (1859). Platyptilus, Zell., ‘‘Isis,’’ p. 777
(1861) ; H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’”’ v., p. 368 (1855); Wallgrn., ‘‘ Skand. Fjader.,’’
p. 11 (1859) ; Wocke, ‘‘ Stett. Ent. Ztg.,’’ xxili., p. 254 (1862); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,’’ p. 121 (1869); Nolck., ‘‘Lep. Fn. Estl.,’’ p. 801 (1871). Amblyptilia,
South, ‘‘Ent.,’’ xv., p. 34 (1882).

The genus Fredericina was created in 1905 (Fnt. Rec., xvii.,
p. 87), when calodactyla, S.V. (=<zetterstedtit, Zell.), was named as the
type. This became necessary owing to the discovery of certain marked
differences that were found to occur in the early stages when compared with
Platyptilia. The egg is long, roughly cylindrical, somewhat inclined to
the brick-shape of the Agdistid egg, the micropylar end being wide
and flattened, its nadir more elongated and rounded, and with only faint
traces of surface reticulation. The larva is peculiar in that it is without
any trace of the enlarged skin-points or skin-spines (not true skin-
hairs) which are to be found in Platyptilia, Gillmeria, etc. As these
are quite sui generis among “plume” larve, it would appear that
Fredericina is a generalised form and never had them. Skin-hairs
(as described elsewhere among the plumes) are absent in the Platyp-
tilids, but they are well provided with these httle unjointed spines,
which, however, as already noted, are absent in F'redericina. The larval
dorsal tubercles of the meso- and metathorax show, in F’. calodactyla,
the dorsal hairs (i and ii) of either side on a separate plate, but these
so close together that, in some instances, it is not quite clear
that they are really separate. In DPlatyptilia (gonodactyla) they
are in every case both on the same plate. The larva of this
genus forms a puparium in which to pupate as in Platyptilia.
The pupa shows the double dorsal ridge weak; the nosehorn sharp
(0.6mm. long in F’. calodactyla), the anal end blunt, the cremaster with
very few hairs; the posterior borders of abdominal segments smooth ;
the colour homogeneous and dark. Judged by external imaginal
characters, nemoralis and tesseradactyla belong to Fredericina. This
suspicion may be entirely upset, when more is known of the early
stages. Speaking of the closely-allied pairs of Platyptiliid species,
likely to be mistaken for each other, ¢e.g., gonodactyla and farfarella,
calodactyla and nemoralis, Hofmann observes that they may be readily
recognised as distinct species by the differences in the apophyses oi the
penis and of the ninth ventral plate.

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA, Schiff. and Denis.

SynonymMy.—Species : Calodactyla, Schiff. and Denis, ‘‘ Schmett. Wien.,’’ lst
ed., p. 146 (1775) ; Ill., ‘‘Schmett. Wien.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 128 (1801); Hb., ‘* Schmett.
Kur.,’’ Aluc. pl. ii., fig. 7 (1804); ‘‘ Verz.,’’ p. 429 (1825). Petradactyla, Hb.,
‘‘Schmett. Hur.,”” Aluc., pl. vii., figs. 37, 38 (circ. 1823); ‘‘ Verz.,’’ p. 429 (1825).
Calodactylus, Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’’ xi., p. 652 in part, pl. 313, fig. 9(1838). Tes-
seradactyla, vars. a-b, Zett., ‘‘Ins. Lapp.,’’ p. 1012 (1840). Zetterstedtii, Zell.,
‘‘Tsis,’’ p. 777 in part, vars. a et h, pl. iv., figs. 3-4 (1841) ; Standfuss, ‘‘ Stett.
Ent. Zeit.,’’ p. 156 (1848) ; Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Meth.,”’ p. 381 in part (1845); Testrm.,
“*Finl. Fjar.,’’? p. 154 (1847); Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 333 (1852); H.-Sch.,
“Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 368 (1855); Frey, ‘‘ Tin. Pter. Sch.,” p. 403 (1856) ; ‘‘ Lep.
der Schweiz,” p. 428 (1880); Stainton, ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,’’ ii., p. 44 (1856); ‘‘ Man.,’? ii.,
p. 441 (1859) ; Wallgrn., ‘““Skand. Fyiid.,’’ p. 11 (1859); Jord., ‘*‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”
vi., p. 121 (1869) ; viii., p. 187 (1871); Nolck., ‘‘Lep. Fn. Hstl.,”? p. 801 (1871);
Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 785 (1877); Staud., ‘* Hor.
Soc. Ent. Ross.,’’ xv., p. 423 (1880); Snell., ‘De Vlind.,”’ ii., pt. 2, p. 1020 (1882);
South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xv., p. 33 (1882) ; xxii., pp. 29, 103 (1889); Leech, ‘* Brit. Pyr..’’
etc., pl. xvi., fig. 7 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ xi., p.179 (1890); ‘*Pter. Brit.,’’

162 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

p. 48 (1895) ; Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,’’ p. 48 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook, ete.,”’
p: 434 (1895); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’’? 3rd ed., p. 72 (1901); Barrt., ‘‘ Lep.
Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 355 (1904). Megadactylus, Mann, ‘“‘Stett. Ent. Ztg.,’’ p. 209
(1850). Zetterstedtti, Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 342 (1871) ; ees a
‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,”’ p. 486 (1890). « Zetterstedii, Tutt, ‘« Young Nat., a
p. 163 (1889). Nemoralis, H. -Sch., ‘‘Sys. Bearb. 5 BAH eT (1855); South, “Bint. 2?
xiv., p. 304, pl.i., fig. 19 (1881). Zetterstedti, L: ech, ‘‘Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 54, pl. xvi., fig.
Tf (1886). Taeniadactylus, South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xv., p. 34 (1882) ; xxii., p. 30 (1889).
[There appears to us to be little doubt, from the evidence offered by Schiffer-
miiller’s description of calodactyla, and Hiibner’s figure of the same, that both are
to be referred to this species. Certain it is that, in both cases, they are Platyptilias,
with which Hiibner, in the Verzeichniss, p. 429, places them, and that both are
the same species. In addition, Charpentier states that they agree (see anted, p. 76),
and that gonodactyla, Schiff., is only a worn calodactyla, Schiff. (anted, p. 77), a mis-
take that might readily occur, but which shows also that both are Platyptilias.
Zeller’s own opinion (Isis, 1841, p. 879), that ‘hitherto he had thought that calo-
dactyla, Hb., fig. 7, was meant for zetterstedtii, an opinion confirmed by its union
in the Verzeichniss with megadactyla, Hb. (gonodactyla, Schitf.),’’ isimportant, but, as
Hiibner wrongly referred the larva of Amblyptilia cosmodactyla, Hb., to calodactyla,
Hb. (Raupen, etc., ix., pl.c, figs. a-d), Zeller avers himself unable to solve the puzzle.
We cannot understand Zeller’s difficulty. Hiibner’s error in referring the larva
and pupa to his calodactyla is evident. An Amblyptiliid larva and pupa cannot
produce a Platyptiliid imago. Zeller thinks also (Isis, 1841, p. 879) that Hiibner’s
petradactyla is nearly allied to zetterstedtii. Herrich-Schiffer (Sys. Bearb., v.,
p. 368) expressly states that they are identical, and Hofmann agrees (Die deutsch.
Pteroph., p. 194) with this and treats it as the same species. This is our opinion. ]
ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION™.—Dunkelbraun, und oraniengelb-gemischtes
Geistchen (Schiffermiller). [Ground colour reddish-brown, costa
darker ; a distinct dark triangular costal blotch; the base of this blotch
towards outer margin, its apex on the costa, at about one-third from
base of wing; beyond the costal blotch a transverse yellow band extending
to fissure ; below fissure the yellow band is continued towards the inner
margin as the base of a wedge-shaped mark, which runs along the
inner margin of wing and points towards base of wing; this mark is
edged superiorly with white, and this is continued as a fine white inner
marginal line to the base; below it, about two-thirds from base, is a
small, dark, longitudinal mark ; across the two lobes and passing over
the fissure is a pale line edged narrowly with black centrally, and much
more broadly internally; three very short black longitudinal streaks
arising therefrom pass into the yellow transverse band and point towards
base, the most marked of these on costa; two small, black, longitudinal
discal streaks; some white scales at end of fissure. Fringes greyish
edged internally with darker. Hindwings unicolorous, reddish-grey,
apex of lst plumule rather dark, upper margin of all plumules edged
with pale ; fringes of plumules grey, mixed with darker scales on lower
margin of 8rd plumule (Hitibner, Schmett. Eur., Aluc., pl. i1., fig. 7).]
Imaco.—19mm.-24mm. Anterior wings, apical point sharp and
dark; ground colour greyish-ochreous; the costa darker; alarge triangular
costal blotch, base towards fissure apex on costa, of adeep red-brown colour;
a short dark median longitudinal discal dash; imner margin whitish,
cutting off darker longitudinal area between this and middle of wing; this
darker longitudinal area with the appearance of being made of dark

* Zeller’s description of zetterstedtii reads as follows :—‘‘ Capillis in fasciculum
brevem frontalem productis; alis anterioribus dilute ochraceis, marginibus brunnes-
centibus, triangulo costali ante fissuram cinnamomeo, striga laciniarum pallida ;
in digiti tertii dorso medio lineola atro-squamata. Var. b. Solito major”’ (Isis, 1841,
p. 777).

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA,. 163

lineations ; two small black points on the inner margin, one about two-
thirds from base, and one midway between this and anal angle (latter looks
like a continuation of base of costal triangular blotch in crescent form); a
pale crescent of ground colour, separating base of triangular blotch from
a dark transverse band extending from costa across both lobes to inner
marein (this band varies much in width and appearance),and sometimes
contains quite a black line on the costa; a pale transverse line of ground
colour crosses both lobes nearer hind margin than end of fissure; fringes
white, except at anal angle where is a dark grey patch. Posterior wings
reddish-grey, with a very mottled appearance; the costal edges of
plumules pale shiny-grey; the apex of 1st plumule dark; the fringes
long and pale grey, those of 1st plumule edged internally with dark, as
in the lobes of the forewing; those of the hindmargin of the 3rd plumule
mixed with black scales from base to nearly half-way to apex, where
they become segregated into a conspicuous extended bunch (very
inconspicuous in worn examples).

Variation.—The species varies considerably in colour, size, and
markings. In some examples the prevailing colour appears to be
reddish-brown, the costa, inner margin, triangular costal blotch, and
transverse lobal bands being of this colour, the pale tint being
confined to a longitudinal section of the middle of the wing, the pale
lunule at the base of triangle (and its weaker continuation) and the
narrow transverse lobal line; in others the pallid colour is predomi-
nant and the reddish-brown areas ill-developed ; in others again the
base of the triangular patch is extended to, and connected with, the
lower half of the dark lobal band. In tint, too, the pale areas have
in some specimens a much greyer, in others a more ochreous, hue.
[ [he above notes were made from the examples in the Frey collection. |
Our British examples vary considerably, and, on the whole, are slightly
smaller and darker than those represented in the Frey collection; they are
particularly wanting in the marked mottled appearance, and the dark
markings are considerably more intense than in the continental speci-
mens examined; in this respect, they are much nearer Htibner’s figure
although the ochreous band at fissure and pale wedge-shaped mark below
the costal triangle are never yellow as in that; the deeper ground
colour, more intense lobal bands, costal triancle, and inner marginal
lineole, darker fringes, as well as the much darker hindwings, are very
characteristic. Oneremarkablespecimen in our collection, howev er, taken
by South in Devonshire, is exceedingly pale, almost of a whitish colour.
The species varies in size in England, for South notes a specimen
captured in North Devon (and fioured Eintom.; ive, pli dy dias 29°
under the name of nemoraiis) that he says measured rather over 14
lines (rather over 29mm.) in expanse. Some from Devonshire and
Kent average about 20mm.-23mm., the largest being only 23-2mm.
Zeller, however, was the first to notice this large aberration (sis, 1841,
p. 977). The forms that have come under our notice appear to be as
follows :—

1. Ground colour whitish (almost white); the costal triangle, and lineole on
inner margin the only darker (brown) markings, the nae bands and normally
darker markings faintly marked in ochreous=ab. pallida, n. ab.

2. Ground colour ochreous, the costal triangle, costa, eesti on inner margin,
and transverse lobal bands reddish-brown = var. (et. ab.) cetterstedtii, Zell.

3. Ground colour ochreous, suffused with brown seales, the costal triangle,
costal margin, lineole of inner margin, and particularly the lobal bands of a deep

164 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

eee inclining to blackish ; fringes black=var. (et ab.) taeniadactylus,
outh.

4. As in 3, but the costal triangle rather less distinct, and fringes white=ab.
petradactyla, Hb.

5. Ground colour yellow (bright ochreous), and confined to the transverse lobal
lines and inner marginal half of wing; the rest suffused with red brown; the costal
triangle, lobal bands, and inner marginal lineole nearly black=calodactyla, Hb.

We note the Bossekop examples as being particularly bright in
colour, but still they are very like the Silesian and central Huropean
type, although Wocke notes those taken at the foot of the Scaaddavara,
as a little smaller (2l1mm.-22mm.) than those from the Riesengebirge,
whilst Fuch’s doronicella is, like petradactyla, a merely slight
modification of South’s taeniadactylus. Zetterstedt recognised it as a
variable species, and gives (Ins. Lapp., p. 1012) descriptions of the
following Scandinavian forms:

(1) Alis anticis flavis, atomis brunneo-ochraceis adspersis, macula costali
triangulari mox pone medium brunnea albo-terminata, margine interno fasciculis
2 cum ciliis immixtis fusco-brunneis. Long. al. exp. circiter % poll.

(2) var. a. Alis anticis flavis, macula costali mox pone medium margineque
apicali summo, brunneis; reliqua ut in diagnosi.

(3). var. b. Alis anticis flavis, macula costali mox pone medium, margineque
apicali late brunneis, hoc striga pallida margini payrallela notato; reliqua ut in
diagnosi.

His var. c, ‘“‘Similis var. b, sed paullo obscurior, cinerascens,”’ is
no doubt gonodactyla. Zeller notes that Mann’s Pisa specimens do
not in the least differ from the Sudeten examples. He also says that
Herrich-Schiffer’s fig. 7 (noted as nemoralis) is of too pure a yellow
for true nemoralis 3, the spaces between the costai triangle and the
transverse line of the upper lobe being too narrow and the lobes of
too yellow a ground-colour and without white dusting; and adds
that, as the underside is not depicted, botu Herrich-Schiffer’s figures
may serve as very successful representations of zetterstedtii, if we leave
out of consideration the size of the first and the subjoined measure-
ment of the second. The following are the already described forms:

a. var. (et ab.) zetterstedtii, Zell.—Capillis in fasciculum brevem frontalem
productis; alis anterioribus dilute ochraceis, marginibus brunnescentibus, triangulo
costali ante fissuram cinnamomeo, striga laciniarum pallida; in digiti tertii dorso
medio lineola atro-squamata (Zeller, 1sis, 1841, p. 777).

Zeller’s description of the ordinary central Kuropean form under
this name was not made in ignorance of the early Hubnerian names.
He fully recognised that Hubner’s fig. 7 calodactyla was a brightly
coloured example of this species, his only doubt in applying the latter
name to the species arising over the fact that Hubner figured else-
where the larva of cosmodactyla (acanthodactyla) under the same name.

B. ab. (et var.) petradactyla, Hb., ‘‘ Kur. Schmett.,’’ Aluc. pl. vii., figs. 37-38
(1823).—Hiibner’s figure may be described as having the forewings ochreous,
shaded with brown along the costal and inner margins; the costal triangle
brownish-red, rather indistinct ; the pale transverse band at base of triangle (just
before fissure) and the median patch only pale ochreous; the lobal transverse line
whitish, edged externally with darker, the whole lobal area dark; fringes white
with black basal line. Hindwings unicolorous reddish-grey, fringes dark grey, no
dark patch to third feather.

There can be no possible doubt whatever that this insect belongs
here. This has been acknowledged by Zeller, Hofmann, and most
other serious students of the superfamily. Zeller notes (Linn. Ent.,
vi., pp. 838-4) of Htibner’s petradactyla (figs. 87-38) that the differences
between the figures and his zetterstedtit are probably entirely due to the
poor condition of the specimens figured by Htibner, these differences (as

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA. 165

shown by Hubner’s figures) being—a broad brown dash in place of the
costal triangle of the forewing, a bright elongate dash before the cloud of
the lower lobe (indicated in calodactyla), the thick yellowish transverse
lines in the lobes; the want of black scales on the margin of the
third plumule of the hindwings, the shortness of the forewings.
Zeller surmises further that Kuhlwein supphed Hubner with his
petradactyla from the Riesengebirge. Herrich-Schiffer observes (Sys.
Bearb., v., p. 368) that Hubner’s figures of petradactyla are small
examples of this species from Silesia, and were, he adds, in Geyer’s
collection. The figures, he says, are sufficing but poor, the terminal
portion of the fringes on the forewings not white enough, the inner
margin not sufficiently sharply defined, the tooth on the outer margin
of the third plumule of the hindwings absent.

y. var. (et ab.) taeniadactylus, South, ‘‘Entom.,”’ xv., p. 34 (1882); xxii.,
p. 30 (1889) ; Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,” p. 54, pl. xvi., fig. 8 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Pter.,”’
p. 49 (1895).—Expanse 94-10 lines. Forewing, ground colour pale ochreous-brown,
dusted with darker brown scales; a narrow dark chocolate line edges the
costa, and a dark chocolate-brown stripe runs along the inner margin; this
latter is interrupted or broken by three blotches, rather paler than the ground colour,
one at the base, one in the middle, and one between this and the angle of inner
digit; there are three conspicuous dark chocolate-brown marks; the first, some-
what triangular in shape, has its base on the costa just beyond the middle, and its
apex in close proximity to the digital juncture; the inner half of this triangle is
much darker than the costal half, and its posterior edge is distinctly edged with
whitish, especially so on the costa; beyond this the second and third marks
represent a broadish fascia, interrupted by the fissure ; its posterior edge is sharply
defined by a whitish line running parallel with the hind margin ; fringes black,
streaked along the inner margins with white. Tip of outer digit acutely pointed.
Hindwings dark grey-brown, with only slightly paler fringes, except third feather,
which has an elongate patch of black scales in the middle, and between this and
the base of feather, whitish cilia. Head and thorax colour of forewings. Abdominal
juncture whitish. North Devon, three examples; other examples in Doubleday
collection under name of zetterstedtii. ‘The species may be at once separated from
the last-named species by its narrow wings, the structural character of which
would seem to indicate its belonging to the subgenus Amblyptilia. The ground
colour and markings certainly favour zetterstedtii, but only superficially, for, on
comparison, the dark brown digital fascia and black cilia sufficiently establish its
claim to rank as a distinct species (South).

Leech says that this aberration occursin June and July at Lynmouth;
it flies at dusk ; and differs from the type by the narrower wings, the
darker brown digital fascia, and the black cilia. We do not observe
the narrowness of the wings, but the darker brown digital fasciw, the
darker (not black) fringes, the suffusion of the ground colour, and other
details, are very characteristic of the majority of our darker British
specimens.

6. var. (et ab.) doronicella, Fuchs, ‘‘Stett. Ent. Zeitg.,’’ p. 329 (1902); Rebel,
“TLep. Balk.,”? p. 310 (1903). Zetterstedtii var. b., Zell., ‘Isis,’ p. 977
(1841). ?¢Nemoralis, South, ‘‘Entom.,’’ xiv., pl. i., fig. 19 (1881).—Larger,
llmm.-12mm.; forewings with elongated apex, reddish-grey dusted with brown,
with a dark brown costal triangle anteriorly weakly-margined before the fissure ;
lobes brown, clouded with darker shades; underside darker with a yellow line before
the outer margin of the first segment of the hindwing. From letters received I
first heard of this form, supposed then to be a var. of nemoralis, from which it was
said to differ still more than var. saracenia, Wk., but, last autumn, two fine examples
were sent to me as zetterstedtii var. The yellow line which occurs on the under-
side of the first segment of the hindwings near the outer margin—the best-known
character by which zetterstedtii may be separated from nemoralis—proves it to
belong to the former, though it differs from that in its distinctly larger size and
different coloration. In size between zetterstedtii and nemoralis. Forewings with
distinctly elongated apex. without the yellow tint of its ally, reddish-grey darkened
with brown dusting. The lower part of the costal triangle, before the fissure, is

166 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

marked distinctly only on its outer edge by a broad whitish transverse fascia ; both
lobes are brown-clouded; the cloud is interrupted by the transverse fascia and the
pale line which runs before the outer margin, it is distinct on the upper lobe and is
there posteriorly bordered by a blackish line; before this, in about the centre of
the upper lobe, lies an indistinct brown triangle produced towards the base of
the wing. The pale line ot the lower lobe dies out towards the inner margin.
Costal fringes before the pale line across the lobe scaled with darkisk black,
outer marginal fringes blackish-brown at the base, the outer half white ; the inner
marginal fringe of the lower lobe white, twice spotted with brown, broadly
brown at the anal angle. The hindwings brown, darker than in zetterstedti,
especially the third plumule, which has the scale tuft always larger and, therefore,
more noticeable. Underside much darker than in zetterstedtii, grey-brown, the
first segment of the hindwings with a sharper lighter diagonal line, the abdomen
above blackish-brown. From Breslau. According to Herr Gétschmann, from
whom I received them, this is the form of zetterstedtii which flies among Doroniewm
austriacum (Fuchs).

One cannotcertainly gather from Fuchs’ account whether this be only
an aberration or local form of the insect, possibly only the former. Itis
possibly to this that Zeller’s var. b, described as “‘solito major,” belongs,
also South’s large aberration captured in 1881 near Lynmouth. Still
Fuchs’ wing-measurement, 22mm.-24mm., with say 1mm. for width of
thorax, makes this little larger than the specimens in the Frey collection
from Silesia, etc., and which belongs to the form zetterstedtti, as com-
pared with our smaller British examples from 19mm.-22mm., for the
darker (if not all) of which we are inclined to keep South’s name
taeniadactylus, his type being evidently neither the palest nor quite
one of the darkest of our British race. Still, Rebel notes that “a 9
sent. by Drenowski taken on the Vita, belongs to this quite recently
described form, which differs very strikingly from the type in its larger
size, deeper colour and stronger tooth of scales on the inner margin of
the hindwings.” Rebel adds that he has “also taken this form in
the Wienerwald and in the Hochschwab district. Specimens have
also been described from Breslau.’’ We note that, although Fuchs’
specimens have the rather darker general tint, and deeper coloured
lobes of South’s taentadactylus, these features are coupled with a larger
size, not so great as that of South’s nemoralis, which is otherwise paler
in tint. For the present we conclude that it is best to keep the name.

CoMPARISON OF F'REDERICINA CALODACTYLA AND FE’, nEmMoratis.—Zeller
says (Linn. Hnt., vi., pp. 833-5) that the life-histories show these to be
separate species, although in the imagines it is difficult to find marked
differences to separate them. The yellowish transverse line on the
underside of the first plumule of the hindwings, always present in
F calodactyla, is said to be always absent in F’. nemoralis, but as the
line is so variable in Platyptilia gonodactyla one doubts where it is
here sufficiently constant to differentiate the species. On the whole,
nemoralis is a much larger insect than calodactyla, although occasional
specimens of the latter approach it in size. Hofmann observes (Die
deutsch. Pteroph., p. 46) that, in FP. nemoralis, the costal triangle is
usually cut off straight below, and leaves the lowest part of the black
streak at the fissure free ; in F’. calodactyla this is not so, or, at least, it
is less clearly defined. The black scales on the 8rd plumule of the
hindwings, also, always forms a much longer and thicker tuft than in
F’. calodactyla.

CoMPARISON BETWEEN F'REDERICINA CALODACTYLA AND PLatTypriiia
GonopactyLa.—The former is more ochreous and has a redder tone,
much less grey, distinctly more marbled and hence is a much brighter,

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA. 167

as well as darker, looking insect. Stainton nctes it (Ent. Ann., 11., p.
44) as much darker in colour, the lobes of the anterior wings especially
darker; the tip of the anterior lobe rather less produced; the pale
streak keeping nearer to the hind margin on the second lobe. Leech
observes it as being more slender in appearance, having the broken
dash of dark brown colour along the inner margin of the forewing
and the broad pale posterior edging of the costal triangle. Hofmann
observes (Die deutsch. Pteroph., p. 48) that F’. calodactyla always difters,
even in the darkest examples, from P. yonodactyla by its rich admixture
of yellow and its brighter coloration ; the markings are the same, the
only noticeable difference being that the yellow colour (beyond the
brown costal triangle) extends in a diffused manner further into the
upper lobe, but even this character is not quite constant; the brown
space in front of the white transverse line on the upper lobe, as
regards its extent and its paler or darker tint, is just as variable as in
P. yonodactyla.

Keetayinc.—The eggs are laid beneath leaves of golden-rod, the
upper surface tending to become depressed by desiccation, as in many
plume (and other ‘flat’’) eges. Those under observation began to
hatch July 3rd, 1904 (Chapman).

Ovum.—The egg is pale yellowish-green in colour, ovoid in form,
0°52mm. long, 0°30mm. wide, and 0:26mm. high at the thicker, and
0-18mm. at the thinner, end. The sculpturing is of a hexagonal
character. or atleast polygonal, but is faint or evanescent, there being ap-
parently the depressions of the cells, although the divisions between them
are not well defined lines (Chapman. Described June 26th, 1904. The
eges probably at this date already laid a few days ; hatched July 38rd). A
long oval in outline, slightly inclining to brick-shape, the two ends of
different form, the one flattened and the other tending to be pointed.
Of the usual pale yellow-green colour, and semitransparent in appear-
ance. Leneth between ‘5mm. and -6mm., width about -8mm., thickness
about 250mm. to:°275mm. The pointing at the narrow end (? the nadir)
is very much more apparent on edge view, the outline viewed in this
position is really a very long ovoid. I can find no trace of structural
pattern, the surface appearing varnished as usual. The sides of some
of the eges are somewhat depressed in places, but the eggs seem to
vary a good deal in this respect, so perhaps the depressions are only
a sign of age (Bacot, July 2nd, 1904).

Hasirs or Lrarva.—Young larve left the eggs on July 8rd, 1904,
and disappeared rapidly, apparently somewhere towards the lower part
of the plant, but opportunity was wanting to carefully examine leaves,
ete., for burrows (Chapman). The only (we believe) full-grown larva
ever examined in Britain, was taken by accident in Raindean Wood,
Folkestone, on May 28rd, 1904. Searching for larve of Leioptilus
tephradactyla on leaves of golden-rod, we found a larva feeding low
down in the main stem of a young plant of Solidago virgaurea, the
burrow reaching into the root so that the outside leaves hardly held
together when the affected part of the stem and root was pulled from
the ground. The larva was sent to Dr. Chapman, with others of
Adkinia bipunctidactyla, in stems and roots of Scabéosa, who at once
guessed its species. ‘It was then, on May 25th, in the centre of half-
a-dozen root-leaves, or leaves of a stem not yet begun to shoot up,
these had apparently been pulled up together, but had broken from the

168 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

root-stock at the level of the lowest leaf, so that a mere film below the
larva remained to hold the leaves together, the larva had apparently
eaten the central young leaves and bud, and as it changed to pupa not
many hours after I found it, I imagine it used the space it had so
cleared as a puparium, but I discovered no trace of silken cocoon or
other means of attachment. The character of this pupa that is most
marked in contrast with those of the other Platyptilias, is the delicacy
and transparency of the pupal shell, and the netted pattern extending
over so much of the pupa and over the transverse ridges (Chapman).
Larva.— Hirst instar (newly-hatched): About Imm.-1:5mm. in
leneth according to extension. Head black; the remainder white or
rather colourless and very difficult to make out owing to its trans-
parency. The black head is -27mm. across, and has various pale hairs
in definite positions. The longest, 0-09mm. long, is in front, just
above the antenne, then several higher up and more laterally, a very
small hair (0°02mm.) in the middle of either side (seen from the front),
a similar hair on each side just above the clypeus, and another one at
each angle close to lower end of clypeus. The clypeus itself has a
small pair nearly central, a pair above and further out (about
0:04mm. long), and a pair just above the labrum. The jaws, 0:08mm.
long and 0:05mm. wide (seen from front), are brown with 4 teeth and
rounded edge internal to them. The prothorax has a faintly tinted
thoracic plate, on which only 4 hairs can be made out on either side,
apparently the lst and 3rd of the front row and the 2nd and 8rd of the
posterior row, of the two normal rows of three each. Of these the 1st
of front row is 0:025mm. long, the 38rd 0:15mm., of the posterior no. 2
is O:-llmm. and no. 8 is 0°03mm.long. ‘The spiracle is large and on a
rounded, but somewhat conical, boss. There is a long hair, 0-16mm., in
front of it, and this is apparently accompanied by one or two quite
short ones. On the meso- and metathorax* there are the usual four
pairs of hairs on either side, except that instead of the third pai, is a
single hair, as is common in first instar. The two hairs of each pair are
closer together than to the next pair, but are still a little way apart. It
is not possible with their great translucency to say positively whether
they have or have not a common chitinous base, but they appear to be
separate. Their lengths are, 1st, 0°025mm.; 2nd, 0:18mm.; 38rd,
0-025mm.; 4th, 0-06mm.; 5th (the single one), 0:'17mm. On the
abdominal segments the hairs are normally disposed, those on i and ii well
apart and trapezoidal, 111 just above and in front of spiracle, iv below it,
v well above and in front of iv, and apparently on a separate base.

* The tubercles on the meso- and metathorax of plume larve are primarily
eight on either side, arranged usually in four pairs, at fairly equal distances apart,
the first pair near the dorsum, the fourth close above the legs. Each individual
hair (arising from tubercles) may be separate from the others, but it is usual for
each pair to be together on a common plate, and in those species in which the
tubercles become warts, they form four warts, and the pair of tubercles which each
wart represents are often indistinguishable. There is also, usually, another
tubercle (hair), behind the third pair, and in those larve with warts another also
behind first pair. The two hairs of the first pair are usually arranged with the
inner one most in front (trapezoidal), of the second pair the lower is generally to
the front (reversed trapezoidal), the third pair are one above the other, and the
fourth one in front of the other, to name these i, ii, iii, iv, etc., is to assume that
they are homologous according to these numbers, with those on the abdomen. It
may be so, but to my mind the evidence is much stronger that they are not so
(Chapman).

sn pce. Ramage a ane Ie IRE aa,

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA. 169

There are also two (not so far as can be seen three, as in later
instars) hairs at the base of each proleg, a posterior outer and
longer, and a shorter inner rather in front; vi not seen; on segments
without prolegs are two hairs in line transversely, vii and ? vii. The
longer hairs (those on ii and iii) are nearly as long as the larva
is wide, 0:23mm. and 0:16mm., that on 1 is about 0‘O6mm. and on v
about 0:04mm. long, that on iv is, however, longer, 0:1l5mm. All
the spiracles are well raised on tall rounded bases. The prolegs
are on rather tall slender pedicels, and have three rather large
hooks each. The hairs on the anal plate are difficult to locate
exactly, but, besides shorter ones, there are four very long ones,
0-20mm. and 0:24mm. long. The claspers have four hooks, possibly
five, as they are not very clearly seen, being easily retracted (Chapman,
July 3rd, 1904). The newly-emerged larva has a somewhat flattened
body tapering gradually to a rather pointed anus. The head is large and
broad, carried horizontally, very polished in appearance, in colour dark
brown. Both the anal plate and scutellum are in evidence, the latter
paler than the head but still noticeably brown, the former very pale,
almost of the same hue as the general body tint, that is a bright, but
pale, semitransparent green. The segments are distinctly marked. The
hairs are bright brown in a strong lght, tapering, and, I think, quite
simple; at any rate, I cannot discern any thorns; those on the head
are short, but on the body they are much longer. The skin is shiny
without spicular growth. Tubercles i and ii are set in pairs transversely,
on meta- and mesothorax; their bases are well apart, but the space
between the two pairs centrally gives them the appearance of being
close together, 111 and iv are close together but not touching; v is
alone in usual position. On the abdominal segments 1 and u are
set in markedly trapezoidal position, 111 carries a long single hair, iv
and v, beneath spiracle, are, as usual, close together. There are,
of course, no secondary hairs in this skin (Bacot, July 5th, 1905).
Final instar (fullgrown) : This larva is very like that of Platyptilia gono-
dactyla in general aspect ; but differs especially in having no secondary
hairs (7.é., skin-points). Theheadishght brown. Thereis adeep brown
prothoracic plate, divided in the middle line, with the usual six hairs on
either side and a slightly darker puckered spot, where some plume
larve have a black mark ; the prothoracic spiracle is placed in a hardly
raised conical plate, of about thrice the diameter of the spiracle
itself; this plate looks nearly black; in front of the spiracle is a
large plate with three hairs, the lower (front) one largest. On the
meso- and metathorax, there are, on each side, three plates at regular
intervals down the middle of segments, each of these tubercular plates
with two hairs; and much lower a fourth plate with two hairs at base
of legs. The first plate is nearly divided into two. Behind and
between the second and third is another plate with one hair. Of
the tour plates the first has the hairs slightly trapezoidal, i.e., the
second a little further back. The second has them reversed,
i.c., the second rather forward, the third has them in line with
the zone of the segment, i.e, in a transverse line, the fourth
has them one in front of the other. On the abdominal segments
i and ii are placed trapezoidally, about one-third of the width of
the segment apart, 111 normal, iv and v on a single plate well below the
spiracle, tolerably close together and the anterior (v) upper; vi has

170 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

two hairs rather near together, but on separate plates, the anterior the
higher, vil has three hairs, at base of prolegs, the posterior the largest; a
minute hair below prolegs. The abdominal spiracles are nearly as large
as the thoracic, that of the 8th abdominal much larger than the others.
Anal plate dark with several long hairs. Length of hairs—longest about
0:3mm. on front and anal segments, on abdomen generally 0-lmm. to
0:15mm., with some shorter. Prolegs with seven to nine crochets,
claspers with nine ; the prolegs have very short chitinised pedicels. The
skin-points are extremely fine, black; there are various small lacune
free from them, but nowhere any trace of secondary hairs of any
sort. The true legs are nearly black, with a fine sharp claw
and well-chitinised base, and a good many bristles. The general
colour of the larva is greenish-yellow, with a pink dorsal line, there
is a pink band between u and iu, with branches or extensions down
to below spiracles. The tubercles are black, but all have a pale
area round them, almost giving a pale subdorsal and lateral line.
The pink and white below the spiracle merge into the green ground
colour, which the pink and white above seem rather to overlay than
replace. The plates on the last segments are nearly black; the 8th
abdominal has two plates dorsally, each with only one hair (ii ?) and
behind them a very narrow plate without hair, the 9th abdominal has
a transverse plate, carrying two hairs on each side, and a subsidiary
plate at each end (each with two hairs), that seem to be attached to
the central one, making a continuous plate, right across the dorsum.
The anal plate has seven hairs on each side. [The description of this
larva may differ a little from that of a feeding example by its being
so near pupation.| (Chapman, May 25th, 1904).

Fooppiants.—Solidago virgaurea (Wocke), [Senecio sylvaticus
(Rossler), Senecio nemorensis (Herrich-Schaffer) | .

Purarium.—The only fullgrown larva ever examined in this country
used for a puparium the hollow that it had made in the stem of
Solidago virgaurea, in which it had been feeding, and which was loosely
augmented by half-a-dozen radical leaves, but it appeared to use no
silk whatever to hold the almost detached leaves together nor for
suspension. This example pupated on May 26th, 1904, and the imago
emerged in mid-June (Chapman). {[Zellersaysthat “Fehr found larve
in stems of Senecio nemorensisin June. These pupated from July 25th,
the imagines appearing in about three weeks.’ (It must not be over-
looked that this is the foodplant of the allied F’. nemoralis.) |

Pupa.—The pupa, when first changed, is a vivid green with red
longitudinal stripes on the abdominal dorsum. When mature the
colour is rufous, with a faintly darker subdorsal line and darker beak.
The double dorsal flanges, or ridges, are not strongly pronounced, and
are not differentiated in colouring. On the mesothorax they seem
rather wide apart, but this may be because they are not so high, e.y.,
as in Gillmeria nallidactyla (bertrami). In some lights, the spiracles
elisten. The sides of the first three abdominal segments are a little
paler than the rest of the pupa, with a slight greenish tint. The most
striking character of the pupa, as compared with those of Platyptilia
gonodactyla, P. isodactylus, etc., is that the 9th and 10th abdominal
segments are very short, so that, instead of the anal end of the pupa
being conical, in continuation of the tapering of the previous segments,
the end looks rather abrupt with the cremastral pen rather dorsally

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA.W LTA

affixed, the difference, on close examination, is not great, but is enough
to strike the eye. [I have only one pupa, and that one was much
disturbed in its last larval instar and had no silk to which to attach
itself, so that the difference may be due to the abnormal conditions,
but there is no appearance of -deformity.| To complete the account of
these terminal segments, the length along the dorsal line of the 8th
abdominal segment is 0°-4mm., and of the 9th and 10th, to apex of
cremastral pen, is O'8mm., together 1:2mm. In Gillmeria pallidactyla
(bertrami) the three segments are 1‘7mm., of which the 8th takes about
0:-45mm., and the 9th and 10th, 1:25mm. _ As the dorsal line is fairly
straight, the result is that the ventral aspect of the 9th is terminal
rather than ventral. The cremastral hooks are a set of ten forward,
apparently arising from the two round ventral eminences of the 9th
seoment, and a posterior set rising round the margin of the cremastral
Spine, eight or ten near the apex (of which one or two are on the
dorsum), and then, after a vacant space, some thirteen or fourteen along
the margin quite up to the base; all are directed in the plane of the
cremastral pen, t.e., except the terminal one, laterally, rather than
ventrally; they are brown straight bristles, with one complete close
circular coil at the end, so close that the central opening of the circle
is less than the thickness of the bristle; they are about 0:12mm.
long. The anal scar is deep, between two large rounded and very
wrinkled eminences. The eminences of the 9th abdominal segment
have been referred to. The pupa is a male. The cremastral spine
has a lofty ridge down each side of its dorsal aspect, on each
are two minute hairs (0‘02mm. or 0-03mm. in length) which probably
represent tubercles 11 of the 9th and 10th abdominal segments respectively.
The length of the pupa is just 10°Omm.; seen laterally it is just 2mm.
at the 2nd abdominal segment, in antero-posterior diameter; forwards
it gets rather narrower, notwithstanding the dorsal crests (ridges
or flanges) on the mesothorax. It tapers to about 1:3mm. at the 7th
abdominal segment, the 8th is about 1mm. in diameter. The nose-
horn is long and sharp, about O-6mm. long and about 0-4mm. wide at
base, and, with the whole head, is much wrinkled, chiefly transversely,
and half-way along has a small knob on each side carrying a hair, with
a smaller knob nearer the sharp apex. The mandibles are well marked
and much wrinkled, they meet in the middle line for about 0-lmm.,
and so the labrum is only seen above them; between them and the two
portions of the maxille is a small diamond-shaped piece of labium. The
maxille disappear under the first legs after about 83mm., and remain
so for 1‘Omm. and reappear for a final 1‘Omm. between the wing-tips,
the first legs ending just after they reappear. The bundle of free
appendages over the 4th abdominal segment does not quite reach its
posterior border. Its tip consists of the second and third tarsi; the
maxille nearly reach the tip, the sharply-produced wing apices are a
little shorter, and the first legs barely reach into the bundle; the first but
not the second legs reach up to the eyes. The antennx extend to a little
below where the maxille disappear, all these appendages are wrinkled,
chiefly transversely, but the more basal portion of the antennex are quite
roughly and goutily lumpy. The wings show the venation as ridges, but
without colouring; the hindwings end just past the spiracle of the 2nd
(not the 8rd) abdominal, and have a quasi-suture marking them from
the metathorax. There isa minute but distinct dorsal head-piece, which,
on dehiscence, remains attached to the prothorax and also keeps the eye-

17/4 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

cover attached to it. The transverse ridges of the thoracic pieces are
less regular than on the abdomen, but are probably homologous with
them though they look at first glance different. The dorsal flanges are
wide apart on the front of the mesothorax and have a hair (representing
tubercle 1) internal to them, and one (ii?) on the ridge; at the back of
this segment they nearly coalesce, are ill-marked on metathorax, and more
definite where they separate on the 1st, 2nd and 8rd abdominal segments.
The sculpturing of an abdominal segment (say the 5th) is very similar
to that of many other plumes. The whole surface is pitted with very
minute fossee, longest in the transverse direction ; on the intersegmental
subsegment and the interseemental membrane proper these are
arranged in transverse rows so closely together as to look very like the
hexagonal cells on many eggs of lepidoptera, the space between the
pits being merely fine raised lines like the network on an egg. What
seems to be the intersegmental membrane proper is more delicate and
has the network rather finer. The pits are about 0-008mm. in trans-
verse, 0'004mm. in longitudinal, diameter. On the forward two-thirds
of the segment, there is also a number (about 16 or 18) of transverse
ridges (the pits not only lie between these, but form a continuous
sculpture right over them, as if, as is probable, these ridges were not
sculpturing but actual flutings of the whole thickness of the pupal shell).
These fine ridges appear to run right across the segment, but, as an
actual fact, they die out (intermediate ones appearing) after a length
never more than a fifth or sixth of the circumference of the segment.
There is no dorsal ridge on these segments, yet there is a slight
angulation in the line of tubercle 1. The tubercles carry a minute
bristle (0-°02mm.), i and ii between about the 6th and 7th ridges, and
i1 Just in front of the last but one. The spiracle is an inconspicuous
circle (or set of concentric circles) about 0:06mm. in diameter, which
a little disarranges the ridges, the latter being about the same in
number before and behind it. Behind the spiracle is a certain
rearrangement of some of the ridges, which sweep a little backwards
and then forwards, two finally passing forward and a little upward
under the spiracle and thus crossing the others, and, possibly, represent-
ing one portion of the lateral flange, another portion of which, perhaps,
exists in another doubtful ridge below this one; tubercles iv and v are
on or just above this lower portion, v just in line of spiracle, iv lower
and further back; tubercle vi carries a solitary hair, about two ridges
from the posterior border; the three bristles of tubercle vii are as
in the larva. The scar of proleg is marked by a slight tangle of the
ridges, with a slightly raised dark mark (Chapman).

Time OF APPEARANCE.—In Britain, this species appears to be on the
wing from towards the end of June and continues throughout July.
Mann notes it as early as the middle of May in the Pisa district, a
record, however, that Zeller seems to doubt, although he notes the
specimens as being accurately determined. In Germany, in the low-
lands, it flies from early June into July, in the mountains from the
end of July to the middle of August (Hofmann); early June in Hesse
(Rossler); end of July and early August in Waldeck (Speyer); in July
in Brandenburg (Kretschmer), and in the upper Harz (Hoffmann) ;
June to August in Baden (Meess and Spuler); July 8th on the
Sémmering in Styria (Roeslerstamm); in Switzerland, from the com-
mencement of June into July at Zurich, the end of June at Samaden,
commencement of August on the Bergli Alp (Frey); in Scandinavia it

FREDERICINA CALODACTYLA. 173

varies much, not althogether depending upon latitude, as it occurs from
mid-June to early August at Tromsd; July to mid-August in the
northern coast mountains of Lapland, from July 26th to August
8th at Bossekop, near Alten (Zetterstedt); middle of June to
beginning of August in Finland (Tengstro6m); from June 21st to
August 1st in the Riga district (Teich). We have very few exact
dates of capture of this species; the following are all we can muster :—
July 16th, 1840, between Suul and Kongstue (Zetterstedt teste Zeller) ;
July 10th, 1847, and throughout the month in the Riesen Gebirge
(Standfuss) ; July 18th, 1860, at the foot of the Scaaddavara, Finmark
(Wocke); June 1st, 1862, in the pinewood, south of Dotzheim (Réssler) ;
July 28th, 1879, at Kerasdere, Amasia (Staudinger); June 11th, 1883,
and August 2nd, 1884, at Troms6 (Schneider); July 22nd, 1897,
in the Ustedal in Hol, and August 5th, 1897, at Aal (Strand); mid-
July, 1900, at Pontresina (Chapman). In Britain, there are records from
June 11th-July 1st, 1881, July 4th-18th, 1884, in North Devon (South);
imago bred mid-June, 1904, from larva found in Raindean Wood
that pupated May 26th, 1904 (Chapman); on the wing June 20th,
1904, at Folkestone (Purdey).

Hasirs.—This species was first found to belong to the British fauna
in July, 1855, when several specimens were taken near Lynmouth
by Boyd. Barrett says that the imagines inhabit woods in the south
of England, flying along their broad grassy paths, or open spaces, but
the species is extremely local, found among golden-rod but not among
any species of ragwort. He further states that Zeller told him that, in
Germany and the Alps of Central Europe, the species accompanied
Hellinsia osteodactyla, a well-known Solidago feeder, “as if the two
species belonged together.’’ These are practically its habits in Raindean
Wood near Folkestone, where it occurs with Adkinia bipunctidactyla,
Hellinsia osteodactyla and Letoptilus tephradactyla, being disturbed by
day from the long grass and other plants by the sides of the ridings
where Solidayo virgaurea grows, and flying more freely in the late
afternoon and evening. South found specimens near Lynmouth by
stirring herbage during the day. Standfuss gives (Stett. Ent. Zeity.,
1848, p. 156) a most interesting account of the habits of this species in
the Riesen Gebirge in July, 1847, observing that it appeared to fly in
little companies, as he found, from time to time, some eight or ten
specimens skipping about together over the low herbage, then for a time
not one was to be seen, until another little company was discovered.
FE’. nemoralis, he says, is certainly a distinct species; it was not found
with F’. calodactyla (zetterstedtii) on the hill-summits, but both were
observed flying together lower down, and were then noticed to be
distinctly different in their habits, as well as in size. The latter, he
says, is a lively species for an Alucitid, flies freely by day in bright
weather, and again later just at the very first shades of evening, and
is always easily disturbed; the much rarer FE’. nemoralis, on the other
hand, is exceedingly sluggish; it was scarcely ever to be found, even
by the most diligent searching, throughout the day-time—from early
morn until darkness had set in—and those seen allowed themselves to be
readily picked off without attempt to escape, or fell to the ground:
one, late in the evening, made a ponderous attempt to escape by flicht.
He further notes that the plant among which F’. remoralis hides is
exclusively Senecio nemorensis, to the blossoms, leaves and stalks of
which it clings, but I’. zetterstedtit hides among many different plants.

174 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Staudinger notes a doubtful example captured at light at Kerasdere in
Amasia.

Hasirat.—In England, it is a southern wood species, living by the
side of the wide ridings in woods near Folkestone in Kent, Lynmouth
in Devon, and Penzance in Cornwall, in the first two localities being
abundant, but it is little known in this country, and is probably much
overlooked. South notes that, in North Devon, it occurs in woody
hollows near the sea, where, in its more western locality (from Lynmouth),
there is an abundance of golden-rod, bilberry, heather, and other kinds
of herbage, including a species of the Compositae, which he suspected
might be connected with the moth, as it only seemed to occur where
the plant grew; in the eastern locality (from Lynmouth) this plant was
observed but golden-rod not. In thealps of central Europe thespeciesis
not uncommon, preferring apparently mountains of moderate elevation up
to about 5000ft., although sometimes going much higher, since Jordan
states (Hint. Mo. Mag., xvi., p. 25) that it occurs in the fields beyond the
church at Zermatt, also on the Riffelberg and on the way up to the
Schwarz-See. It occurs freely in the mountains of Scandinavia,
extending into Finmark and Lapland; it appears to be particularly
abundant in the Riesengebirge in Silesia, in the Tyrol we found it on
one of the little mountain paths that branch off into the woods of
the Mendelstrasse, not far below the Mendel Pass (Tutt); in Fin-
mark at the foot of the Scaaddavara, where there was plenty
of Solidago but no Senecio (Wocke). Rossler notes the capture
of a freshly-emerged example, June 1st, 1862, in the pinewood
south of Dotzheim, where it flew just above the ground among Senecio
sylvaticus, and adds that it tried to hide itself under the leaves of this plant.
In Silesia, it occurs all over the Riesengebirge up to the summits of the
mountains at 3500ft., but is very rare in the plains, Wocke having
once taken an odd specimen at Lissa in July; it also occurs in the foot-
hills of Upper Lusatia (Sommer), and on the Oderwitzer Spitzberg, a
basalt cone of 1574 ft. elevation, near Herrenhuth (Méschler); common
on the Probsthainer Spitzberger, in sunny places, flying about rasp-
berry canes (Herrich-Schaffer), in Baden, it occurs in the mountains
at Freiburg, always in the vicinity of Senecio nemorensis (Reutti). In
Lower Austria, it is found in the Prater, in damp clayey spots near
streams, in Liesing, Rodaun, and on the HKichkogl (Mann); yet
Peyerimhoff took it at an elevation of 2500 metres on the Furka.

BritTIsH LocaLitiES.—Hxceedingly local, and only discovered so far in
the southern counties of England, in woods, comparatively near the sea.
CoRNWALL : coast districts (Bond teste Jordan), Paul, Penzance (Baily). Drvon:

North Devon—Lynmouth (Boyd). Kent: Folkestone (Tutt), [Sydenham (Boyd),
woods near Dover (Barrett) ].

DistRIBUTION.—Central and Northern Europe, Piedmont and Central Italy,
Taurus, southeast Siberia—Dahuria (Rebel). Asta: Taurus mountains (Rebel),
? Amasia—Kerasdere (Staudinger), Kentei mountains (Staudinger). AvustTRo-
Huneary: Hungary, throughout (Aigner), Styria (Roeslerstamm), Galicia (Nowicki),
Bohemia (Nickerl), Lower Austria, distributed—Hernstein, on the Hichkogl
(Rogenhofer), the Prater, Liesing, Rodaun (Mann), Tyrol—Rienzalpe, Cortina (Mann),
below the Mendel Pass (Tutt), near Trafoi, Franzenshohe (Heller), Transsylvania
(Rebel). Bosnta: Dervent (Hilf teste Rebel). Bunearta: western parts (Rebel).
Frnuanp (Tengstrém). France: Auvergne—Mont Dore, Cher—St. Florent,
Indre — Nohant (Sand), Aube (Jourdheuille), Doubs, in the mountains—
Pontarlier, Saut-du-Doubs (Bruand), Sadne-et-Loire—Couches-les-Mines (Con-
stant). Germany: Prussia—Neuhauser, Dammbhof, Koénigsberg, Norkitten (Speiser),
Oberharz (Hoffmann), Hesse—the pinewood south of Dotzheim (Rossler), near
Cassel (Knatz), Wiesbaden (Hofmann), Waldeck—Wildungen, Rhoden (Speyer),

FREDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA. 175

Thuringia—valleys (Knapp), Brandenburg—Frankfort-on-Oder, the Schwetiger
Forst near Grundschaferei (Kretschmer), Silesia—distributed throughout the
mountains up to 3500 ft., rare in the lowlands, Lissa (Wocke), Altvater, Leiterberg
(Neustadt), near Reinerz (Standfuss), on the Oderwitz peak at 1574 ft., near
Herrenhuth (Méschler), lower mountains of Upper Lusatia, distributed—near
Lichtenau, Lauban (Sommer), Saxony—near Bautzen (Schiitze), Freiberg
(Fritsche), Bavaria—Allgau Alps (Hofmann), Baden—the mountains near Freiberg
(Reutti), Feldberg, Todtmoos, Hinterzarten, St. Peter, Lahr, Hornisgrinde,
Rippoldsau, Herrenwies, Heidelberg (Mees and Spuler), Schwarzwald (Frey), Alsace—
in the mountains, Faisanderie, near Saverne (Peyerimhoff). Iraty: Pisa district
(Mann). NertHertanps (Haar). Roumanta (Rebel). Russia: Baltic Provinces
—Aathales near Cremon (Nolcken), Tannenfeld (Berg). Livonia (Lienig teste
Zeller), Riga district (Teich), Moscow district — Konobeewo (Albrecht).
ScanDINAVIA: Sweden — Blekinge, Upland, Lapland, Norway — Finmark
(Wallengren), at the foot oi the Scaaddavara (Wocke), Uleaborg, Kuusamo
(Tengstrém), Saltdalen, Malselvdalen, Alten, Troms6 (Sparre-Schneider), Bossekop,
Kaafjord, Sopnes, Nordreisen, Lyngér district—the Ustedale in Hol, Bakken, Aal
(Strand), Slettafos (Jordan), between Suul and Kongstue (Zetterstedt teste Zeller),
Stryn (Pettersen). SwirzeRuaAnp: Western Alps, the Juras (La Harpe), Ziirich,
rare, Kngadine—Samaden to Sils-Maria (Frey), Pontresina (Chapman), the Albula
district—the Siala road, the Knieholzdreiecks near the Aela-Gletscherbach, Bergiin,
Glarus—Berglialp (Zeller), Zermatt (Frey coll.), the Riffelberg, between Zermatt and
the Schwarz See (Jordan), Lenzburg, Oftringen (Wullschlegel), St. Gallen (Taschler),
on the Furka at 2400m. (Peyerimhoff).
FREDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA, Linné.

Synonymy.—Species: Tesseradactyla, Linn., ‘‘ Faun. Suec.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 370
(1761); ‘‘ Syst. Nat.,”? 12th ed., p. 900 (1767); Miuill., ‘“‘Faun. Ins. Frid.,’’ p. 59
(1764) ; Goze, ‘‘ Ent. Beit.,’’ iv., pt. 3, p. 173 (1783) ; De Vill., ‘‘ Linn. Ent. Faun.
Suec.,”’ li., p. 532 (1789); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 342 (1871);
Zell., ‘‘Stett. Ent. Zeitg.,” xxxix., p. 162 (1878); Sorh., ‘‘ Kleinschmett. Brand.,’’
p. 3 (1886); Meyr., ‘‘Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,” p. 486 (1890); Schneid., ‘‘ Lep.
Tromso.,’’ p.131 (1893); Barrt., ‘‘ Hint. Mo. Mag.,’’ xxxiii., pp. 25-26, 62 (1897); Kane,
‘‘Kint.,”’ xxxi., p. 209 (1898); Walsm., ‘‘Hnt. Mo. Mag.,”’ xxxiv., p. 193 (1898) ;
Fern., ‘‘Pter. Nth. America,” p. 32, revd. ed. p. 33 (1898); Staud. and Reb.,
““Cat.,”’ 3rd ed., p. 73 (1901); Dyar, ‘‘ List Nth. Amer. Lep.,’’ p. 444 (1902) ;
‘‘Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,’’ xxvii., p. 923 (1904). Tesseradactylus, [? Fab., ‘‘ Mant.
Ins.,”’ ii., p. 259 (1787) ; ? ‘Ent. Syst.,”’ ili., p. 347 (1793) ;] Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,”’ vi., p. 121 (1869). Fischeri, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,’’ p. 781(1841); Lienig, ‘ Isis,’’
p. 300 (1846); Zell., ‘Linn. Ent.,”’ vi., p. 337 (1352); Dup., ‘Cat. Méth.,”’
p. 383 (1845) ; Tystrm., ‘‘ Fin]. Fjar.,” p. 155 (1847) ; Stn., “‘Cat.,”’ p. 28 (1849) ;
Ee-Seh., “‘ Sys. Bearb,,”’ p. 369, supp. fig. 12 (1855); Frey, ‘‘ Tin. und Pter.,’’
p. 405 (1856) ; Gart., ‘‘ Wien. Ent. Monats.,” p. 330 (1862) ; Wocke, ‘‘ Stett. Ent.
Zeit.,’’ xxiii., p. 254 (1862); ‘‘ Mitt. Schw. Gesell.,”’ i., p. 335 (1865) ; Nolck.,
‘‘Lep. Fn. Hstl.,”’ p. 801 (1871); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xxiv., p. 42 (1887);
Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 356, pl. 314, fig. 2 (1904). Cosmodactyla, Schlig.,
““Schmett. Tauschbl.,’? pp. 132, 216 (1848). Tessaradactylus, Wallgrn.,
‘“Skand. Fjaider..’’pp.8, 12 (1859). Tessaradactyla, Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘Schmett.
Deutseh,,” ii., pt. 2, p. 787 (1877); Hofmn., ‘* Deutsch. Pter.,’”? p. 51 (1895) ;
‘‘Tllus. Zeits. Ent.,’’ iii., pp. 152, 306 (1898).

Zeller says (Isis, 1841, p. 879) that Linné’s tesseradactyla is so
defectively described that its species can probably only be determined
by the Swedish lepidopterists. Im 1859, Wallengren determined the
species as that which is here described ; he says:—‘“ As regards Linné’s
A. tesseradactyla, or, more correctly, tessaradactyla, it was a great satis-
faction to us to find, through a consignment of moths, that Prof.
Boheman shares our opinion on the species. Thus we found the result,
at which we had previously arrived, confirmed by this celebrated
entomologist, and regard it, therefore, as so much the more certain.
Prof. Zetterstedt, in his /nsecta Lapponica, has given the Linnean name
to a species with ‘okragula’’ forewings, but that this cannot be
correct is seen from Linné’s words, ‘alae superiores cinereo fuscogue
nebulosae. Therefore, Zeller also has formed another name for

176 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Zetterstedt’s species, which was previously undescribed. That, at the
same time, Linné’s species should be sought among the more broad-
winged, and not among those which have the hind lobe of the forewing
deflected, is clear from the fact that with this, as with the preceding
species, Linné says, ‘alae . . . . fissura connivente.’ Hence one
is obhged to take one’s choice among the genus Platyptilus. Most
authors have, therefore, thought to rediscover the Linnean species in
P. gonodactyla, W. V. This has certainly also at times ash-grey fore-
wines, but they are never ‘ cinereo-fuscoque nebulosae,’ as Linné states
them to be in his species. Geller has, therefore, rightly denied to this
species the Linnean name, yet without giving it to any other. The
genus named has, however, one species to which the Linnean descrip-
tion fits without violence, after the palpable mistake, ‘ alae inferiores

s = tetradactylae has been corrected. Without any doubt we
consider this species to be the P. fischeri described by Zeller, since only
in this, can the forewings be said to be clouded with grey and brown.
The whitish parts of the forewings are, especially in the more worn
specimens, greyish, and the whole of the ash-grey ground colour is
here and there strongly mixed with brown, so that, when one is not
describing more accurately the colour-pattern of species, one will have
to use just the expression chosen by Linné—and it is well enough
known that the older authors before all things strove after brevity,
hence at times distinctness was lost. P. fischeri is likewise, in southern
and central Sweden, one of the more common, or at least oftener
occurring, species in its family; and this could not well be entirely
unknown to Linné, even as it could not have been mixed with any
other species by him. P. gonodactyla is one of the rarest species in the
country, and belongs more to mountain districts, whence also Linné’s
note, ‘ habitat in nemoribus,’ is better fitted to P. fischeri than to the
former species’”’ (Skand. [jdder-Mott., p. 8).

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION.— Phalaena Alucita tesseradactyla. Alis paten-
tibus fissis cinereo-nebulosis, posticis fuscis. Habitat in nemoribus.
Ale superiores cinereo fuscoque nebulose, fissura conniventa. Inferiores
fusce, nec maculate, tetradactyle (Linné, Fauna Suecicae, ed. 2, p. 370).”

Imaco.—Anterlor wings, apical point sharp and dark; ground
colour fuscous-grey or ashy, rather darker fuscous in the portion
that makes up the costal triangle, the inner half of the base of
which, just beyond the fissure, sometimes forms a small conspicuous
darkish line or lunule; the ground colour is marked with white
as follows—a fine longitudinal whitish shade from base of wing
to base of triangle through middle of wing; a fine whitish inner
marginal line extending the length of the wing (except for the
characteristic dark spot or lineation on inner margin about two-thirds
towards anal angle); a white lunular band at base of costal triangle ex-
panding widely below fissure; a fine white transverse lobal line crossing
both lobes from costa nearly to inner margin. Fringes white, edged
internally with a fine dark marginal line; except at anal angle where
the tringes are dark-grey. Posterior wings fuscous-grey (considerably
mottled under lens); extreme apices of first and second plumules
rather darker; fringes of same tint as ground colour of wings; the

* Zeller’s description (Linn. Ent., vol. vi., p. 337) of fischeri reads as follows :
‘‘Capillis frontalibus parum productis; alis ant. fuscescenti cinereis, strigula fusca
triangulo costali adnata ante fissuram plagamque albidam striga laciniarum albida ;
digiti tertii dorso medio in ciliis atro-squamato (¢ ?).”

FREDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA. 177

third plumule with a few dark scales in almost same position as in that of
calodactyla*.

Variation.—This small ashy-grey species varies apparently but
little in size and colour. In tint, some examples appear paler than
others owing to the extension of the white areas in the centre of the
wing and outside and below the costal triangle. In these whiter
examples, the discal lunule stands out distinctly (as also it does in some
of the paler I’. calodactyla) along the base of the costal triangle at some
little distance from the fissure, whilst, in the more grey examples, it
becomes absorbed in the costal triangle and in one is absent altogether.
In the Frey collection, examples from the Engadine and Zurich
appear to be whiter than others from Silesia and Bossekop, but the
material is too scanty to tempt one to any conclusions. One rather
suspects that there is considerable variation, in this respect, within
somewhat narrow limits in most localities. Wocke says that Finmark
specimens from Altenelv are somewhat smaller than, but otherwise
like, German examples. Barrett says that the Trish examples are
whiter than continental specimens, with the dark markings grey rather
than brown, the Swiss individuals having a decidedly warmer tinge of
colour than those captured in Ireland. We append Barrett’s descrip-
tion of the Irish specimens :—

a. var. hibernica,n.ab. Tesseradactyla, Barr., ‘‘ int. Mo. Mag.,”’ xxxiii., pp.
25, 62 (1897); Kane, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xxxi., p. 209 (1898).—Forewings narrow at the base, .
but rather suddenly broadened behind and shortly angulated at the apex, so as to
present a rather stumpy appearance; pale grey-brown dusted with white, and
having two oblique, white, transverse stripes towards the hind margin, one of them
crossing the base of the fissure, and the other crossing both lobes; immediately
before the first of these is the usual dark costal triangle, of a dark grey-brown tint ;
preceding this, in the middle of the costal margin, is a small dark cloudy spot, a
pair of similar spots lies on the dorsal margin before the middle and a pair of
minute dark dots at the base of the fissure; cilia sharply white. Hindwings dark
fuscous with a golden gloss; cilia smoky-brown, except at the tip of each lobe,
where is, in each case, a dash of pale yellow; on the dorsal side halfway down the
third lobe is a darker fuscous tuft in the cilia. Antenne pale brown, barred with
white; head and front of thorax pale umbreous, hinder part of thorax white;
abdomen whitish-brown; legs whitish, the tibiv of the hindmost pair haying a
brownish cloudy dash before each pair of spurs. It bears some resemblance to
Platyptilia gonodactyla, but is less than one-half its size, being in fact decidedly
smaller than the occasional dwarf second-brood specimens of that species. Hab. :
Clonbrock (Barrett).

The American form is described by Fernald (Pter. Nth. America, p. 38)
as follows :-—

Expanse l6mm.-20mm. Head, palpi and frontal tuft greyish-brown. Antennz
whitish, dotted above with dark brown. Thorax grey in front, white behind.
Forewings whitish, heavily dusted with brownish-grey. ‘The somewhat indistinet
brownish triangle on the outer third of the costa is followed by a whitish spot, and
a subterminal white line crosses both lobes.

Comparison OF F'REDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA WITH ITS ALLIES.—
Zeller notes (Linn. Hnt., vi., p. 887) that it is ‘closely related to
gonodactyla, zetterstedtii and nemoralis, but is much smaller (forewings
from 41'''-44'"), with a very ill- developed tuft on the vertex; the
eround colour dusky brownish- erey, without yellowish admixture, and
always with sharply defined black-brown transverse streak before the
cleft of the forewing.’’ Hofmann writes (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 51):
“The smallest Platyptilud; easily separated from the other allied

* These scales are particularly easily removed in this species. Some other-
wise perfect specimens are practically without, or with only the slightest traces cf,
them.

=

178 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

species by the very short frontal tuft, which can be distinctly observed
in quite fresh specimens when viewed in profile, as well as by the white
coloration with its brownish-grey shading, and the two pure white
transverse bands, one just in front of the fissure, and the other across
the middle of the lobes.”’

Ovum.—The ege is pale green and smooth in outline, forming a
somewhat elongated ovoid (Gartner).

Hapits oF LaRva.—Gartner first discovered the larve in July,
living in the dried pith of the flowerstalks of Gnaphalium dioticum ;
they were then exceedingly minute, and repeated observation convinced
him that they made little growth during the autumn, and he was
much astonished that, in spite of their small size, they had grown
very considerably by the earliest days of spring. Search in the old
flower-shoots showed that the larve had vacated these before winter
was over, and the fresh shoots showed no signs of being inhabited.
The withered central leaves of the newly-grown central shoots,
however, gave evidence of the larval attack; these leaves were
easily detached and showed the larva at work within. He says that
as the larva confines itself to this portion, it 1s obliged frequently to
seek a fresh plant, but, when the plants are more developed and the
larve have grown older, they draw together the central leaves with silk
threads, and penetrate more deeply into the substance of the plant,
whilst the black-brown excrement is collected on an outer leaf and
betrays the larval abode. ‘The larva bores in the stem of its foodplant
and lives until the winter in the pith of the smaller stems’’ (Sorhagen),
or in the flowering shoot, hybernating young, in the withered flower-
stalks, entering, in the very early spring, the shoot of the young plant,
which it eats down to the root; the small, still folded, terminal leaves
of this shoot remain a long time in position in a withered or dried-up
state, even when the larva has already left its first dwelling; it then
goes into the still little-developed flower-bud which is yet on a short
stalk and folded up into a thick knob, and on which there is outwardly
not much or mostly nothing at all to reveal the presence of a larva,
unless here and there a few grains of excrement, or a somewhat miser-
able appearance of the bud, betray the presence of a larva (Hofmann).

Larva.— First instar: Head, thoracic and anal shields black; body
yellowish-white with single hairs. Hybernating staye (September):
As before, but with dorsal and lateral rows of rust-brown. After
hybernation (March): Stouter, but not much increased in length.
Head, thoracic and anal shields dark brown; dorsal stripe crimson
rust-colour, consisting of triangular spots; the subdorsal and lateral
lines similar, but finer or more delicate. The ground colour of the
body yellowish above and rust-red beneath. Final instar: In shape
cylindrical, slightly narrower at each end. The head is small and
black, the thoracic shield yellowish-white, with a small, black dorsal
area divided by a pale line. The colour of the body is dark ferruginous-
brown. On the dorsum of each segment stand whitish spots, each
with two pairs of black dots (tubercles), of which the hinder pair are
placed farther from each other than those in front; similar dots
(tubercles) occur on the sides, from which arise long pale hairs. The
anal shield and legs are dark brown. The larve frequently vary in the
depth of their colour (Gartner).

FREDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA. 179

_ Fooppiants. — Gnaphalium dioicum (Gartner),* G. arenarium
(? luteoalbum) (Sorhagen), Gnaphaliwn alpium (Wocke).

_ Puparrum.—In the excavation made by the larva in the central
stem of the foodplant, the fullfed larva pupates; the hollow is closed
up by means of silk spinning, and, fixing itself in an upright position,
the larva changes to pupa. On May 16th, 1861, the natural puparia
were found, a bent-down flower-bud, kept in position by silken threads,
beneath which a deep excavation in the centre of the plant was hidden,
in which was an Alucitid pupa standing in an upright position. By
following up this clue several pupe were obtained, but it was too late
for larve. The pupal stage lasts about three weeks, the pupa being
‘partly protruded from its puparium on the emergence of the imago
(Gartner). The larva pupates in the hollow of the stem which it has
previously utilised as a larval habitation; in this, the pupa stands
upright (Hofmann). The pupa can move the abdomen somewhat, but
does not throw the anterior parts backwards (Zeller).

_ Pupa.—tThe slender pupa tapers towards the posterior end; the head
dark brownish-grey, which colour is continued to beyond the thorax; the
eye-covers dark with the frontal prominence between them. The dorsum
of the abdomen bone-yellow, the row of spots along the back and the
lateral curved markings darker; above the cremaster there is a long,
thickly-cilated point, directed somewhat upwards. The wing-cases pale
greenish, the protruding portion of the leg-cases, which stand out free for
the length of 34 segments, are brownish, in front of the hairy cremaster
towards the belly are two points. The older the pupa the more it is
marbled with brownish-grey (Gartner). About 44’ long, slender, the
head bent downwards, the upper part of thedorsum suddenly swollen; the
abdomen closely and very finely striated transversely, quite smooth,
ereyish-white; the whitish cases of the forewings have a brown-grey
dash extending towards the outer margin and acutely angled towards
the base. Under the inner margin of this case, the case of the hind-
wing protrudes as a very narrow, short, seement-like strip. The cases
of the legs and antenne, united into a point, reach to the 5th
abdominal segment. The dorsal line is indicated only at its commence-
ment by very pale spots. On each side of the dorsum of the abdomen
runs a pale brownish longitudinal stripe, becoming stronger on each
segment, but fading out on the last two segments. Below this, a row
of pale brownish spots runs on each side, one of them lying at the
commencement.of each segment. Still lower, a row of faint spots
follows these, but the last two segments are unspotted. The point of
the tail is curved upwards, sharply pointed, and above there are two
finely pointed warts near each other. Head, thoracic shield and leg-
cases are brown-grey (Zeller).

Time OF APPEARANCE.—In Britain, the species appears to have been
taken only in June, having been discovered in the first week of June,
1895, at Clonbrock, and again taken directly afterwards on June 11th,
1895, at Ardrahan (Kane). It also occurs in central Germany in June,
but Mann records it from Tuscany in the middle of April, and

* This plant is abundant in Scotland, Wales, Ireland and many parts of
England, descending occasionally nearly to the coast level, its general habitat being
mountain-heaths ; common in northern Europe, Asia and America to the Aretie
regions, and in the great mountain ranges of central and southern Europe and
Russian Asia (Bentham).

180 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

Herrich-Schiffer says that Mann also found it well out in April in
the Vienna district among spindle (!). [Milliére seems to be in doubt
about the insect which he says occurs around Cannes in April-June
and September; we suspect he is referring to some other species. ]
In Germany, it occurs in June at Tantow in Pomerania (Buttner) ;
in May and early June in Hesse (Rossler); mid-May and early
June, and again in early August (erroneously suggesting a second
brood), at Wildungen (Speyer); in June in Silesia (Wocke); also at the
commencement of July on the Silesian mountains, and from about
June 9th to mid-July in the Albula district, on the Knieholzdreieck
and behind Chiaclavuot (Zeller) ; the last third of May near Regensburg
(Schmid) ; in June and July near Munich (Hartmann) ; also in June
and July in Baden (Meess and Spuler); but at the end of May in
Wurtemburg (Steudeland Hofmann); the end of May and commencement
of June in Moravia, near Brinn (Gartner); and in May and June in the
Médling district (Mann). In the Baltic Provinces it has been taken in
May at Kurtenhof (Teich). In Switzerland from the end of May
through June and July, according to elevation, e.g., end of July and
early August at Samaden, at 6000 feet elevation, June in the Upper
Rhone Valley, and end of May at Wutrenlos (Irey); similarly it
occurs in May and June in south and central Sweden (Wallengren),
but from mid-June to mid-August at the higher latitudes of northern
Europe, ¢.g., Uleaborg in Finland (Tengstrém), etc. The only exact
dates of appearance we have been able to collect are the following:
May 28rd, 1861, and following days, near Brinn (Gartner); June 5th,
1866, above the Faisanderie, in Hesse (Rossler); June 9th-mid-July,
1871, 1873, 1875, in the Ober-Albula district (Zeller); July 10th, 1890,
July 7th, 1891, at Troms6 (Schneider) ; July 28rd, 1897, at Sund-dal,
common, on August 2nd, 1897, near Aal, in the Votndal, July 20th-
August 7th, 1902, at Erfjord (Strand); June 17th, 19th, 1871, in
Scott’s Valley, California (Walsingham); July 29th, 1908, on Bear
Lake Mountain; August 11th, 1908, on Kokanee Mountain, near
Kaslo, in British Columbia (Dyar).

Hasrrs.—Little is known of the habits of this species. Kane observes
that it was first taken at Clonbrock, flying in the sunshine to the flowers
of a species of Gnaphalium on a dry bank alongside a bog, and later
adds that it is easily disturbed from among its foodplant on a sunny day
inGalway. Barrett adds that it flies in the late afternoon and evening
among Gnaphalium by roadside and dry banks at the edges of bogs.
Gartner says that this little plume lives gregariously in the Schriebwald,
near Brinn, and swarms in the month of June in the early evening round
the blossoms of Gnaphalium diotcum, and is sometimes to be seen sitting
on these plants in copula. The same habits were observed in other
wooded places in which the Gnaphalium occurred, and this led to the
later discovery of the pupa and larva of the insect. In confinement,
the moths, at rest during the daytime, become lively at dusk, without,
however, showing much desire to breed, for only a single pairing
was obtained. Some six years before Gartner discovered the life-
history of these insects, Herrich-Schaffer noted that the imagines
flew gregariously towards the end of May in large numbers in a few places
about Ratisbon, especially above and beyond the Tegernheimer Keller,
on wooded pastures where much Hieracium pilosella grows, although
he added “ the larva most possibly feeds on Gnaphalium.’’ Borgmann
observes that, in. June, the imagines fly slowly among grass towards

FREDERICINA TESSERADACTYLA. 181

evening, in numbers, over a dry woodland meadow in the Kaufunger
Stiftswald, near Cassel, where much Gnaphalium dioicum grows.

Hasrrat.—lIn Britain, the species has as yet only been discovered in
the counties of Clare and Galway, where it prefers the stony pasturages,
although its chief haunt at Ardrahan is in a clearing in a plantation
where Antennaria (Gnaphalium) dioica grows plentifully (Kane), also
at the edge of a plantation at Dromoland Castle (O’Brien). On the
continent, its habitats are varied, extending from low stony wastes
on the plains to high up the mountains to the snow-line, e.y., the
Riffelberg. Strand says that itis common in Arctic Norway—Tromso,
etc.—wherever Antennaria dioica grows, and Wocke notes that it occurs
on dry loamy slopes at Altenelv, in Finmark, among G. alpium. Zeller
says (Isis, 1841, p. 781): ‘This species is common in Bohemia on the
Saxony boundary on dry knolls and on ridges between fields. In Silesia, I
found, in mid-June, numerous examples on Probsthainer Spitzberg in
open places between young forest and fir-trees ; two specimens at Reinerz
at the beginning of July on a hill, where the pine-trees had decayed away
and the spot was covered with Aira flexuosa; two examples at Glogau
in a hilly, woody neighbourhood, on a heath between birch under-
wood. ‘The species, at least in these three places, is not common and
is seen very rarely, as they are inconspicuous and fly only at sunset.”
He afterwards noted (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 337) that, in Silesia, it
occurs abundantly in the mountains, particularly on the drier foothills
arising from the plains; later he observes (Stett. Hut. Zeit., 1878,
p. 162) that, in the Ober-Albula district, the insect is not rare in any
places where Gnaphalium dioicum grows, flying in dry thickets and in
open spaces in the vicinity of its foodplant. Gartner says that it
prefers wooded places in Moravia where Gnaphalium dioicum grows. In
dry woodland meadows near Cassel (Borgmann), on the foothills near
Wildungen and Korbach (Speyer), in open spaces on the outskirts of
deciduous woods on hillsides, and also in the wide grassy roads on the
outskirts of such woods, as well as along the edges of the wood-ridings
themselves in Silesia (Méschler). Milliére says that the species occurs on
chalky ground around Cannes, but as he states that the insect he is
describing is double-brooded we doubt whether he is referring to this
species.

Britis Locauities.—Only known at present from the west coast of
Ireland. Crane: Dromoland Castle (O’Brien), through the Burrens of Clare to
Corcumroe and Ballyvaughan (Kane). Gatway: Ardrahan, Clonbrock (Kane).

Distrisution.—Probably throughout the whole northern part of
the Palearctic region, also the western (mountain) part of the Nearctie
and across the continent to Massachusetts. Hurope north and central
(except Batavia), southwest France, central Italy, Dalmatia and

Hyrcania (Rebel). America: Colorado—Loveland (Smith teste Walsingham),
California—Scott’s Valley (Walsingham), British Columbia—Bear Lake Mountains,
Kokanee Mountains near Kaslo (Pyar), Massachusetts (Fernald). Avusrro-
Huneary: Bohemia (Fischer v. Réslerstamm), Moravia—Briinn (Gartner), Lower
Austria—Herstein, in the foothills (Rogenhofer), Mauer, Médling, Gahns (Mann),
Vienna district (Mann teste Fischer v. Réslerstamm), Tyrol—near Bozen, Trient, the
Dolomite region (Mann), Taufers, Franzenshéhe (Heller), Dalmatia, Croatia—
Josefsthal (Mann), Budapest dist.—Nagyag (Aigner). Finuanp: up to Uleaborg (Teng-
strom), Tyskland (Wallengren). Betarum(Lambillion). [France : Var—Cannes dist.
(Milliére), Auvergne—Mont Doré (Sand)]. Grrmany: widely distributed in north
and south Germany (Hofmann). Prussia—near Dammbof (Speiser teste Sauter),
Pomerania—near Tantow (Bittner), Hesse—Wiesbaden near the Chausseehaus
(Vigelius), above the Faisanderie (Réssler), near Cassel (Borgmann), Waldeck—near

182 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Wildungen, Korbach on the lower mountain slopes (Speyer), Thuringia, ’

generally distributed (Knapp), Brandenburg —Garz-on-Oder, near Tantow,
distributed (Sorhagen), Silesia—generally distributed (Wocke), Seefelder near

Reinerz (Standfuss), Probsthainer Spitzberg, near Reinerz, Glogau (Zeller),

Upper Lusatia (Moschler), Saxony—Saxon Upper Lusatia (Schiitze), Bavaria—
distributed, near Regensburg (Schmid), Munich district—near Schleissheim in the

Schwarzhélzchen, Tegernsee (Hartmann), Wiirttemberg—Katharinenlinde, Hisen-’
bach, Wasseralfingen (Steudel and Hofmann), Baden—near Constance (Reutti),

Hinterzarten (Meess and Spuler). Irany: Tuscany—near Ardenza (Mann).
Russia: Baltic provinces, generally distributed and common — Magnusholm,
Neuhof, Lips, Riga, Pichtendahl (Noleken), Kokenhusen (Lienig), Ringen ~
(Rosenberger), Kurtenhof (Berg). Scanprnavia: Finmark to 70° N. lat. (Schoyen), -

Troms6, Malselvdalen, Alten (Sparre-Schneider), Altenelv (Wocke), Bossekop (Chap- :
man), Kaafjord, Sopnes, Lyngor district, common—Aal, the Votndal, Sunddal in Hol, ,

Stavanger district—Erfjord (Strand), Throndjem, Little Elvdal (Jordan), common
in south and central Sweden—Blekinge (Wallengren), Smaland, Oestergéthland
(Boheman). SwirzERLAND: In the valleys and also in the mountains to about 6000ft.
—Wiirenlos in the Limmatthal, Upper Rhone district (Frey), Ober-Albula—dis-

tributed from Bergiin to Weissenstein, Upper Engadine—Samaden and Sils-Maria,

at about 6000ft. (Zeller), the Juras (Rothenbach), Riffelberg (Jordan).

Puatyptinia, Hubner.

Synonyary.—Genus: Platyptilia, Hb., ‘‘ Verz.,”’ p. oe (1825); Stphs.,:

SqlusspHaUsis: wives ei paotom (oot) Hellen. °c inn. Eint..?? vibes 328 (1852) ;
Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,” 2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Hein. and Woes ‘* Schmett.-
Deutsch.,’’ iii., pt. 2, p. 784 (1877) ; Frey, ‘‘Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 428 (1880) ; South,
COM iiga2? 20hvoq 105 304 (1881); Stange, ‘‘Stett. Ent. Zeit.,’’ p. 118 (1881) ; p- 514

(1882); South, ““Ent.,”’ xv., pp. 31, 33, 145, pl. iii., figs. la- 1c (1882); XXli., pp. 29, ole

103 (1889); Tutt, “Ent., ” xviii. PP» L695 195 (1885) ; xO. 0s HILT (1887) : XX Sp.
259 (1888); ‘ eat: Mo. Mag.,”’ xxv., pp. 104-107 (1888) ; Sorhgn., ‘‘ Kleinsch.
Brandbg.,’’ p. eek Leech, “ Brit. Pyr.,”’ p. 52 (1886) ; Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,”’
Xo ps Ge (1889) ; 5 OD 18, HOM LS) ae ae tere brit. ” p. 39’ (1895))/= Meyne
“Trans, Ent. Soc. Sere p. 486 (1890) ; “ Handbook,” etc., p. 434 (1895) ;

Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ p. 42 (1895); ‘‘Illus. Zeits. Ent.,” iii., pp. 131,.
152, 306 (1898); Barrt., ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xxxili., pp. 25-26 (1897); Kane,.
“Ent.,’’ xxxi., p. 209 (1898); Walsm., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xxxiv., p. 193 (1898) ;

Fern., ‘‘Pter. Nth. Amer.,’’ p. 32, revd. ed., p. 33 (1898); Staud. and Reb.,

‘““Cat.,” 8rd ed., p. 72 (1901); Dyar, ‘‘ List Nth. Amer. Lep.,’’ p. 444 (1902).
Alucita, (Linné, ‘‘ Faun. Suec.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 370 (1761); ‘‘ Syst. Nat.,’’ 12th ed.,.

p. 900 (1767) 5 Miiller, ‘‘ Faun. I. F.,”’ p. 59 (1764) ;] Schiff. and Denis, ‘ Sys.
Verz.,’’ Ist ae pp. 146, 320 (1776); Sulz., ‘‘ Ges. Ins.,”’ p. 163 (1776) ; Gea
‘‘Hnt. Beit., ., pt. 3, p. 175 (1783); de Vill, ‘Linn. Ent. Faun. Suec., Pe 5!

532 (1789) ; Tlie, ue Sys. Verz.,” 2nd ed., p. 128 (1801) 5 Hib.) “Bur Selimett.

NICS eapler tae, fig. 6 (1804); Haw., ‘‘Iep. Brit.,”’ p. 478 (1811); ee

‘« Die Schmett., Ae ee OO) (1833) ; Zett., ‘Ins. Lapp.,”’ p. 1012 (1840). Ptero-
phorus, Fab., “ Mant. Ins.,’? i1., p- 259 (178%); Pab., ““Hnt— Sys, 7 105 peeeeene
(1793) ; Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp..,”” p. 409 (1819) ; Curt., ‘“* Brit. Ent., 7 fo, 161
(1827); Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’’ xi., p. 647 (1838) ; Wood, oe Tea. ines Ist ed., p.
236 (1839); Zell., “Isis,” p. 777 (1841); Dup., ‘“Cat. Méth.,’’ p. 381 (1845) ;

Testrm., ‘‘ Finl. Fjar.,’’ p. 154 (1847); Frey, ‘“‘ Tin. Pter. Schweiz,” p- 402
(1856) ; Sta., ‘‘ Man.,”’ ii., p. 440 (1859) ; Peers, ‘‘ Ent.,” ii., p. 38 (1864) ; Barrt..
and Buckler, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ viii., p. 153 (1871); Machin, ‘‘ Ent.,” xiii. 1 De
283 (1880) ; Porritt, ‘‘ Buckler’s Larve,’’ ix., p. 343 (1901). Platyptilus, Zell.,

‘lisisv pps (1O,ot0d, be. 41841)-) i eSeho) “Sys. Bearb..: v., p-3o0o (1855) ;
Wallgrn., ‘‘Skand. Fjarderm.,’’ p. 11 (1859); Jord., ‘‘Knt. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p.’

121 (1869) ; vili., p. 137 (1871) ; xxiv., p. 42 (1887) ; Nolck., ‘‘ Lep. Fn. Estl.,”’ p-

800 (1871); Gregs., ‘‘ Ent.,’’ vi., p. 426 (1873); Barrt., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p.
350 (1904). Platyptila, Barrt., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag., 2 XVidis Po Lid (1882).

The heterotypical genus Platyptilia is diagnosed (Verzeichniss, p.
429) by Hubner as follows :— ,

The forewings posteriorly broad and obtuse; the hindwings not uniform—=
Platyptilia calodactyla et megadactyla, Schiff., Verz., Alu. A. 4, 8; Hiibn., Aluw.,!
1,6. PB. petradaciyla, Hubns Alu. 37%, 38: -P- ochrodactyla, Hiibn., Alu. oy 13.
P. rhododactyla, Schiff., Verz. , Alu. ASS; Euibus, Alius, 8:

It will be seen that ine genus in its Syaephon contained the whole

de

$e:

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 183

tribe Platyptiliidi, and, in addition, the genus Hucnemidophorus. We
have already dealt with calodactyla, Schiff., Hb., and petradactyla, Hb.,
under F’redericina (antea, pp. 161-2), and of the remainder of the original
species in this heterotypical genus, we have ochrodactyla, Hb., the type
of Gillmeria, rhododactyla, Schiff., the type of Hucnemidophorus, and
megadactyla, Hb. (=gonodactyla, Schiff.), which we named as the type
of Platyptilia (Ent. Record, xvii., p. 87). Whether tsodactylus, Zell.,
is really congeneric with gonodactyla, Schiff., and farfarella, Zell., we
are not prepared to say, but at present we know too little of their early
stages to separate them under distinct genera. The ege is more or
less cylindrical according to the Platyptiliid type, they are laid
externally, but the larva at once becomes a miner and remains so all
its life. The typical pupation habit of P. isodactylus in the second
brood, is similar to that of F’redericina, i.e., pupation takes place
internally in the stem of the foodplant, whilst, in the first brood, the
larva leaves its burrow and pupates in a cocoon outside. The
larva of P. gonodactyla usually emerges from its feeding-mines and
makes a puparium among the pappus of the Tussilayo seedheads (in
the first brood), or in a cocoon on the undersurface of a leaf (in the
second brood). Occasionally it appears to pupate quite exposed, as is
the case with Gillmerta. The two British species, gonodactyla and
isodactylus, are double-brooded.
The following is our diagnosis of the restricted genus :—

Imaco.—Frontal tuft short; palpi with the terminal joint rather short,
porrected ; the frontal tuft and palpi about as long as the head; the black scales
on the third plumule of hindwings markedly collected in a small patch near
the centre ; the costal triangle of forewings usually well-defined; one lobal trans-
verse line or band.

Pupa.—The nose-spine shorter, 0°25mm. (than in Gillmeria, 0:8mm.), less
well-developed, and not so prominent; the dorsal line with a curved ventral sweep ;.
the posterior border of abdominal segments with spinous ridge (marked in isoduc-
tylus, evanescent in gonodactyla) ; the cremastral hooks in forward part of cremaster
obsolete, the hairs almost evanescent; the wing-markings rather different (difficult
to define) from those in Gillmeria; the dorsal ridges distinct (but rather less
prominent than in Gillmeria).

Larva.—Form, outline and colouring much as in Gillmeria and Fredericina ;
skin-hairs (or skin-points) present (in Fredericina absent); confined to definite

areas, other parts bare (in Gillmeria completely covered); the skin-hairs dark (those
of Gillmeria alternately dark and colourless) ; hooks of prolegs (8-10) fewer than in
Gillmeria ; the basal or attached end of hooks, oblique, produced and narrow ; the
column rather shorter than in Gillmeria: the head, dorsal plates and legs black ;
mesothoracic and metathoracic sete paired (four pairs on each side of segment), each
pair on the same plate (rather less markedly in isodactylus than gonodactyla) :
these pairs at a good distance from each other; the sete of i and ii rather more
trapezoidal than in Gillmeria, still almost transverse; plates on 8th and 9th
abdominal segments present (absent in Gillmeria).

PLATYPTILIA IsopactyLus, Zeller.

Synonymy.—Species: Isodactylus, Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 328 (1852) ; Stphs.,
** List,’’ p. 174 (1854) ; Sta., ‘‘ Man.,’’ii., p. 440 (1859) ; Dbldy., ‘‘Syn. List,’’ 2nded.,
p. 36 (1859); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 121 (1869); Barr. and Buckl., ‘* Ent.
Mo. Mag.,”’ vili., p. 153 (1871) ; Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ iii., pt. 2,
p. 786 (1877); Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,” p. 52 (1886) ; Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,”’ x., p. 163
(1889) ; xi., p. 79 (1890) ; ‘* Pter. Brit.,”’ p. 35 (1895); Porrt., ‘‘ Buckl. Larv.,” ix.,
p. 343, pl. clxiii., fig. 4 (1901); Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 330, pl. 413, figs.
4-4¢ (1904). Monodactyla,* Haw, ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 476 (1811); Snell., ** De Vlind.
Ned.,”’ ii., 2, p. 1018 (1882). Monodactylus, Stephs., ‘ Cat.,”’ ii., p. 229 (1829) ;

* We at first suspected that this should be considered a purely literary name,

i.¢., not described from actual specimens, but copied from existent descriptions, when,

184 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

‘* Tllus.,’’ iv., p. 373 (1834). Pheodactylus, Stephs., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ ii., p. 230 (1829).
Similidactylus,+ Stphs., ‘‘Ill.,” iv., p. 375 (1834); Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,’’ Ist ed.,
p. 236, pl. li., no. 1643n (1839). Similidactyla, Staud., ‘‘ Cat.,” 2nd ed., p. 342
(1871); Stange, ‘Stett. Ent. Zeit.,”’ p. 118 (1881); p. 514 (1882); Sorh..,
‘“‘Kleimschmett. Brandbg.,’’ p. 2 (1886); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,”
p. 486 (1890); Hofm., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,’? p. 49 (1895). Isodactyla, South,
‘‘Ent.,’’ xxil., p. 31 (1889); Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,’’ etc., p. 434 (1895); Staud.
and Wocke, ‘‘Cat.,’”’ 3rd ed., p. 72 (1901). [Nemoralis, Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent.
Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 486 (1890).]

ORIGINAL DEScRIPTION.—(Capillis in fasciculum brevem frontalem
productis ?); alis anterioribus fusco-ochraceis, antice obscurioribus,
triangulo costali ante fissuram obscuriore obsoletissimo; in digiti
tertio dorso medio squamis paucis atris (g¢ musei Stainton). The
single, old and worn g from Stainton’s collection, which I have before
me, has, as Stainton correctly observes, only a remote relationship
with ochrodactylus, from the apex of the anterior wings being much
less prolonged. It is much more nearly allied to gonodactylus, of
which it has quite the same form of wing. Although the costal
trianzle seems to have been rubbed, yet it appears to have been
originally paler and less distinctly margined. This then is the first
point in which it differs from gonodactylus. The second lies in the

of course, the name would stand or fall with the original. Itappears, however, that
Haworth really referred a specimen of isodactylus to monodactyla, Linn., quoting de
Villers note thereon. Bankes has the specimen reputed to have been in
Haworth’s possession. The parts of Haworth’s account that most probably refer to
this insect are the ‘‘ Habitat” and ‘‘ Captor’’ (infra), but, as Haworth queries the
references he quotes, it is quite possible that the diagnosis (which Bankes says
agrees with Haworth’s example in his possession) was also made from the specimen,
in which case the name would really belong here. The matter is of little importance,
but we give our readers the details: ‘‘ 4. monodactyla (The hoary Plume).—Alis
anticis canis retusis, fissura inconspicua, posticis tripartitis fuscis. [Phalaena Alucita
monodactyla, Linn., ‘‘Faun. Suec.,’’ 1452?; Villers, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ 2, 530, 1083?].
Habitat apud nos rarissime. Imago ripis. Communicavit ejus captor R. Scales.
Expansio alarum 94 lin. Obs. Alucitarum omnium ale digitate quodam modo
videntur ; inferiores semper tripartite et ultra divise sunt. Superiores scissurarum
numerus variat, ex his rimis nomina trivalia sumpsit Linneus. Monodactyla illa
est cujus ale superiores indivise sunt; scilicet parum scisse, rima unica ultra
dimidiam ale partem non extensa parumque visibilis. Didactyle ale superiores
bifide, etc. Pedes omnium specierum longi, tenues, spinis acutis armati. Alarum
situs fere semper cruciformis (de Villers, loc. cit.).’’ (Haworth, Lep. Brit., p.
476). The species is placed by Haworth between bipunctidactyla and tetradactyla.
Stephens’ description is purely literary, and the name stands or falls with Haworth’s.
Itreads : ‘‘ Pterophorus monodactylus.—Alis anticis canis retusis, fissura inconspicua,
posticis, tripartitis fuscis (Exp. alar. 94 lin.). [Ph. Al. monodactylus, Linné ?;
Pt. monodactylus, Steph., Cutal., ii., 229, no. 7609.] Anterior wings retuse, hoary,
with a very obscnre short cleft; posterior fuscous, and divided into three. Rare,
found near Croydon and at Darenth Wood, in June’”’ (Stphs., Illus., iv., p. 378).
** Croydon and Darenth Wood”’ are not at present known as localities for isodactylus.
Zeller referred the species here, possibly on the strength of information received con-
cerning the Haworthian specimen, for, at the time that he made the reference, he was
describing isodactylus from a single worn specimen in Stainton’s collection. Double-
day marks (‘‘ Syn. List,’’ 2nd ed., p. 36) monodactyla, Haw., with a query. Wood, in
1839, figures (Ind. Ent., pl. 51, fig. 16437) well this species as Pterophorus similidac-
tylus, and gives as a synonym —P. phaeodactylus, Steph., Illus., iv., p. 575, and
notes it as occurring in Dorsetshire, Devonshire, the New Forest, etc. Stephens, in
1854, in his List, p, 174, gives Wood’s figure, 1643, as undoubtedly isodactylus,
Zell., but queries both Haworth’s and his own monodactyla in reference thereto, i.e.,
Stephens did not himself know at that time whether his monodactylus was tsodac-
tylus, Zell. (stmilidactylus, Wood), although Wood’s figure is an excellent one. It
appears doubtful, therefore, whether, in 1854, Stephens really knew the species.
+ Similidaetylus, Stphs. nec similidactyla, Dale, the latter =lithodactyla, Tr.

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 185

colouring of the lobes of the anterior wings, which, instead of being
partially much darker, are rather paler than the remaining surface of
the wings and have only an almost imperceptible trace of the whitish
transverse line. Again, the cilia of the inner margin are dirty
yellowish-erey, and there is no trace of the two deep black tufts of
scales on them ; whilst the streak-like collection of scales in the cilia
of the third feather of the hindwing of yonodactylus is here reduced to
the half, which, as in that species, lies rather nearer to the tip than to
the base of the feather. The following marking would also furnish a
good specific character if it should prove constant—the pale spot or
dot in the brown line, which in gonodactylus runs along the cilia near
the hindmargin of the anterior lobe, is entirely wanting in tsodactylus.
Capnodactylus has certainly anterior wings of a similar form, and also
an interrupted brown line in the cilia of the anterior lobe, but, besides
other differences, the second feather of the hindwing is much broader
and blunter, and, in the third feather, the strong black bundle of scales
hes very far towards the apex. The thorax much damaged. The
legs less pure white, otherwise marked as in gonodactylus. The fore-
wings of a brownish-clay colour, very dull, becoming whitish at the
base along the inner margin; the costa darker, without white
markings. The brown costal triangle in the same position as in
gonodactylus, but paler, less sharply margined, and less extended along
the costa towards the first lobe; on the inner edge it fades into the
ground-colour. At the cleft is a darker spot with a smaller one above
it. The two lobes with a paler, more yellowish, ground-colour than
the rest of the wing, darkening slightly only on the terminal third,
the darkening deeper and wider in the lower portion, whilst in front
of the darkened area is the slightest trace of a transverse line. The
hind marginal fringes whitish, traversed nearly at the base by an
interrupted dark brown line, between which and the hind margin the
colour is brownish-yellow, as in gonodactylus ; at the anal angle of the
hinder lobe the fringes are also similarly blackish ; the inner marginal
fringes are darker without black scale-tufts (as noted above). The
plumules of the hindwings are grey-brown ; the fringes much darker,
particularly those of the third plumule. On the underside, the apex of the
first lobe of the forewing is noticeably pale yellowish, and the trans-
verse line is more distinct ; the first plumule of the hindwing on the
outer two-thirds has many scattered whitish scales, without forming,
however, a transverse line. This doubtful species has been found in
several localities in Kngland. Iam greatly surprised that it should
have been already split up into two species* (=similidactylus, Dale,
Stphs., Jddus., iv., p. 875, and monodactyla, Haw., Stphs., [dlus., iv., p.
3873) (Zeller, Linnaca Kntomologica, vi., pp. 828-9).

* It seems to us the more remarkable that Zeller, having been informed (he
only had one worn example for description) that this species had apparently been
already twice described (1) as similidactyla, Dale, and (2) as monodactyla, Haw.,
should redescribe it, for, had the name similidactyla, Dale, been really given to this
species it would of course have stood. As matters of fact (1) Stephens and Wood
wrongly referred it to similidactyla, Dale, which =lithodactyla, Tr. ; (2) Haworth’s
monodactyla seems to have been partly original and partly a literary description
quoted from de Villers, and he appears to have erroneously referred a specimen of
isodactylus in his collection to monodactyla, Linn. Bankes says that a specimen,
presumably the one described by Haworth, and bearing his label, agrees with the
latter’s short description, and his remark as to ‘‘ Habitat,’’ to some extent, supports
the idea of an independent description.

186 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Imaco.—20mm.-24mm. Head, thorax, and abdomen same tint as:
the ground-colour of the wings. The anterior wings with the apex
comparatively blunt, the ground-colour clayey, pale greyish-ochreous,
or ochreous-brown, more grey in the central area and along the inner
margin, with a more or less indistinctly defined triangular blotch placed
on the costa just before the fissure ; a dark conspicuous discal lunule ;
the outer margin darker than the ground-colour, the darker band edged
internally by a paler line parallel to the outer margin, and crossing
both lobes; fringes pale greyish. Posterior wings divided into three
plumules ; greyish-brown, mottled with darker scales, especially along
margins ; fringes paler; the third plumule with some black scales, but
not forming so distinct a tuft as they do in gonodactyla.

SEXUAL DiMoRPHISM.—The females average rather larger, and are:
decidedly darker (7.c., more fuscous) than the males (Bankes).

Variation.—Hofmann notes that this insect is ‘‘ distinguished
from all the allied species by its peculiar clayey coloration, and by the
costal mark over the fissure being either entirely absent, or represented
by a dark straight dash extending towards the base of the wing.”’ In
size, there appears to be a considerable difference in the specimens of
the two broods, those of the second brood being, on the whole, dis-
tinctly smaller than those of the first brood. Barrett considered that
this was largely due to a difference in the temperature at which the
larvee fed up, noting that, in August, 1880, the second brood was very
abundant at Pembroke, and that the individuals were much smaller
than those of the spring brood. This difference might be best remem-
bered by calling the autumnal brood :—

Var. gen. 2 aestiva, n. var. Isodactylus var., Barrt., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles, xi.,’’
p- 351, pl. 413, fig. 4b (1904).—Variable in size, but the autumnal specimens.
distinctly smaller than those on the wing in June, and far paler in colour, often
dull drab or whitish-drab (Barrett).

Barrett says that the autumnal specimens are often little more than
one-half the size of those captured in spring; but Bankes observes
that, “judging from a few caught, and a large number of bred.
specimens of both broods, the approximate average wing-expanse of
the first brood appears to be— g, 225mm.; 92, 24mm.; and of the
second brood to be—g,20mm.; 2?,2lmm. The largest g and ?
examined, both belonging to the first brood, but hardly larger than
some others reared with them, expand, respectively, 25mm. and 26mm.,
while the smallest representatives of each sex, but little smaller
than a few others of the second generation to which they belong,
measure only 17mm. in the g, and 16mm. in the 9. The wing-
expanse of one dwarf g of the jirst brood is just 18mm.” Of
the colour variation Bankes writes (in litt.): As a rule the examples.
of the second generation are, in both sexes, much smaller and
paler than those of the first, although, very occasionally, individuals.
belonging to the latter may be bred identical in size and colour with
normal representatives of the former, and, in exceptional cases, second-
brood specimens are so large and dark that, were their history un-
known, one would have unhesitatingly referred them to the earlier
brood. The following is an attempt to classify the various forms :—

1. Forewing pale whitish-grey, hardly, or but slightly, clouded with darker
=ab. pallidus, n. ab.

2. Forewing whitish-grey, somewhat clouded with darker=ab. canus, n. ab.

3. Forewing brownish-ochreous, clouded with fuscous=isodactylus, Z. The:
type specimen wasa ¢ (teste Zeller).

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 187

4. Forewing ochreous-brown, whitish-dusted, clouded. with fuscous = ab.

brunnea, n. ab.

5. Forewing brownish-fuscous, sparingly dusted with whitish, partially

ochreous-mixed posteriorly =ab. fuscus, n. ab.

This last-named form appears to be that figured by Wood (Indea
Entomologicus, pl. li., fig. 16483) as similidactylus. Bankes says that
the only examples that he has seen of this extremely dark form are a
few 2s of the first brood. Two specimens from the Puerto de Pajares,
4000 ft. elevation, belong to the ab. canus and ab. fuscus respectively.

Eeeiayine.—Pairing took place on the evening of June 6th, 1904,
and several eges were noticed on the plant the next day. The eggs of
these June moths are laid on the undersides of the leaves of Senecio
aquaticus singly, very rarely two are placed together. The youngest
and the very oldest leaves seem to be avoided. The egg-stage lasts
ten days, the first larva appearing on June 17th (Chapman). liggs of
the August moths are laid on the lower leaves of the plant. (It should
be noted that I had no first-year plants on which they could oviposit,
and as my old plants were largely reduced to stumps, owing to the
ravages of the summer-feeding larve, there was little choice in the
matter but for the moths to lay where they did.) Eggs laid between
August 8th and 12th commenced to hatch oa August 21st (Bacot).

Ovum.—The eggs are very smooth, shining and polished, so that
any sculpturing or structure is not detected, either because it is,
exceedingly faintly marked or really absent. The eggs are pearly white;
seen from above they are a fairly regular oval, 0°54mm. in length,
and 0-33mm. in transverse diameter. Seen laterally, they are flat
below and a little rounded on top, but only slightly, just enough to
make it incorrect to say that the upper and lower sides are both flat;
the ends are regularly rounded, one larger than the other, so that just
inside the larger end the height is 0:27mm., and inside the smaller
only 0-2lmm. (Chapman, June 10th, 1904).

Haprrs or tarva.—(1) Summer feeding larvae (second brood) :
Larvee of this brood appeared from June 17th-20th, 1904, from eggs
laid between June 7th-10th. The newly-hatched larve placed on
leaves of the foodplant, and those that hatched from eggs laid thereon,
with one exception, took to wandering, and one or two were seen to drop
by threads, but no trace of the young larve attacking the leaves could be
found. ‘Three days later, however, the young leaves seem inclined to
droop, and, looking at the axil of one leaf, a considerable drop of exuded
sap is to be observed and some frass. At one other leaf, at least, a little
frass appears in the axil. At one spot, about the middle of the stem, a
small drop of fluid is seen, as large, perhaps, as a large pinhead ;
examining this, a young larva is seen about one-third buried in the
stem, the next third in the fluid, and the anal end exposed with several
pellets of frass. On June 27th, at thirteen different leaf axils are
minute expulsions of frass, and there are two wounds in the bare
stem, at one of which a larva was seen entering; there is no trace of
larval work in leaves, or leafstalks, or midribs. On July Ist, portions
removed from the plant with several larvie in it a few days since, afford
three small larvee; these were placed a couple of days ago on two other
plants, and have now burrowed into these, choosing for entrance the
lower side of a small bud, i.e., between the bud and the leat: they are
now working into the stem, but taking some tit-bits from the interior
of the bud on the way (Chapman). On July 11th, the plant of Senecio

188 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

aquaticus, passed on to me by Dr. Chapman, some few days since, was
noted as having remained wonderfully fresh, and, until a few days ago,
when it quite suddenly began to look very sickly, showed remarkably few
signs of the ravages of the larve within. Examination showed that the
larve are from ‘8 in. to ‘5 in. in length, and are maxing rapid progress.
At least twelve have been already moved to other plants, and there
appear to be still some left burrowing in the lower part of the stem.
One of these left the burrow on the evening of the 11th, and, climbing
to the top of the plant, was observed feeding on a flower-bud, but the
habit was not again noticed as occurring in the case of any other
larva. Larve will certainly move from one plant to another if their
leaves are allowed to touch (Bacot). The larve of the second brood
feed throughout July and early August, the young larve mining at
first one of the smaller shoots of Senecio aquaticus near the buds ;
afterwards the larva crawls further down entering one of the larger
branches at the axil of a leaf, frequently devouring the tender side
shoot ; it then bores down the interior, feeding on the pith till nearly
fullgrown, when it again deserts its burrow, and proceeds to the thick
main stem of the plant, which it enters, and there feeds up, hollowing
out a space in which to assume the pupal state. In every case, a
round hole is left for the extrusion of excrement, and, in the final
burrow, this is placed exactly against the head of the pupa (Barrett).
The larve feed in the stems of Senecio nemorensis near Rotterdam
(Snellen). Fullfed larve and pupe of this brood were found on
a marsh on the banks of the river Yare, near Norwich, from
August 15th-24th, 1870, and August 10th-20th, 1871 (Barrett).
(2) Winter feeding larvae (1st brood): Larve commenced to appear
from the August-laid eggs on August 21st, when two were placed
on young leaves of young plants of Senecio aquaticus, and at
once directed their course towards the front of the midrib, and thence
downwards towards the central point of the plant. In one case, the leaf
and centre of the plant were well clothed with tomentum, and the
young larva kept to the surface of the leaf, burrowing beneath this.
What at first sight appeared to be taking a shght breakfast by the
way, was, on further observation, concluded to be merely loosening
the tomentum to make a way, apparently by a biting action, at any
rate by biting or pressure of the front of the head. On August 22nd,
another larva hatched and was placed on another plant. These
plants at the end of their first season, have, as in most biennials,
made a ground rosette, but are leaving an upward stem for next
season, these being, apparently, the present state of such plants as in
the spring are like those in which larve were sent last spring by
Bankes. The object being to discover, if possible, at what stage they
pass the winter, a plant was investigated on December 3rd. One
petiole had been burrowed for about an inch, but was abandoned,
though the leaf was alive and well; the next younger petiole had been
burrowed for only a few millimetres, had been entered half-an-inch
from centre of plant, the ravagesinit most inconspicuous. This burrow
contained a larva 4mm. long, with black head and thoracic plate, and
nearly black anal plate. [One preserved on June 30th isalmost identical. |
The larva was very white and colourless—there were, however, some
contents in alimentary canal—but the burrow was very clear and
suggested a resting-place rather than a feeding burrow. On January

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 189

25th, 1905, some dead plants were examined, and two, small, cocoon-
like cavities were found in the bases of the leaves, i.¢., the petiole
close to the centre, but the larve had gone; there was a little silk, and the
cavities were apparently between two leaves, though their actual hollows
were excavated out of one of them (Chapman). Larve foundon May 19th,
1904, in the Wareham district, after hybernation, varied much in size,
some being quite fullfed. Two of the tenanted plants of S. aquaticus
contained two larve, feeding in the same stem; owing to the luxuri-
ance of the vegetation the larve seemed specially hard to find (Bankes).
The larve found (by Bankes) were forwarded to Chapman on May
21st, who reports: The larve have the appearance of being fat white
erubs, of the same outline and build as gonodactyla, ochrodactyla, etc.,
but rather stouter and longer, 1Omm. x 2°6mm. or 12mm. x 2°8mm.,
according as to whether one is stretched or retracted. The larva is a
typical internal feeder by aspect, white (really faint greenish-yellow),
with black head, prothoracic plate, spiracles, and tubercles to anal
plate. On closer examination, the whiter patches round the tubercles,
making subdorsal (including 1 and i1) and supraspiracular (including
lii).bands, and a subspiracular (including iv and v) flange, are readily
distinguished. Numerous minute black secondary hairs are also seen,
darkest and most evident, dorsally and sublaterally. The larve
excavate the central bud of the Senecio, clearing it out completely, and
making their wide cavity down quite (or just) into the root, if by root
we understand all below the level at which root-fibres are given off.
Comparing the material before me with Buckler’s and Barrett’s
account of the larva and its habits, one notes that they describe the
second brood, this is the first, and, moreover, these (on May 20th) are
fullfed. The plants are at most a few inches hich, and those in which
the larve are, are less than an inch, growth being checked by the
larval attack. The roots are, however, thick and strong, doubtless
being the stored-up material which carries the plant through the
winter and starts it in spring. There is no evidence of how the larva
passes the winter, but it probably does so on (or in ?) the shoot it now
inhabits. The larve being fullgrown, and nearly all eating the white
pith or heart of the young shoot, they quite lack the greenish tint.
Buckler describes. The skin is absolutely without colour, thin and
pellucid in places, thicker and whiter in others. These white patches
surround the tubercles, and nearly run together into similar white
stripes as those that occur in Gillmeria pallidactyla (bertrami), ete., and
are the white areas described by Buckler. The more delicate portions are
coloured according to the material beneath. In my specimens, the
fluid (blood) is practically colourless, the fat-bodies are abundant and
white, and the contents of the alimentary canal are white forwards
and dirty dingy posteriorly. The total result is, however, that we
have a white larva, in which the differentiation of the skin into white
and colourless areas is not at all conspicuous. Buckler’s larye were
not all fullfed, and, moreover, they fed on green food, é.e., the leaves,
buds and stems, well above the ground, mine are feeding in the stem at, or
below, ground level (Chapman). Bankes writes (cn litt.) : “The larvee of
both broods feed throughout inside, and on the pith of, the stems of
Senecto aquaticus (although, when those of the earlier ones are feeding,
these stems are often very short), entering the first stem at its terminal
bud and burrowing downwards; later on, they readily come out as often

190 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

as convenience or necessity arises, and at once either re-enter the same
stem lower down, or else bore into a fresh stem and feed downwards,
the frass being ejected through the entrance hole. A single stem, if of
any length, not infrequently contains more than one larva. The
infected plants generally look rather sickly, but the presence of the
larve therein may most readily be detected by the pellets of moist
pale frass seen clustered beside the entrance hole. The larve of the
second brood are far easier to find than those of the first, because, in
July and August, the Senecio stems are so very much taller than in
May, and, being then comparatively clear of the surrounding herbage,
are more readily seen and examined, and bring the larval traces
considerably nearer the eye. The larve of both broods feed up very
irregularly, and, probably, in early June and early August of each year,
larvee, pupe, and imagines could be collected together on the same
date and in the same spot. This I have done on three separate
occasions, viz., May 31st, 1890; August 2nd, 1890; and August Ist,
1891, although all my expeditions have been timed to secure the insect
before 1t reached the perfect state. On August Ist, 1891, and July
28th, 1892, many larve were found, in nature, dead in their burrows
inside the stems, evidently from disease. In 1891, the previous
weather was exceedingly wet, whilst in 1892 it was exceptionally fine
and hot! My notes make mention of some larve being ichneumoned,
but the parasites were not preserved.” Stange observes (Stett.
Ent. Zeity. = S825 9p: 514) that the larve of the first generation may
be found in Friedland in May, mining at first down the midrib of a
radical leaf of Senecio (? aquaticus), and usually with head directed
towards the leaf-base ; later, it enters the central shoot and the upper
part of the root which it eats out in a downward direction; the
excrement 1s heaped up on the central shoot. The larva of the second
generation lives in the stem and betrays its presence by the excrement
which protrudes from the entrance hole.

Larva.—First instar} (newly-hatched): A minute yellow scrap,
barely 1mm. in length, with large black head, nearly twice the width
of the body of the larva; a large black prothoracic plate; a faintly
tinted dark anal plate. The hairs are nearly half the width of the
body in length; that on tubercle i directed forwards, on ii backwards,
on iil forwards; iv and v present one very long hair directed nearly
backwards (arising from iv), and a shorter one above and in front of
it directed rather forwards (arising from v); these are quite distinet
from each other and on separate bases. There appears to be no hair
between these and those at the base of prolegs (vil). On the meso-
and metathorax, i, 11 and ili are as on the abdomen, except that 1 is
nearly as far back as 11 on metathorax, and quite so on the mesothorax,
and in both cases they are close together; there is an accessory
tubercle above and behind ii1 (? the usual second pair on thorax) ;
below these a long hair (? solitary). The spiracles are very large and
project very markedly. The general surface is very smooth, and no
hairs or hair-points can be seen, but there is some trace of sub-
segmentation. The hairs are nearly black with slightly expanded

+ When young the larva is white, and is peculiarly long and slender, thus
forming, both in colour and shape, a remarkable contrast with the green hue and
short, stout proportions assumed as it approaches maturity (Bankes).

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 191

ends (June 17th, 1904). Second instar*: The head has increased
from a width of 0:25mm. to one of nearly 0°5mm. (in the third instar
it is 0°'75mm., and in the fullgrown larva 1:2mm.); there are skin-
points everywhere, colourless and transparent, but very prominent.
The arrangement of hairs and tubercles seems to be already that of
the adult larva, viz., 6 hairs on each side of the prothoracic plate, 3 set as
a triangle in front of spiracle, and 2, level, at base of legs; on the 2nd
and 8rd thoracic segments there are 4 pairs of hairs—the first pair, a
small inner and longer outer, placed shghtly trapezoidally; the second
pair, a small inner and large outer, slightly reversed trapezoidal (if
these 4 hairs were described as actually in line the error would be
trifling, and if said to be equidistant 1t would be little more appreciable,
the distance between the hairs of each pair being more than half that
between the pairs) ; the third pair is not quite so close, the upper hair
is small the lower large, the upper one is behind the lower, the line
joining them being about 45° from the horizontal, the upper one is so
small that it may easily have been present in the first instar and escaped
observation; the fourth pair is the pair on a level at base of legs.
The abdominal tubercles, 1, ii and i are in usual position—i the
smallest, ii the largest, i and 11 are very far apart and very trapezoidal,
ili being almost as near ii asiis. ‘Tubercle v is small, below spiracle ;
iv large, lower and behind ; vi is solitary, large, towards hind margin
of segment; vil has one hair very large, the two in front of it
small. There are 6 hooks to prolegs and 5 to anal claspers.
The hairs are all smooth and pointed. Third instar: The same
description would apply to the third instar, except that there are 9
hooks to the prolegs, and 7 to the anal claspers, and that the skin-
points are prolonged into fine needle points. There are still no other
secondary hairs. inal instar: In the last skin, the skin-points
are quite rounded, but a certain number have developed into quasi-
secondary hairs. These are most abundant on the anterior segments;
on the mesothorax, they are fairly regularly distributed on the darker
portions of the middle zone of the segment, but are not difficult to
count, viz., about 37 on either side, from dorsal line to leg-base. On
the abdominal segments, they are wanting in the spiracular region,
from just above iii to below v; there are about 13 round i and ii,
and 6 between iv+-v and vi, on the 1st abdominal, and none below vi.
On the following segments they occur right down to the ventral line.
On the 5th abdominal there are about 25 above iii, and about 30 below
iv. On the 7th abdominal there are 14 on dorsum (above iii) and
8 below iv. On the 8th abdominal there may, or may not, be 8 or

* The larva in the first instar has apparently no skin-points. I may have
missed the second instar, and what I take to be the second, may really be the third.
I think, however, that this is not so. The chief ground for supposing this to be
the case, is the considerable increase in the size of the head between the first and
supposed second instar. A very similar amount of increase, however, oceurs in
Adaina microdactylay where I have a larva at moult showing both heads in the
same specimen, and what is nearer home, a precisely similar increase in the size of
the head occurs at the first moult. The difficulty of following one larva in these
internal feeders is practically too great to be achieved, especially when one has to
be economical of material, but that of comparing a number of different specimens
may usually be depended on, the criteria of ditferent instars being, not the size
of the larva itself, but of its head, or the lengths of the hairs, or other hard parts
that are invariable throughout an instar (Chapman).

192 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

4 below iy, none dorsally, or on the 9th or 10th abdominals. On
another specimen they are much more numerous, the 8th abdominal
having 2 or 8 dorsally and 10 lower, and on the mesothorax, instead
of 87 are 180 or so, on either side. The prolegs have 10 or 12 hooks,
varying even on the two sides of one specimen. The spiracles are tall
and thimble-shaped. The prothoracic plate (and head) is black with
the usual 6 hairs and dark mark ; 3 prespiracular hairs on one plate
and 2 at base of legs, also on one plate. On the meso- and metathorax
the first and last pairs of tubercular hairs are on just separate plates,
the two intermediate ones on conjoined plates; above and behind the
third pair is a small hair. On the abdomen, tubercles iv and v are on
one plate, the others as well separated as in the second instar; on the
1st abdominal vii carries a single hair, and there is another near the
middle line (villi ?). On the 9th abdominal are, consecutively, 3
plates, each with 2% hairs arranged trapezoidally, and then 2 hairs
singly. The large black anal plate has 9 or 10 hairs on either side.
The plates carrying the hairs are of a beautiful tessellated pattern.
In one specimen (from Spain) the hairs on iv are curiously malformed,
being bent and twisted, enlarged and flattened out, etc. One, for
example, near the base, is flattened and bent as if it had been pinched,
then further on it is flattened out into a plate with serrated edge, and
a median one of the serrations is continued as a fine termination of
the hair. The others have peculiarities of the same character. I
find in one or two of the English specimens some trace of a similar
peculiarity of this same hair. The quasi-skin hairs are really skin-
points, t.e., they are not jointed at the base, and, except for size, have
the same simple structure as the skin-points. They only appear in
Platyptiiia isodactylus in the last instar (not at all in Fredericina
calodactyla [zetterstedtit}) (Chapman). Fullyrown: Three-eighths of
an inch in length, rather thick and plump, tapering much just at each
end, the head small, the legs short and placed much under the body,
the skin smooth, shining and pellucid; it is of a watery, greenish tint,
showing a dark, greenish, dorsal vessel; the subdorsal stripe is also
darker green than the ground-colour, and this is bordered above by an
opaque whitish stripe, which lies beneath the skin, and shows partially
through its glossy surface; another such faint whitish stripe shows
through along the side, and below that is another, somewhat inflated,
on which are the spiracles; the head is black, and so also is a narrow
plate across the middle of the back of the second segment, which is
divided in the centre by a thin line of the pale ground-colour; the
anterior legs are black; the tubercular dots above are small and black,
those along the spiracular region are rather larger, and those on the
front part of the 13th segment are very much larger still; a black plate
is on the anal flap; it is noteworthy that each tubercular dot has, in
this species, but a single hair (Buckler). Buckler figured (Larvae, ete.,
pl. clxiil., figs. 4-4a) two larve of this species in different stages of
growth, and very differently coloured, r7z., fig. 4 green, fig. 4a brownish,
together with an enlarged view (fig. 4c) of one of the abdominal
segments showing the tubercles, on August 16th, 1871, and May 18th,
1872.

SEASONAL VARIATION OF LAaRVA.—Buckler states (Larvae, etc., 1x.,
p. 846) that, on May 18th, 1872, he figured larve from Norfolk,
mining the stems of Senecio aquaticus. These larvee, he says, were finer

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 193

than those he described in August, 1871, being perhaps the least trifle
larger, the proportions, structure, and details all exactly similar, the
general colour of the skin only being a little different, these being
more yellowish and less greenish. One individual was flesh-coloured
as far as the 7th segment, the remainder being of a pale, faintly
ochreous, greenish-yellow.

Fooppiants.—Senecio aquaticus (Barrett), [Senecio nemorensis (Snel-
len).

‘lo ae mode of pupation of the larve fullfed in May and
those fullfed in August differs greatly. Those of the early brood come
out of their larval burrows and form outside puparia, spinning up in
leaves,** etc., those of the late brood make a hollow in the stem of the
foodplant and pupate therein. Describing the pupation-habit of the
latter, Barrett says that, *‘ when nearly fullfed, the larva buzrows into
the thick main stem of the plant, hollows out a space of considerable
size in which to pupate, the head of the pupa being in every case
placed against the round hole that is left by the larva for the extrusion
of excrement. The pupa lies perfectly free in the burrow, the anal
segment not being attached to the usual button of silk.” Describing
the pupation-habit of the early, or spring, larve, Chapman says: ‘‘ When
made in a folded leaf, the edges of which cannot be got together (or
rather the face, as the leaf is too large to be occupied to the edges, and
is also rather stiff), the cocoon is made in the fold, and there is a good
deal of loose silk inside, especially basally, forming a sort of loose
pocket for the abdominal end of the pupa, the exposed silken surface
is very various in shape and area, as may be necessary to complete the
enclosure, but there seems to be generally a piece, some 2mm. or 8mm.
wide, by 8mm. or 10mm. long, at the head end, at which it may stretch
out another 6mm. or so, as a light network for emergence, and, through
this, the front of the pupa may be seen. The rest of the silken surface
is strong, thick and opaque, and looks, as it is, quite equal to holding
the thick fleshy leaf in a fold. Along the margin, where the silk joins
the leaf, some scraps of leaf are bitten out, and these are the little brown
(now, of course, faded and dead) points, with which the silk of the cocoon
is studded. This arrangement seems to be to allow the leaf to open
freely. The typical situation (not always adopted) seems to be on the
midrib of the leaf close to the petiole, and the cocoon is probably made
before the leaf is fully expanded, so that httle drawing together has to
be done, but, as the expansion of the leaf proceeds, some holding together
has to be accomplished. This nibbled margin meets the difficulty in two
ways, viz., by giving a rough surface to which the silk adheres much more
firmly than to the smooth face of the leaf, and, by weakening the leaf, allows
a reverse bend to occur here, and so relieves the tension (May 21st-30th,
1904). Bankes writes that “the pups of the first brood may be found,
in nature, either in the final burrow made by the larva inside the main
stem of Senecio aquaticus, or else in a thin silken, blister-like cocoon,
spun on the upper surface of a leaf of the foodplant, or of some other
neighbouring plant, such as Ranunculus, the leaf being a little drawn

* The pupation habits of the spring larve were first noted by Buckler, who
writes (Larvae, ete., ix., p. 346): ‘* Larve of the early brood were, on May 10th,
1872, mining in the stems of Senecio aquaticus, but one of them, apparently
fullfed, has slightly drawn the top of a leaf together, and in the corner thus formed
has spun a web.”’

194 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

together on each side of the cocoon. My experience with this brood
leads me to believe that, when the Senecio stems are of suitable length,
the larve, as a rule, pupate therein, but when, owing to any cause, the
plants are very stunted, the larve almost, if not quite, invariably
pupate on the upperside of an upstanding leaf, thereby minimising the
risk from floods, and securing suitable accommodation, which, owing
to their own ravages in the stems, probably cannot be found within
them. After prolonged drought I have found the shoots of Senecio,
stem and all, not more than an inch or two in height by the end of
May, when the larve have mostly pupated, but the radical leaves of the
foodplant, containing the pup, were then an inch or two higher, and
about on a level with the top of the surrounding herbage. The pupe
of the second brood are found, as a rule, inside the last burrow in
the main stem of the foodplant.”’ In confinement, pupation of first-
brood larve took place in a loose, white, silken web outside the plant, the
pupa not lying in any particular position. The pupation of the larvee
of the second brood takes place usually within the stem (Stange).
Commenting on this difference, Chapman writes (in litt.) : ‘“‘ The sea-
sonal dimorphism in the matter of the pupating habit is most remark-
able ; Barrett describes the larva as forming the puparium in the stem
in which the larva finished feeding, this would be impossible with
early spring larve, not merely because there would be danger of their
being possibly under water, or otherwise badly accommodated, but
simply because there is no stem for them to pupate in, the largest
available stem being (comparatively) small, succulent, and rapidly
growing. ‘The larva therefore leaves the stem (bud, root ?) in which
it has fed up, and makes a definite cocoon elsewhere. Mr. Bankes sends
four such cocoons on leaves of the Senecio, and larve in captivity have
made similar cocoons on leaves, and have nibbled and torn paper to
make it suit their requirements. They fold over a leaf till it nearly
meets (and serve paper in the same way), and across the small remain-
ing gap is spun a strong opaque diaphragm of silk for part of the fold,
and, at the top, the silk spreads out more thinly into a short funnel-like
portion, through which the anterior end of the pupa can be seen as
through a very slight screen, and through which the moth is to emerge.
The silk is whity-brown in colour, and seems to have some particles
entangled in it in some cases.” Bacot writes (August 12th, 1904):
‘‘T am rather puzzled as to where pupation is taking place; I found
one pupa spun-up on the upperside of a leaf, but can find no more
pup externally on the plant. Two others I found on the earth as
though they had fallen, and I suspect the larve have pupated within
the plant, and that they wriggle out of their puparia occasionally as in
the two individuals just noted.”

Pura.—The pupa is, in some specimens I have, pale terra-cotta,
with practically no dark markings; some of the summer pup2 are
well-marked, but none anywhere approaching black, which is, I
imagine, rather a rare form, as it does not occur amongst a number of
(spring ?) pupz sent me by Mr. Bankes. Of these, some are very dark
and some very light-coloured. All these Platyptiliine pupe are very
much alike, but that of P. isodactylus is at once distinguished from all
the others by the ridge, carrying spines, which encircles the abdominal
segments, just above the line separating the front part of the segment
from the intersegmental subsegment; it is present on the 3rd, 4th, 5th,

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 195

6th, 7th, and 8th abdominal segments. Its actual position is on the
last but two of the transverse ridges marking the level part of the
seoment. Of these, I count 17 on each segment, but they are not
continuous, and, by overlapping, fading out, etc., they might easily be
counted, by rigid ruling one way or other, as low ag 12, or as many as
20. A description of the 5th abdominal segment gives us all the
tubercular hairs, as in the larva—i about middle of rough part of
segment, behind the sixth ridge (eleventh on counting everything
possible), 11 just behind ridge of spines, iii well above spiracle and in
line with i, though there is, on all segments, half-way between i and ii,
a mark, as though three or four ridges had been rubbed down with a
finger (supposing them to be plastic, as of clay or sand), which interferes
with following the ridges on readily. In front of, and above, the spiracle,
is a minute tubercular point, much further away than one would
expect to see the accessory spiracular tubercle, judging from its larval
position. Tubercle v is below the posterior margin of spiracle, and iv is
below and behind v, three ridges above spinous ridge; vi is one ridge
in front of spines, and vii is represented by the three usual hairs—the
first in line with v, the second (largest) two (or three) ridges behind,
the third, one ridge in front of the second. No inner (viii) hair
is observed. On the 6th abdominal segment, vii retains only one hair
on one side and two on the other, there is also a minute hair-point
near the anterior border of segment, quite ventral to vii; and there is also
trace of a hair-point at anterior margin, between ii and iii. The
spinous ridge is very similar on the 4th, 5th and 6th abdominal
segments. The largest spines, four ventrally on either side, are
sharp, and triangular, and pointed backwards ; one ventral to v, two,
one on either side of, and close to, vi, and one just posterior to vii; the
first and last of these are longest. Immediately ventral to the last is
a hollow, with thick raised anterior ridge, that, though almost too
posterior, is almost certainly scar of proleg, as there is no other, and
it does not occur on the 7th abdominal segment. Thereisa very similar
mark, still in line of spinous ridge, below the spiracles, but it is less
of a hollow or pocket, and the raised margin (ridge) is behind it.
Dorsal of this, the ridge is merely a line, except just below ii, where
there is a low spine; above 11 the ridge is well marked, with thinner
portion in front ofit. The 17 (12, or 20, as may be) ridges, are about
twice their own widths (and heights) apart, and, whilst their summits
are fairly transverse lines, their margins are very irregular; regarding
them as hills, their flanks have many small subsidiary ridges running
down into the plain. The finer sculpturing consists of numerous
minute pits (8 or 4 in width of a valley), circular, and well separate
from each other ; to be like those of I’redericina calodactyla (zetterstedtiz),
they would have to enlarge to twice their size, and diminish the plain
on which they are, by the consequent encroachment, but they are,
perhaps, not so regularly placed as in that species. There is, however,
quite a different sculpturing in places, and, all along the anterior
margin (except just dorsally and in front of the spiracle), and along the
posterior margin ventral to v, and the whole width of the segment
ventrally, nearly out to vii, there are no pits, but extremely sharp skin-
points, directed backwards, about nine in width of a ridge and valley :
on the 7th abdominal, these skin-points invade most of the seement.
The spiracles are well-marked circles about 0-O8mm. in diameter, that

196 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

on the 7th abdominal nearly O‘lmm. In one specimen, the anal scar
is large, nearly 0°2mm. across, with central incision, marked by
marginal ridges and wrinkles; it is in an area of more than twice the
width, bounded by ridges running down into the cremastral spine and
running forward and including a circular area smaller than the anal
scar; this area is elevated on either side, and carries on each side
one hair, similar to the cremastral ones, but smaller, and but imper-
fectly hooked ; posterior to this is another very small one ; the central
line between the two elevations is smooth and depressed, the rest of the
area between the ridges is transversely marked by ridges, which,
however, curve to accommodate the circular area. The cremastral
spine is a somewhat obtuse cone, with very sharp point; it carries
fewer than 30 hooked hairs, about 0-2mm. long, thickened some distance
before their ends, and with a fish-hook point. The small number of
hooks, and the obsolete character of the forward group, must be cor-
related with the cocooning habit. Both summer and winter pupa,
however, are armed in precisely the same way. The 8th abdominal
segment 1s very narrow ventrally, and, in the @, has a rounded central
notch. The nose-horn is much less developed than in the other
Platyptiliine species, except perhaps P. gonodactyla. Instead of being a
salient spike, it is hollow in front (or below) and curved down and for-
ward, and the apex incurved. In putting the head-parts on a slide, the
nose-horn submits readily to being flattened ; in (rillineria pallidactyla
(bertramt) it will only go down sideways, and twists the other portions.
The face-parts are wrinkled, the jaws do not quite meet beneath the
labrum, with its very small lappets on each side of the central notch ;
a diamond-shaped piece of the labium is visible, the maxille rapidly
narrow, and at 2°Omm. come to a point, in some specimens finally
disappearing beneath the legs, in others, maintaining a microscopic
line at the surface to their termination 2°5mm. further on. The 1st
leg broadly abuts against the antenna, the 2nd is still further out.
The Ist pair of legs terminate 5mm. from head, at level of end of wing-
margin (but short of apical point); the antenne terminate Imm.
short of this. Beyond the line of hind-margin of wing, the appendages
lie together in a bundle, fixed together, but free from the body. The
bundle consists of the 2nd and 8rd legs (the 8rd posterior), side
by side, extending to 13mm. beyond line, supported on either side
by the prolonged wing-apex for about 0-7mm.; this pointed process of
wing is about 0-2mm. wide at its base. The ends of the 1st legs just
appear in front, and from beneath them the ends of the maxille
proceed to the same distance as the wing apex. The dorsal head-
plece is very minute, but carries the eye-cover on dehiscence, the
prothorax is half as broad as long, 0‘'7mm.x0O-4mm. The mesothorax
is notched at its outer front angle by a hollow, in which is an elaborate
cover for the spiracle (the spiracle proper being some way under this
and rather attached to prothorax when the parts are separated); this
cover is 0‘'2mm. long and 0:07mm. wide, fairly rectangular in plan,
but arched across, and a little from end to end, and is crossed by rows
of fine spicule, those in each row connected by raised waved lines.
The mesothorax also carries the dorsal flanges, which are well marked ;
each 1s 0:12mm. wide, and about 0°25mm. from the dorsal line; they
converge so as almost to touch the middle line at the posterior border
of the segment, and dwindle so as to be inappreciable on the meta-

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 197

thorax, but are still traceable down to tubercle i on the 3rd abdominal
segment; the hindwing disappears just beyond the spiracle of the
2nd abdominal segment. The forewing shows marks of veins, and also
exhibits ‘‘ Poulton’s line,” giving a wide inner- and hind-margin, slightly
passing as an angle between the two lobes, and cutting off the long
wing apex, so that the portion inside the line hardly intrudes into it at
all; the slit between the lobes has paler chitin, with quite a large pale
patch at the point of fission (Chapman). ‘The pupa is figured by
Buckler (Larvae, etc., pl. clxiil., fig. 4b), and is of a very dark grey
colour, differing considerably from his description of the same (infra).

CoLOUR VARIATION AND MARKINGS OF PuPA._—The pupa is smooth*,
nearly -375 in. in length; the wings and leg-cases meeting in a point
low down the abdomen, and in close contact with it; in colour, it is
pale whitish-ochreous, the abdomen a little deeper tinted, it is
generally striped and marked with brown, particularly on the head
and back of the thorax; the dorsal marking is a series of brown acute
triangles (Buckler). The spring pupz are, as a rule, much darker
than would agree with Buckler’s description of the internal summer
pupa; probably, I have not examples of the palest of the spring
forms, but my palest are darker than Buckler’s, whilst two are absolutely
black, but with a fine “ bloom”’ giving a bluish effect, one of the black
ones must have the word “ absolutely’ modified, to admit of a faint
trace of a paler subdorsal line being represented by brown spots faintly
indicated on each segment at the ridge which encircles each segment.
Barrett can hardly be correct in finding no cremastral attachment; it is
represented in the summer form, in all the specimens examined, exactly
as 1t exists in the spring one; the pupa is easily drawn out of the cocoon,
but brings a thread or two of silk with it. Some pale pupz would be
best described as black, with pale ochreous markings, but one can be
found that may almost be called pale whitish-ochreous, with dark mark-
ings. It may be called so in order to agree with Buckler’s description,
and also because, by analogy of other plume pupe, the pale is the ground
colour, and the dark is the marking. The spiracles (2nd- 7th
abdominal) are very distinct as shining brown points ; the legs, maxilla,
most of the antenne, and much of the wings, are black; the bases of
the antenne, and some markings on the head and marblings on the
mesothorax, and wing-spines (bases), are ochreous. The metathorax is
also very dark; the abdomen is paler, ochreous, with a faint greenish
tinge; this has various black (not brown) markings; of these, a
lateral line (below iv and v) of some width, and a narrower one below
it, are fairly straight and linear ; in calling these markings black, they
are really very thin black, through which the pale tint of the apes
shows sufficiently to prevent the ‘black being solid and dense. A dorsal
line takes the form of triangles, as noted by Buckler; on the 1 1st, 2nd
and 8rd abdominal segments, they consist of very fine lines sloping
outwards and backwards : . two of these form a central triangle with an
acute angle forwards, enclosing a small black triangle ; the lines out-
side the triangle are rather reticulate; from the 4th abdominal segment
onwards, the whole triangle is black, and somewhat blurred into an
irregular dorsal band. Above tubercle lli is a line, also irregular, as

* Barrett adds (Ent. Mo. Mag. SEVElLawe Ds 154) that the pupa is destitute of hairs
like those of the allied species (gonodac tyla, ochrodactyla, ete.). This is erroneous
all these pup possess the primary set in the pupal stage (Tutt).

198 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

if it were tending to form similar triangles. Ventrally, each segment
has a central blackish shade, and, outside this, a wide shade sloping
outwards and downwards, The bloom is visible wherever the surface
is dark enough to show it up. The pen-like anal spike is fringed by a
fine fan of rich brown-coloured hairs, with hooked extremities, perhaps
14 to 18 on each side; underneath the 8th abdominal segment is
only a pair of small hairs of this character. Hach abdominal segment is
divided into two portions by a ridge encircling it. In front of this is
the segment proper, about ‘6 of the whole segment; behind it, is the
intersegmental membrane; a small portion of this is not invaded in
extreme flexion, and is also probably segment proper, but the line
separating this from the real intersegmental membrane is not easily
made out. This ridge is nearly evanescent ventrally ; laterally it
carries several short but sharp spines, probably of use in fixing the
pupa during emergence; the longest and largest of these is just
ventral to the spiracle, and there are two others ventral to this one, on
either side, the first of these is double; there are also two (on either
side) dorsal to the larger one. Of the pupe examined, the g's are dark,
the 2? s the paler. This is true of pupex, whose larve had spun up in leaves
of Senecio, but, of some cocooned in paper, all are paler than any
pupating in Senecio, though still much overlaid by black markings.
In a distinctly pale one, the wings are ochreous, without black marking;
the legs, antenne, etc., are darkerochreous with darker shading, especially
towards the head ; the head and thorax, dorsally, have much dark marking,
except the mesothoracic crests, which are pale; the dorsal triangles on
abdominal segments, the subdorsal blotchy band, the spiracular band
of marbled lines, rather almost network, a sublateral dark line, and
another below it, and the ventral triangulated line and dots are all
very distinctly separate on an ochreous or olive-ochreous ground colour
(Chapman). The pupe of the second brood appear to be strikingly
lighter than those of the first generation, much resembling those of
Gillmeria pallidactyla (bertrami) (Stange).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—This species is apparently wholly double-
brooded, occurring first in June and again in August, each brood
lasting over three weeks. Also double-brooded in Friedland, occurring
in June and August (Stange). Chapman observes that, at Puerto de
Pajares, in Spain, between July 12th-16th, 1904, the imagines were
fairly abundant; eggs were laid and the larve fed up rapidly in con-
finement so long as food lasted, but finally the larve died when nearly
fullgrown, on August 10th, and on the point of pupating ; no doubt
these would have produced moths in the ordinary course about the
end of August, in time to lay eggs to produce hybernating larve. The
species has, therefore, at Pajares, exactly the same life-history as in
Britain, but is two or three weeks later in the season, probably passing
its summer stages more rapidly (in litt.). Actual recorded dates are as
follows—August 20th, 1879, and June 18th, 1880,in Friedland (Stange) ;
the first weekin June, innumbers, at the foot of the Kagle’s Nest mountains
(Kane) ; June 18th, 1836, at Dorchester (Dale) ; sparingly August 10th,
1864, and preceding days, at Cromaglaun Glen (Birchall) ; July, 1868,
at Carmarthen (Hearder) ; June 21st, 1871, and August 20th, 1871, and
following days, on the banks of the Yare, near Norwich (Barrett) ;
imagines bred August 20th-September 2nd, 1871, others again bred
June 6th-16th, 1872, all from larve found on the banks of the Yare,

PLATYPTILIA ISODACTYLUS. 199

in Norfolk, the preceding July and May respectively (Buckler) ;
imagines captured August 30th, 1889, May 31st, and August 2nd, 1890,
May 24th-26th, 1892, near Wareham, Dorset; imagines bred May 29th-
June 30th, 1890, from larve and pupe collected May 15th-31st, 1890;
also August 9th-September 15th, 1890, from larve and pupe collected
August 2nd, 1890; also June 10th-28th, 1891, from larve and pupe
collected May 25th, 1891; also August 2nd-September 8th, 1891, from
larvee and pupe collected August 1st, 1891; also May 27th-June 11th,
1892, from pupe collected May 24th-26th, 1892, and August 1st-30th,
from larve and pupe collected July 28th, 1892, all near Wareham ;
imagines bred August-September, 1890, from larve collected August
2nd, 1890, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ; imagines captured Septem-
ber 8rd, 1898, on the Belfast Hills (Watts) ; imagines taken August 14th-
16th, 1900, and also September 18th, 1902, near Dartmouth (Bankes) ;
imagines bred June 2nd-4th,1904, from larve collected May 19th, 1904,
at Wareham (Chapman); imagines inbred from the last recorded lot
emerged August 2nd-12th, 1904 (Bacot).

Hasrrs.—The moth is very local, yet plentiful in its restricted
haunts ; it hides during the day among coarse herbage, and especially
among ragwort in marshy places, and is very sluggish when disturbed,
shuffling into the nearest hiding-place, but, before dusk, it begins to be
very lively, flying about such places quite freely; later, at night,
ascending to fly abroad over the country, and sometimes even hang
upon a roadside gaslamp. The females are particularly sluggish
(Barrett). The moths, during the day, rest among Senecio aquaticus
or other marsh plants, from which they may be more or less easily
disturbed. They are on the wing during the evening, until about dusk,
in favourable weather, flitting to and fro amongst the marsh herbage
in characteristic Alucitid manner, and with the usual jerky flight. I
have taken the imago on the wing as early as 4.40 p.m., in an excep-
tionally shady spot, on September 18th, whereas in June. or early
August it would, of course, not come on flight until a considerably
later hour. The ?s are decidedly more lethargic than the g s (Bankes).
Griffith notes that he took a fine series in South Uist, flying in the
evening over alaree marsh where half-an-hour earlier Bactra furfurana
was abundant. Chapman observes that, at Puerto de Pajares, in
Spain, the imagines were common and easily disturbed from among
Senecio aquaticus, both in the mornings and evenings. {Evans observes
(Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist., 1897, p. 100) having taken a doubtful specimen
of this species off a lamp at Merchiston in October, 1894.) | Chap-
man sleeved two gs and two @sona plant of Senecio aquaticus on
June 6th, 1904, and, at 9 p.m., one pair was observed in copuld, the
? hanging by the front two pairs of legs to the plant, the g inverted
and suspended only by his attachment to the ¢; half-an-hour later
they had separated (in litt.).

Hasrrar.—This species lives on marshy or swampy ground where
Senecio aquaticus and S.nemorensis grow. Jordan notes (/nt. Mo. May., iv.,
pp. 88-89) it as occurring in “an alder swamp, near Teignmouth, that
was fed by a little stream running from Haldon, about a mile distant.
It was about an acre in extent, and under the alder-trees grew sorrel and
saxifrage, whilst near there were small thickets of Kupatoriwn canna-
binum, Hpilobium hirsutum, Equisetum telmatera, with the marsh-thistle
towering up among them, and it was in these fastnesses that the plumes

200 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

took shelter. There were also Senecio aquaticus, Caltha palustris,
Cardamine pratensis, Lychnis flos-cuculi, and Sparganium ramosum,
‘scattered through the bog, besides rushes and sedges, and a few
occasional stragglers from the heath above, such as Anagallis tenella,
Wahlenbergia, and Pediculavis, amongst the grass and Sphagnum,
which formed a rather treacherous footing.’’ Birchall observes (loc. cit.)
that near Killarney, on the bog that lies between the Tower Lodge and
the precipitous base of Cromaglaun Mountain, the imagines are abun-
dant, being, however, apparently confined to the dry and somewhat
elevated margin of the bog, the first example taken there being disturbed
from a clump of Calluna vulgaris. In the Norwich district (op. ctt.,
vil., p. 158), Barrett found the species in a marsh by the river Yare,
‘where Senecio aquaticus grew among coarse grass, flying over reeds and
the tall herbage there. In the early summer or 1880, Barrett further
notes (op. cit., xvil., p. 91) that he found the species by no means
scarce, flying before dusk among Senecio aquaticus, in the stem of which
its larva feeds, and among which it conceals itself in the day-time, on
a piece of pecuharly wet marsh thickly overgrown with Iris pseudacorus,
Senecio aquaticus, Mentha palustris, Ranunculus flammula, &e., at Pem-
broke, whilst, in August of the same year, the imagines were so abundant
on the same ground that he could have taken hundreds. Bankes records
(Ent. Mo. Mag., xxv., p. 455) that its habitat near Wareham is a water-
meadow, and says (7 litt.) that it is excessively local, both in the south
of Devon and the south of Dorset (the only counties where 1t has occurred
to him), but usually common in its special and very restricted haunts,
which, in his experience, are swampy corners of water-meadows beside
rivers, and the like; owing to the value of water-meadows for hay-
making and grazing purposes, suitable spots are few and far between,
and, hitherto, his efforts to find it in Purbeck have only resulted in the
discovery of four or five larve. When first he met with it in Dorset, in
1889, it had only been taken in the county once previously, namely, in
1836. Watts found it in a reedy spot on the Belfast hills where Senecio
aquaticus 18 abundant. Barrett later writes (Lep. Brit. Isles, ix., p.
352): It is found in marshy places rather than fens in Norfolk; in
Wales, it is common near Pembroke and elsewhere on the Pembroke-
shire coast, and also in Carmarthenshire; in Scotland, Stainton records
it from the Orkneys, and Mr. A. F. Griffith found it in a marsh in the
Hebrides, whilst, in Ireland, it has been taken among the hills near
Belfast and Carrickfergus. In Friedland, this species is found beside
ditches, and on the banks of the Datze (Stange); [in south Holland,
near Leiden, on marshy ground (de Graaf).| In Spain, July
12th-16th, 1904, at Puerto de Pajares, the road from Leon to Oviedo
crosses the Cantabrian range at a height of 4500 feet; much of the
region hereabout is not unlike a Scotch moorland, and, in many of the
marshy bogs about, Senecio aquaticus is common, and among this P.
tsodactylus is abundant, just as the Senecio is coming into flower
(Chapman).

British Locatities.— Exceedingly local in England, Scotland and
Treland, but abundant where it occurs. Anrrim: Belfast Hills—Knockagh,
near Carrickfergus (Watts). CARMARTHEN: Carmarthen (Hearder). Corr: Glengariff
(Tutt coll.). Drvon: between Haldon and Teignmouth (Jordan), Dartmouth
(Bankes), Exmouth (Leech). Dorset: near Wareham, Isle of Purbeck (Bankes),

Dorchester (Dale). [EprnpureH: Merchiston (Evans).] Gatway: Moycullen
(Kane). Hesripes: South Uist (Griffith). (Hants: Isle of Wight—New Forest

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA. 201

(Stephens).] Kerry: Cromaglaun Glen—near Tower Lodge, on the upper Lake of
Killarney (Birchall), foot of the Eagle’s Nest Mountain (Kane). KrxcarpineE: Stone-
haven (Tutt coll.). Lonponprrry : Londonderry district (Barrett). Norroix: banks
of the Yare—Norwich (Barrett). Pembroke: coast districts of Pembroke (Barrett),
Saundersfoot (Blandford). Suernanps and Orkneys: Orkney (teste Stainton).
Stico: Markree Castle (Kane), Culleenamore (Leech). [Surrorx (Meyrick). ]
Distrreutron.—An exceedingly local and little known species, and,
no doubt, from its recorded localities, much overlooked. So far only
recorded from northwest Germany, Batavia, England and the Channel

Isles. [BreLerum (teste Barrett ; wants confirmation).] CHAannrL IsLes: Guernsey
(Ansted). Grrmany: Friedland—on the Fohlenkoppel (Stange). [Hoxnuanp : South
Holland, near Leiden (de Graaf teste Snellen).] Spain: Puertode Pajares, where the
road from Leon to Oviedo crosses the Cantabrian range (Chapman). [The Silesian
records of isodactylus do not refer to this species (teste Hofmann). The Leiden
specimens have been compared, and found to correspond, with British examples
(teste Snellen). |

PuatyprTiLia GoNnopactyLA, Schiffermiiller and Denis.

SynoNyMy.—Species : Gonodactyla, Schiff. and Den., ‘‘Schmett. Wien.,”’ 1st
ed., p. 320 (1775); Goeze, ‘‘ Ent. Beit.,”’ iv., pt. 3, p. 177 (1783); Lllig., ‘‘ Schmett.
Wien.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 130 (1801); Zell., ‘‘Isis,’’ p. 882 (1841) ; Staud. and Wocke,
“¢Cat.,’’? 2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ iii.,
pt. 2, p. 784 (1877); Frey, ‘‘ Lep. der Schweiz,” p. 428 (1880) ; Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,’”’ xvill., p. 177 (1882); Tutt, ‘‘ Knt.,’’ xviii., pp. 169, 195 (1885); Sorh.,
**Kleinschmett. Brand.,” p. 2 (1886); Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 53 (1886); Tutt,
** Hint.,”’ xx., p. 211 (1887); xxi., p. 259 (1888) ; ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xxv., pp. 104-
107 (1888) ; ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x., p. 163 (1889) ; xi., p. 123 (1890); ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,”’
p. 40 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 486 (1890); ‘‘ Handbk.,” p.
434 (1895); Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,” p. 42 (1895); ‘‘Illus. Zeits. Ent.,”’ iii.,
pp. 125, 152 (1898); Staud. and Reb., ‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 72 (1901). Diptera,
Sulz., ‘‘ Ges. Ins.,”” p. 163, pl. xxiii., fig. 19 (1776). Megadactyla, Hb., ‘‘ Eur.
Schmett.,”’ Aluc. pl. ii., fig. 6 (ante 1804); ‘‘ Verz.,’’? p. 429 (1825). Trigono-
dactyla, Haw., ‘‘Lep. Brit.,” p. 478 (1811). Trigonodactylus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent.
Comp.,” p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘‘Brit. Hnt.,’’ fo. 161 (1827); Stphs., ‘ Illus.
Haust.,’’ iv., p. 375 (1834) ; Wood, ‘‘ Ind. Ent.,”’ 1st ed., p. 237, pl. li., fig. 1644
(1839); Sta., ‘‘Cat.,”’ p. 31 (1843); ‘‘Zool.,” p. 3064 (1858); ‘‘Man.,”’ ii.,
p. 440 (1859); Dbldy., ‘‘ Syn. List,” 2nd ed., p. 36 (1859); Peers, ‘‘Ent.,”
li., p. 38 (1864) ; Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo, Mag.,”’ viii., p. 137 (1871) ; Machin, ‘‘ Ent.,”’
Kili., p. 283 (1880) ; South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xv., pp. 31, 145, pl. iii., figs. la-1c (1882) ;
Xvill., p. 170 (1885) ; Porritt, ‘‘ Buck. Larv.,’’ix., p. 347 (1901). Tesseradactyla,
Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,’’ ix., pt. 2, p. 230 (1833) ; var. c, Zett., ‘“Ins. Lapp.,’’ p.
1012 (1840); Evers., ‘‘ Faun. Lep. Volg. Ural.,” p. 605 (1844). Tesseradactylus,
Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,” xi., p. 647, pl. 318, fig. 5 (1838) ; supp. iv., p. 500, pl. 88, fig. 8
(1842). Zetterstedtii (in part), Zell., ‘‘Isis,’”’ p. 777, var. c (1841); ‘‘Isis,”’ p.
300 (1846); Dup., ‘‘Cat. Meth.,’’? p. 381, in part (1844). Gonodactylus, Zell.,
‘Linn. Ent.,” vi., p. 330 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 368, supp., pl. ii.,
fig. 9 (1855); Frey, ‘‘Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’’ p. 402 (1856); Wallgrn., ‘‘ Skand.
Fjader.,’’ p. 12 (1859); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’? vi., p. 121 (1869); Nolck., ‘‘Lep.
Fn. Estl.,’’ p. 800 (1871) ; Gregs., ‘‘ Ent.,’’ vi., p. 426 (1873) ; Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.
Isles,’’ ix., p. 352, pl. 414, figs. 1-la’ (1904). Ochrodactylus, Sand, ‘‘ Cat. Lep.
Auv.,’’ p. 203 (1879). Farfara, Gregs., ‘‘ Ent.,” xviii., p. 151 (1885); Tutt, ‘‘ Ent.,”’
Xvili., pp., 169-171 ,195-196 (1885). Farfarella, South, ‘Ent.,’’ xviii., p. 172
(1885). [In 1804, Hiibner figured gonodactyla, Schiff., under the name megadactyla.
In 1821, Charpentier examined the Schitfermiillerian collection, and stated that gono-
dactyla was a worn specimen of calodactyla (zetterstedtii) (an error that could easily
be made when one recognises how little was known of the Platyptiliids at this time).
Zeller notes (Isis, 1841, p. 882), however, that Fischer von Réslerstamm (and
with this the original description agrees) states, that Schiffermiiller’s example is
identical with the example which Zeller treats as Pterophorus zetterstedtii var. c,
and with Alucita tesseradactyla, Tr., both of which have been since referred to the
species now generally known as gonodactyla. ]

OriGiInaL DESCRIPTION. — Alucita gonodactyla. — Braunlichtweisses
Geistchen mit einem diistern Dreyeck fleckchen (Schiffermiiller and
Denis, Sys. Verz. der Schmett. Wien., p. 820). {Illiger, in the 2nd ed.
of the Sys. Verz., ete., pp. 180-1, writes: ‘*The plume, which I hold

202 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

to be the gonodactyla of Schiffermuller and Denis, is of a brownish-grey
tint, about as large as P. tetradactyla. The forewing is divided into
two lobes by a longitudinal fissure for the first third of its length; at
the termination of the cleft (on the costa) stands a triangular brown
spot ; the inner margin of the exterior part (or ‘ Spitzenlappens’) is, like
the inner margin of the forewing itself, edged with whitish. The
hindwings are composed of three plumules, fringed only on their inner
margins.’ |

Imaco.—21mm.-27mm. Head, thorax and abdomen of the same

colour as the wings. Anterior wings divided into two lobes ; the apex
sharply angulated but not much produced ; the ground colour whitish-
erey, the costal area darker, being sprinkled with dark seales; the
inner margin also darker at the base, but paler in centre and towards
anal angle; in this pale part there are generally two dark marks on
the inner margin, variable in shape, one near the centre, the other nearer
the anal angle; the central area comparatively clear; a dark brown
triangular blotch on costa (just within cleft) 1s produced almost to
inner margin, and externally edged by a pale line, forming roughly a
lunular mark ; a dark shade, hardly to be called a band, crosses the
two lobes parallel to the outer margin, edged externally by another
very pale line. Posterior wings divided into three plumules, of a
ereyish-brown colour, with paler fringes, the posterior plumule with a
distinct tuft of black scales towards the anal angle.

VarraTion.—The newly-emerged imagines differ considerably in
eround colour and intensity of markings; some are distinctly whitish-
erey in ground colour, others strongly reddish-ochreous, whilst many
are strongly suffused with a rosy tint. The strength of the markings,
too, varies considerably, some being faintly, others quite darkly,
marked. In some specimens, principally of the early brood, the
ground colour is slaty-grey, the markings very rich brown, the costal and
inner margins much speckled with ochreous, and thus these specimens
somewhat resemble the more richly marked I’. calodactyla. On the
whole, there is much more variation in the first than in the second brood,
the specimens of the early brood being, generally, much redder and
more strongly marked than those of the later brood, a pale whitish-grey
example being rare in the spring brood, whilst in the autumnal brood

a reddish or ochreous specimen is of rare occurrence, almost all being

conspicuously pale. Not only are the second brood examples paler,
but they are generally smaller and not so decidedly marked, the earlier
specimens of this brood especially having a bleached appearance; the
colour too appears to be of a more uniform grey, and the markings also
are less sharp than in most specimens of the first brood, the bleached
appearance being possibly due to the fact that the larve hurry through their
changes compared with those of the first brood. There is also a great
deal of variation in size, those of the early brood being generally the
larger, although very large and very small examples occur in both
broods. Borgmann notes that he reared examples from larve in the
flowerheads of Tussilago at Cassel, in 1878, that were nearly one-third
larger than the autumnal specimens. There appears to be little, if
any, fixed sexual variation in colour or size. Some individuals, one:
notices, have only one, or neither, of the two dark spots normally present
on the inner margin ; some have a dark shading at the exterior edges of
the cleft in the anterior wings, whilst others are without it, and yet again

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA. 203

we find specimens with scarcely a trace of the fascia parallel to the
hindmargin, and others in which the characteristic costal spot is ill-
developed. There is also considerable difference in the falcate
character of the apex of the anterior wings, some being very pointed
compared with others. South notes (Hnt., xv., p. 32) that some
examples that he bred from the larval stage, in north Devon, were
very pale, and had quite a bleached appearance when compared with
other specimens captured in Kent and elsewhere. The following
appear to be the chief forms :—

(1) Greyish-white, with ill-defined markings=ab. pallida-obsoleta, n. ab.

(2) Greyish-white, with well-defined markings=ab. pallida, n. ab.

(3) Greyish-ochreous or greyish-brown, with ill-defined markings =ab. typica-
obsoleta, n. ab.

(4) Greyish-ochreous or greyish-brown, with well-developed markings = gono-

dactyla, Schiff.

(5) Slaty-grey, the costal and inner marginal areas ochreous, the darker
markings richly reddish =ab. clara, n. ab. .

(6) Unicolorous brownish, the markings largely absorbed in ground colour=
ab. obscura, n. ab.
Bankes says that ‘“‘although the species gets quickly worn, thereby
becoming paler, a comparison of fresh specimens shows considerable
variation in the ground colour of the forewings. In the palest
individuals this is conspicuously white, only very partially and lightly
tinged with brownish, whereas, in the darkest, it is distinctly brown
or greyish-brown, partially flecked with whitish scales.”” Barrett
observes that the species is variable in size and in the shade of white
or brown ground colour. Jordan notes the autumnal specimens, taken
in Scandinavia, to be, like those taken in Britain, more dusky than
those caught in summer. The best example we have of ab. obscura
was captured by Dalglish at Giffnock, June 14th, 1894.

Heetayinc.—The early summer moths lay their eges deeply among
the tomentum or fluff on the underside of the leaves or on the stems;
they appear to be pushed so far within the woolly coat as to give one
the impression that they are laid internally. [In confinement, many
were laid on the muslin with which the plant, on which the imagines
were enclosed, was covered; these were pushed quite through the tiny
holes in the muslin, and so had the appearance of having been laid from
(as well as the reality of being laid on) the outside.| (Tutt). The eggs were
found fairly plentifully on the underside of leaves of T'ussilago farfara,
growing on a piece of waste land at Upper Clapton, on July 2nd, 1899;
five eggs were on one nearly fully-expanded leaf; two of which were laid
close to, and the others well away from, veins; all, however, were more
or less buried in the woolly texture of the leaf (Bacot). Eges received
on June 12th, 1904, from Mr. Sich, had been laid on the underside of
a leaf of Tussilago farfara, a little sunk in the fluff of the tomentum ;
they were placed on a flat side, and have already a slight hollow on the
top from desiccation (Chapman). In 1904, the first eggs were noticed
on May 31st (four); thirteen more had been laid by June 8rd, 1904.
The ova are laid on the underside of the leaves of the foodplant, more
or less hidden by the tomentose hairs of the leaf. In confinement, the
moths always chose this situation, which is undoubtedly the natural
one, for the summer brood at any rate, for, on June 8th, I searched the
leaves of wild coltsfoot in a field at Chiswick, and soon found eggs in
this situation (Sich). No observation appears to have been made as
to where the eggs of the autumnal imagines are laid.

204 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Ovum.—Pale pea-green when newly laid, changing to pale pearly-
yellowish as the embryo matures; smooth and shiny, with the faintest
trace of a fine coarse-meshed surface reticulation; roughly oval in
outline (viewed from above); laid upon the long side; about ‘55mm. in
length, ‘3mm. in width; the micropylar end rather broader than
its nadir; this end becoming black (possibly the larval head) as
maturity approaches (Tutt). [Im size, rather larger than those of
Porrittia galactodactyla, differing also in shape, being more cylindrical. |
Length -5mm., width -25mm., thickness nearly the same as width;
one end tapering rather more than the other; eggs flattened on one
side, but upper surface not depressed; the surface very smooth and
varnished-looking, with very fine polygonal (? hexagonal) facets
towards ends, possibly the remnants of a surface cellular reticulation
(Bacot, July 2nd, 1899). Pale green in colour; very polished, yet
with a distinct network of hardly raised ribs in irregular polygons, that
run into longitudinal rows in places, e.y., a set of seven or eight, or
possibly more, if they could all be made out at once, are placed side
by side in a row in line with the longest axis of the egg, so that their
separating ribs are transverse, and their common line of margins is
nearly straight, but still so far irregular that, instead of the cells
appearing to be quadrangular, they are modified hexagons or pentagons;
in other places they are irregularly placed, of various sizes and figures,
and the ribs are often so flat and rounded as to be difficult to see. The
cells of the network are about 0:03mm. in diameter. Seen from above
the egg is oval, 0-60mm. long, and 0°36mm. across; seen laterally,
the top and bottom are nearly parallel, and would be but that one end
is slightly thicker; this end is also a good deal flattened; both top
and bottom are a little hollowed; the height is 0°25mm. at the
thinner end, 0°:27mm. at the thicker (Chapman).

Hapits or Larva.—(1) Summer feeding larvae——A large number
of larve appeared July 2nd-5th, 1888, ffom ova deposited on the
leaves of some potted plants of Tusstlaqo farfara; numerous tiny mines
were at once noticed in the undersurface of the leaves, and, on July 7th,
a thorough examination showed a number of small round holes in the
under epidermis, and mines leading from these into the leaf substance;
the larvee in the mines were very inconspicuous, and could only be traced
by their black heads. On July 10th, a large number of tiny larvee—pale
green with black heads, the two following segments with a black plate and
a dark dorsal streak—were observed mining under the fluff, both of leaves
and stems. ‘The larve were now conspicuous enough, many wandering
about on the outside of the undersurface of the leaves; they were then
turned out-of-doors, and soon crawled on the strong plants growing in the
garden; they directly, however, bored beneath the fluffy under-epidermis.
On July 19th, some of the larve had left the mines and were feeding
externally; they were then about ‘25mm. long, and very pale in colour;
those that were feeding outside the mines, and quite exposed, were eating
little round holes in the undersurface of the leaves, through the epidermis
and parenchyma, leaving only the upper epidermis. On July 30th,
some larve were still mining under the fluff of the undersides of the
leaves, but most of them were fully exposed, and some of the
latter larvee had now quite a dark purplish-brown dorsal line. On
August 19th, the larve were still eating round holes through the lower
parts of the leaves, but leaving the upper epidermis. The larve were

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA. 205

at this time practically fullfed and appeared to vary in a much less degree
than those of the spring brood, being, as a whole, much paler; there were
now no traces of mining, all the feeding being done outside, and one larva
had already pupated in a web on the underside of a leaf. Pupation
took place between this date and August 26th, by which time, many of
the plants looked as if they had been riddled, for the growth of the young
leaves causes the upper epidermis, which the larve appear to leave
uneaten, to crack (Tutt). On June 17th, 1904, the young larve, a day or
two old, were found mining in the substance of a colt’s-foot leaf. No
sien of their work was visible above (on June 20th), except a faint dis-
coloration over some of the largest ; below, nothing is to be seen until
close observation shows the minute hole of entry, sometimes, quite
close to the eggshell, at others so far froman eggshell that the larva must
have travelled some distance; by holding the leaf against the hght, the
little larvee and their mines are very evident, and it is by first finding
the mines in this way that the other indications just noted are dis-
covered. By July 2nd, the larve are still mining in the leaves, eating
out the parenchyma, and leaving the upper and lower layers; they are
ready, however, if the cover fails them, to use a little silk, or, if the
leaf gets dry or stale, to come out and seek other quarters. The larve
are already (some of them) in the 3rd skin, and look, inform and colouring,
much like the full-fed larva. The plants on which they were placed
were badly established, and the leaves failing, the larve had to make
various pilgrimages ; whether in consequence of this, or asan ordinary and
natural habit, is uncertain ; I find all the leaf-stalks have one or more
larvee in them, as evidenced by the small extrusion of frass (Chapman).
(2) Winter-feeding larvae.—Little is known of the habits of the winter-
feeding larvee, from the time they hatch in September until the earliest
days of April, when they are about 25mm. in length, 7.e., the second
(and most probably the hybernating) instar, at which time they may be
found in the hollow scapes of Tussilago farfara, often in the lower
part, often in the solid basal part, and sometimes even extending into
the rootstock. That little, however, is important, and consists of an
observation made by Ovenden, in October, 1908, that the tiny larvee
mine in the leaves, near the midrib and close to the petiole, along which
he suggests the larve bore in the autumn, and at the base of which they
lie dormant until January or February, when they enter the already
rapidly-growing plant. We suspect that thelarva enters the upper part of
the rootstock to make its hybernaculum, for it clearly attacks the young
shoots and scape just as they are springing therefrom. The scape of 7.
farfara is, when well-grown, hollow from the base of the receptacle (carry-
ing the capitulum) to within an inch or so of the point where it leaves the
rootstock. Ovenden writes: ‘‘ After the examination of some dozens
of flowering stems of T'usstlago farfara, I have come to the conclusion
that the larva works into the flowering-stem when very minute. I
found some yesterday (April 20th, 1904), no longer than from 8mm.-
4mm., lowdown in the stem, in fact nearly into the root, whilst, in many
plants, the entrance holes were plainly discernible under the leaf-like
bracts that encircle the flowering-stalk. I found the large ones higher
up the stem, and, when they were just beneath the capitulum they appeared
to be mostly in their last instar. There were plenty of traces of eating, as
well as of frags, in the stem, and, as there was not a single larva observed
in the flower-head itself, although the bases of the capitula sometimes

206 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

had holes in them, I incline to the opinion that the larva works up
from the root to the flower, and only feeds on the fruits when the stem is
cleared. It appears probable that, as I have found the larva mining
in leaves in October, near the midrib and close to the stem, the
larva works its way along the petiole of a leaf, lying dormant at the
base thereof until January or February, at which date the previous
year’s leaves are still attached to the foodplant, and then enters a
flower-stalk just as it begins to rise. Such small larve, as these are
in the winter, certainly hybernate in the foodplant; they also leave
clear signs of the points of entrance into the flower-stalks at the base
of thesurrounding bracts.’’ About 200 flowering-stalks of T'ussilago far-
fara, in very different stages of development, some being extremely small,
others nearly fullgrown, collected at Strood on April 20th, 1904, by Mr.
Ovenden, and sent to us, were split on the morning of April 21st. A few
points appear to beclear. The smallest larve, now about 83mm.-4mm. in
length, are in the bottom internode of the peduncle or scape, the point of
entry being manifestly just at the upper point where the bottom bract
joins the stem; the appearance inside leaves one with the impression that
the larve had been within this for some time, although the eating of the
inside pith in quantity, which was very evident, had been very recent;
the brown tint and tiny bore of some of the burrows make one suspect
this area as a possible hybernaculum, when the development of the
internode has not proceeded far. Slightly larger larve had pushed
their way up into the stem at least two inches, showing traces of
feeding and frass, but with the pith of the upper part of the flowering
stalk and the base of the flower quite unattacked, firm, and uneaten.
Many stalks, however, which were deserted, and were not otherwise
affected, had traces of attack in the lowest internode. One such
flowering-stalk, about four inches in length, quite young and with the
capitulum not yet opened, that had been attacked in this manner and
had been deserted, had a tiny entrance hole just at the base of the sheath
of the third bract below the capitulum ; the gallery from this led to the
pith which had been cleared out downwards for about an inch by a small
larva that was present. There was no connection between this and the
affected internode at the bottom, or the flower at the top of the stalk,
the upper part of the pith and the receptacle, being unattacked and
uneaten. In some stalks, the connection between the capitulum
and the bottom node by means of a gallery in the centre of the stem
was complete, and traces of eaten pith and frass were evident through-
out the whole distance; a small hole in the flat receptacle, however,
suggested that the stem had been entered from the top and not from
the bottom, and that, by eating downwards, the particular larva had
at last reached the hybernaculum of another larva; that this
was certainly the case in some instances is clear, for, in one case, a
small larva was making the usual borings in the lowest internode of
the flower-stalk, whilst a hole in the receptacle of the same stalk, being
followed downwards, showed a gallery with traces of frass and eaten
pith, for a distance of five inches, when a not very large larva was
reached, only separated from the one in the lowest internode by an
uneaten and untouched distance of about 14 inches. In other stalks
there were distinct traces of the entry of a larva in a not yet, or scarcely,
opened capitulum, the larva having entered the hollow below the recep-
tacle which it had cleared of pith and gone down the stem for some

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA. 207

distance where the pith was also eaten ; neither the achenes nor
floral structures showed any sign of being eaten. The large pro-
portion of larve that were in the receptacle and upper part of
the flower-stalk, the abundance of frass here, and the absolute clear-
ance of all the soft, cellular, pithy material in this portion, with
no connection whatever with the lower part of the stalk, which was
quite sound, made it quite clear that these larve had entered from the
top, and had not worked their way up inside the stalk. Only one larva
showed actual evidence of having eaten the achenes and floral structures;
this was a large fullfed larva, coiled up in the cleared out receptacle,
which was surrounded by the fruits in a green, juicy state, on which
it had been evidently feeding heartily. This particular stem showed
no trace whatever of having been attacked previously by any larva in
its lower internodes, and, no doubt, the larva had left another head to
complete its feeding in this one. This most careful examination has
left us in a more or less uncertain state as to the habits of this larva.
The larva appears, when small, to bore into the base of the un-
developed peduncle (whether in early or late winter is doubtful), and
to remain there until the peduncle has grown to a height of, at least,
three or four inches above the ground. [It may even very occasionally
work its way up the peduncle to the capitulum through the stem, but
we incline to doubt it.] It appears then to leave the lower part of the
peduncle, and to enter the receptacle through the flower, feeding on
the pith of the receptacle and peduncle, and moving up and down
therein with the greatest ease, and almost always travelling with its
head downwards. If one, containing pith, be insufficient to bring it to
maturity, it leaves the peduncle and enters another just-expanding
flowerhead, often, however, getting no further than the receptacle,
which it clears hefore coiling itself to feast on the achenes and florets,
erowing rapidly, and in a short time coming to maturity. Although
a larva from September to May, two-thirds of the growth takes place
in the last three weeks of its larval life, when, from a slender larva of
some 7mm. or 8mm. in length, by less than 2mm. in width, it grows to a
plump, fat larva of some 20mm., with a width of 4mm.-6mm. (April 21st,
1904). In confinement, laggard larve of the spring brood will feed
up on leaves quite comfortably, and may occasionally also be found
doing so in nature (Tutt). Sich observes that, in April, when the
larve are not more than 2°5mm. long, they will burrow a certain
distance into the lower solid portion of the scape, but are more often
found in the hollow portion. In some cases, the larva enters the scape
by biting a hole just above the base of one of the numerous scales
which clothe the scape, in other cases, the larva will burrow down
among the florets (or pappus if the flower be over) and bite a hole
through the receptacle, usually at the centre. Once inside, it remains
concealed and feeds on the soft cellular tissue which lines the interior
of the scape and lower portion of the receptacle. It never appears to
eat either the florets or the achenes. It usually undergoes ecdysis in
the scape, and moves readily from one to another stem. When the
larva is in its last instar it occasionally eats away the tissue almost
down to the outer skin of the scape, which causes the flower-head to
droop. As to the variation in the larval feeding-habits in nature, Bankes
states that, eleven larvee found, April 80th, 1904, in the Isle of Purbeck,
showed the following different feeding-babits: (1) Two young larve feed-

208 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

ing beneath the down, on the back of a young leaf, underneath the curled-
back flap of the leaf. (2) Feeding upwards inside the flower-stalk. (8)
Feeding downwards inside the flower-stalk. (4) Feeding downwards
through the shoot or basai portion of a stem into the rootstock (two or
three well-grown larve were found doing this). (5) Feeding in the base
of a flower in the oft-described way. Bankes adds that, from the pub-
lished accounts, one would gather that, when there are plenty of tall
flower-heads about, most of the larve would be found in them, or in
the stalks just below them, but the majority of those found were in
other parts of the plant, nor did the pose of the four tenanted flower-
heads differ in any way, except in one instance, from that of the
untenanted ones, for most of the latter hang head downwards, their
stems being bent completely over above the flowers; the position
of the attacked head is a mere matter of chance; if the larva
happens to enter a flower-stem, erect throughout its length, and also
happens to mine the portion of the stem just below the head, then the
latter will droop so as to touch the scape, as South says (Entom., xv.,
p. 145), but it does not always, by any means, bore the stem below the
head, nor if it bores one of the numerous stems already bent right over,
can the head droop so as to touch the scape. Chapman notes that, on
May 2nd, 1903, near Lac Bourget, several larvee were found apparently
fullfed, the food of which seems to have been the receptacle and the
material just below it. He notes further that, if this be insufficient, the
larva will go down the stem; usually it does this for a short distance,
inch orso, but more rarely goes quite to the bottom ; the flowers destroy ed
by the larvee succeed in seeding, or rather the achenes remain, but contain
no seed, and the pappus is fully developed; the amount eaten by the larva
appears to be, usually, small, only the fleshy receptacle and little else,
so that it also, probably, in the rapidly-growing flower, gets a good
deal of sap; the plants show no other damage, so that it would appear
that the larva reaches this spot as soon as its hybernation is over, and
as growth beginsin the plant; it is certain that, when the shaft of the
flower-stem is burrowed into, this is donefrom the top; theseconclusions ©
are derived from noting the damage done to the plants at Lac Bourget,
and may easily omit something, an actual observation of the larva
between hybernation and its full-growth in spring being still a
desideratum. Gregson observes (Hnt., vi., p. 426) that the larvee feed
in April in the young flower-shoots of Tusstlago farfara, causing them
to be stunted and droop; towards the end of April, they leave these
stems and enter more advanced flower-stalks, a little below the flower-
head, and live beneath the seeds, eating them from below, or they enter
a well-crown flower, before it is open, causing it to burst on one side,
and take their place among the seeds as soon as they have eaten out a
home to live in; on one occasion, in June, at Llanferas, a larva was
found feeding ina kind of gallery, made i in, or under, the woolly under-
side of a coltsfoot leaf. Peers (/nt., i1., p. 38) and South (Lint. Xue
p. 82) publish notes as to the larval attack on the flower-heads.
Barrett says (Lep. Brit. Isles, ix., p. 853) that, in April and May, the
larva eats out the substance of the bud or flower or the base of the
seedvessel, and that a second generation feeds in June in the upper
part of the root of the same plants. Our preceding notes suggest that
the latter of these statements is probably inaccurate.

Larva.—First instar (June 17th, 1904).—Pale greenish colour, with

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLAo 209

dark dorsal stripe and black head (Tutt); nearly 2mm. long, with body
as wide or wider than the black head; the prothoracic and anal plates
also black; the hairs, on the contrary, rather pale; the tubercles all
single-haired, i with a shorter hair directed forwards ; 11 with a longer
one pointing backwards; 11 long and directed forwards ; the spiracles
large, each forming a prominent truncated flat cone ; tubercles iv and
v on a common base, the former carrying a very long hair directed
outwards and a little backwards, whilst the latter, above and in front
of iv, carries a shorter hair; this is very much directly above the other,
so that unless one is careful to get a proper view, one is apt to think it
is directly above it; tubercle vi seems absent. On the thoracic seg-
ments the hairs forming the 1st and 2nd pairs are near together ; 111 is
without any accessory behind it. Two prespiracular hairs are found on
prothorax; in front of the spiracle are several rows or rather a small patch
of recurved short hooks, and some occur also behind the spiracles, these
appear to be skin-points, not detected on other parts of the larva.
Second instar: The larva is 8mm. long, 3°5mm. if fully extended. It
differs from the previous instar in having tubercle vi present, and in
having a covering of skin-points. The longer hairs on 11 and iii are
about 0-2mm. in length, quite simple; whilst, on the 7th and 8th
abdominal segments, that on tubercle ii is about 0°25mm. long. The
_ head, thoracic plate, legs and anal plate black. Most of the skin-points
are rounded below, but terminate in a fine needle-like point. The
prolegs have five hooklets as against four in the first instar. Third
imstar : In form and colouring’ apparently lke the fullfed larva
(Chapman). /? Penultimate instar (May 1st, 1904).—About 10mm. in
length, 2mm.-2:5mm. in thickness ; the body more or less cylindrical,
gradually (but noticeably) tapering to either end. The head and
thoracic segments are rather small; the anus also is small and some-
what pointed. The segments clear and plump, without being accentu-
ated in this respect; there is a slight central incision dividing each
segment into two poorly marked subsegments. Head small, rounded,
with a polished black surface. The prothoracic scutellum is conspicu-
ous, polished similarly to the head, also jet black, but with a narrow white
mediodorsal streak across it; the anal plate inconspicuous, chitinous,
but coloured asa portion of the body and not distinctively; the true legs
are black; the prolegs short in comparison with those of the external-
feeding Alucitid larve. [The larva uses an abundance of silk, dropping
on a thread on any and every opportunity ; it also has the micro habit
of crawling in jerks, and the ability to crawl backwards.| A marked
lateral flange is one of its noticeable features, but this is situated
rather low down, and best observed ventrally. The larval colours are
pale brown beneath, reddish-brown above, with pale or dirty-white
irregular bands, one on either side of the mediodorsal area, one sub-
dorsal and one lateral. The skin-surface appears shiny, but it bears a
tolerably dense coat of minute spicules, and, in addition, there is a
scattered coat of short tapering black secondary hairs ; these are stout
enough to appear bristly under a 1-inch objective; each of them arises
from a small chitinous black base, and it is these that are chiefly
responsible for the rough appearance of the larva. The tubercles
proper consist of primitive set arising from slightly raised chitinous
buttons,:each surrounded with a small area of chitinised skin-surface ;
tubercles iand ii on meso- and metathorax are set transversely, with a

210 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

shghtly oblique slope on metathorax, near together, but not touching ;
they are joined by a chitinised skin-area that is hardly marked enough
to be called a plate; tubercles iii and iv are situated close together (as
in Sphingid larve) on a single plate, vi carries a single weak hair some
little distance below, while v is a plate bearing two hairs (probably the
primary seta of v and the small secondary hair that is generally found
near it); there is a treble-haired plate (vil) at base of legs. On the
abdominal segments, tubercles i and ii are set in trapezoidal position,
single-haired, 11 bearing much the longer hair; 111 is situated some
little distance above the spiracle; close to the spiracle the usual minute
tubercular point is quite noticeable, the point being larger than
customary, and having a small basal plate. The spiracles are large,
with slightly raised black walls tapering upwards. ‘Tubercles iv and v
are, as usual, mounted on a single plate beneath the spiracle; this
plate is more raised and wart-like than any of the others. There are
also two marginal sete situated a short distance apart; their bases are
distinct, but the actual setze are not (Bacot). inal instar: In the
last instar, the skin-points are very numerous, dark in colour, mostly
flat or round-topped, but with sharp points in places, especially along the
anterior border of the segments, and the long sharp needle-points are still
found ventrally, especially in front of each pair of true legs. The
skin-hairs are almost universal, quite different from those of P.
isodactylus where considerable areas are without them. There are,
however, as in all these species, certain small, usually circular, areas
without hairs or skin-points; these are generally about O-1mm. in
diameter, and the skin-points are often in rows round them. Their
number is much the same as that of the tubercles, and they seem to
have equally fixed positions. The prolegs and claspers have eight or
nine hooks. The prothoracic plate is dark, with darker, puckered-looking
(depressed) patch near each outer end, with a central suture and six hairs
on either side in typical disposition; there are also three hairs on
the prespiracular plate and two on one plate at the base of legs. On
the meso- and metathorax there are, on each side, four plates, each
with two hairs, and a small plate with one (above and behind the third
large one) ; on the four plates the hairs are placed: (1) trapezoidally,
(2) as reversed trapezoidals, (3) upright, (4) horizontal. On the abdo-
minal segments, 1 and ii are widely separate, trapezoidal, i with hair
about 0-8mm. long, ii and iii with hairs about 0:5mm., iv and v on one
plate, trapezoidally; vi may carry one, two, three, or four hairs (on the
1st abdominal segment it is generally a single plate with two hairs,
one above the other, on the 2nd abdominal, it has usually three
separate hairs, often four on the following segments, an odd segment
varying from the others, in one case only one hair, all the other
segments having two or more) ; viichas the usual three hairs; viii (?)
a single small hair. The spiracles are large, circular, on a high conical
base. On the 8th abdominal, the hairs of ii on either side are on a
single conjoined base (a narrow transverse dark plate); on the 9th
abdominal, is a dorsal quadrangular plate, with four hairs placed in
square, then a small plate with two hairs trapezoidally placed, then
two hairs vertically on a smaller plate, then a single hair, and, finally,
a very small hair close to the ventral line. The anal plate has six (or
seven) principal hairs, and four (or three) smaller ones (Chapman).
Short general descriptions of the fullfed larva are given by

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA. 211

Peers (Fnt., i., p. 38), Gregson (Hnt., vi., p. 426), South (fnt.,
Xv., p. 32), and Buckler (Larvae, etc., 1x., p. 347).

VARIATION OF LARVA.—Examination of a number of fullfed larve
collected in Westcombe Park, in late April and early May, 1888, led
to the conclusion that the larve were exceedingly variable. The ground
colour varies extremely, and the amount of development of the red
dorsal and subdorsal lines differs greatly in different specimens; in
some, the suffusion was so complete that the whole of the dorsal area
-was red, in others, so faint that the larva was almost unicolorous
ereen or whitish, according to the ground colour ; in some specimens,
the larvee had decidedly brownish, rather than reddish, stripes, in
others, grey. The different forms noted are:

1. Ground colour grey, with very dark reddish dorsal and subdorsal stripes.
In some specimens of this form, the colour of the stripes suffuses the whole of the
dorsal area, while, in others, they exist simply as fine lines, often reduced to a series
of dots, by the breaking up of the lines in the neighbourhood of the abdominal
incisions.

2. Ground colour green, with the reddish dorsal and subdorsal stripes, offering
almost as great differences as in 1, both as to depth of colouring and area of
suffusion.

3. Ground colour whitish, with very faint reddish stripes, sometimes only a
faint reddish tinge in the dorsal and subdorsal areas.

4. Ground colour whitish, with indistinct, grey, narrow, dorsal and subdorsal

stripes, in fact, almost unicolorous.
Some larvee of the 2nd brood, reared in July-August, 1888, appeared
to vary less, and to be on the whole, much paler than those of the
spring brood. Chapman notes (in litt.) of larvee collected on the shores
of Lac Bourget, in March, 1908, that the general colours were pink
and white; taking the pink as ground colour, there is, he says, ‘‘a broad
subdorsal whitish band on line of 11, and again another below spiracle.
There are whitish markings in the pink dorsally, and again, especially at
level of iii, where it may be described as an abortive or interrupted white
band. Beneath it is chiefly pink. Tubercles simple, black, with
short hairs, general surface clothed with very short black hair, invisible
without alens. The amount of pink varies, so that, in some instances,
it would be more correct to describe the larva as greenish-yellow with
broad, pink, dorsal band (extending to i), a subdorsal band between, but
not including either, ii or iil, and a spiracular one, all with irregular
margins, and including paler and ground colour marblings.’”’ The
differences in individual descriptions are considerable, as may be
expected. Bankes notes the discrepancy referred to by South (Hntom.,
xv., p. 82), between his description of the larva (loc. cit.), and that by
Peers (Hntom., ii., 38), in which South mentions, besides the dorsal
line, two others, viz., a ‘“‘subdorsal stripe’’ and ‘“‘spiracle line,” whereas
Peers only refers to one other, viz.,a ‘subdorsal line.” He says that, “in
that, Peers doubtless included in his term ‘ subdorsal line,’ the two lines
distinguished by South as ‘subdorsal’ and ‘spiracle’ respectively ;
these two lines might easily be regarded as one broad line, much
interrupted down the centre, for their inner margins are by no means
well-defined, and they appear to unite here and there. Unless Peers
had regarded these two as one line, it is inconceivable that he should
have made no mention of what South calls the ‘spiracle line.’ ”’

Fooppiants.—T'ussilayo farfara (Bower), 7. nivea, T. alba (Zeller),
Petasitis (Sorhagen).

212, BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Pupartum.—The seasonal dimorphism to be observed in the mode
of spinning the puparia, by spring and autumnal larve respectively, is
very interesting. Spring larvae.—When fullfed, the larva usually clears
out a space among the pappus on the top of the receptacle, by thrusting
afew of the pappus hairs aside and spinning a few threads, which
keep the hairs in position, and prevent them later from falling off. On
this group of spun-together pappus hairs, the larva rests vertically with
the head uppermost and surrounded on all sides by the pappus. In
about three days it becomes a pupa; if a larva be late in feeding up,
and cannot find an unoccupied scape, it will enter a leaf-stalk and eat
out its inner substance, or, in rare instances, will eat the underside of
the leaves (which, of course, it habitually does in the second, or
autumnal, brood). Under these conditions, it will clear off the
tomentose hairs on the undersurface of the leaf, and, mixing them
among its threads of silk, form a flattish oval cocoon, in which to
pupate, exactly as the larva of the later brood does. One such
puparium was found on May 18th, 1904, at Chiswick, and, just in its
vicinity, four other puparia were noted, formed of the spun-up pappus
of the old flower-heads (Sich). The larva spins together a quantity of the
pappus, so that a portion of it looks a little close together, and it may,
in many cases, be pulled apart a good deal without revealing the pupa.
In one case, the larva had gone to another head and made its cocoon
in the pappus of a normal uninjured flower-head ; the pupa stands up
in the cocoon, parallel with the pappus, and with its tail to the recep-
taculum (Chapman). The larve of the first brood spin the pappus of
the flower-head together, or make a slight web on the surface of a leaf,
and suspend themselves therein for pupation. Even in confinement, when
the larva pupates on the side of a box, it appears always to spin a slight
silken puparium within which to change (Tutt). Pupation takes place in
the cavity at the base of a seedhead of coltsfoot, excavated by the larva,
with the terminal pappus drawn together (Barrett). It appears to be
somewhat difficult to find pupe# in nature, I have only found a few,
and all have been contained in a puparium formed of a tuft of the pappus
spun together. Pup were still obtainable at Strood, up to May 19th,
1904, the first having been found in early April (Ovenden). Autumnal
larvae.—The larvee of the second brood appear always to spin a silken
web on the undersurface of the leaves of the foodplant, usually in a
fork formed by two of the veins. It is often a moderately thick
structure with small pieces of the under-epidermis of the leaf woven
into the silk. The larva then suspends itself in the usual Alucitid
fashion within the web, and the pupa is attached by the hooks of the
cremaster which is apparently almost confined to the 10th abdominal seg-
ment, so that the pupa-case remains within the web on the emergence of the
moth (Tutt). Barrett says that the larve of the second generation are
attached to a stem of the foodplant. We have never thus observed it,
and, if it does so, it must be of very rare occurrence. Sorhagen notes
that, in Brandenburg, even in the spring brood, it prefers to pupate on
the underside of a leaf or in a stalk. Stange notes a similar preference
in this brood in Mecklenburg, adding that the formation of the cocoon
on the underside of a leaf, causes the latter to become quite conspicu-
ously folded. Biittner says, also, “‘pupates by preference on the under-
side of the leaves of the foodplant,’”’ in Pomerania, so that it is possible

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA. 913

that the habit is more frequent in the early brood than is generally
supposed in Britain.

Pura.—The pupa has a short sharp beak. It has the same mark-
ings, and sometimes the same colour as the larva, but varies much
from very pale to very dark. The general outline of the pupa is
characteristic of that of the group. The portion from the metathorax
to the 8rd abdominal segment inclusive is fairly cylindrical (about 2mm.
in diameter), but with a dorsal hollow at the 1st abdominal segment
on each side by way of waist; in front of this portion, the posterior
end of dorsal ridges (combined) at posterior angle of mesothorax stands
up a little, and from this point the dorsal line quickly curves ventrally
to apex of nosespine. The front of pupa is thus a slope of about 30°
from being directly frontad, consisting of head, pro- and mesothorax.
The nosespine and eyes form a ventral projection beyond the cylindrical
mass of the pupa. The free abdominal segments taper at an increasing
angle (and are therefore curved), to the cremaster. The pupa is very
like that of P. isodactylus, it has a similar short nosehorn, with a
slightly sharper point, and it is also without cremastral extension on
the 9th abdominal segment, 7.e., it ranges with that of P. isodactylus in
this respect, but, as a matter of fact, it is rather better provided, for P.
isodactylus has two hairs, abortively hooked, and may have one or two
more or less; P. gonodactyla has four hairs fairly well hooked, one at
posterior end of anal scar, another further out opposite front of scar
(these are really, therefore, on the 10th abdominal segment, but they
belong to the ventral and not the terminal armature), and two on the
boss of the 9th abdominal segment, arranged transversely ; the terminal
set consists of about 24 on either side. It differs chiefly from the pupa
of P. isodactylus in having no trace of the spinous flange along the
posterior borders of the segments. The transverse ridges are fewer
on each segment, and are narrower in proportion to the spaces between
them ; thus, on the 5th abdominal, are thirteen, with 11-18 as the limits,
according to strictness of counting, and the valleys are about three
times the width of the ridges; they are quite as well provided with
branch ridges, in places they might be called angulated or zigzag.
The fine sculpture of pits and skin-points is much the same in distribu-
tion as in P. isodactylus. The tubercular hairs are about 0-05mm. long;
tubercle i has about six ridges in front, and the same behind it, ii is on
the last ridge, 111 is in line with i; the prespiracular accessory is very
distinct, and is two ridges before spiracle, and iv two behind v; vi
is in an area without ridges, due to the three or four penultimate ones
being here absent; it is in the line of the last ridge but one; three
hairs represent vii ; there is nothing ventrad to this. The scars of the
prolegs look like little slits between ridges, and, in a mounted specimen,
appear to have, beneath the slits, cavities as deep as wide; nothing like
this is seen in P. tsodactylus. The cover of first spiracle is almost
identical with that of P. isodactylus. There are two pairs of hairs on
each side of the meso- and metathorax, probably the two most dorsal of
those in the larva ; both wings are marked off by a quasi-suture. The
length of the pupa, fully extended (as just before emergence), is 12mm.,
contracted it is about 2mm. less. The dorsal flanges are marked in
front of mesothorax, meet near its posterior border, are not very
marked across metathorax and the 1st abdominal segment, are plainer on
the 2nd, and distinct but low on the 8rd, where, as usual, they cease.

914 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

There is a very definite ridge or flange below the spiracle on the 4th
abdominal segment, which extends to the end. of the cremastral spine,
where it combines with the dorsal ridges, which reappear on the 8th,
9th, and 10th abdominals, to give a somewhat quadrangular section to
the end of the pupa. On the wings, the veins stand out as raised
ridges. The area beyond ‘‘ Poulton’s line”’ is quite flat. The appendages
are free beyond the 8rd abdominal segment by about 1‘8mm. This
portion includes the produced wing-apices (beyond Poulton’s line),
about 1:4mm., angular, and behind second legs at the extremity; the
second legs which reach the extremity; the tip of the proboscis
appearing between them; the maxille behind for a great part of their
length ; the third pair of legs behind the second, and sometimes
just beyond them, sometimes a little short. The first pair of legs end
at about the end of the 38rd abdominal segment (base of free spine).
The maxille are visible below the head for about 2°2mm., and then are
hidden for 3°5mm. below the second pair of legs. The labrum is a
triangular piece, beneath which the mandibles meet in the middle line
for about 0°2mm.; the diamond of labium visible below them is only
about O-lmm. long and exceedingly narrow. The antenne reach down
4mm.,7.e., 15mm. short of first legs. The latter have a square top, the
flat end abutting against antenna, the 2nd pair has a rounded end
where the curve of antenna bounds its upper portion. The central
rough portion of the eye-piece carries two short hairs. The eye-portions
are carried on dehiscence like horns in front of the pupa-case, by a
slight attachment to the nearly invisible dorsal headpiece; the
prothorax is somewhat roughly oval, about 0‘6mm. x 0-4mm. Amongst
the wing veins, the transverse vein, with two short veins (5 and 6),
stopping and giving place to a fold representing the fissure, are very
definitely marked (Chapman).

VARIATION OF pupA.—There appears to be as much divergence in
colour and markings in the pupal, as in the larval, stage, the pupa
exhibiting, besides a number of well-marked forms, many intermediate
ones. Those described by us, in May, 1888, when the pupa-cases were
well-set, are:

1. Ground colour pinkish, with dark reddish dorsal and subdorsal stripes, with
the wingcases darker and striated all over with fine longitudinal black line's ¢
generally, but not always, with distinct black spiracles.

2. Ground colour grey, with dorsal, and subdorsal, lines, and wingcases as in 1,
but the spiracles always very indistinct.

3. Ground colour, bright green, with no stripes, the abdominal incisions
slightly paler, the wingcases of the same green colour, and no longitudinal strie ;
the spiracles whitish.

4, Ground colour, unicolorous pink, with whitish wingcases, the spiracles very
indistinct.

All the above varieties assume a dark appearance just before
emergence.

Timz oF aAppEARANCE.—The species is apparently distributed
throughout the whole of central Europe, but appears to fail in high
latitudes and altitudes, as well as in southern localities. In Britain,
it is usually on the wing from mid-May to early July, and again from
August to well into October, but the dates vary somewhat according
to season and latitude even in our own islands. In Switzerland, Frey
notes it in the lower levels as occurring at the end of May and begin-
ning of June, and, again, at the end of July and beginning of August.
In Germany, it appears to be similarly doublebrooded, e.g., in May-

a Eas a

ts wis eit Da =

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA. Wiis

June and again August-September in Wurttemberg (Steudel), near
Wiesbaden (Rossler), in Baden (Meess), and at Gottingen (Jordan); in
June and August near Regensburg (Hofmann), and Munich (Hartmann),
etc. Many authors only notice the early brood, although one supposes
it is due to want of observation. In Scandinavia, Wallengren records
it in May-June and again in July-August. In Brussa, it is reported as
occurring in June, and this is the only Asiatic locality that we can find
so far, for it, in fact, the actual dates at our disposal, outside the British
Islands, suggest that it is really a little known species in many parts
of its range. The dates we have are as follows: June 13th, 1864, at
Zurichberg (Dietrich); May 29th, 1869, at Meseritz, August 2nd, 1871,
at Weissenstein (Zeller); June, 1878, at Zermatt; August 20th, also
on September 6th-7th, 1887, at Christiania (Jordan); June 14th-16th,
1590, at Tancarville (Leech); July 26th-31st, 1895, at Mendelpass ;
August 4th, 1895, in the Val Bigontina; August 6th, 1895, on the pass
beyond the Tre Croci, between Cortinaand Schluderbach; August 20th,
1895, between Alstatten and Gais(Tutt); July 19th, 1898, on the Mendel-
pass (Rebel); July-August at Gais (Peyerimhoff); July 18th-28rd, at
Kemmern and Schleck, in the Riga district (Teich); July 22nd, 1903, on
the Durrensteinalpe, near Schluderbach (Meixner); August 12th, 1904,
between Saas-Grund and Hiiteck; August 14th-16th, 1905, between Val
Tournancheand Breuil (Tutt). Inthe British Isles, itis recorded as being
more abundant at the beginning of September than in June, in the Hud-
dersfield district (Porritt); the earliest noted dates in the Clyde district are
May 13th, 1893, and June 18th, 1894, latest dates, August 27th, 1886, and
August 17th, 1888 (Dalglish); throughout June, 1880, and again Sep-
tember 4th, 1880, near Lea Bridge, on Hackney Marshes (Machin) ;
August 22nd, 1881, at Seaton Carew, June 10th, 1882, in the Isle of
Purbeck (Bankes); June, 1882, at Culleenamore (Russ); August 18th,
1882, some worn, near Llangennech (Richardson); June, 1883, on
Hackney Marshes (Sheldon); August 16th, 1884, at Glasgow (Mackay);
June 8rd, 1885, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); August 27th, 1886,
at Giffnock (Dalglish); September 1st, 1886, at Castle Cary (Macmillan);
bred June 5th, 1887, and three weeks following, from lary found at
Westcombe Park (Tutt); July 8th, 1887, at Giffnock (Dalglish) ; bred
120 imagines between June 2nd-July 1st, 1888, from lary found at
Westcombe Park, in May (Tutt); June 27th, and July 2st,
1888, at Giffnock, August 18th, 1888, at Brig o’Turk (Dalglish) ;
imagines bred September 4th, 1888, and following days, from
larve that had pupated between August 19th and 26th, the
eges producing which had hatched July 2nd-5th, at Westcombe
Park (Tutt); September 8th, 1888, at Portland, June 4th, 1889,
near Weymouth (Richardson); June 17th, 1889, at Giffnock (Dalglish);
June 19th, 1889, at Southend (Whittle); second brood from mid-
August to the end of September, 1889, at Westcombe Park (Tutt); end
of August and early September, 1889, at Armagh (Johnson); imagines
bred May 24th, 1890, and on for nearly a month at Westcombe Park
(Tutt); August Ist, 1890, at Giffnock (Dalglish); August 18th, 1890,
an imago taken at Buckerell (Riding) ; June 17th, 1891, in the Isle of
Purbeck (Bankes) ; July 13th, 1891, at Giffnock (Dalglish) ; second
brood abundant September Ist-24th, 1891, at Westcombe Park (Tutt);
two on a lamp September 24th, 1891, at St. Anne’s-on-Sea (Baxter) ;
May 21st-27th, 1892, at Seaton (Still); July 18th, 1892, at Giffnock
(Dalglish); August 17th, 1892, at Oxton (Studd); mid-September,

216 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

1892, at Scarborough (Farren); April 1st, 1898, at Panton (Raynor) ;
imagines April 24th, 1893, at Seaton (Still); May 18th, 18938, at
Giffnock, July 13th, 1893, at Luss, August 17th, 1898, at Crookston
(Dalglish) ; June 2nd and 14th, 18938, at Southend (Whittle); June
6th, 1893, imagines at Mansfield (Daws); June 15th, 1893, imagines
common at Lee (Bower); August, 1893, common at Morecambe
(Porritt); May 8th, 1894, at Prittlewell (Whittle); June, 1894, at
North Berwick, July 17th, 1894, at Newpark, July 81st, 1894, at
Otterston, July 4th, 1894, at Winton (Evans); June 8th, 1894, in Upper
Teesdale (Bower) ; June 6th and 11th, 1894, at Stockton (Lofthouse);
June 13th, 1894, at Giffnock (Dalglish); imagines July 9th, 1894, in
Teesdale, September 17th, 1894, on Greenwich Marshes (Bower); May
22nd and September 8th, 1895, at Prittlewell (Whittle) ; imagines
abundant near Bride, August, 1895 (Ash); June 27th, 1896, at
Bransford (Edwards and Towndrow); June 6th, 1897, at Carlisle
(F. H. Day); June 17th, 1897, at Harrow (Rothschild) ; June 17th,
1898, imagines common at Lee (Bower); August 22nd, October 29th,
1898, at Corsemalzie (Gordon); early June, 1899, at Carlisle (Day) ;
June 15th, 1899, at Bredon (Kdwards and Towndrow); July Ist, 1899,
at Hazeleigh (Raynor); July 2nd, 1899, at Upper Clapton (Bacot) ;
August 7th-20th, 1899, at Shoeburyness (Whittle); August 19th, 1899, at
Chiswick (Sich); an imago bred August 28rd, 1899, at Buckerell
(Riding); July 7th, 1900, at Dundonald (Dalglish); July 9th, 1900,
rare at Oxton (Studd); August 1st, 1900, at Dawlish (Turner); August
18th and September 11th, 1900, at Shoeburyness, June 15th, 1901, at
Prittlewell (Whittle); July 10th, 1901, at Kirn (Dalglish) ; end of
August, 1901, at Bawdsey (Pyett); June 15th, 1902, at Birtley
(Harrison) ; August 9th, 1902, near Ashford (Kdelsten) ; June 18th,
1903, at Skinningrove, in the Cleveland district (Lofthouse); June
20th, 1908, at Southchurch ; June 380th, 1903, at Shoeburyness ;
August 30th, 1903, near Great Wakering (Whittle); September 38rd-
16th, 1903, at Birtley Fell (Harrison); June 4th-6th, 1908, May 25th-
26th, 1904, from larve collected April 80th, 1904, in the Isle of
Purbeck (Bankes) ; May 15th, 1904, and throughout the month, also
on September 6th, 1904, at Strood (Ovenden); July 30th, 1904, at
Burnley (Clutten); June 8rd, 1905, at Mucking (Burrows) ; June 8rd,
1905, abundant at Northwood (Turner).

Hasits.—The imagines hide during the day either on the coltsfoot
or other herbage in the nerghbourhood, usually sheltered by the large
leaves, and are not easily disturbed at this time. If aspecimen be made
to take flight it only movesashort distance and soon hides again lowdown
on the herbage near the ground. This is also its habit abroad as we
found in the Tyrol on the Tre Croci pass behind Cortina, and Zeller noted
when collecting in the Oberalbula, and in his own district at Meseritz.
It is much more readily disturbed in the late afternoon, and appears
sometimes even to be moving about quite naturally at this time,
but flies freely towards dusk, and on into the night. Sich says that
the imagines commonly rest by clinging only with the pro- and
mesothoracic legs, the former spread out in front of the head and
wings, the latter spread out under the wings, and often hidden by
then). The metathoracic legs are held under the body, crossed at the
tarsal portions. The wings are horizontally outspread, the forewings
covering the hindwings except the dorsal fringes. The body hangs
down at right angles to the forewings with the last segments curved

PLATYPTILIA GONODACTYLA. He VTE

upwards. The antenne are carried under the wings. After
emergence the wings hang vertically from the thorax during the
process of drying, as in most lepidoptera. In pairing, the moths rest
one below the other. The female rests in the usual manner with the
wings spread out horizontally and the abdomen hanging vertically
downwards. The male’s position is exactly the reverse, his abdomen,
hanging from that of the female, extending vertically upwards. The
male clings to any neighbouring object with the prothoracic legs, but
his whole weight is borne by the female which he clasps with the
prensors. They remain paired many hours—in one case at least four
hours and forty minutes, from 11.50 p.m. to 4.30 a.m. This pairing
may have continued longer but the moths were separated at 8.30 a.m.
On June 10th, 1904, two moths were found paired in the sleeve at
9.15 a.m. The female was clinging with the pro- and mesothoracic
legs to the underside of a leaf of Tusstlago farfara. The male was
hanging from the female by means of the prensors. The metathoracic
legs of both moths were extended outwardly, those of the female
downwards, and those of the male upwards, till they met and crossed,
but it did not appear as though the male gained any support by these
means, he seemed to be hanging solely by means of the claspers, his
pro- and mesothoracic legs being drawn up fairly near the body and
quite unattached, in fact, he was hanging in mid-air. Both moths
remained apparently motionless. At 7 p.m., they were still in contact,
and when last seen, at 10 p.m., they had not separated. The imago is
readily attracted by light, and we have seen it repeatedly on the lamps in
Westcombe Park and at Strood, and it is noted also at light at Lee
(Bower), at Seaton (Still), at St. Anne’s-on-Sea (Baxter), at Coxhorne
(Robertson), at Corsemalzie (Gordon), in the Glasgow district
(Dalglish), etc. Bankes observes that imagines captured June 4th,
1903, in the Isle of Purbeck, Dorset, were on the wing between
7.40 p.m. and 8.10 p.m. Of two bred, May 25th-26th, 1904, from
Isle of Purbeck pupz, one emerged at 9 a.m., and the other between
9 a.m. and 12 noon.

Hasitat.—This species is par eacellence the “plume” of waste
places, and is to be found in most places where its foodplant springs up—
on railway banks, roadsides, rough ground, and the many almost barren
places which appear incapable of producing anything except Tussilago
farfara, in Eneland, Scotland, and Ireland. It occurs in abundance
on the railway banks about Gloucester (Hudd), at Carlisle (Day),
about Aberdeen (Reid), and at Westcombe Park, and other places in
the London district (Tutt), as also throughout the Clydesdale district,
or wherever the ground has been recently turned up in the same district
(Dalglish), it is found on rough ground at Mansfield (Daws), on road-
side banks at Southend (Whittle), in a garden at Enfield (Edelsten),
on the cliffs at Scarborough (Farren), on the steep rough limestone
cliffs at Llanferras (Gregson), on the old breeze heaps in the brickfields,
as well as on the banks of the Medway, at Strood, in the chalkpits at
Charlton, and almost any and every kind of waste place imaginable,
where its foodplant is to. be found. Barrett notes that it is still
common in the suburbs of London, where the coltsfoot grows on
railway banks, or the embankments of waterworks, and is to be found
commonly in suitable places throughout England, probably also in
Wales, etc. In Germany, it occurs in similar places ; it is recorded as
occurring in a sandpit at Friedland, in a chalkpit at Johannisberg

218 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

(Stange), on the railway banks near Cassel (Borgmann), in deserted stone
quarries near Regensburg (Hofmann), in meadows between Grabow
and Bredow, in Pomerania (Bittner), etc. In Austria, we found the
species on a bare piece of limestone ground by the roadside, between
Bézen and the Mendel Pass; on a piece of stony wayside between the
Tre Croci and Schluderbach in the Cortina district, whilst Mann notes
it on the Schneeberg, by ditch-sides and on ground where trees have been
felled. Jordan records it as common among coltsfoot near Zermatt
Church, and we have taken it between Stalden and Saas-Grund, as
well as in the high mountain valley between Val Tournanche and
Breuil. Peyerimhoff notes it as occurring in the mountains of Alsace,
whilst Aurivillius maintains that, in Scandinavia, it is a somewhat
rare insect, and confined practically to the mountains there. Sand
records if as a mountain species in the Auvergne (but his remark that
the larva is a gentian feeder, makes us wish for further records from
this district). Milliére notes it as common on the coast of the
Mediterranean, near Cannes.

British Locaities.—Generally distributed throughout the British

Islands. Asrrpgen: near Pitcaple (Reid). Antrim: Belfast (Watts). Areyzn:
Kirn, abundant (Dalglish). ArmaguH: Armagh (Johnson). Ayr: Ayr (Fergusson),
Dundonald (Dalglish). Berwick: Berwick (Barrett). Bure: King’s Cross (Dalglish).
CamBripGE: Cambridge (Stainton). Carnarvon: Penmaenmawr (Porritt). Carmar-
THEN: Llangennech(Richardson). CHrsurre: Birkenhead(Stainton), Chester(Arkle),
Wallasey (Prince), Knutsford, Holford Moss (Day). [Corx: Timoleague (Donovan),
Kenmare(Dillon).] Cornwauu: Paul,Penzance(Baily). Cumprerianp: Carlisle(Day),
Bewcastle, Hayton (Routledge), Lake dist.(Stainton). Drnpicu: Llanferras(Gregson).
Dersy: Gresley Common (Harris), Ashby Road, abundant (Baker), Burton (Brown),
Bretby, abundant (Gibbs). Devon: North Devon—Lynmouth, etc. (South), Oxton
(Studd), Seaton (Still), Buckerell (Riding), Dawlish (Turner), Sidmouth (Leech),
Dorset: usually common (Bankes)—Portland (Richardson), Bloxworth, Swanage
rare (Cambridge), Weymouth (Richardson), Isle of Purbeck (Bankes). Dusiiy:
Howth, Clontarf (Birchall), Killasloe (Carpenter), Dublin (Barrett). DumBarton:
abundant, Luss, Milngavie (Dalglish). Durnam: in Teesdale (Bower), near
Stockton (Lofthouse), Birtley (Harrison), Darlington (Sang), Seaton Carew (Bankes).
EprinsureH: North Berwick, Newpark, Otterston, Winton (Evans). Essex:
Hazeleigh (Raynor), Southend, Shoeburyness, Southchurch, Prittlewell (Whittle),
Mucking (Burrows), Colchester (Harwood), Clacton, Walton-on-the-Naze (Leech).
FrermanacH: Enniskillen (Partridge). Fire (Barrett). GuoucrestaR: plenti-
ful and generally distributed (Hudd), Bristol (Bartlett), Coxhorne (Robertson),
Painswick (Watkins). Hants: on the coast (Stephens), Isle of Wight—Ventnor
not common (South). Herrerorp: Leominster (Hutchinson), Tarrington (Wood).
Iste ofr Man: near Bride (Ash). Krnr: Lee, Greenwich Marshes (Bower), Strood
district, Cuxton, Blackheath district, Westecombe Park (Tutt), Brockley (Turner),
near Ashford (Edelsten), Gravesend (Leech). Kerry (Barrett). KixcarpIne:
rather scarce (Reid). Lanark: Carluke (Morton), round Glasgow, Cambuslang
(Dalglish). LancasHrre: St. Amnne’s-on-Sea (Baxter), Morecambe (Porritt),
Manchester (Stainton), Oldham (Rogers), Burnley (Clutten). Lixcomn: Panton
(Raynor), Ashby, near Brigg (Cassal). MippiEsex: Hackney Marshes (Sheldon),
Harrow (Rothschild), Dalston (Prout), Mill Hill (South), Enfield (Edelsten),
Hammersmith, Shepherd’s Bush (Gates), Upper Clapton (Bacot), Chiswick (Sich).
NorTHUMBERLAND: Newcastle (Stainton). Norrs: Mansfield (Daws). OrkNEY
(Curzon). PrmBroxe: Pembroke (Barrett). PErTrusuire: Brig o’ Turk (Dalglish).
RENFREW : abundant, Giffnock, Crookston (Dalglish), Paisley (Dunsmore). Rox-
BURGH: Hawick district—Hardie’s Hills (Guthrie). Sti¢o: Culleenamore (Russ).
Somerset: plentiful in all stages (Hudd), Castle Cary (Macmillan). Srarrorp:
Rugeley, generally distributed (Freer). Srimuine: Fintry (Eggleton). Surroik:
Brandon (Barrett), Hacheston (Harker), Bawdsey (Pyett). Sussex: Hastings, St.
Leonards-on-Sea (Ford). Warwick: Knowle, Sutton (Bradley), Rugby (Rugby
lists). Wierown: Corsemalzie (Gordon). Worcester: Bransford (Rea), Bredon
(Edwards and Towndrow). Yorxs: Wilsden, common (Butterfield), Huddersfield
(Porritt), Scarborough (Farren), York (Stainton), Doncaster district, common
(Corbett), Everingham, common (Sumner), Skipwith (Ash), Bishop’s Wood (Prest),

GILLMERIA. 219

Flamborough Head (Horton), Goole (Harrison), Bramham (Smith), Hexthorpe,

near Doncaster (Warren), Sheffield (Wilson), Cleveland district—Skinningrove

(Lofthouse).
Disrrisution.— Central and northern Kurope (except Polar region),

southeast Gaul, central Italy, southeast Russia and Bithynia cena
Asta: Asia Minor—near Brussa (Mann). Avustro-Huncary : Bohemia—Prag®
(Nickerl), Moravia—near Briinn, near Schebetein, in Obraner Thale, near the
Ziegelei, not rare (Gartner), Lower Austria—Vienna district (Schleicher), near
Hernstein (Rogenhofer), Schneeberg, in Graben, Holzschlagen (Mann), ‘Tyrol—
Gross Glockner district (Mann), near Innsbruck, from 1850ft.-3000ft., not rare,
Taufers Valley (Weiler), Monte Sabion, Trafoi, Franzenshdhe (Heller), Mendelpass
(Rebel), Cortina district (Tutt), Diirrenstein Alpe, near Schluderbach (Meixner),
Carinthia—near Preth, Raibl, not common (Zeller), Hungary—Budapest district,
Kovaszna, Croatia—Fiume (Aigner), Styria—Graz (Meixner). Brncium: very
common (Crombrugghe). Denmark (Bang-Haas). France : Normandy—Tancarville
(Leech), [Auvergne— Mont Dore (Sand), ] Cannes, coast districts (Milliére). GeRMANY:
east and west Prussia, somewhat common—Konigsberg, Waldau (Speiser), Pomer-
ania, not rare, and generally distributed—Riigen, Stralsund (Paul and Plotz), between
Grabow and Bredow (Biittner), Posen—Meseritz (Zeller), Mecklenburg—near Fried-
- land, near the Ziegelei Johannisberg (Stange), near Parchim (Gillmer), Hamburg—
Grasbrook, Harvestehude, Eppendorf (Sauber), Hanover—near Hanover (Glitz), near
Gottingen (Jordan), Hesse—near Wiesbaden, Spelzmiible im Salzbachthal (Réssler),
near Cassel (Borgmann), Waldeck—near Rhoden (Speyer), Thuringia, throughout
(Knapp), near S6mmerda (Jordan), near Erfurt, rare (Keferstein and Werneburg),
Saxony—near Halle, not rare (Stange), near Céthen (Gillmer), Brandenburg—near
Berlin, rare (Pfiitzner), Silesia—Lower Friedersdorf, near Neusalza (Méschler), in
the Grundwalder Thal, near Reinerz, Wolfesgrund-am-Schneeberg, Thaler-am-
Altvater (Wocke), near Lichtenau, Lauban (Sommer), kingdom of Saxony—
Saxon Upper Lusatia, not rare (Schiitze), Bavaria—near Regensburg, Tegern-
heim, Weintinger Holz, etc. (Hofmann), near Miinich, Isarauen, Niederaschau,
Tegernsee, Oberaudorf (Hartmann), Wiirttemberg (Steudel), Baden—near
Constance, Freiburg (Reutti), near Ueberlingen, Hiifingen, Schopfheim, Sulz-
burg, Lahr, Durlach (Meess), Alsace, in the mountains — Hoheneck,
etc. (Peyerimhoff). Irany: Piedmont Vaileys—between Val Tournanche and
Breuil, [? Val Véni] (Tutt). Russta: Ural district, common—Orenburg, Casan,
Saratov (Eversmann), Baltic Provinces—near Rambdau (Lienig), Riga district—
Kemmern, Schleck (Teich). Scanpinavia: rare, and usually confined to hilly
districts (Wallengren), Norway—Dovre (Wallengren), Drivstuen (Bohemann), near
Frutigen, Christiania (Jordan), Kaafiord (Strand), Saltdalen (Sparre-Schneider).
SWITZERLAND: at low elevations to 5500ft.—Frauenfeld, Ziirich (Frey), Lenzburg,
Oftringen (Wullschlegel), St. Gallen (Taschler), on the Ziirichberg (Dietrich),
Degersheim (Miiller), Ebenalp (Peyerimhoft), Bergiin (Zeller), Turtmannthal
(Geneva Mus.), Upper Engadine—near Samaden, St. Moritz (Frey), Weissenstein
(Zeller), the Valais, between Saas-Grund and Stalden (Tutt), Zermatt (Jordan),
Gais (Tutt), Weissbad, common, the Furka, 2400 m. (Peyerimhoff).

Genus: Gitumeria, Tutt.

Synonymy.—Genus: Gillmeria, Tutt, ‘‘Ent. Rec.,’’ xvii., p. 37 (1905).
Alucita, Schiff. and Denis, ‘‘ Sys. Verz.,’’? Ist ed., p. 145 (1776); Gize, ‘‘ Ent.
Beit.,’’ iv., p. 176 (1783) ; Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 478 (1811); Hb., ‘+ Schmett.
Kur.,”’ Aluc. ix., figs. 12-13 (post 1811) ; Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,”’ ix., pt. 2, p. 227
(1833). Pterophorus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,’’ p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘ Brit.
Hnt.,” fo. 161 (1827); Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’? xi., p. 641, pl. 313, fig. 2 (1838);
Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,’’ p. 236, pl. li., figs. 1639 (1638 in error), 1642 (1839) ; Dup., ‘Cat.
Méth.,’’ p. 381 (1845); Zell., ‘* Isis,” p. 775 (1841); Tgstrm., ‘ Finl. Fjir.,”
p. 154 (1847); Frey, ‘‘Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’ p. 402 (1856); Sta., ‘‘ Man.,”’ ii.,
p. 440 (1859) ; Buckl., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xii., pp. 233-234 (1876); Porritt, ‘* Ent.
Mo. Mag.,”’ xxii., pp. 103-105 (1885); xxiii., p. 163 (1886); ‘‘ Buckler’s Larye,”’
pp. 338-341, pl. 163, fig. 3 (1901). Platyptilia, Hb., ‘Verz.,”’ p. 429 (1825) ;
Zell., ‘‘Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 227 (1852); Staud. and Wocke, ‘“ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed.
p. 341 (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 782 (1877) ;
Frey, ‘‘Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 428 (1880); Sang, ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xviii., pp.
143-4 (1881) ; South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xv., p. 146, pl. iii., figs. 2a-2e (1882) ; xviii., p. 279
(1885) ; Sorh., ‘‘ Kleinschmett. Brandg.,’’ p. 2 (1886); Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 51
(1886) ; Tutt, “Young Nat.,” x., pp. 163, 220 (1889); xi., pp. 18, 22 (1890);

)
. - e fF (
Hering, ‘‘Stett. Ent. Zeitg.,”’ pp. 269-279 (1892) ; Tutt, ‘* Pter. Brit.,"’ p. 22 (1895) ;

220 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,”’ p. 486 (1890); ‘‘ Handbook,”’ ete., p. 434
(1895) ; Hodg., ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,’’ iii., p. 186 (1892) ; Hofmn. a aes Pteroph.,”’
p. 53 (1895); Fernald, ‘‘ Pter. N. Amer.,” p. 33, revd. ed. 4 (1898) ; Staud.
and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 72 (1901) ; Dyar, ‘‘ List N. Es Lep., 22 p. 444
(1902). Stenoptilia, Stphs., ‘‘Ill.,’’ iv., p. 375 (1834). Platyptilus, Zell.,

“Isis,” pp. 770, 775 (1841) ; H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,” v., p. 367 (1855) ; Wallgrn.,
oC Sheng. Fyjadermott,’’ p. wil (1859) ; Ross., ‘Wien. "Ent. Monats.,’’ viii., pp. 53-54
(1864) ; Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 121 (1869); xviii., pp. 74-75 (1881) ;

Nolck., ce Lep. Fn. Est.,” pp. 783, 800 (1871) ; Walsm.., ‘¢Pter. Cat. Oreg.,” p. 3,
pl. i., fig. 3 (1880); Jord., ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xviii., pp. 74-75 (1881); Barr.,
‘‘Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 346, pl. 413, figs. 3-3c (1904). Platyptila, Barr.,
‘« Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xvili., p. 177 (1882).

The genus Gillmeria, created in 1905 (Ent. Record, xvii, . 37),
in order to separate it from the closely allied genus Platyptilia, from
which, however, it differs in certain marked characters, had already
been placed i in a separate section of the latter genus by Herrich-Schiiffer
(antea, p. 83), Hofmann (anted, p. 160), and Wallengren (antea, p. 86).
Herrich-Schaffer’s diagnosis of the group (Sys. Bearb., v., p. 867) is:

Lobus alarum posteriorum interior concolor, ante medium aut in medio
dentatus. Palpi et fasciculus frontalis capite duplo longiora—ochrodactylus, Hb.

Wallengren’s sectional diagnosis (Kong. Svensk. Vatens. Akad. Hand.,
il.), referring to Gillmeria, reads:

Frontal tuft rather long. Palpi with the terminal joint rather long, somewhat
drooping. 'Tibie slender—P. ochrodactylus, Hb.

Hofmann’s differentiation (Die deutsch. Pteroph.., p. 40) is as
follows :

Palpi and frontal tuft much longer than the head ; the frontal tuft reaches to
the tips of the palpi; upper lobe very acute; fringes with darker basal line.
Yellow species.

1. Ochreous-yellow, usually with very distinctly expressed brown markings—

ochrodactyla, Hb.

2. Almost unicolorous, rusty-yellow, without clearly expressed markings—

bertrami, Ross.

Our own diagnosis (antea, p. 160) of Gillmeria may be extended to
read :

Imaco.—Palpi and frontal tuft longer than the head; the terminal saint of the
palpi rather long and drooping. With the tuft of black scales on the third plumule
of hindwing ill-developed (sometimes absent). The dark costal triangle ill-
developed and more or less obsolete.

Pupa.—The nose-spine much longer, (0°‘8mm.), than in Platyptilia (isodac-
tylus and gonodactyla) (0°25mm.), directed more forwards ; the dorsal line, stead
of proceeding in its curved ventral sweep, bends forwards along the dorsum of the
spines; posterior border of abdominal segments quite smooth; a plentiful supply
of hooks in the forward part of cremaster (almost absent in Platyptilia) ; the pupal
pattern of the markings differ (but owing to variation not easy to define); the
prominences of the dorsal ridges much more conspicuous (than in Platyptilia, or in
fact, than in any other plume pupa).

Larva.—Form, outline and colouring very similar (to Platyptilia). Skin-
hairs, over whole surface, divided into alternating areas, in which hairs and skin-
points are—(1) dark, and (2) transparent and colourless (in Platyptilia, skin-hairs
dark, some areas of skin without them) ; proleg hooks (10-12) more numerous than
in Platyptilia (8-10); proleg hooks with attached ends squarely transverse, and
consequently broad, the column rather longer (than in Platyptilia); the head,
dorsal plates and legs pale ochreous or nearly colourless (not black as in Platyp-
tilia); the meso- and metathoracic sete paired, but quite separate, and without
basal plates (in Platyptilia each pair on common plate), bases surrounded by skin-
hairs; the hairs in each pair widely separate ; these setz more distinctly transverse
round segment ; no plates on the 8th and 9th abdominal segments.

The two species in this genus appear to be essentially more or less
phytophagic—ochrodactyla being almost confined to Tanacetum, palli-
dactyla to Achillea. That they are distimct species is clear from the

GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA. 221

genitalia (Pter. of Nth. America, p. 35, pl. ix., figs. 4-5, and figs. 14-15).
The similarity of the imagines is great, but their differences are dealt
with at length (postea p. 223). Muhlig (Stett. Knut. Zeitung, 1863, p.
213) and Rossler (Wien. Ent. Monats., viil., pp. 58-54) were the first
observers to discriminate between these two closely allied species, and
their attachment to separate foodplants. Sang insists (Hnt. Mo. May.,
Xvlil., pp. 148-4) that ochrodactyla occurs only on Tanacetum, although
Achillea may be plentiful in the same district, to which pallidactyla
appears to be equally closely confined. Barrett observes (op. cit., xviil.,
p. 177) a correlated difference in the divergent ways in which the larvee
of the two species feed. Porritt also states (op. cit., xxil., pp. 104-5), that
anyone having experience with both species in nature can scarcely help
noticing the differences between them, and this, in spite of the fact
that the larve of both insects. correspond in having three forms of
colouring in the different stages of growth, and the resemblance of the
adult larve particularly shows their close relationship, whilst the
differences, apart from the foodplants, are sufficiently wide to separate
them. 7
GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA, Schiffermuller and Denis.

» Synonymy.—Species : Ochrodactyla, Schiff. and Denis, ‘‘ Sys. Verz.,’’ p. 145
(1775) ; Goze, ‘‘ Ent. Beit.,”’ iv., pt., 3, p. 176 (1783); Hb., ‘Eur. Schmett.,”
Aluc. ix., figs. 12, 13 (post 1811); Charp., ‘‘ Die Ziinsler,’’ etc., p. 174 (1821) ;
Hb., ‘‘ Verz.,”’ p. 429 (1825); Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,”’ ix., pt. 2, p. 228 (1833); Staud.,
“‘Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 341 (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ iii.,
pt. 2, p. 783 (1877); Frey, ‘‘Lep. Schweiz,” p. 428 (1880); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,”’ xviil., p. 177 (1882); Sorh., ‘‘ Kleinschmett. Brandg.,’’ p. 2 (in part)
(1886) ; Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 51 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x., pp. 163,
221 (1889) ; xi., p. 18 (1890) ; Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,” p. 486 (1890) ;
Hering, ‘‘Stett. Ent. Zeitg.,” pp. 269-279 (1892); Tutt, ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 27 (1895) ;
Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,’’ p. 435 (1895); Hofm., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,” p. 453 (1895) ;
Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 72 (1901). Ochrodactylus, [Dup., ‘“‘ Hist.
Nat.,’’ xi.. p. 641 (in part) (1838);] Zell., ‘‘ Isis,”’ p. 775 (in part) (1841) ; [Dup., ‘‘ Cat.
Meth.,’’ p. 381 (in part) (1845) ;j Zell., ‘* Linn. Ent.,”’ vi., p. 327 (in part) (1852) ;
H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 367, supp. fig. 3 (1855) ; Frey, ‘‘ Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’
p. 402 (1856); Sta., ‘‘Man.,” ii., p. 44 (in part) (1859); Wallgrn., ‘‘ Skand.
Fjar.,’’ p. 11 (1859); Ross., ‘‘Wien. Ent. Monats.,’’ viii., pp. 53-54 (1864) ;
Nolck., ‘‘ Lep. Faun. Kstl.,”’ p. 800 (1871); Jord., ‘‘Hnt. Mo. Mag.,” xviii., pp.
74-75 (1881) ; Porritt, ‘‘ Buckl. Larve,’’ ix., p. 338, pl. clxiii., fig. 3 (1901).
Dichrodactylus, Miihlig, ‘‘ Stett. Ent. Zeitg.,”’ p. 213 (1863); Sta., ‘* Ent. Mo.
Mag.,”’ ii., pp. 137, 138 (1865); Jeffrey, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ ii., p. 165 (1865) ;
Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” vi., p. 121 (1869); Buckl., ‘‘Knt. Mo. Mag.,’”’ xii., pp.
233-234 (1876); South, ‘ Ent.,” xv., p. 146, pl. iii., figs. 2a-2c (1882) ; xviii., pp.
280-2 (1885) ; Porritt, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’”’ xxiii., p. 163 (1886). Dichrodactyla,
Sang, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., pp. 143-144 (1881). Bertrami, South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’
Xviii., p. 279 (in part) (1885). Ochrodactylus var., Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isl.,’’ ix.,
p. 346 (1903). Dichrodactylus var., Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., pl. 413, figs.
3b-c (1903). [The Alucita ochrodactyla of Schiffermiiller and Denis (Sys. Ver.
Schmett. Wien., p. 144) was figured by Hiibner (Hur. Schmett., Alue. pl. iii., figs.
12-13) between 1811 and 1817. In 1821, Charpentier states (Die Ziinsler, Wickler,
etc., pp. 174 et seq.), after comparison of the plumes in the Vienna collection with
the descriptions of Schiffermiiller and Denis, that ochrodactyla, Schiff., was quite
accurately figured under this name by Hiibner. Fabricius’ description of ochro-
dactylus (Mantissa, p. 258) evidently does not refer to a ‘‘plume’’ at all, nor ean
it have any connection with Schiffermiiller’s species of this name (see anted, p. 72).
Zeller says (Isis, 1841, p. 881), that the specimen bearing this name in the Vienna
collection in 1841 (66 years after the issue of the Schmett. Wien.), was Gracilaria
elongella (Ornix signipennella). One can only suppose that there were two species
labelled ochrodactyla in the collection, one an Ornicid which Fabricius saw and
described, and which Zeller refers to G. elongella (O. signipennella, Tr.), the other an
Alucitid which Hiibner figured and Charpentier saw. It is impossible to discover
what changes were made from time to time in old collections, and, where supposed

999. BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

‘*types’’ disagree with descriptions, one must follow the descriptions and not
the types. |

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION.—Blass réthlichtgelbes Geistchen (Schiffer-
miller and Denis). [Htibner’s figure (Hur. Schmett., Alu. pl. 111, fig.
12) represents a J; the anterior wings pointed, of a rather deep yellow
sround colour, a reddish shade extending from the costa (about one-
third from apex) to the internal edge of the cleft of the anterior wings,
the internal edge of this shade gradually toning down towards the
centre of the wing, the inner part of the wing slightly shaded with
reddish ; the hindwings yellow-ochreous; head, thorax, and abdomen
of the same colour as the wings. Fig. 18 is that of a? , with the apex
more pointed, the ground colour paler yellow, with more reddish
shading, a shade from the costa to end of fissure in anterior wings, as
in g, another nearer apex of wing, and another nearer body; hind-
wings dark greyish. MHerrich-Schaffer gives (Sys. Bearb., v., p. 367)
the first really separable description of the species: ‘ Ochrodactylus,
Hb., figs. 12,18. The apex of the forewings not markedly sickle-
shaped, fresh examples are brightly coloured and marked (Supp. fig. 3).
lima, ees Ochraceus, ferrugineo-nebulosis. | Ochreous-yellow,
clouded with rust-brown, the costal triangular spot of the following
species not so distinctly defined, the apex of the forewings sickle-shaped.
Austria and Hungary, Sweden, Livland, Kasan. June and July.
Among willows and other bushes on the river-banks. Near Regensburg
in Weintingen wood. [Everywhere rare. Twelve examples from
Fischer v. Rosslerstamm’s collection ; six in my own.’

Imaco.—Nearly pure Indian yellow* , clearly marked, and streaked
with a pale shade of the same colour, and with the few costal and
fringe-markings and spots dark brown to black; the markings clear
and decided, with invariably a very clear, small, black spot just below
the fissure, in some examples also one above united by a brown shade
(Sang). ‘See also p. 225.]

SexuaL pimorpHismM.—The gs are decidedly saalee and rather
paler than the @s.

Varration.—There is considerable difference in the intensity of the
ground colour and markings, but the special characters of the genitalia
leave no doubt about the species. The following races have been
described :

a. var. borgmanni, Ross., ‘‘ Schppfi.,’’ p. 220 (1881) ; Hering, loe. cit. (1881):
Hofmn., ‘‘ Die Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ p. 58 (1895); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,”’ 3rd
ed.,p.72(1901). Ochrodactyla var., Borgm., ‘‘ Anleitung z. Schmett.,’’ p. 191 (1878).
—A form is to be noticed, which Borgmann obtained from larve feeding in the
main stems of Chrysanthemum corymbosum and Senecio sylvaticus, and that appears
to be like those of typical ochrodactylus, but the pupa of which tended to be red-
brown in tint and dotted. The imagines are pale bone-yellow, with similar mark-
ings to ochrodactylus, in which the blackish border line of the forewing stands out
particularly sharply. If not a distinct species, the form deserves at least to bear
the name of its discoverer, as var. borgmanni (Rossler).

Rebel (Cat., 3rd ed., p. 72) makes this a possible form of ochrodactyla,
with the diagnosis “ pallide ossea, distinctius signata.’’ Hofmann, on the
contrary, makes (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 58) it a form of bertrami (palli-
dactyla). Borgmann’s original note appears to read as follows: ‘‘ In the

* Sang observes (Ent. Mo. Mag., xviil., p. 144) that the imagines of dtchro-
dactyla fade out-of-doors very quickly, caught examples are ‘always ‘bleached,
sometimes almost white.

GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA. 223

young main stems of Chrysanthemum corumbosum growing in firwoods,
near Cassel, I found larve of a plume, which produced imagines of a ver
different general appearance from ochrodactyla, and will probably be
found to be a distinct species. The ground colour is a wholly pale
bone-yellow, which allows the middle portion of the costal marking,
as well as the dots on the inner margin, to stand out strongly, whilst
all the other markings have nearly disappeared. ‘The chief difference
is in the pupa, which is similarly of a bone-yellow colour, covered with
dark brown dots and longitudinal streaks, and is thus very different
from the normal uniformly green pupa of ochrodactyla.”’

B. var. bosniaca, Rebel, ‘‘ Ann. k.k. Nat. Hofmus.,’’ xix., pp. 323-4 (1904).
Ochrodactyla, Bachm., ‘‘ Soc. Ent.,’’ xii., p. 14 (1897); Rebel, ‘‘ Ann. k.k. Nat.
Hofmus.,’’ p. 310 (1903).—Three ? s in good condition, obtained in the neighbour-
hood of Prozor by Hilf, on July 20th, 1904. So different are these from typical
examples of ochrodactyla, that, in spite of the great variability of this species, I
consider it as a marked local form, distinguished from ochrodactyla by its some-
what larger size, its much sharper and somewhat different markings of the pale
bone-coloured forewings, and its darker (more grey) hindwings. The difference in
the markings is exhibited in that, in the 1st lobe of the forewing, after the yellowish-
white costal mark (continued as a band to the cleft), a very dark spot crosses the
whole width of the lobe, and is edged externally by the sharp yellowish-white ante-
marginal line; in no specimens of ochrodactyla before me has this spot anything
like the strength or prominence here exhibited. The fringes exhibit for one-third
their length (as in ochrodactyla), a black-brown dividing line, after which the
whitish colour is prevalent ; but, besides this, there is, at the base of the fringe, a
fine dark outer marginal line, which is wanting in ochrodactyla. Length of fore-
wing, 13mm.-l4mm. (in ochrodactyla, 12mm.-13mm.). The absence of the
ochreous-yellow tint, and the strongly marked spot in the 1st lobe of the forewing,
are the most essential characters of this form, which, in the pale colour of the
forewing, at all events, comes nearest to G. pallidactyla var. borgmanni, Ross., but
is essentially distinguished from it by the very sharp dark-spotted hind tibiz. This
last character also excludes a close relationship with G. pallidactyla (bertrami). It
has since been found in West Bulgaria, at Sophia (Buresch ; determined by
Rebel, 1904) (Rebel).

This last-noted example is that observed (Ann. k.k. Nat. Hofmus.,
1908, p. 310) as captured at Kokaleny-Kloster, July 4th, 1903. Rebel
thinks this form may possibly occur in South Russia and Armenia.

COMPARISON OF GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA AND G. PALLIDACTYLA.—
The continued discussion as to whether these species be distinct or not

\ appears to be purposeless, since there are excellent distinguishing
characters in the genitalia, proving them to be abundantly distinct.
Fernald figures (Pter. North America, pl. 1x., figs. 4-5 and 14-15), and
notes (op. cit., p. 36) that, so different are the genitalia, that, of speci-
mens, named by Zeller, and forwarded to him, he had no hesitation in
referring one of those named pallidactyla (bertramt) to ochrodactyla, and
another of them named ochrodactyla to pallidactyla. Of the more or
less characteristic differences in the imagines, Réssler, in 1864, notes
(Wien. Ent. Monats., viil., pp. 58-54) that pallidactyla are rather
smaller and more uniformly ferruginous (while ochrodactyla ave ochre-
yellow), without the sharp dark brown spots described by Miihlig, and
differing more especially from ochrodactyla in that all the rust-coloured
spaces of the forewings exhibit bright yellow scales at regular
intervals that make them look like a piece of wood levelled with a
blunt plane (in ochrodactyla these marks only occur on the costa) ;
the two dark spots before the fissure are quite absent or only
very faintly indicated. On the other hand, the whitish-yellow
spots on the upper wing are present as in ochrodactyla. The

a

224 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

hindwings are similar in tint, rusty-brown, and the fringes of each
feather are ight yellow at base and darker at apex, but in a less marked
degree than in ochrodactyla, in which the fringes have a spotted
appearance from the strong contrast of the bright yellow and dark
brown; in correspondence with this, the scale-tuft on the 8rd feather
of the hindwing is sharply marked with dark brown in ochrodactyla,
whilst it only shows a slight darkening in colour in pallidactyla. He
agrees, however, with Mihlig (Stett. Ent. Zeity., 1868, p. 213) that the
most essential difference occurs in the colour of the hind-legs; in ten
specimens of pallidactyla examined, the two terminal unspurred joints
are unicolorous yellowish-white, whilst the two upper spurred joints
are unicolorous rusty-brown, with white spurs; only towards the knee
(trochanter) doesthe colour become gradually lighter. Stainton adds (nt.
Mo. Mayq.,ii., pp. 187-1388) that, in ochrodactyla, the apex of the anterior
wings is more prolonged, more falcate than in pallidactyla (bertramt),and
the brown scales on the hind margin of the third feather of the posterior
wings should be more distinct. The best character is, however, furnished
by the hindlegs ; in bertrami the tibie are slightly browned, but the tarsi
are spotless whitish; in ochrodactyla (dichrodactylus) the tibiz are brown
at the middle and apex, and there is a brown spot at the end of the
1st tarsal joint. These three dark spots have, in bred specimens, a
very conspicuous appearance (Stainton). Jordan writes (Ent. Mo. Maq.,
XVlll., pp. 75-6) that a specimen of ochrodactyla, bred from Tanacetum,
from Scarborough, in his possession, has a most decided black spot just
above and near the end of the split, and surmises that Packard’s
cervinidactylus (Ann. Lyc. N. Y., x., p. 266) may have been described
from such a specimen. He further states that this is the brightest in
a long series, and has long faleate anterior wings, whilst on the other
hand, a type from Muhlig, the author of the name dichrodactylus (for
the Tanacetum feeder), is very lhght in colour, and the anterior lobe
truncate, without any approach to the falcate form of the former speci-
men. Hesays that he cannot see any distinct dividing line between the
richly fawn-yellow specimens with falcate wings, and the pale straw-
coloured insects with the apex as square as in gonodactyla; the extremes
of the series look most distinct, but the gradations are such as to make
it very difficult to draw the boundary hne. He quotes Stainton, who
says (Ent. Mo. Mag., 11., p. 138) that ‘the best character is furnished
by the hindlegs, for, in bertrami the tibie are slightly browned, but the
tarsi are spotless whitish, whilstin dichrodactylus the tibia are brown at the
middle and apex, and there is a brown spot at the end of the 1st tarsal
joint.”’ He further notes that Heinemann makes (Schmett. Deutsch.,
ll., p. 784) “‘bertrami very close to dichrodactyla, but that the forewings.
of the former are less sharply pointed, all the brownish-red dusting
paler, the spots before the division pale, often entirely wanting, the
lines at the hind border finer, whilst, on the 8rd feather of the hind-
wing, the black scales behind the middle are either less or wanting ;
the legs are yellowish-white, the tibie of the forelegs are brown at the
end, in the hind tibie the reddish-brown colour is equally spread from
the middle to the end.” Jordan states that these slight distinctions
seem certainly inconstant in apparently fine examples, and further
adds that he hasa specimen from Walsingham before him, from a pupa
found on Artemisia campestris, which has for bertrami remarkably
pointed ‘wings. Sang, who knew the species better perhaps than any

GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA. 295

other British lepidopterist, after describing the imagines (Hnt. Mo.
Mag., xviii., p. 144) writes: ‘‘ Besides the differences already noted in
the colour, in our description of the imagines, the palpi in dichro-
dactyla are decidedly longer than in bertrami. The hooked apex,
which, in some specimens of bertrami, probably 9s, is well-marked,
will be found on close examination to have a different shape in the two
insects. In dichrodactyla the hook is much more emarginate on the
lower side, so that it comes to a much finer point than in bertrami.”
Bankes writes (in litt.): G. ochrodactyla may readily be separated
from G. pallidactyla by the following major distinctions, of which the
fourth alone would be sufficient, even in the case of the most wasted
specimens :

1. G. ochrodactyla has the apex of the forewing decidedly more produced and
more pointed than G. pallidactyla, the termen of the upper lobe being, therefore,
more emarginate, and the apex projecting much further beyond the tip of the lower
lobe than in its congener.

2. In G. ochrodactyla the forewings are, in general colour, entirely ochreous,
though the different shades vary from very pale to very dark, whilst in G. palli-
dactyla the palest parts of them are distinctly whitish, and the darker parts are
more or iess decidedly brownish, sometimes mixed with fawn colour.

3. In G. ochrodactyla the dark spot on the forewing just before the fissure is

black; in G. pallidactyla, however, it is merely brown, and is, moreover, occasion-
ally obsolete.

4. InG. ochrodactyla, the whitish hindlegs are conspicuously barred exter-
nally, or ringed, with bright brown above both pairs of spurs and the first tarsal
joint, whereas in G. pallidactyla the posterior half of the hind tibia is altogether
brown or brownish externally, and the first tarsal joint, which may be wholly
whitish, sometimes tinged posteriorly with brownish, or wholly brownish, is never
distinctly ringed.

A comparison of 30 bred and caught pallidactyla, with some 90 bred
ochrodactyla, shows that the wing expanse of the latter averages decidedly
larger than that of the former. He further adds: “Stainton’s remark
(Hnt. Mo. Mag., ii., 188 [1865]) that, in bertrami (pallidactyla), the
tarsi are ‘spotless whitish,’ is quite unreliable, for the long 1st joint is
sometimes partly or wholly brown. Meyrick (Handbook Brit. Lep., 435)
gives the scale-tooth of the hindwings as somewhat larger in ochrodac-
tyla than in bertrami, but this varies greatly in size in both species,
and in both it is sometimes obsolete. Sang, in his useful notes (Ent.
Mo. Mag., xvill., 148-4 [1881]), states that captured ochrodactyla
(dichrodactyla) are generally almost white, whereas he never took a faded
bertramt (pallidactyla); some, however, of the few bertrami that I have
netted, are certainly ‘ almost white,’ though it is quite likely that the
former becomes bleached more rapidly than the latter. Sang (loc. cit.)
also says that the darker shades are, in bertrami, indistinctly margined,
and mere washes of colour, not sharply laid on as in ochrodactyla.
This is true, as a rule, of the males of pallidactyla, but, in some of the
females, the patches of darker colour are quite as sharply laid on, and
clearly margined, as in any ochrodactyla, and, in my darkest form of the
? [which would appear to be our ab. intermedia (posted p. 238)], the
deeper shade, which is warm russet-brown, contrasts so clearly and
strongly with the underlying whitish ground colour, as to give the
moth a remarkably mottled appearance.” South states (Hnt., xviii.,
p. 281) that the alleged points of distinction, on which reliance is placed
for considering bertrami and dichrodactyla, distinct species, fail. Hestates,
and criticises, the case for not considering them to bea single species as

226 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA-+

follows: (1) ‘ The palpi are decidedly longer” (Sang, Knt. Mo. Mag.,
Xvill., p. 144). - South has .carefully examined the palpi of both, and
‘quite failed to see any perceptible difference in their respective lengths.”
(2) ‘‘ The top of the outer digit is rendered more acute by the deeper
concavity of the hind margin of that digit” (Sang, loc. cit.).—South
says that ‘‘ the top of the outer digit is, in bertrami, variable as regards
its structure; in some specimens, the hind margin of the outer digit is
strongly emarginate, and the tip is, in consequence, produced and very
acute.’ (3) “ The tibie in dichrodactyla are brown at the middle and
apex, and there is a brown spot at the end of the first tarsal joint ”
(Stainton, Hint. Mo. Maq., ii., p. 1388).—South says, ‘‘ Identical mark-
ings exist on the hindlegs of fresh examples of bertrami.’”’ As noted
above, the genitalia prove the absolute distinctness of the species, and
it would, therefore, be purposeless to deal with Hering’s long summar-
ised article (Stett. Ent. Zeit., liii., pp. 269-279), attempting to prove
their specific unity, and, since Fernald has discovered in Zeller’s own
examples, sent to him as pallidactyla (bertramt), specimens of ochro-
dactyla, the statement of Geller that he had bred both pallidactyla and
ochrodactyla from Tanacetum loses all force, the assumed pallidactyla
being probably ochrodactyla like the others from the same pabulum.

Keetayine.—The ¢ oviposits at night, most usually quite after
dark, with its abdomen thrust down among the disc florets of the tansy-
flowers; one egg wili, probably, be laid on each flower (Sang).

Hasits oF LarvA.—The young larva mines down the flower-stem
into the root of Tanacetum vulgare in early autumn, where it remains
during the winter and until the fresh shoots are thrown up in the
following spring, working up these as the plant grows, throwing out
frass from the joints and causing the whole plant to droop, very like
the effects produced by the larve of Ewaeretia allisella in the stems of
Artemisia vulgaris, and becoming fullfed about the end of June (Sang).
The mouth of the mine is generally between the axil of a leaf and the
stem, with afew silk threads spun from one to the other, just above it,
among which the dark olive or blackish frass becomes entangled, as
the larva pushes it out from time to time in its course head down-
ward; the quantity then increases more and more, until,at length, the
accumulation becomes very conspicuous, and betrays the presence of
the larva. In confinement, as soon as the food began to wither, fresh
sprays of tansy were provided for the larve, which, as often as this
occurred, readily left the old stems to commence mining into the
fresh ones (Buckler). The larva bores into the stem at the axils of
the upper leaves, and its presence may be detected by the frass extruded
from the point of entry (South). The dull whitish-green larve throw
out the excrement from the joints of the leaves and this indicates their
presence (Jeffrey). The feeding-habits of the larve of this species and
those of G. pallidactyla are very similar, neither species seeming to do
at all wellin small stems. The stems in which the larve of G. ochrodac-
tyla arrived, on June 18th, 1904 (having been sent originally from Dur-
ham), were from :25in. to ‘33in. thick, whereas the stems of the variety
growing in my garden were only about ‘22in. in thickness, and,in these
smaller stems,the larve did not seem at all happy nor progress satisfactorily
(Bacot, June 26th, 1904). The following are actual dates on which
larvee have been found—July 20th, 1861, in the shoots of Tanacetum
vulgare, at Wiesbaden, but in early June in 1866 (Réssler); mid-June,

GILLMERIA OCHRODAUTYLA. — 227

1850; at Chudleigh (Stainton) ; third week in June, 1860, at Scar-
borough (Jeffrey); June 4th, 1874, June 5th, 1875, at Coniscliffe, of
varying size; June 10th, 1880, at Blackwell, quite small (Sang); June
18th, 1893, at Chester-le-Street (Bower); May 22nd, 1904, between
Aylesford and Maidstone (Ovenden); June 11th, 1904, in the Durham
district (Gardner).

Larva.—While immature, the larva is darker in its colouring than

it afterwards becomes. When not more than a quarter of an inch long
it is blackish-green ; when about three-eighths of an inch long it is
glaucous-green with grey stripes; when fullgrown the larva measures
a little more than 4in., its figure moderately slender, cylindrical, and
tapering a little from the 3rd segment to the head, which is rather
rounded; it tapers also from the 11th segment to the end of the 13th; the
segmental divisions are well defined on the back, and rather deeper on
the belly; the legs all tolerably well developed. The colour of the
head is very pale, either of a brownish-yellow or greyish-yellow, semi-
pellucid and shining; the ocelli large and blackish ; the mouth blackish-
brown; on the 2nd segment (prothorax) isa shining plate of the same colour
as the head, bearing minute blackish dots, and another plate of similar
tint is on the anal tip; the rest of the back is either a lively green, or
else a rather subdued transparent light green, bearing a dark olive-
brownish pubescent or bristly dorsal line; a naked stripe of opaque
greyish, or whitish-grey, follows at a short interval, on which the
minute tubercular black dots are visible; then comes the subdorsal
thinner stripe of the transparent greenish ground colour, and then
another naked thin stripe of greyish, which is succeeded by a broad
lateral band of the ground colour, but so thickly covered by a minute
bristly kind of brown pubescence as to assume an olive hue, and just
within its lower margin are the circular brownish-red spiracles, outlined
with black, and surrounded by a ring of naked ground; beneath
them runs an inflated and puckered stripe of opaque greyish-white,
relieved below by a line of the brown pubescence; the belly and all
the legs are of the pale greenish ground colour, and but very slightly
pubescent; on the belly, between each pair of the anterior legs, at their
base, are two black spots; the ventral legs tipped with dark brown
(Buckler). The dull whitish-green larve have the usual lines con-
spicuously darker, and, when more mature, obtain a pink tinge (Jeffrey).
Length 8 lines, slightly attenuated posteriorly. Head yellowish-green,
with brownish mandibles, and a black spot on each cheek. Ground
colour green; dorsal stripe whitish, broken at the segmental divisions ;
a median line of the ground colour is intersected by the darker alimen-
tary canal; subdorsal and spiracular lines whitish, interrupted at the
segmental divisions. Tubercles inconspicuous; dorsal, two rows (four
on each segment), blackish, each emitting a single, short, whitish hair;
subdorsal, a row of black warts, each with a single short white hair ;
numerous minute whitish bristles all over the body. The spiracles
are dark brown with yellowish centres ; anal segment tinged with
yellowish and shining. Prolegs and anal claspers semi-transparent,
with a greenish tinge and tipped with brown (South).

VARIATION OF LARVA OF GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA.—The larva, like
that of G. pallidactyla, has two distinct colour forms in its later stages:
(1) A brownish form. (2) A green form. [am not certain whether
these belong to the penultimate and final instars respectively, as they

928 _ BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA. |

appear to do in the case of G. pallidactyla, and, as their respective sizeg
would suggest, in G. ochrodactyla also, for I found, on carefully
measuring a brown larva and a green one that was somewhat larger
and more bulky, that their heads were of exactly the same size. From
this it would appear that the period at which this coat is obtained is a
variable one, or else that the brown larve can attain the green form
without the necessity of a moult. The change in these: two
larval forms simply amounts to the replacement of the brown areas by
a vivid green. Description of the brown form: The larva is quite of
the normal Platyptiliid form; head pale green, surface polished,
shape rounded, with brown mouth-parts and black ocelli; capable of
partial retraction beneath prothorax. Body: The prothoracic scutellum
is very distinct, of a very pale yellow-brown colour. The meso- and
metathoracic segments have three nearly equal subdivisions, the
central one bearing the tubercles. The subdivision of the abdominal
segments consists of a large anterior subsegment carrying tubercle 1,
with two small subsegments behind it, the middle subsegment
carrying ii. The anal plate, though large and chitinous, is not
distinctively coloured. There is a clear, but only slightly raised,
lateral flange. Coloration: The dorsal area is pale brown, and down
the centre of this area there is a sharply marked and much darker
brown band, while there are similar sharply marked subdorsa] bands
of the same colour, bordered by a whitish area which fades off above
into the general brown of the dorsal area, and beneath into another
brown band which encloses the spiracles ; below this again, the lateral
flange is whitish, bordered along its lower edge by a dark brown
stripe, the subventral and ventral areas being alike of a very pale
brown. The prolegs are, as usual, rather long, both these and the
true legs having no distinctive coloration. The spiracles are large and
slightly raised with a broad dark brown chitinous rim. The body is
covered by a coat of fine spicules, and there is also a fairly even coat
of tapering secondary hairs. The primary sete are of medium
length, simple and tapering, with well-marked raised black chitinous
bases; in position they seem to exactly agree with those of G. palli-
dactyla. (2) The green form: This seems to differ only in the points
above menticned, except, perhaps, in one small particular, viz., that
the secondary hairs are much less noticeable on the white areas than
elsewhere, and this, I think, applies specially to the green form. This
seems to be due to their colour on these areas not contrasting with
the skin; certainly these hairs are not absent from these areas, and, so
far as my discrimination goes, they are not less numerous (Bacot.
June 26th, 1904). Buckler figured (Larvae, etc., pl. clxi., figs. 3-3a),
on June 8th, 1875, two larve of this species after their final moult,
one representing a paler, the other a darker, green form.

CoMPARISON OF LARV# OF GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA AND G. PALLI-
pactyLa.—The larva resembles that of G. pallidactyla a great deal. It
has precisely the same outline, and the same alternation of dark and
light stripes, viz., a dark dorsal line, a broad pale stripe including 1 and
il, a narrow dark line including iui, a broad dark lateral stripe includ-
ing the spiracle, a pale lateral line including iv and the flange; below
this, dark with faintly paler tint along vi and vii (?). The differences
are first and chiefly (i.e., most important) that the pale and dark
lines are not so marked as in G. pallidactyla, the pale is not so
pale ; the flange stripes, so clear white and porcelain-like in G. palli-

GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA. 229

dactyla, are distinct enough, but of a dull creamy colour, and the lower
one (marginal) would hardly be noticed, if one did not look for it to
compare with that of G. pallidactyla; the subdorsal and supraspiracular
pale bands are duller and are patchy, the dorsal dark line especially
invading their area, and giving, perhaps, more nearly the aspect of what
they are, viz., white patches roundiandii. The ground colour of G.
pallidactyla is definitely pale olive-green and white ; that of G. ochro-
dactyla is a pinky-green with pale, nearly white, markings. All the
G. ochrodactyla are more or less pink, of which no trace is seen in any
of the G. pallidactyla. One specimen is especially pink, having broad
patches of pink beside the dorsal line, extending far across the posterior
margin of the segments, and on the 6th and 7th abdominal segments reach-
ing the subdorsal line, whichis pink also. On this specimen,one may, in fact,
distinguish at least four tints :—(1) The white areas whichare not soclear
white asin G. pallidactyla. (2) A pale fuscous-brown, the dorsal line and
patches of the spiracular band—the spiracles themselves being dark,
surrounded by a white rmg—the lower margin immediately below the
white lateral line. (8) Pink, large patches beside the dorsal line
invading the subdorsal pale band, the subdorsal dark line also break-
ing across the next pale line, in three places, viz., anterior and posterior
margins of segment, and along a subsegmental division which is rather
behind the middle of segment. (4) The under surface is very pale, but far
from white—faintly fuscous may be the right description. It is difficult
to detect any exact structural differences between the living larvee of these
species. Thatof G. pallidactyla has the areas of dark hairs and points
larger than those on that of G. ochrodactyla, but there is some individual
variation, and I cannot be positive that the differences that hold good in
the three specimens of each that I have carefully examined, would be
found to obtain in all cases. The dorsal band is narrower in G. ochro-
dactyla than in G. pallidactyla, the portion between 11 and iii, which is:
almost a good continuous linein G. pallidactyla, may be represented by two
scraps, or by one, or be practically absent. The large portion round
the spiracle, forming a lateral dark band, is smaller in G. ochrodactyla
than in G. pallidactyla. The band between iv and vi is much smaller,
and is broken up by pale intrusions, that between vi and vii is xery
small in two specimens—wanting inone. ‘The patch round the base of
the prolegsis absent in G. ochrodactyla, always present in G. pallidactyla.
In one of the G. pallidactyla, the dark predominates largely, but the
pale lines indicated above are all present, although very much narrowed.
As to the meso- and metathoracic sete, in G. pallidactyla the eight
hairs (four pairs of two each) on each side, are all quite separate
and. without basal plates, and, though still in pairs, the members
of each pair are wider apart, and the distance between the pairs
is less. Accepting the hairs as i, ii, ili, etce., then i and ii are
even less trapezoidal than in the larva of Platyptilia gonodactyla,
though, in all, i and ii are almost exactly transverse, but, if the
distance from i to ii be taken as 1, then ii to iii is little more than 1°5 ;
whilst in P. gonodactyla, if i to i=1, then ii to ii=3. In G. ochro-
dactyla, the condition is nearly that of G. pallidactyla, but each
hair has a basal plate, colourless and transparent (smaller than
in P. gonodactyla), and, owing to the hairs being further apart,
the plates do not touch, but are separated by skin-point-bearing
integument. This does not hold, however, in regard to the third pair.

930 i BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

(v and vi ?) which possesses, in this species, in all cases, only one
plate, and is, in one instance (out of 12), a single hair; in two cases a,
three-haired wart, and in nine cases, two hairs on one plate, looking in
several instances rather wartlike. This variability of this pair of
tubercles has no parallel in the other species, and the presence and
absence of plates to these tubercles appear to afford clear proof that
these two are “‘ good ”’ species (Chapman).

Puration.—Although an internal feeder, this larva leaves its panies
when fullfed, spins a tough silken web, usually on the stem of its food-
plant, to which it attaches itself for pupation, its beautiful colour being
in the highest degree protective. It has a highly developed cremaster,
the hooks in two sections, the forward on the front of the 9th or back of
the 8th abdominal, the hinder on the 10th abdominal segment, by
means of which it fixes itself to the silken pad. It has the normal
habit of bending itself over in somersault fashion if disturbed, that is
noticeable in most of the other species. Buckler observes that it is
attached by its anal segment to a stem of the foodplant, whilst South
notes that, in confinement, it is suspended by the tail from the
underside of a leaf.

Pupa.— 12-5mm. long, 1:8mm. wide at mesothorax, 1-5mm. wide
at 4th abdominal. The differences in colour between the pupa of this
species and that of G. pallidactyla are very considerable, but they may
be largely individual. It is also much more slender, a difference that
may be sexual. The surface is dull, that of G. pallidactyla is very
shining and polished, the ridges on the mesothorax are wide apart, and,
on the metathorax, they diverge a little laterally. Seen from above,
the antenne look more serrate, and stand out as a bordering ridge or
flange; in G.pallidactyla they are more regular, smooth, and rounded,
and fall into the general outline. The colouring is beautiful, but so
elaborate as to be difficult to describe; assuming the ground colour to
be green, it is overlaid by markings of pink, brown and white; the white
comprises a lateral line (flange) below the spiracle and the upper and lower
surfaces of the “‘ beak;”’ both these are shaded with pink ; the marginsof the
dorsal flanges on the mesothorax arealso white; the wings and appendages
are more olive-tinted than the rest of the pupa, the veins are not paler,
but some of the interstices are olive-brown, showing up the veins ; the
sides of the beak are brown; below the white flange is a dark pinkish-
olive band, then a broad green band shaded with pink, with dashes of
olive-green down the centre of each segment, these do not form a line,
as they do not reach the margins of the segments; the venter is broadly
pale olive-green. Dorsally, the subdorsal ridges are pale reddish-pink
on the last 4thof the mesothorax, and on the metathorax, and 1st, 2nd,and
3rd abdominal segments, culminating on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd abdominal
segments in a dark red-brown spot at the outer side of the posterior
end of the portion on each segment. This colouring is repeated on the
following segments (where there is no flange), but more weakly on each,
so that, on the 7th abdominal segment, there is merely a pink dot
representing the dark spot of previous segments. Between these is a
dark olive-green dorsal line, and another (subdorsal) at an equal distance
outside the flange; there is another broader band above the white
lateralflange; thisis somewhat irregular, and isinterrupted by a palespot
round the spiracles and another behind, giving it a chain-like appear-
ance ; each antenna has a row of olive-brown dots down each side, in

GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA. 231

the hollows between the pectinations. The tubercles can be detected on
the usual sites, they carry very minute hairs, thick and stubby, barely
0:03mm. long. The dorsal ones (i and ii) are very obvious on the
mesothorax on the flange, one towards each end; similarly, on the 1st
and 2nd abdominal segments, the flange (with the ribbing) occupies
about two-thirds of the segments, and the tubercles are at each end
of the flange; the posterior third of the segment is unribbed, and
corresponds with what is the intersegmental membrane in movable
seoments. At the spiracular level, the ribbing becomes wider below,
so that, in the movable incisions, there is more intersegmental mem-
brane dorsally than ventrally, corresponding with the great curve
backwards that these pupee make. This curious feature seems to occur in
all plume pupe, though also curiously hable to escape observation.
On the 8rd abdominal segment, 1 1s at the middle of the flange; on the
following segments, i is at the middle of the ribbed piece, 1i at the
posterior margin of the ribbed piece, the two tubercles dividing the
segment into three almost equal pieces; these tubercles are closer
being generally on the same subsegment or ridgeas i. Structurally the
pupa may be said to be very much like those of the other Platyptilias.
The nose-horn is long and thick (vertically), with sharp dorsal edge
and fairly sharp point, and rather compressed laterally above the brown
edge, and, therefore, with somewhat triangular section; it is rough
and ridged, but not extremely so; length O-8mm., or a little less if
measured along the lower angle. The cover of the 1st (prothoracic)
spiracle is similar to that in the pupa of Platyptilia isodactylus, but is
only of about half the length, although similarly covered with waved
lines and spicule. The wing-venation is as in the others; tubercle iii
is apt to be obsolete on the forward abdominal segments. The sub-
spiracular flange is very marked, as is the dorsal one, which is very high
over the meso-and metathorax, so that over the metathorax and posterior
part of mesothorax those of each side approach each other, but keep
wellseparate, and, diverging again, terminate behind the middle of the 3rd
abdominal segment, reappearing again on the 9th and 10th abdominals,
giving four marked angles to the cremastral spike; the cremastral
hooks are about the same length as in the pupa of P. isodactylus, but are
much finer and vastly more numerous; so much so, that to count
them seems useless, and one says 100 on either side of the terminal
set, as a round number, which cannot be much too large, and may
be a great many too few. The forward set are of the same size and
structure, and also very numerous, each with the end sharply bent back,
and ending in a very fish-hook like point; these count about a hundred
on either side, and make that figure, as an estimate of the terminal set,
seem insufficient. They arise from the large genital double projection
of the 9th abdominal segment, and I gather that I must have been
wrong in attributing them to the 8th abdominal segment (supposing,
as seems probable, their position to be uniform throughout the family)

-
,

they are certainly here on the 9th. [The error is an easy one to make,
as the 8th abdominal segment is here exceedingly narrow, and, in the
living pupa, this ventral portion of the 9th abdominal segment is in
alignment with the 8th abdominal segment, regarded laterally and
dorsally.| The transverse ribbing of the abdominal segments is pro-
nounced, the ribs count about fifteen. Probably the structure is the

282 ‘BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

same in all cases, but, in this species, the ribs appear to have flat tops,
with sharp margins where they meet the slopes into the valleys. The
anterior margins of the segments, especially ventrally, show sharp skin-
points, but these seem less widely distributed than in, say, P. isodactylus.
Tn other respects the pupa is too like that species to be worth describing
separately (Chapman, May 29th, 1904).

VARIATION IN PUPA OF GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA.—The pupa is -5in.
in length, slender, with a longish beak in front, projecting at a slight
angle downwards from the head, pointed at the tail; the wing-covers
of moderate length, well-developed, and the ends of the leg-cases
projecting free from the abdomen ; its figure, in repose, is a little curved,
so as to be concave, on the back. In colour it varies, some examples
being very pale greenish, others light pinkish-grey, while others again
are dark reddish-grey; in the pale green variety, the characteristic
darker markings, though partially present in deeper tints of greenish,
are more tenderly rendered than in some of the greyish varieties,
which are marked as follows: the beak is white above, and black
at the sides; on the thorax a blackish-brown dorsal stripe widens and
then narrows, and from thence passes down of uniform width to the
tail; on the thorax, it is margined with a line of white ; the subdorsal
line is blackish-brown and rather interrupted; between this and the
dorsal stripe, on each segment, are double dark brown streaks a little
divergent; these are strongly marked on the anterior segments, but
more faintly, by degrees, on the hinder ones; at an interval below the
subdorsal another brown line occurs, rather interrupted; the lateral line
is white, bordered beneath by a stripe of black; the ventral surface of
each segment has a broad, central, somewhat squarish, mark of light
brownish-grey, and a fine subventral line of similar tint, much
interrupted; the wing-covers brownish-grey with whitish rays
(Buckler). Whitish-green, streaked dorsally and laterally with
olivaceous-brown; thorax humped; from the head is a beak-like
projection, which is whitish in front and blackish at the sides; the
lower portion of the antenna-cases are detached from the abdomen
(South). Buckler figured (Larvae, etc., pl. clxi., figs. 3b-8c), on
June 17th, 1875, two forms of the pupa of this spevies, one bright
green, the other grey.

CoMPARISON OF PUPH OF GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA AND G. PALLI-
pactyLa.—The difference between the pupe of these species is very diffi-
cult to define. In the specimens compared—four of G. pallidactyla and
ten of G. ochrodactyla—one might define that of pallidactyla as a nearly
white pupa, with faint markings, and that of ochrodactyla as a pupa, dark
from the intensity of the markings. In the latter, these markings
differ from those of Platyptilia gonodactyla and P. isodactylus in being
very clear and distinct, with sharp margins, not fading away into the
pale areas. This difference between G.ochrodactyla and G.pallidactyla,
however, is probably true only of my specimens, as I have one ochro-
dactyla that is very nearly as pale as pallidactyla, and, in this pale one,
I cannot so easily differentiate the markings from those of pallidactyla.
I imagine that, in a longer series, there would be much overlapping.
To return to the markings of ochrodactyla, they consist of a dark
dorsal line or band, and three more between it and the spiracle ; these
are fairly continuous, and differ in darker and lighter specimens in
width and intensity, but always have a fairly defined margin.

GILLMERIA’ OCHRODACTYLA. 233

The lower one usually includes the spiracle, 7.c., it is broad, and
extends down below the spiracle ; there is, however, some ground
colour usually in it that would make it an union of supra- and sub-
spiracular lines. Below the spiracle is a broad pale, and then a broad
dark, band, and vi is in a narrow pale line below this. Then, ventrally,
is a narrow dark line, a pale line and a dark central shade. There is
a, peculiarity here which I find only in ochrodactyla, though I think
pallidactyla would show it if a dark enough specimen were forth-
coming. This peculiarity is, that this first ventral dark line curves
inwards at its lower end on each segment, and the pale line within it
curves still more, so that it meets its fellow of the opposite side along
the posterior border of the segment, giving the dark central shade a
somewhat ocellated character. This shade tends usually to divide
into two by a partial pale ventral line, and the centre of each half
may be pale, aiding the ocellated effect, and, in all cases, making the
ventral markings run largely in curves instead of in straight lines. The
proleg scars in this region seem to be pockets as in P. yonodactyla
(Chapman). All my pupe of G. pallidactyla (some twelve in number)
were of a pale green tint, darkening to a very pale wainscot-brown ~
on the wing-cases, thoracic, and dorsal areas, before emergence. Theonly
G. ochrodactyla, that has pupated, at once turned dark wainscot-brown,
mottled. and striped with dark umber-brown to almost black, and
some pale bone colour, almost white in places. I only had one pupa
of pallidactyla available for comparison at this time, and this was a very
small one, but I do not think that there is any marked difference in
the size of normal specimens. In shape, the ochrodactyla looks the
more slender of the two, but this is, I think, in part, due to the extra
length of the nose-horn in ochrodactyla, but not entirely so. Certainly
the nose-horn in this particular specimen is much longer than that of the
pallidactyla. The pupa of the latter is 12mm. long, and its nose-horn,
from eye to tip, is only 1:°50mm., while the pupa of ochrodactyla is
14mm. long, and its nose-horn is 2mm. in length. The nose-horn of
pallidactyla is also more beak-like, in that it projects outwards from the
pupa further in a ventral direction, while the larger horn of ochro-
dactyla has but little ventral inclination (Bacot).

Foopriants.—Tanacetum vulgare (Mihlig). [Chrysanthemum corym-
bosum, Senecio sylvaticus (Réssler and Borgmann) ‘see anted, pp.
222-223).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—The species is rarely out before July; usually
its time of appearance in the British Islands extends from mid-July to
mid-August, although, over a series of years, it extends from the end of
June till towards the end of August. Wallengren also gives July and
August as the dates for its appearance in Scandinavia; and Eversmann,
June and July, in the Ural district of Russia. In Germany, we note it
recorded in July and early August in Friedland (Stange), near Hamburg
(Sauber), and near Wiesbaden ; July or August, according to the season
(Réssler), near Cassel (Borgmann), in Wiirttemberg (Steudel) ; in
June and July, in Pomerania (Paul and Plitz), also near Géttingen
(Jordan), near Berlin (Pftitzner), in Silesia (Wocke), near Briinn
(Gartner) ; in June, in Saxon Upper Lusatia (Schiitze); in July, in
Bavaria (Hofmann and Herrich-Schiiffer) ; in the first half of August,
on Sylt Island (Werneburg), also near Hanover (Glitz) ; whilst, in
Upper Lusatia, the end of June to August is given by Méschler. The

934 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

actual dates noted are as follows: In conrIneNTAL LocaLitigEs.—July
4th, at Kokalény (Bachmetjew); August 7th, 1861, and following days,
bred at Wiesbaden, from larve collected July 20th (Réssler); July
19th, 1867, near Rhoden (Speyer) ; August 20th, 1887, at Christiania |
and Harmer (Jordan) ; from June 17th-July 22nd, in the Riga district
(Teich). In British tocatirres.—One bred July 5th, 1850, from a
pupa found in June at Chudleigh (Stainton); August 8th-22nd,
1854, August 15th, 1857, at Nag’s Head on the banks of the
Tees (Sang); a fine series bred July, 1860, the earliest specimens
appeared July 5th, from larve taken the third week in June at
Scarborough (Jeffrey); August 14th, 1865, July 24th, 1870, August
22nd, 1872, at Nag’s Head on the banks of the Tees (Sang);
imagines bred from June 28th-July 5th, 1875, from larve collected at
Darlington on June 8th (Buckler); August 17th, 21st, 1886, at Salt-
burn (Porritt); July 14th, 1890, at Bundoran, Donegal Bay (Johnson);
July 9th, 1896, at Corsemalzie (Gordon); August 17th, 1898, at
Dawlish (Rea) ; July 21st, 1889, at Cofton (Studd); August 1st-1th,
1900, at Dawlish (Turner); August 2nd, 1900, in cop., at Cofton ;
July 25th, 1901, at Oxton (Studd); bred 1st half of July,
1901, from larve collected during June at Colchester (Harwood);
common in July, 1902, at St. David’s, Fife (Evans); August Ist, 1902,
at Starcross (James); bred July 4th-17th, 1904 (Bankes), from larve
collected on the banks of the Wear, near Durham, on June 11th, 1904
(Gardner).

Haxrirs.—The species is confined very closely to the beds of tansy,
on which plant the larve feed; Sang observes that it is restricted in the
Darlington district to Tanacetum, although Achillea may be plentiful
in the same district, to which plant the allied G. pallidactyla (bertramt)
is here equally closely confined. Porritt also insists (Hint. Mo. Mag.,xxiil.,
p. 163) on this, observing that,in the Saltburn ravine, also all over
the district, in August, 1886, although yarrow was in full bloom, and
in equal luxuriance with the tansy, on which he found the species there,
yet not a single specimen of G. ochrodactyla was seen frequenting it,
common as it was at the flowers of the Tanacetum. It appears to be
a very sluggish species during the day, hiding very successfully, and is
only with difficulty started up from among its foodplant; it becomes
active, however, at dusk, when it is found freely at the tansy flowers,
or flitting about among its foodplant. Bankes observes (cn litt.) that
the species seems very indifferent as to the time of day at which it
emerges from the pupa ; of the specimens on which careful observations .
were made, thirteen emerged between 7 a.m. and 1 p.m., eleven
between 1 p.m. and 7 p.m., seventeen between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., and
10 others between midnight and 7 a.m. ‘There appears to be no real
trouble in obtaining pairings of the species in confinement, as both
Bacot and Bankes obtained them in July, 1904. On this point, Bankes
notes that a g and a 2 that had both emerged early on the morning of
July 15th, 1904, were put together into a small cage that day, and
kept in a warm room; they did not pair during the night of the 15th,
or day of the 16th, but were found zn cop. at 10.80 p.m. on the night
of the 16th, and remained so till between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m. on the 17th
(nearly 24 hours !), when they separated. Bacot observes that, in spite
of pairings being obtained, it was found impossible to get eggs;
the moths lived for some time, waiting apparently for the tansy
to throw up its flowering stalks to the proper point of develop-

GILLMERIA OCHRODACTYLA. 935

ment; the right condition of the flower-heads was evidently
not obtained, and the moths died without laying. [Of unusual
points in its habits, we note that Beadle records one imago at a
laburnum flower, at Keswick (the laburnum is certainly over in the
south long before the species is on the wing). Gordon notes it flying
at dusk about honeysuckle, in the garden, at Corsemalzie|. Barrett
records it at light at Norwich, and Studd at hght at Oxton. In
Germany, it is usually reported as flying in the evening around
Tanacetum, e.g., in the Island of Sylt (Werneburg), in Silesia (Wocke),
in Saxon Upper Lusatia (Schtitze), etc.

Hasirats.—This very local species, with which its near ally G.
pallidactyla was confused until 18638, is exceedingly localised, being
confined to the near neighbourhood of the clumps of its foodplants,
which one meets with in various situations. In the county of Durham,
the banks of the Wear and Tees are its best known haunts, whilst, in
Kent, it is to be found on the canal bank between Aylesford and
_ Maidstone, restricted to particular tansy patches, and by no means to
be found on every clump. ‘The same is true at Colchester, and Hudd
reports it as occurring on the bank of the Avon. Porritt says that it
is to be found in a ravine on the coast of Yorkshire, near Saltburn,
where tansy grows in large luxuriant patches, and yarrow is in equal
luxuriance with tansy ; yet, although G. ochrodactyla occurs freely on
the former plant, it never frequents the yarrow. In Germany, it is
recorded as occurring—in Friedland, everywhere where the foodplant
grows, but especially on the sandy edges of firwoods at Stausee (Stange),
in woodland meadows in Hanover (Glitz), in the swampy parts of the
Oberharz (Hoffmann), in warm and sheltered spots in a high-lying
wooded valley at Wiesbaden (Rossler), in firwoods around Cassel
(Borgmann), in vineyards, lying fallow, around Regensburg (Hofmann
and Herrich-Schiffer). | Peyerimhoff notes the capture of a specimen
on the Furka, at a height of 2400 metres.

British Locatities.—Local, but widely distributed. [The localities
here given are not always clearly differentiated from those of G. palli-
dactyla|. [Aneuesra: near Holyhead (Freer)]. Cavan (Kane). [CHESHIRE:
Bromborough Pool, Wirral (Ellis), Chester (Newstead), Holford (G. O. Day)],
Wallasey (teste Leech). [CumBrertanp: Keswick (Beadle).}] Drrpy: Repton
(Garneys). Devon: Chudleigh (Stainton), Oxton, Cofton (Studd), Dawlish
(Rea), Exeter (teste Leech), Starcross (James), Lundy Island (teste Leech). DonEGaL:
Bundoran, Donegal Bay (Johnson). Durnam: Darlington (Buckler), Chester-le-
Street (Bower), Tees-side—Nag’s Head, Coniscliffe, Blackwell (Sang), banks
of Wear, a few miles from Durham (Gardner). Dustin: Howth (Birchall).
EssEx : Colchester (Harwood), Mucking (Burrows). Fire: St. Davids, common
(Evans). Gaunway: Galway, Clonbrock (Kane). GuoucrstrR: scarce on the
banks of the Avon (Hudd). Hants: Boscombe (Robertson). Kenr: canal
bank, Aylesford to Maidstone (Ovenden). Lanark: Glasgow district (Henderson).
Norrotk: Norwich (Barrett), Horning (teste Leech). PrrrH: Glen Lochay
(Morton), Dunblane (Henderson). Somerset: near Leigh, Portishead (Huda).
SurREY: Sutton (Blackburn). [Wiarown: Corsemalzie (Gordon).} Yorx:
Huddersfield, Saltburn (Porritt), near Scarborough (Jeffrey), York (Stainton),
Darlington (Sang).

Distrisution.— Central Europe, Russia, northwest and southwest
Armenia (Rebel). Ausvro-Huneary: Bohemia—near Prague (Nickerl), Moravia
—near Briinn, rare (Gartner), Lower Austria—near Vienna—the Prater, Dornbach,
Briihl (Mann), Budapest district—Sopron, Nagyadg (Aigner). Brnerum: very
common—tIxelles, etc. (Crombrugghe). Buncarta: Kokalény-Kloster, near Sofia
(Bachmetjew). Denmark (Bang-Haas). Finnanp: as far north as Uleaborg
(Tengstrém). Franck: Dept. du Nord (Paux), Sadne-et-Loire (Constant),
[Indre—Nohant (Sand).] Grrmany: Prussia, very common—Memel, Cranz,

236 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Dammbhof, Kénigsburg, Kalgen, Rastenburg, Steinert, Lyck, Dantzig (Speiser),
[Pomerania—not rare in Neu-Vorpommern and Rigen (Paul; and Plotz),
Stettin, the Julow, near Nemitz, near Vogelsang, Wollin Island (Biittner)*],
Mecklenburg — near Neustrelitz, Riilow, Wismar (Boll), near Friedland
(Stange), Schleswig-Holstein—Sylt Island, near Westerland (Werneburg),
Lower Elbe district—Steinbeck, Hamburg, common (Sauber), Heligoland (Dalla
Torre), Hanover—Borkum Island (Schneider), near Hanover (Glitz), Oberharz
(Hoffmann), near Quedlinburg, near Géttingen (Jordan), [Rhine Provinces—near
Linn, Aachen, Crefeld, Uerdingen, rare, Elberfeld, Schwelm (Stollwerck),*] Hesse
and Waldeck—near Wiesbaden, Nassau (Réssler), near Frankfurt, in the Taunus
(Koch), near Cassel (Borgmann), near Rhoden (Speyer), Thuringia—near Jena
(Knapp), near Mihlhausen (Jordan), Province of Saxony—near Dessau (Richter),
near Aken-on-the-Elbe (Gillmer), Brandenburg—near Berlin (Pfiitzner), Frankfurt-
on-Oder, Kornbusch (Kretschmer), Silesia, distributed (Wocke)—Upper Lusatia
(Méschler), near Gorlitz (Sommer), Kingdom of Saxony—Saxon Upper Lusatia
(Schiitze), Bavaria—near Regensburg, Weintinger Holz, Gebraching (Hofmann),
Wiirttemberge—Heudorf, Wasseralfingen (Steudel and Hofmann), Rhine Palatinate
(Meess and Spuler), Alsace—La Chapelle (Umbang). Russia: [Baltic Provinces—
Sassehof, near Riga (Nolcken),] Tannenhof, Kurtenhof, Sillen (Berg), Livonia
(Lienig teste Zeller), Riga district (Teich), Ural district—Orenburg, Casan, Saratov
(Eversmann). Scanpinavia: South and central Sweden—Upland (Wallengren),
Norway—Christiania, Harmer (Jordan). SwirzeRLaAND: very rare near Ziirich
(Bremi).
GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA, Haworth.
SynonymMy.—Species: Pallidactyla, Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 478 (1811); Tutt,
“Young Nat.,” xi., p. 22 (1890); ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,” i., p. 92 (1890) ; “ Pier: Brite ap:
1 (1895) ; Hodg., ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,”’ iil., p. 186 (1892). Pallidactylus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent.
Comp.,’’ p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,” p. 161 (1827); Stphs., ‘‘ ill.,”’ p. 375
(worn) (1834). Ochrodactyla, Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,’’ ix., p. 227 (1833); Sorh.,
‘« Kleinschmett. Brand.,’’ p. 2 (in part) (1886). Migadactylus, Curt., ‘‘ Brit.
Ent.,’’ fo. 161 (1827); Stphs., ‘‘ Ill.,’”’ p. 375 (1834); Wood, ‘‘ Ind. Ent.,’’ lst ed.,
p. 236, pl. li., fig. 1642 (worn) (1839). Ochrodactylus, Dup., ‘* Hist. Nat.,”’ xi.,
p. 641, pl. 313, fig. 2 (1838); ‘* Cat. Méth.,”’ p. 381 (i845); Zell., ‘‘Isis,”’ p. 775
(in part) (1841); ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,”’ vi., p. 327 (in part) (1852); Tgstrm., ‘‘ Finl.
Fyar.,’’? p. 154 (1847) ; Kaltenbach, “Verh. Nat. Ver. ee XV., p. 165 (1858) ;
Dbldy. ., ‘Syn. List,”’ 2nd ed., p. 36 (1859); Sta., ‘‘ Man.,” ii., p..440 (in part)
(1859); Barrt., ‘‘Lep. Brit., ” ix., p. 346 (in part), pl. i13, ‘figs. 3-3a (1904).
Marginidactylust, Fitch, ‘“ ‘New Y. Rept.,’’ i., p. 848 (1854) ; Fern.,; ‘‘ Pter. Nth.
Amer.,’’ p. 33, revised ed., p. 34 (1898); Dyar, ‘‘ List Lep. N. Am.,’’ p. 444 (1902).
Nebulaedactylus+, Fitch, ‘‘ New Y. Rept.,’’ i., p. 849 (1854). Bertrami, Rossl.,
‘¢ Wien. Ent. Mts.,”’ viii., p. 53 (1864); Sta., «Ent. Mo. Mag.,” ii., pp. 137- 8
(1865) ; Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 21 (1869) ; XViil., pp. 74-5 (1881); Staud.
and Wocke, ‘‘Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett.
Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 784 (1877) ; Walsm., ‘‘ Pter. Cal. Oreg.,’’ p. 3, pl.i., fig. 3

(1880); Sang, ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xvili., pp. 143-4 (1881); Barr., “Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’

xvili., p. 177 (1882); South, ‘‘ Ent.,” xviil., p. 279 (1885) ; Porritt, ‘* Hint. Mo.
Mag.,’’ xxii., pp. 103-105 (1885); xxiili., p. 163 (1886); Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyne. cap:
52 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,”’ x., pp. 163, 221 (1889); ‘‘ Pter. Brit., ”” p. 31 (1895);
Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 486 (1890); ‘‘ Handb.,’’ p. 434 (1895); Hofm.,
‘¢ Deutsch. Pter.,’’ p. 55 (1895); Porrt., ‘‘ Buckl. Larve,’’ ix., p. 341 (1901); Staud.
and Reb., ‘‘Cat.,” 3rd ed., p. 72 (1901). Bischoffi, Zell., ‘‘ Stett. Ent. Zeit.,’’
XXViii., p. 333 (1867); ‘‘ Verh. z.-b. Ges. Wien.,’’ p. 317 (1873). Cervinidactylus,
Racks. “7A duycseN. Wk:522 xc, 1p s5200 (1873). (Curtis, Stephens, Doubleday and
the older British authors all ratetied this species to Haworth’s pallidactyla, and it
was not until Zeller cited this as a synonym of ochrodactyla, Hb., followed by
Doubleday (Zool. Syn. List, 2nd ed., p. 36), who also treated it as a synonym of
ochrodactyla, Hb., that it was lost to us; Stainton, in the Manual, following
Doubleday, failed to differentiate the two species. In 1864, Réssleri(Wien. Ent.
Monats., pp. 53-54) differentiated the pale Achillea-feeding insect, ‘as a species
distinct from the more cleanly marked Tanacetum-feeding insect, and redescribed

* Localities not separated from those of G. pallidactyla by this’ author ; both
species appear to be equally widely distributed in Pomerania. One suspects ‘many
other localities to be unreliable.

+ Fernald writes: ‘‘The types of Fitch now belong to my collection, and I
have made a critical examination of the génitalia, which agree perfectly. with the
genitalia of bertrami (‘pallidactyla) ’’? (Pter. North America, p. 35).

_
:
*
2
i

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA. 237

it under the name bertrami, whilst Mihlig, also recognising the two species, referred
the Achillea-feeding one to ochrodactyla, Hb., and named the Tanacetum-feeding
one dichrodactylus (Stett. Ent. Ztg., 1863, p. 213). We are at a loss to understand
why Staudinger and Rebel (Cat., "3rd ed., p. 72) make pallidactyla, Haw., a
synonym of ochrodactyla, Hb.]

OricinaL DEScRIPTION..—Alucita pallidactyla (The pale Plume). Alis
anticis ochroleucis, nebulis aliquot saturatioribus. Hxpansio alarum
1 unc. Ale antice bifide ; postice, tripartite fusco-ochracee
(Haworth, Lepidoptera Britannica, p. 478). [Réssler was the first
lepidopterist to give a comparative diagnosis of the species as apart.
from ochrodactyla, Hb. His description reads: ‘It is not so large as
ochrodactyla, of more uniform rust colour, without the well defined
dark brown spots of ochrodactyla (Muhlig’s dichrodactylus), differing
particularly in having light yellow scales at regular intervals marked
on therust-coloured ground of the forewings, producing the appearance of
wood shaved by a blunt plane; the two dark spots, also, near the
cleft of the forewings, are either entirely wanting or are very faint.
On the other hand, the same whitish spots noticeable in ochrodactyla
are to be seen. The hindwings rust-brown, the fringes of the plumules
at the base yellow, at the tip darker, yet not so contrasted as in
ochrodactyla, in which the fringes appear as if spotted ; the position of
the scale-tuft of the 8rd plumule of ochrodactyla is dark brown, whilst
in this species it only shows as a faint dark shading. The chief
difference, however, consists in the colouring of the hindlegs; in all
the specimens (10) examined, the two terminal joints, without spurs,.
are uniform yellowish-white in colour, whilst the two upper joints are
unicolorous rusty-brown, with white spurs, only towards the knee does
the colour. become gradually lighter. The apex somewhat less hooked
in bred epecimens ” (Wien. Hint. Monats., 1864, pp. 53-54).] (See also
antea, pp. 223-4.»

Imaco.*—22mm.-26mm. Anterior wings moderately extended at
apex. Pale ochreous, or whitish-ochreous, in tint, washed with darker
ochreous along the costa, along the base of the discal area, and narrowly
at the base of the inner margin; the discal area from base to fissure
pale ; a pale lunule from costa to end of fissure ; two inconspicuous
dark brown discocellular spots; the lobes washed with darker ochreous;
an ill-developed, pale, transverse, lobal line parallel to hind margin,
obsolete on second lobe; costal and outer marginal lines dark brown;
fringes glossy white, with darker patch at anal angle and on inner
margin. Posterior wings glossy ochreous-brown, costal edges of 1st
and Opal plumules Aliein ; a slight trace of the dank: scale- pateh near
middle of outer margin of 3rd plumule ; fringes glossy grey-brown,
hardly so dark as wings.

Gunrratia.—Fernald gives (Pter. Nth. America, pl. 1ii., figs. 4-5)
drawings of the genitalia of this species, and adds (op. s p. 34) :
“ Hor the sake of comparison the genitalia of G. ochrodactyla are

represented on the same plate (figs. 14-15). These drawings were made
from specimens received from Zeller, which are labelled in his own
handwriting.”

* The colour consists of shades of fawn-colour and brown, the darker shades
indistinctly margined, mere washes of colour, not sharply laid on like those of
dichrodactyla. The spot near the fissure when present at all is exceedingly faint.
The hooked apex, which in some specimens, probably ¢s, is well-marked, is less
emarginate on the lower side, and the apex consequently less pointed than in
ochrodact ula (Sang).

238 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Variation.—There is a considerable amount of variation in this
species. Hodgkinson notes (Hint. Rec., ill., p. 186) that specimens
bred by Eales, from Witherslack, from Senecio aquaticus,* vary exceed-
inely, and that, whilst some are as yellow as ochrodactyla, others are
nearly white, and some nearly black. Dalglish also writes (in Uitt.)
that this is the most variable plume in the Clydesdale district, where
it has a range from pale ochreous-yellow to rich ferruginous,
with an intermediate greyish-ochreous form; he adds that he once
captured a very fine lot at Mauchline. Barrett, who combines palli-
dactyla (bertrami) and ochrodactyla (dichrodactylus) aS one species,
states that the species is variable in the shade of ground colour from
ochreous-white to rather rich full ochreous, and in the deeper shades of
clouding, etc. The darker are apparently the more northern forms. Our
own limited experience certainly leads us to suppose that the southern
pallidactyla are more uniformly of one type—yellow, shaded with
fawn—than thenorthern ones. We have seen no specimen darker than an
almost unicolorous warm reddish-brown form, of almost the same tint
as that of Stenoptilia pterodactyla (fuscus); certainly we have examined
nothing that could, by any stretch of imagination, be termed nearly
black, as noted by Hodgkinson (supra). Rebel notes the capture of a
very large pale coloured ? in the middle of July, 1897, at Campiglio.
The following is our grouping of the forms that have come under our
notice—

ae White, with very faint washes of fawn-grey ; hindwings grey =ab. albescens,
Nn. abd.

(2) Whitish, with very faint washes of ochreous-brown; hindwings brown-
grey = pallidactyla, Haw.

(3) The whitish ground colour very reduced, strongly suffused with ochreous-
brown ; hindwings red-brown =ab. intermedia, n. ab.

(4) Brown, costal line dark; inner marginal fringe pale, costal point (before
fissure) pale; slightest trace of faint lobal line; hindwings deep red-brown=ab.
(et var.) seotica, n. ab.

a. var. (an ab.) albescens, n.var. (an n.ab.). Ochrodactyla var., Tutt, “ Ent. Rec.,”
ili., p. 22 (1892). Pallidactyla var.(?), Tutt, “Ent. Rec.,” 11., pp. 33, 186 (1892);
Hdgkn., “ Ent. Rec.,” iii., p. 186 (1892); Tutt, “Ent. Rec.,” xiii., p. 129 (1901).
Bertrami var., Reid, ‘“ Ent. Rec.,” iv., p. 82 (1893) Anterior wings of a whitish

‘colour, the upper lobe beyond the lunule (reaching from fissure to outer margin),
the costal area (from lunule for a short distance towards base), and inner marginal
line towards base, washed with very faint brownish-grey; the costa narrowly
darker brownish, the discal points traceable ; the outer marginal line dark brownish ;
the fringes shiny-white. The hindwings shiny-grey (almost of same tint as darker
wash of forewings), tending to be mottled; the marginal lines rather darker; the
outer margin of Ist and 2nd plumules dotted with dark; slight traces of dark scale-
patch towards centre of hindmargin of 3rd plumule; fringes grey, rather paler than
tint of hindwings.

This whitish form, so far, appears to be recorded only from Carlisle,
Glasgow, and Aberdeen. It was first noted as being bred from larve
feeding on the underside of the leaves of Senecio jacobaea by Reid (Ent.

- Record, iii., p. 22; Proc. Sth. Lond. Ent. Soc., 1891, p. 148), and
afterwards (Fnt. Rec., iv., p. 82) referred by Reid to the same species
as that found feeding on Achillea willefolium. It is still open to
question whether we have here a distinct species, and it is unfortunate
that, although the insect was bred by Reid and Eales, the details of
its life-history were not published in due course. Hodgkinson’s remark
that it has been bred from Senecio aquaticus (Hnt. Rec., ii., p. 186)
needs confirmation.

*This statement as to so unusual a foodplant is to be noticed.

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA. 239

B. ab. scotica, n. ab. Bertrami, South, “ Ent.,” xviii., pp. 280-281 (1885).
Ochrodactyla var., Tutt, “ Ent. Rec.,” 111., p. 22 (1892). Ochrodactylus, Barr., “ Lep.
Brit. Isles,” pl. 413, fig. 3 (1904).—Expanse 12 lines. So much suffused with an
umber tint as to appear almost entirely of this colour, but the whitish ground colour
shows itself along the inner margin, and again in a narrow ill-defined stripe from
the costa to the digital juncture; the scales at the digital juncture hardly darker.
All three feathers of the hindwings, including the fringes, are lustrous umber-brown,
and there is no trace of darker scales along the inner margin of the 3rd feather. The
tibize of hindlegs whitish to their middle, then brownish to the tarsi; the tarsi are
whitish, and have three narrow brownish rings. Imago emerged July 21st, 1885,
from larva sent from Tillicoultry, June 24th. The halfgrown larve examined
differed from a fullgrown one, in that the dorsal and subdorsal stripes somewhat
approached purple-brown. The fullgrown larva did not differ from that of dichro-
dactylus (already described from tansy, Hnt., xv., p. 146) except that the prolegs
and anal claspers of the yarrow-feeding larva were tipped with black instead of
brown; the position, appearance, and hirsute adornment of the tubercles were
identical. The pupa agreed exactly with the description of that of dichrodactylus
(loc. cit.) (South).

This dark form is merely the extreme brownish-ochreous aberration
that the species reaches in Scotland. Its uniform appearance gives it a
very distinct facies, and the strong development of its discal points and
deep colour combined, suggest somewhat Stenoptilia pterodactyla, but
not, of course, in any critical detail. The best we have seen were taken
by Dalglish at Mauchline, July, 1892, and are almost uniformly brown.
These extremes are found with ab. intermedia in the north, the latter
not being an unusual form in our best coloured English specimens.

The American forms of this species have been described as follows :

a. marginidactylus, Fitch, ““ New York Rept.,” 1., p.848 (1854). Margini-
dactyla, Fern., “ Pter. Nth. Amer.,” Ist ed., p. 33; 2nd ed., p. 34 (1898); Dyar,
“List Nth. Am. Lep.,” p. 444 (1902).—The brown-bordered plume (P. margini-
dactylus). Tawny-brown, the forewings varied with white cloud-like spots, whereof
there is one on the outer margin towards the tip, and two on the inner margin; the
apical and outer margins and a cloud-like central space extending from the cleft
inwards, are of a dark brown colour ; fringes whitish, brown at the outer and inner
apical angles, and a small brown spot beyond the middle of the inner margin ;
underside and hindwings pale tawny-brown; legs white; thighs, anterior shanks,
and apical third of the hind shanks, brownish on their outer sides. Wings expand
lin. Occurs the latter part of June, on weeds growing along the borders of
meadows (Fitch).

B. nebulaedactylus, Fitch, ‘““ New York Rept.,” i., p. 849 (1854)—The cloudy
plume (P. nebulaedactylus). Milky-white, the forewings clouded with pale tawny-
brown, which colour occupies the basal portion, and forms two broad bands towards
the apex, the last one often faint and not perceptible on the inner lobe; hindwings
and their fringes, and the underside of both pairs, of the same pale tawny-brown colour;
abdomen white, sides and stripe on the middle of the back pale tawny-brown ; legs
white. Wings expand 1in. The tawny marks on the forewings are often obscure
in old individuals, and sometimes wholly obliterated; still the species may be
discriminated by the pale tawny colour of the hindwings, and the under surface of
the fore ones contrasting with the whiteness of their upper surface. It is our most
common species, occurring from the middle of June till the middle of July, in yards
around dwellings, frequently entering open windows in the evening, being
attracted by the light of the lamps (Fitch).

y. bischoffi, Zell., “ Stett. Ent. Zeitg.,” xxviii., p. 333 (1867) ; ‘“S Verh. z.-b. Ges.
-Wien.,” p. 317 (1873)—Seven ¢ specimens, some in very poor condition, from
various parts of North America, which Schliiger called bischofji. They fully agree
in the colouring of the wings and legs with bertrami, the principal difference being
in the hindlegs, which, in the best examples, are quite plain and unicoloured, whilst
in ochrodactyla and bertrami there is, at least at the tip of the first joint, a brown
spot; the best examples, too, have the apex of the first lobe somewhat shorter,
broader and less pointed than in these species (Zeller).

Later, Zeller wrote that it was nearest to bertrami, not only by the

240 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

markings of the hind fibule, but also by the colour of the wings,
the less pointed apex of the forewings, and by the unicoloured whitish
hindlegs. The first specimens, he says, he received from Ohio, worn
specimens being taken near Beverly in early July.

6. cervinidactylus, Pack., “ Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. New York,” x., p. 266 (1873).—
One ¢. Head with an unusually long and large tuft of scales projecting slightly
beyond the second joint of the palpi. Wings shorter than usual, and broad in
proportion ; the split in the primaries quite short, the costal division very broad,
the apex triangular ; the apex of hinder division triangular, the outer edge very
oblique, the hindermost division of the hindwings shorter and narrower than usual.
Body and wings fawn-colour, vertex of head whitish-fawn, frontal tuft rather
darker, antennze annulated with whitish-fawn and brown, palpi brownish. Fore-
wings fawn-brown, paler, subochreous along the inner edge, with a concolorous
patch on the costa a little within the apex; a black dot just above and near the
end of the split. Fringe concolorous with the wing. Hindwings with the first division
spoon-shaped at the end, the third feather very short and blunt at end; the entire
wings fawn-colour, with no dark brown scales in the fringe on third division. Legs
whitish-brown ; hind pair as far as middle of tibie, beyond, brown; spurs paler.
Beneath, uniformly brown, thickly dusted with paler scales, with a large pale
cloud on the costal division of primaries. Length of body, ‘48in.; of forewing,
43in. California (Edwards). This species may at once be known by its short
hindwings, its uniform fawn-colour, and by the faded ochreous cloud near the
apex of costal division of forewings. It is remotely allied to P. pterodactylus of
Europe, but differs decidedly in the costal division of the forewings being much
more acutely produced. Besides these, I have received, through Mr. Edwards,
two other species of this genus from California, but too imperfectly preserved for
description (Packard).

Kee tayine.—The moths continued to pair almost every night for
about a fortnight, but it was not until July 2nd, 1904, that eggs were
observed ; these may have been laid a day or two, but certainly not
more, as a careful search had been instituted three days before. As
suspected, the reason for delay was due to the inability to get yarrow
plants with the flower-spike in the right stage of development. The 9s
waited, therefore, until the flower-stem had run up, and the flower-
head had opened out a little. The ova are placed either on the flower-
head itself, or else on the small leaflets closely adjoining the flower-
heads ; on one head the ova have been very thickly laid, mostly on the
top; in one instance, a cluster of about a dozen had been all placed quite
closely together. The eges commenced to hatch on July 18th, the
ege-stage having lasted about 14 days (Bacot).

Ovum.—The eggs are of a pale but vivid green colour, slightly
more opaque or cloudy-looking than usual in those of allied species,
and, although smooth and shiny in appearance, they are without the
highly varnished look that plume eggs so often have. In shape, they
present a rather rounded oval for a plume egg, with low, but
irregular, longitudinal ribs. These ribs are very low and vein-like,
branching from one another. The length of the egg -4mm.; thickness
about:2mm.; width about:250mm. [Unlike the ova of many other species,
they are so firmly cemented that it is difficult to detach them from the
plant without injury, and then, owing to the plant-hairs sticking to
them, they are very awkward to get into position for examination on the
slide.| (Bacot). Eggs laid June 24th, 1881 (by an American example
of bischoffi). Elliptical in outline and somewhat flattened ; the longer
diameter -48mm., the shorter diameter -8mm., the surface irregularly
corrugated. | When first deposited (?0r on June 30th, 1881, when
received) of a light cream-colour, or almost hyaline, with a glossy

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA. 241

surface, turning after two days to deep flesh colour (Fish teste Fernald,
Pter. Nth. America, p. 84).

- Hasrtrs oF tarva.—In confinement, eggs laid in early July, 1904,
had mostly hatched by July 18th, and the two flower-spikes, of the
potted plants on which they had been deposited, showed signs of
withering a few days later, when a careful examination, by splitting a
portion of the stem lengthwise, showed that the pith of the part
examined was riddled with the mines of the young larve, which had
bored thereinto. These larve apparently entered at the axils near the
flower-head, from which points they mined down into the stem.
Others, however, do not, at first, attack the pith, many apparently feed-
ing just beneath the surface in the juicy cambium layer, where they
make small mined tracks; the favourite feeding-position would seem
to be at the junction of a leafstalk with the stem; the damage done to
the plant (compared with that done by the larva of LP’. tsodactylus) appears
to be very little, yet the plant shows the attack more than the foodplant of
the latter species. The larve evidently hybernate young. They are rarely
to be found in spring till mid-April, or even early May; they have then
left their hybernacula, and have, apparently, entered the crown-shoot
when very small, judging from the slight signs of entrance that are trace-
able; they then appear to clear out the crown as it grows, eating down
into the shoot, and mining thus for a considerable distance. At this
time (May 8th), no lateral shoots appear to have been attacked, and
most of the larve appear to be in their penultimate instar. A later
lot, found May 22nd, 1904, were then in their last instar, and their
presence was very easily detected, compared with those of the earlier-
found larve. In some cases, the affected shoots contained two larve,
one working down from the crown in the usual way, the other having
entered at an axil lower down the stem, and so mining below the first
one (Bacot). It seems impossible to determine, from the stems of
yarrow containing the early spring larve, where hybernation has taken
place; all the young affected shoots received from Mr. Ovenden, and
collected at Higham, May 15th, 1904, appeared to have been recently
entered. An examination of the same plants in early April was quite fruit-
less, as there were no traces whatever of larve, nor could their place of
hybernation be detected. One stem contained two larve; one about four
inchesfrom the top had entered at the point where a leaf left the stem;
a narrow tunnel led to the centre of the stem, which was hollowed out
and much stained, and in this was a larva between 4mm. and 5mm. in
length. A second had bored into the growing point of the same stem,
and had hollowed out a chamber of some 8mm. in length, which was
also stained brown, and in this was a rather smaller larva, 4mm. in
length, within 8mm. or 4mm. of the evident point of entry, which one
would suspect, by the appearance of the point and the small quantity
of material eaten, had taken place not more than five or six days, at
most, previously. The other plants examined led one to suppose that
the lowest hollows may have been formed in the autumn, and that
the larve hybernate whilst exceedingly small, in a tiny hollow in the root-
stock near the point of a bud, é.e., from which a stem will spring the
succeeding year (Tutt). Ovenden writes (in litt.) that the young larye
of G. pallidactyla (observed May 15th, 1904) appear, when very young, to
mine into the rising flower-stalk, feeding much like P. gonodactyla,
-ehtering sometimes near the root; when, however, the flower-stalk is.

QAP BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

well up, the better-grown larve appear to attack the head, but do not
often seem to eat the heart out of the rising bloom-stalk until
fullgrown. Sich writes: ‘‘On May 19th, 1904, I found five larve in
stems of yarrow, at Chiswick, on a bank close to the river Thames.
Two of these were in the penultimate instar. One of them, about
to change its skin, was resting head upwards in the shoot of yarrow
at the axil of a leaf. The larva chooses this angle (where the leaf
springs from the stem) to enter the stem; it does not bore very deeply
into the stem, preferring to come out and make a fresh hole rather
than go down to the roots. The interior of the yarrow stem is rather
soft, and very juicy, where the larva likes to feed. The excrement is
thrown up in a heap at the entrance of the burrow. In the
penultimate instar, the larva has dark purplish-brown stripes, which
harmonise very well with the similarly coloured young stems of the
yarrow. ‘The youngest shoots of the yarrow are green, but they are
often ornamented, when older, with deep red-brown lines. In the final
instar, the larva loses all the purple colour, being at first of a
somewhat olive tint, but, as it approaches maturity, it becomes paler
and clearer green, and has a less solid appearance. One was fullgrown
on May 21st, and another produced a parasite on the same day; the
last of the larve spun up June 9th.”’ Barrett says the larve feed in
shoots of yarrow, apparently preferring the central shoot, and eating
downwards towards the root, and Porritt adds that, when fullgrown, the
larva leaves the shoot for pupation. Thelarvaof G. pallidactyla, hesays, is
rather an external than an internal feeder, and its habits vary much from
those of G.ochrodactyla; it feeds on Achillea millefolium and A. ptarmica,
attacking the top of a young shoot, eating out the heart and feeding
downwards for a short distance into the tender young stem, then leaves
it to attack another young shoot in the same manner. lLarve were to
be found at Higham until May 26th, 1904, when most were fullfed
(Ovenden); larve found fullfed on June 6th, 1900, pupated from
June 12th, at Hazeleigh (Raynor) ; larve of various sizes from Tilly-
coultry, June 25th, 1885, fed up and pupated in due course, the first
moth not emerging until July 24th, 1885 (Porritt). Kaltenbach, who
first discovered the larve on the Continent, found them on May 15th,
1857, on Achillea ptarmica, at Aachen (Aix), living solitarily at first,
between the united top leaves, but later boring into the stem, the delicate
pink pith of which they eat out to the depth of an inch, the presence of
the larva being very apparent from the black mass of frass which
it turns out from an especially-made ejection opening (Pflanzenfeinde,
pp. 347-8).

Larva.—First instar (somewhat grown, July 21st, 1904): Rather
short, thick-set, with round, black, polished head, paler brownish
scutellum and anal plates. Body pale yellow, of even thickness, the
skin smooth and shiny with a peculiar yellow spotting, as if it had
little globules of fat beneath it. No spicules visible with an 1-inch
objective, hairs tapering; the incisions of segments clear and sharp;
spiracles somewhat raised; the position of the tubercles seems quite
normal for the group; on the meso- and metathorax i and ii are near
together, 1 slightly in front and inside 11; iii and iv close together, v
alone, in usual position below. The hairs of the same colour as the
body, very indistinct. The positions of the tubercles on the abdominal
segments appear to be as usual (but the light is not good enough for

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA. 243

a detailed description) (Bacot). Penultimate instar (May 8th, 1904) :
Short, stout, heavy, of the Platyptilia (gonodactyla) type. Head of
medium size, rounded, of a pale colour. Length (when crawling)
9mm. to 10mm.; width slightly exceeds 2mm.; a rather longer,
more marked, tapering occurs towards anus than towards head; roughly
cylindrical, with a small but distinct lateral flange; when at rest or
feeding, it retracts itself considerably, the tapering being then short
and abrupt. There are at least 3 subdivisions to meso- and metathorax ;
and at least three, or possibly four, to each abdominal segment, two
small anterior ones, and another small posterior one after a large
central one, but the larva is so active that this will need confirmation.
The segments are distinct, and the incisions clear, but the latter are
not deep, nor are the segments greatly swelled as in some of the species.
In its general outward appearance, the larva is not unlike a small
larva of one of the Satyrids; this effect is chiefly due to the alternate
dark and light stripes, with which it is coloured, for of course, the
small neck-like prothoracic segment, and finely tapered anus, with its
two prolongations, are wanting. Head rounded, tolerably smooth and
shining, but hardly polished; colour pale semitransparent yellow, with
dark brown mouthparts, and a dark brown or black patch surrounding
the ocelli; it can be partly retracted into the prothorax; hairs on head
weak and pale ; the prothoracic shield is chitinous in appearance, and
polished; the anal plate is much rougher, as regards surface; both are
of the same pale yellow colour as the head; the body is pale whitish,
with just a tinge of yellow in it, there is a dark mediodorsal stripe that
ends just short of the scutellum ; a similar subdorsal stripe, and a very
broad lateral one that encloses the spiracles within its area; below this
band, the lateral flange is white, and there is another narrow stripe of
the same colour just above the level of the prolegs, with a few scattered
dark markings below it; the ventral area is entirely pale; both the legs
and prolegs are pale, the latter rather long, considering that the larva
is practically a burrowing one. The skin presents a fine coat of minute
spicules, and also a coat of small stiff secondary hairs that might
almost be called bristles, these hairs are very numerous in comparison
with the scattered secondary hairs of the exposed feeders; both the
hairs and the spicules assist in heightening the contrast of light and
dark stripes, as they are pale on the former, and dark on the latter.
The primary sete are quite primitive in character, save that their bases
are somewhat large and conspicuous; there are no raised skin areas,
and no tendency to form warts. It is remarkable that all the primary
hairs have their bases situated on the pale areas. The bases of the
sete are black-rimmed, while the hairs themselves are pale and simple.
The position of the tubercles on the meso- and metathoracic segments
is—i and ii some little way apart (further, apparently, than in P. gono-
dactyla), on the mesothorax set almost exactly transversely, on the
-metathorax very slightly obliquely, with 1 shehtly to the front; iii and
iv are two sete some little distance apart, the lower hair being the
larger; below these, and slightly posterior, is a subprimary seta, while
‘still lower, but almost in line beneath, or slightly anterior to iii
and iv, are two more hairs, a strong upper v, and a weak lower vi:
“above the leg, but below the flange, are two hairs, a large posterior and
a smaller anterior, some little distance apart, these form tubercle vii.
“On the abdominal segments, i and ii are set trapezoidally, and well

944 * BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

apart, 11 being the larger, a subsegmental division coming. between
them; ili is directly above the spiracle; the prespiracular point has,
for it, a large and distinct plate at its base, and is rather higher than
usual. Below the spiracle, iv and v are situated close together, .v a
little above iv; both are rather small; there is a triangular group of
three hairs well below iv and v, a large posterior and two small
anteriors; these may represent vi and another subprimary tubercle;
below these, again, is another group of three, probably the basal group
vii. The spiracles are large, with broad flat black rims ; as usual, those
on the prothorax and 8th abdominal segment are larger than the others
(Bacot). inal instar (nearly fullfed, May 18th, 1904): Stout, short,
about llmm. long, 2mm. wide (reminding one much of the larva of P.
gonodactyla) ; green, with no pink tinge, of a dull sage-green tint with
white bands, looking as if enamelled ; these are (1) a broad subdorsal
band (with 1 and ii); (2) a narrow lower one above, but almost including,
iii; and (3) a lateral one below spiracles and on flange; along these
white bands, the secondary hairs seem absent; really they are colourless
on these, and black on the dark areas; the tubercles are small, with
single, short, black hairs; the prolegs on short props (Chapman).
Another spun up for pupation (May 22nd, 1904): Length 12:5mm., the
greatest width about 2°75mm.; segments strongly marked, swollen, but
subsegments not at all distinct. In shape, the body is cylindrical, and
tapers very gradually towards either end, the tapering only becoming
noticeable at mesothorax and 6th abdominal segment. The prothorax
small (head not visible in this position); anus bluntly pointed; the
mesothorax large and long in comparison, but both the metathorax
and 1st abdominal short; the 8rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th abdominals
fairly long; they then tail off, both as regards girth and length.
Colour very different from that of iast instar; the skin appears smooth and
shining, of a bright but pale green, with a white dorsal area, and clear
green mediodorsal stripe; there is also a broad and strongly developed
white lateral band. The prothoracic plate well marked, but coloured
much the same as the rest of the body ; the anal plate not so distinct.
The head is still pale, with black ocelli; the true legs and prolegs pale-
coloured; both spicules and secondary hairs present, and, as in the
earlier instar, the latter are dark, with dark bases, on the green areas,
but pale, and almost colourless, on the white stripes. The primary hairs
are long and tapering, with small black buttons at bases. There is no
trace of any accessory hair behind spiracle (Bacot).

VARIATION IN COLOUR ACCORDING TO AGE OF LARVZ.— The larva is of the
usual Alucitid form, though, perhaps, a little more slender than in some
species; body cylindrical, stoutest in the middle, tapering towards the
extremities ; head small and polished, considerably narrower than the
prothorax; segmental divisions well-defined, the skin rather glossy.
When about a quarter of an inch long, the ground colour is pale greyish-
olive, but this is almost hidden by dark purplish-brown dorsal and
subdorsal stripes, which give the larva a very dark appearance ; head
very pale straw-colour, marked with smoky-brown; the ocelli black, and
the mandibles reddish-brown ; frontal plate and anterior legs polighed
black. When about three- ails of an inch long, it has become consider-
ably lighter in colour; the ground colour is glaucous-green, the dorsal
-and-subdorsal stripes purple, but more interrupted than, and not so wideas,
in the earlier stage; head of the same pale straw-colour, but not so much

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA. 945

clouded with darker, though the ocelli are still black, and the mandibles
yeddish-brown; the frontal plate is gradually becoming pale like the
head, the black being confined to the front in some specimens, in others
to.a black edging, more or less broken all round. Ground colour of the
ventral area. and the prolegs uniformly glaucous-green, the anterior
Jegs now ringed with black only. Mullgrown (about half to five-eighths
of:an inch), the larva has a still paler appearance. Ground colour
bright pea-green; head very pale straw-colour, faintly tinged with
preen ; the large ocelli intensely black, and consequently very conspicu-
ous; the mandibles reddish-brown; the frontal and small anal plate of
the same bright green as the ground colour; the dark green (slightly
brownish anteriorly) pulsating dorsal vessel forms the dorsal stripe ;
between it and the spiracular region are two greyish-white stripes, on
which the small black tubercular spots may be seen; below the
spiracles is a still cleaner and more conspicuous white stripe; spiracles
black. Ventral surface uniformly of the same bright green as the
dorsal area; at the front, and at the base of each anterior leg, is an
intensely black spot; the prolegs are finely margined with black.
It will be seen by comparing this description with that of Buckler’s
description of the larva of G. ochrodactyla (dichrodactylus) (Buckler’s
Larvae, 1x., p. 338), that both species correspond in having three
forms of colouring in the different stages of growth, and the resem-
blance of the adult larve particularly shows the close relationship of
the two species, whilst the differences, apart from the foodplants, are
sufficiently wide to separate them (Porritt).

Fooprpiants.— Achillea millefolium (Réssler), A. ptarmica (Kalten-
bach), [Senecio aquaticus (Hodgkinson teste Eales),] Senecio jacobaea
(Reid), [Artemisia vulgaris (Sorhagen), Artemisia campestris (Walsing-
ham)].

Pupation.—The full-grown larva of G. pallidactyla (like that of G.
ochrodactyla) leaves the shoot in which it has fed, and, forming a
silken pad, attaches itself for pupation to a stem or other part of the
plant; one was found that had pupated in a shoot of yarrow
(Chapman) ; Porritt also notes that it leaves the shoot in which it
has fed, and affixes itself by the tail to the outside of the stem or leaf,
etc. A pupa was found attached to a stem of Galium verum, growing
near Achillea millefolium, on July 11th, 1899, at Hazeleigh (Raynor); a
pupa fastened to a grass-culm on June 8th, 1894, at Benfleet (Whittle);
a pupa found on May 26th, 1904, spun up, fully exposed, on the
underside of a young yarrow leaf, attached by the cremaster to a silken
pad, the head upwards, standing normally close against the midrib,
except that the head projects slightly; in tint not very unlike that of
the main rib of the leaf (Ovenden). The larva spins a silken pad, and
then seems to rest with the head turned inward ventrally ; after being
fixed in position, it shows the fine and very numerous transverse
striations (that are frequently so marked a feature of plume pupe)
through the skin of the dorsal area (Bacot). A pupa found on a stem
of Artemisia campestris (no Tanacetum near) (Jordan, Hnt. Mo. Mag.,
Xvilil., p. 76). The pupa, at first green, later changing to earthy-brown,
was found suspended freely, without a cocoon, by the anal end, attached
to the surface of a shoot of Achillea ptarmica (Kaltenbach).

.. Pura.—The pupa is of a fine, delicate, though fairly bright, green
colour, with finely projecting beak; the mesothorax somewhat

246 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

prominent, and remarkable for its double, white, dorsal ridge; the
wings finely striated with white, and much swollen at the inner
margin, where the hindwing projects; there is a well-developed supra-
spiracular white line extending from the base of the wing to the anus,
whilst the abdominal segments are also lined with white longi-
tudinally, and a mediodorsal linear depression extends from the
mesothorax to the anus, an extension of the more highly-developed
depression between the two prominent ridges of the mesothorax; the
prominent apex of the beak, the mesothorax, and the anal points, tinged
with reddish-brown [Tutt, May 27th, 1904, from pupa found at
Higham.|] Pupa 13-5mm. long, 25mm. wide at mesothorax, and
2mm. at the 4th abdominal. Seen dorsally, there is a great deal of
the bulbousness of thorax noticeable in many ‘‘plume”’ pup; seen
laterally, the beak in front, and the dorsal ridge or crest, take away a good
deal of this. The pupa is of a delicate green tint, with reddish-pink
outlining the ridges on the meso- and metathorax; a darker shade under
the beak ; the head dorsally, prothorax, and part of mesothorax white ;
there is also a white lateral line as in the larva. Dorsal line darker.
The spiracle is on an interrupted paler line; there is a narrow con-
tinuous one above; then a broader, darker band; then a very broad
pale one besides the dorsal line, divided, however, into two by a slender
dark line; below the white lateral line is a darker one, a pale one, a very
narrow dark one, then pale; the wings and appendages pale, the hollows
darker ; the neuration marked by raised white ribs ; some of the hollows
between these, at the dorsal marginal portion, pinkish- olive. The
beak projects ‘beyond the ventral line, but its lower margin curves
regularly to the face and maxille (Chapman, May 26th, 1904).
[The pupa from which the following description is made has failed to
free the antenne successfully from the head, and they have not fallen
into their proper grooves, and the pupal head is bent forward, so that
the well-developed central spine, or nose-horn, which stands out as a stout
beak, projects ventrally, instead of directly, forwards, as it probably
ought.] The pupa is green, with white markings and over-colouring.
It is quite smooth, so that even tubercular bristles seem to be quite
absent. At the 3rd and 4th abdominal segments it is fairly cylindrical,
tapering slightly, and then more rapidly, tothe cremaster, which consists
of the forward and terminal groups of fine hooks, each sroup rather
small. The only sculpturing, beyond the pronounced beak, is a strongly
marked ridge on either side of the dorsum of the mesothorax, the
median line being at the bottom of a groove between them. The
median line is an indication of a suture. The ridges are white,
conspicuous on the green ground colour, approximate as they proceed
backwards, where they are broader, and tinted with pale reddish-brown ;
at the posterior margin of the segment they do not quite meet, the
median line intervening; or they might be described as meeting
without uniting. On the prothorax there are no such ridges, but the
surface is waved upwards where they would have heen, if present.
On the metathorax, the same ridges are present, just meeting at its
margins, but leaving a hollow between them at the middle of the
segment; they are here broad, flat, white, with a brownish wash at
their margins. On the Ist, 2nd and 8rd abdominal segments the same
ridge is present, but fainter on each, till, on the 4th, one must say it is
absent, though some coloration, etc., suggests that it really proceeds along

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA. 247

all the segments in an evanescent form; on the 1st, 2nd and 3rd ab-
dominals the ridges are broad and flat, furtherapart on each segment, and
onits hinder margin, where they formalow prominence. Toreturn tothe
thorax, where, only, they are a prominent feature, each is divided by
transverse lines into a slightly beaded structure, and, together, they
form a great prominence on the posterior margin of the mesothorax.
The same transverse lines, that form the beaded structure on the
thorax, exist all round the abdominal segments, as far back as the
interseemental membrane, and are eleven or twelve in number. On
the 2nd abdominal segment, they are about twenty on the segment
proper, and ten or twelve on the posterior subsegment that appears to
correspond with the intersegmental membrane of free segments. A
conspicuous white stripe passes subspiracularly along the abdomen,
and is ona slightly raised surface. Green lines exist dorsally, sub-
dorsally in a slight hollow below the dorsal ridges, and a slightly
whiter line below this. The spiracles are faintly raised rings with
hardly darker margins. The wings have the nervures well marked in
whitish raised lines, rather broad and rounded; all the nervures
shown are simple, except the median, which has three branches, ani
what looks like the subcostal, but is really, no doubt, one portion of
the radial, which has two. The margin beyond “ Poulton’s line”’ is
well marked, and reachesas a fine point to the apexjust beyond the edge of
the 38rd abdominal seement. The 3rd legs extend beyond the margin of
the 4th abdominal, and the 2nd legs are a little shorter. The antenne
do not reach half way, but, not being in their grooves, their relations are
not correctly shown. [Described June 14th, 1899, from pupa found
wild by Raynor, near Maldon.| The pupa is a little over ‘5 inch long,
and exactly of the shape of that of G. ochrodactyla as described by
Buckler (anted, p. 282), though, perhaps, a little stouter, as it can
hardly be called “slender,” the word applied by Buckler to that species.
It has a longish beak in front, projecting at a slight angle down-
wards from the head, pointed at the tail; the wing-cases of moderate
length, well-developed, and the ends of the leg-cases projecting free
from the abdomen. The colour is bright pale green, dorsal line
darker green, edged on the thorax with white ; beak white above, rust-
colour at the sides; there is also a conspicuous streak of this rust-
colour on the hind part of the thorax, and the same colour also appears
(but more faintly) on the abdominal point, and at the tips of the
leg-cases; subdorsal line dark green, lateral line white. Ventral
surface pale green with darker green lines, and the wing-cases with
whitish rays (Porritt).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.— The species is single-brooded, occurring in
June and July, and, in late seasons, odd specimens are occasionally
tuken in August, but, on the whole, the species is considerably earlier
than G. ochrodactyla, which rarely occurs before July, and frequently
is found in August ; Reid also observes that, in Aberdeenshire, G@. palli-
dactyla occurs in June and July. This time is apparently conditioned
by the flowering of the respective foodplants. In America, Fernald notes
it as occurring on June 24th, in Maine; June 10th-27th, in Massa-
chusetts; June 23rd to July 17th, in New York; May, in Missouri;
June 11th-16th, in Colorado; June Ist-18th, in California. Stange
observes that, near Friedland, the imago appears to fly somewhat
earlier than G. ochrodactyla; in the Hamburg district, it occurs

248 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

in June (Sauber), also in Pomerania (Bittner); in early July, at
Aachen (Kaltenbach) ,in Hanover in July (Glitz), and at Gottingen, in
July (Jordan) ; whilst at Wiesbaden, June and early July (Rossler),
and at Waldeck, mid-June to beginning of July (Speyer), are also
recorded. In France, Duponchel gives June for the Dept. du Nord,
and Leech found it in Normandy, at Tancarville, June 14th-16th,
1890. Teich gives from June 17th to July 22nd, in the Riga district.
Exact dates available are as follows: Bred June 28rd, and following
days, from larve found June 3rd, 1860, at Wiesbaden (Réssler). June
17th, 1829, at Portland (Dale); July 18th-20th, 1872, at Witherslack ; July
19th, 1872, at Grange (Hodgkinson); July 1st-20th, 1874, at Low
Coniscliffe; July 13th, 1878, at Witherslack (Sang); July 21st,
1876, at Witherslack (Threlfall); July 10th, 1877, at Witherslack
(Hodgkinson); imagines fairly common, July 15th, 1878, at Brandon
(Bower); July, 1879, at Dutton (Hodgkinson); July 4th, 1883,
at Deal (Tutt); imagines, early July, 1883, common, at Dover
(Coverdale) ; July, 1884, at Mill Hill (South); July 21st, 1885, bred
from Tillicoultry (South}; bred July 24th, 1885, and following days,
from larve from Tillicoultry (Porritt); July 1st-4th, 1885, at Deal,
(Tutt); July 4th, 1886, at Linwood, near Paisley (Mackay); July
21st, 1886, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June 27th, 1887, at
Sanderstead (Sheldon) ; July 12th, 1887, at Corrie (Dalglish); July
14th-16th, 1887, at Westcombe Park (Tutt) ; July 16th, 1887,common,
at Askham Bog (Porritt); June 26th, 1889, at Maidenhead (Tutt) ;
June 28th to July 12th, 1889, at Brentwood (Raynor) ; July 6th, 1890,
at Lochwinnoch (Dalglish) ; July 14th, 1890, at Bundoran (Johnson) ;
July 14th, 1890, at Brentwood (Raynor); August 10th, 1890, at
Shoeburyness (Whittle) ; July 4th, 1891, at Strangford Lough (Watts) ;
July 5th, 1891, at Brentwood (Raynor) ; July 9th, 1891, in the Isle of
Purbeck (Bankes) ; early July, 1891, abundant at Newbury (Kimber) ;
July 17th, 1891, at Leigh (Whittle) ; June 28rd, 1892, at Wareham
(Bankes) ; July 10th-27th, 1892, at Aldeburgh (Cruttwell) ; July 15th,
1892, at Mauchline (Dalglish); July 27th, 1892, at Benfleet (Whittle) ;
July 80th, 1892, at Witherslack (Arkle) ; imagines, June, 1898, at
Buckerell (Riding); June 26th, 1893, at Giffnock (Dalglish) ; July 7th,
1898, at Aberdeen (Horne); July 5th-22nd, 1894, at Panton, and
July 22nd, 1894, at Brentwood (Raynor) ; second week in July, 1894,
at Stonehaven (Dalglish); July 22nd, 1894, at Canvey (Whittle); June,
1895, at Glen Lochay (Morton) ; June 20th, 1895, at Giffnock; June
30th, 1895, at Crookston (Dalglish); July 10th, 1895, at Canvey
(Whittle) ; June 26th, 1896, at Crookston (Dalglish) ; July 6th, 1896,
at Corsemalzie (Gordon) ; July Ist-9th, 1897, at Canvey (Whittle) ;
July 9th, 1897, at Cromer (McIntyre); an imago, July 13th, 1897, at
Buckerell (Riding); July 17th, 1897, at Crookston (Dalglish); July
11th, 1898, at Bushey Heath (Barraud); July 12th, 1898, at Danbury
(Raynor) ; July 20th, 1893, at Leytonstone (McIntyre); imago, July
30th, 1898, at Chiswick (Sich) ; July, 1899, at Boscombe (Robertson) ;
July 1st, 7th and 12th, 1899, at Hazeleigh (Raynor) ; July 21st, 1899,
at Benfleet (Whittle) ; an imago, July 28th, 1899, at Chiswick (Sich) ;
June, 1900, at Enfield (Edelsten); June 21st, 1900, at Bowling, and
June 29th, 1900, at Crookston (Dalglish); July 24th, 1900, at Shoe-
buryness (Whittle); July 15th, 1901, at Northey Island (Raynor) ;
July 17th, 1901, at Newton (Dalglish); August, 1901, at Ipswich,
August 2nd, 1901, and following days, at Yoxford (Pyett); August

GILLMERIA PALLIDACTYLA. 249

12th, 1902, and July 17th, 1903, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ; June
28th, July 5th, 23rd, 1903, at Keswick (Beadle); June 30th, 1903, in the
Norfolk Broads (EKdelsten) ; July 12th, 1908, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes) ; July 21st, 1908, at Hazeleigh (Raynor) ; mid-July, 1903, at
Mucking (Burrows); bred June 25th, 1904, from larva found June
8th, 1904, at Benfleet, others captured on July 7th, 1904, at North
Shoebury (Whittle); July 6th-18th, 1904, at Witherslack (James) ; July
15th, 1904, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ; July 6th-28th, 1905, at
Great Wakering, July 15th. 1905, on Thundersley Common (Whittle) ;
July 14th-23rd, 1905, in the Strood district (Ovenden).

Hasitrs.—The imago is very difficult to find and to dislodge from its
hiding-places during the daytime, but may be occasionally disturbed
in the late afternoon from among its foodplant. Towards evening it is
readily made to stir, and is to be seen later hanging about on the flower-
ing shoots of yarrow. Bower observes that it was flying commonly in the
late afternoon in mid-July, 1878, at Brandon, among Achillea millefolium ;
Bankes notes it as being on the wing, in the Isle of Purbeck, in theevening,
amongst rough herbage, where A. millefolium is plentiful, and observes
that it continues to fly till about dusk, and perhaps later ; whilst in mid-
July both sexes have been taken on the wing at 8.45 pm. It is
recorded as flying at dusk about the foodplant at Witherslack (James),
at Sanderstead (Sheldon), at Buckerell (Riding), at Boscombe
(Robertson), at Pitcaple (Reid), near Sheerness (Walker). Whittle
notes that, from July 6th-28th, 1905, he found it flying earlier in the
evening, where there is a good growth of milfoil at Great Wakering,
whilst, later, an occasional example was taken at sugared flowers of mil foil
or wild carrot. Barrett observes that the moth hides by day in the
tufts of its foodplants, keeping very closely concealed, and, if shaken
out, is hardly to be induced to more than scramble away to another
place of concealment; at early dusk it flies gently about, and is readily
seen. Miss Kimber observes that it only flies after dusk, and that, in
early July, 1891, in a piece of swampy ground near Newbury, hundreds
of specimens were seen flying at night, whilst hours of laborious
beating in the daytime failed to disturb a single specimen from among
the heath, rushes, and yarrow. It has been taken at light at Panton
(Raynor), at Ipswich (Pyett), at Bushey Heath (Barraud), at Boscombe
(Robertson), at Dutton (Hodgkinson), at Norwich (Barrett). The
imagines pair during the late evening and night (Bacot). Sorhagen
says that on one occasion he found a pair of G. pallidactyla (bertram?)
in copula on Artemisia vulyaris.

Hasirat.—The habitats of this species are very varied. We have
taken it on sandy banks by the roadside, between Deal and Sandwich;
on waste ground that had been shut in for building-purposes, and that
became covered with yarrow, in J887, at Westcombe Park, where it was
most abundant ; a few plants of yarrow that had been allowed to grow in
the garden were also attacked. It abounds in the yarrow plants growing
on the waste places edging the path by the side of the Thames, from
Maidenhead to Cookham, and also on the waste places by the side of
the road at the foot of the Leas at Folkestone. It is, like Platyptilia
gonodactyla, essentially a species of waste ground, but confined to those
places where Achillea millefolium, or A. ptarmica, is the prevalent plant,
whilst P. gonodactyla is confined to places where T'ussilago farfara runs
rampant. Barrett says that it iscommon among its foodplants on the

250 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

rough ground on which they grow, very often in open spaces at the
sides of lanes and roads, also fields, railway embankments, hillsides,
rocky places, and quarries, in all the southern and eastern counties,
particularly those along the coast. Whittle notes it as occurring
on the river-wall at Shoeburyness. Beadle observes that it is
common on the marshes at the foot of Derwentwater, and at
the head of Bassenthwaite, whilst Miss Kimber records it as very
abundant on a piece of swampy ground at Newbury. It occurs on
the banks of a small stream near Aberdeen (Horne), on a railway bank ©
at Mill Hill (South), on the railway banks near Hartlepool, also in
Hesleden Dene (Gardner), and on the edge of a pasture field at Buckerell
(Riding). Bankes notes (in litt.): ‘‘ The imagines have occurred to me
in four different spots inside, and one just outside, the Isle of Purbeck.
The specimens have been taken on a variety of soils, including lime-
stone, stiff clay, and gravel.’’ Near Carlisle, it occurs on grassy borders
of moors amongst yarrow (Day). Sorhagen says that, at Hamburg, he
captured G. pallidactyla (bertramt) on the same ground where G. ochrodac-
tyla occurs, the former, however, always resting on Artemisia vulgaris,
whilst the latter confines its attention to Tanacetum. At Wiesbaden,
the insect is common on Achillea ptarmica, but on the borders of woods
it appears to frequent Achillea millefolium (Réssler). Near Friedland,
it occurs in a sandy woodland field amongst A. millefolimn (Stange).
Locatitres.— Widely distributed, but locally confined to its food-

plant, throughout the British Isles. Asrrprrn: Aberdeen, Pitcaple district
(Reid). [ANetEsEa (Barrett).] AnTRIm: near Belfast (Watts). ArmacH: Bundoran
(Johnson). Ayr: Mauchline(Dalglish). Berks: Newbury (Kimber), Maidenhead
(Tutt). Bure: Corrie, Arran (Dalglish). Campriper: Cambridge (Stainton). Cavan:
Farnham (Kane). CHEsHIRE: Bromborough Pool, Wirral (Ellis), Chester (Newstead),
Holford (Day), Birkenhead (Stainton). Ctackmannan: Tillicoultry (South). Cork ¢
Glandore, Ummera Woods, near Timoleague, Courtmacsherry (Donovan), Cork (Car-
penter). CornwaLu: Penzance (Marquand). CumBeruanp: Carlisle (Day), Keswick
(Beadle), Lake district (Stainton). Dersy: Derby district (Garneys). Devon: Buckerell,
not common (Riding). Donxeau: Coolmore (Johnson). Dorset: Isle of Purbeck,
Wareham (Bankes). Down: Strangford Lough (Watts). Dustin: Howth Hart),
Kingstown, near Lucan (Kane). Dumparton: Bowling (Dalglish). DurHam:
Darlington (Stainton), Coniscliffe, near Darlington (Sang), Hartlepool, Hesleden
Dene (Gardner). EpinpureH: near Edinburgh (Barrett), Kirknewton (Evans).
Essex: Aveley (Bacot), Brentwood, Danbury, Hazeleigh, Northey Island (Raynor),
Leigh, Southend, Shoeburyness, North Shoebury, Canvey, Benfleet, Great Wakering,
Thundersley Common (Whittle), Leytonstone (McIntyre), Colchester (Harwood),
Mucking district (Burrows). Fire: Otterston (Evans). Gatway: Clonbrock (Dillon),
Connemara—Glendalough (Kane). GLamorcan: common (Barrett). GLOUCESTER :
scarce, Almondsbury (Hudd), Bristol (Stainton). Hants: Isle of Wight—Ventnor
(South), Bournemouth, Boscombe (Robertson), Southampton (Buckell). Herts:
Bushey Heath (Barraud), Hailey, near Hoddesden (Bacot). Iste or Man:
Maughold, Ramsey (Cassal), Kent: Dover (Coverdale), Deal, Westcombe Park,
Strood, Folkestone (Tutt), Higham (Ovenden), near Sheerness (Walker), Darenth
Wood (Wood), Alkham, Pembury (Stainton). KINcARDINE: Stonehaven
(Dalglish). Lanark: Carluke (Morton), Newton, Glasgow dist. (Dalglish).
LancasHirE: Grange, Dutton (Hodgkinson), Manchester (Stainton). Lrycozn:
Panton (Raynor), Ashby, near Brigg (Cassal). Mippiesrx: Hendon, Mill Hill
(South), Enfield (Edelsten), Chiswick (Sich). Norrotxk: King’s Lynn (Atmore),
Cromer (McIntyre), Norfolk Broads (Edelsten), Norwich (Barrett), Brandon
(Bower), Thetford (Walsingham). NortHomBerytanp: Newcastle-on-Tyne
(Stainton). PEMBROKESHIRE: common (Barrett). | Psrrusuire: Dunblane
(Henderson), Glen Lochay (Morton). Rrenrrew: near Paisley (Dunsmore), Linwood
(Mackay), Giffnock, Crookston, Lochwinnoch (Dalglish). Roxsuren: Laurieton,
near Jedburgh (Elliot). Suic¢o: Sligo (Russ). Somerser: near Portishead
(Hudd). Srreuine: Alva (Porritt). Surronx: Aldeburgh, Lowestoft, Kessingland
(Cruttwell), Yoxford, Ipswich (Pyett). Surrey: Sanderstead (Sheldon). Sussex :

PLATYPTILIINE, EUNEMIDOPHORINE, ETC. 251

Hastings district, rare (Bloomfield). Waterrorp: Dunmore (Kane). West-
MORLAND: Witherslack (Hodgkinson). Wicrown: Corsemalzie (Gordon).
York: Askham Bog, common (Porritt), Scarborough, York (Stainton), Skipwith
{Ash), Doncaster district (Corbett), Hexthorpe (Warren), Staddlethorpe, near
Howden (Prest).

| Distrirution*.—Northern Hurope except the Polar regions;
Germany, Batavia, Anglia, Alps of Styria and Carinthia, Hungary
(Rebel). America: Canada, Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York,
Pennsylvania, Colorado, California, Oregon (Fernald). Austro-Huneary: Tyrol
district—near Campiglio (Rebel), Hungary—Sopron, Nagydg (Aigner), Upper
Styria (Mann), Carinthia—Wolfsberg (Héfner). Brnerum: very local—Velthem,
Uccle, Verrevinckel (Crombrugghe). Butearta: Sophia (Rebel). Francr:
Normandy—Tancarville (Leech), Dept. du Nord (Duponchel). Grrmany: Pome-
rania, common wherever the foodplant occurs (Bittner), Mecklenburg—Friedland
(Stange), Hamburg—near Lockstedt (Sauber), near Hamburg (Sorhagen), Hanover
—Hanover (Glitz), near Géttingen (Jordan), Rhine-Provinces, near Linn (Stoll-
werck)+, Aachen (Kaltenbach), Hesse—Nassau, Wiesbaden (Rossler), near Cassel
(Ebert), Waldeck (Speyer). Russta: Riga district (Teich), St. Petersburg district
(Erschov and Feild). Scanprnavia: Norway—Bergen, Christiania, Hamar (Jordan),
Scania, Blekinge, Smaland (Wallengren).

Comparison oF THE PuatypTinuNna®, HUCNEMIDOPHORINZ, AMBLYPTILIINE,
AND MaRrASMARCHINA.

The Platyptiliinae are essentially a subfamily with internal-feeding
larvee, recognised, in the larval stage, by the absence of the depression
of the prothoracic scutellum; by an abundance of unjointed secondary
skin-hairs, in addition to the usual skin-points or spicule; the presence
of simple, tapering, primary sete; the arrangement of tubercles i and i
in a transverse line on the meso- and metathorax; the separation of sete
iv and v although on a common basal plate ; the absence of the accessory
postspiracular tubercles, and the unraised character of the spiracles.
‘The pupal characters are as distinctly marked, inasmuch as there is a
poor development (or absence) of the anterior portion of the cremastral
hooks, while the pupal skin is smooth, the sete microscopic and clubbed,
the nose-horn well-developed, the dorsal ridge prominent, and the
posterior portion of the abdominal segments rough dorsally. The
Hucnemidophorinae, Amblyptiliinae, and Marasmarchinae, on the other
hand, are peculiar, in that they have larve that are internal-feeders in
their earliest stadia (¢.e., to the hybernating period), more or less external
and exposed feeders in their later stadia (?.c., after hybernation) ; the
depression of the prothoracic scutellum is generally well-marked, often
strongly pigmented; the secondary skin-hairs are variable in size,markedly
knobbed, or swollen, at tip; the primary sete smooth, blunt or swollen
at, or just before, tip; the sete accompanied by secondary hairs, giving
rise to incipient wart-structure; those of i and 1i conjoined on either side
on meso- and metathorax; of iv and v also with conjoined bases; tubercle
vi usually single-haired ; the accessory postspiracular tubercles usually
indicated, or more or less weakly developed; the spiracles rather raised.
The pupal characters areas characteristic; both portions of the cremaster
are well-supplied with hooks; the skin, though smooth, bears well-
developed primary sete (almost of the same form as those of the larva) ;
the nose-horn evanescent, orabsent; the dorsal ridge variable (evanescent

* The species has not been distinguished from G. ochrodactyla by most con-
tinental lepidopterists ; all, therefore, except the most recent lists combine the two
insects, and one cannot discriminate the localities belonging respectively to G. palli-
dactyla, Haw., and G. ochrodactyla, Hb.

t See also Stollwerck’s list (anted, p. 236) for localities of G. ochrodactyla.

252 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

in Hucnemidophorus, fairly-developed, and carrying strongly-developed
halbert-like processes, in Amblyptilia and Marasmarcha). In the
imaginal characters, the genera Hucnemidophorus and Amblyptilia
present all the naked-eye appearances of the Platyptiliines, particularly
in the shape of the forewing and the dark scale-tuft on the 3rd plumule
of the hindwings, whilst, in these respects, Marasmarcha has undergone
considerable variation in the direction of the Oxyptilines.

The pups of Marasmarcha (lunaedactyla) and Amblyptilia (cosmodac-
tyla) appear to be very similar, inasmuch as they show a marked develop-
ment of the dorsal ridge, but Bacot says that these processes, carrying
the tubercles, are really different structurally, and have probably
reached their present state of perfection, independently, from a primi-
tive common ground; this is particularly evidenced by the differences
in the character of the processes, on the segments following the 3rd
abdominal, being quite as marked as in the more highly-developed
ones. Chapman observes that the essential structural difference
between the pups of the two genera is that, in that of Marasmarcha,
there is an inner posterior set of humps like those of some Oxyptilid
pupe. He thinks that the pupal armature of these may have arisen
in common, whilst that of Amblyptilia may be an earlier stage of the
same development (branching off a little in another direction), but is
more probably a separate, though similar, development. Bacot
further adds that the pupa of Amblyptilia is nearer the Stenoptiliines
in slenderness and shape, whilst that of Marasmarcha is less slender,
and has a less marked dorsal band, inclining rather to the Oxyptilid
form.

As to the differences in the larval characters, Bacot observes that the
larvee appear to show greater divergences than the pupe, the secondary
skin-hairs in Marasmarcha being few in number compared with those
in Amblyptilia, although both vary much, whilst the depressed scutellar
spots are not pigmented in the former as in the latter, that of Amblyptilia
falling in closely, in this respect, with the Stenoptiliines, Marasmarcha,
on the other hand, being apparently rather more distant therefrom. The
amount of wart-development places Amblyptilia rather nearer the Adkinia
species (bipunctidactyla and zophodactylus), whilst that of Marasmarcha
runs nearer that of Stenoptilia (pterodactyla), possibly due toa parallelism
in the larval habits as exhibited in the amount of external-feeding.
Chapman says that too much stress must not be placed on the number
of secondary hairs met with in the larve of Marasmarcha, because
some have hardly any, whilst others have quite as many as the larve
of Amblyptilia.

We have above referred to the pupal dorsal ridge (or ridges).
These are peculiar structures, found only in the Platyptiliidae, double
in character, inasmuch as there is one on either side of the dorsal
line, arising on the prothorax, and passing backwards as far as
tubercle 11 on the 8rd abdominal segment, and then abruptly ceasing.
They approach the middle line most nearly at the posterior border of
the mesothorax, and are, perhaps, best seen in the genus Gillmeria;
they are almost evanescent on the abdominal segments of Platyptilia
isodactylus, especially of the summer brood. In Marasmarcha lunae-
dactyla, and the Amblyptiliae, they terminate in the great halbert-
shaped processes of the 3rd abdominal segment, as in the other
groups, the similar processes on the following segments being isolated,

_EUCNEMIDOPHORINE. 253

and without any ridge connecting each with the next. That the
subdorsal ridges on the last segments, running down into the
cremastral pen, are a reappearance of the same structure, is possible, but
certainly doubtful; there is never any continuous ridge from the
forward to the posterior portion. In the Agdistid pups some traces of
a similar structure exist, at least on the thorax, and are marked on
the mesothorax of Herbertia tamaricis, for example, but they appear to
be more correctly regarded as the pupal representatives of the larval
horns and processes, as connecting ridges are wanting, as in the after-
warts of the pupe of Amblyptilia. When we turn to the Alucitids, we
find structures that at first sight appear to be these dorsal ridges, as,
for example, on the pupa of Ovendenia septodactyla (lieniyianus), where
the fan of hairs on the mesothorax, especially when seen from above,
has all the aspect of such a ridge ; when looked at laterally, it is seen,
however, to continue so far as hairs arise, i.e., it 1s really a specially
formed wart, but it does not continue beyond, or run from, segment to
segment. No doubt these fan-shaped warts, the after-warts of
Amblyptilia, etc., are all expressions of a readiness of the skin
structures to assume special forms, of which the dorsal ridges are one;
no doubt also, in a sense, they are similar responses of this readiness
to similar stimuli; but it seems highly probable that they are separate
responses 1n separate cases, and not variations of one original ancestral
development (Chapman),

So far as the three constituent groups included in this discussion are
concerned, their general characters suggest them not as a homogeneous
eroup, like the Platyptilimes or Stenoptiliines, but as separate
sections. This comes out particularly in the genital appendages. This
could be met by making each the centre of a group equal in value to
the Platyptiliinae or Stenoptiliinae, as we have done, or by treating
them as three separate tribes in a subfamily Amblyptiliinae. The im-
portant thing is to get the differences defined. The units, at any
rate, have no close alliance, as have those of the Platyptiliinae,
Stenoptiliinae or Oayptilinae; we think it very possible that a
sufficiently detailed knowledge of the early stages of a greater number
of extra-British forms would strongly support us in making each the
centre of a subfamily of equal classificatory value with the three sub-
families above mentioned.

Subfamily : HucnemiporHorin &.

Tribe : EKucnemMIDOPHORIDI.

This subfamily is much more distinctly Platyptiliine, than are the
two succeeding subfamilies. So much is this so, that Bacot considers
that the Hucnemidophoridi would be perhaps better placed as a tribe of
the Platyptiliinae than united with Amblyptiliinae, but the differences
between them are also great, and so we separate it from both. In the
larva of Hucnemidophorus, the depression of the prothoracie scutellum
is hardly noticeable ; the primary setz are smooth and tapering (some-
times knobbed); the accessory postspiraculars are marked by the
presence of slightly better-developed secondary hairs, the skin-hairs
being of distinctly Amblyptiliine pattern. In this stage, Bacot observes
that there is a strong growth of secondary skin-hairs, and that the
Kucnemidophorid larva presents also a suggestion that the accessory
postspiracular tubercles form, as it were, a sort of link between the

254 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Stenoptiliines and the Platyptiliines. Chapman observes that the
larval hairs of Hucnemidophorus are much as in Marasmarcha, the skin-
hairs distinctly of Amblyptiliid type, whilst many of the primary
sete are knobbed; he further notes that the postspiracular hairs,
representing the accessory tubercles, are well-represented on some
segments, absent on others, and again not so very different from those of
Marasmarcha. It is a most important fact that these well-developed
secondary skin-hairs are distinctly Amblyptiliid (not Platyptiliid), 2.e.,
they are jointed secondary hairs, as in the more external-feeding larve
of the Platyptiliid stirps, and not minute unjointed skin-points, as in
the internal-feeding Platyptilid larve.

In the EKucnemidophorid pupa, the dorsal ridge is rather poorly
indicated; there is a suspicion of a pupal nose-horn; the skin is smooth,
and innocent of processes, except the ordinary primary set, which are as
long as those of the larva, but sometimes knobbed towards the tip. Bacot
observes that the pupa is of Platyptiliid outline, nearer to that of Maras-
marcha than Amblyptilia, and far removed from those of Stenoptilia and
Adkinia ; the hairs, he says, are very long, and, in this character, it agrees
neither with the Platyptiliines, nor the Amblyptiliines. Chapman
observes that these hairs are exceedingly long, compared with those
in Platyptiliine pupe, whilst he suggests that the pupa of Marasmarcha
shows distinct Oxyptilid indications; strangely enough, the pupa of
Eucnemidophorus has much more in common with that of Buckleria
(paludwm) than with that of any of the Platyptilias.

The special characters above noted, are, perhaps, partly due to the
fact that the larva of Hucnemidophorus is not so truly an external
feeder as the members of the allied subfamilies just considered, and that
something of a cocoon is always spun for pupation, there being, therefore,
less need for complicated development in these directions. Bacot notes
that, in its cocoon-forming habit, Hucnemidophorus inclines to the
Platyptiliines, as also in the manner in which it lies therein, rather
than is attached, in the manner of the Amblyptiliines, by means of a
complicated cremaster on the 8th and 10th abdominal segments.

It is quite open to question, as already noted, whether this tribe
should really be considered as of full subfamily rank; it is, in its
larval and pupal characters, as we have shown, much more inclined
to the Platyptilines than to the Stenoptiliines in the imaginal,
larval, and pupal stages, and retains the, for this superfamily, peculiar
cocoon-spinning habit in an enhanced form, seen nowhere among
the Alucitids (sens. lat.), except in the Platyptiliids (that of Adaina
not being a true spun cocoon).

Genus: HucnemiporHorus,* Wallengren.

SynonymMy.—Genus : Eucnemidophorus, Wligrn., ‘‘ Ent. Tids.,’’ ii., p. 96
(1881): Walsm., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”? xxxi., p. 41 (1895); Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch.
Pter.,” p. 33 (1895); ‘Illus. Zeits. Ent.,” iii., p. 131, fig. 4 (1898). Alucita,
Schiff. and Den., ‘‘Schmett. Wien.,’’ 1st ed., p. 146 (1775) ; Goeze, ‘‘ Ent. Beit.,’’ iv.,
p.177 (1783) ; de Vill., ‘‘ Linn. Ent. Faun. Suec.,’’ iv., p. 547 (1789) ; Ill., ‘‘ Schmett.
Wien.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 130 (1801); Hb., ‘‘ Kur. Schmett.,” Aluc. pl. ii., fig. 8 (antea,
1804); Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 478 (1811); Tr., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,” ix., pt. 2, p.
228 (1833). Pterophorus, Fab., ‘‘ Mant. Ins.,’’ ii., p. 258 (1787) ; ‘‘ Ent. Syst.,”
ili., p. 347 (1793); Latr., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’’ xiv., p. 257 (1805); Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef.
Comp.,”’ p. 409 (1819) ; Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,”’ fo. 161 (1827) ; Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,”’

* Wrongly spelt Hucnaemidophorus, antea, p. 96.

EUCNEMIDOPHORUS. 255

xi., p. 644, pl. 313, fig. 4 (1838) ; Wood, ‘‘ Ind. Ent.,’’ Ist ed., p. 237, pl. li., fig.
1645 (1839); Zell., “Isis,” p. 772 (1841); Dup., ‘‘Cat. Méth.,” p. 381 (1845) ;
Tgstrm., ‘‘ Finl. Fjar.,”? p. 154 (1847); Frey, ‘‘ Die Tin. Pter.,’’ p. 401 (1856) ;
Dbldy., ‘‘Syn. Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 36 (1859); Sta., ‘‘Man.,’’ ii., p. 440 (1859) ;
Porritt, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ viii., p. 183 (1875); ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xii., pp. 88-89 (1875) ;
‘¢ Buckler’s Larve,’’ ix., p. 337, pl. 163, fig. 2 (1901). Platyptilia, Hb., ‘‘ Verz.,”
p. 429 (1825) ; Stphs., ‘Illus. Brit. Ent.,’’ iv., p. 375; app. p. 424 (1834); Zell.,
‘“‘Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 326 (1852); Meyr., ‘‘Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 486
(1890); ‘‘Handbook,”’ etc., p. 430 (1895); Dyar, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,”’ xi., p. 39, pl. i., fig.
4 (1898); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,” 3rd ed., p. 72 (1901). Platyptilus, Zell.,
‘«Isis,’’ p. 770 (1841) ; H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 366 (1855) ; Nolck., ‘‘ Lep.
Fn. Hstl.,”’ p. 799 (1871); Dyar, ‘‘Journ. N. Y. Ent. Soc.,’’ iii., p. 21 (1895).
Cnaemidophorus,* Wallgrn., ‘‘Skand. Fjader.,’’ p. 10 (1859); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,”’ vi., p. 120 (1869); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘Cat.,”’ 2nd ed., p. 341 (1871);
Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ iii., pt. 2, p. 782 (1877); Frey,
‘‘Lep. der Schweiz,’”’ p. 427 (1880); Staud., ‘‘ Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross.,’’ xv.,
p. 423 (1880); South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xviii., p. 275, pl. i., figs. 3-3d (1885); Leech,
‘Brit. Pyral.,’’ p. 51, pl. xvi., fig. 2 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,” x., pp. 163,
201 (1889); ‘‘Pter. Brit.,”? p. 18 (1895). Cnemidophorus, Sorh., << Kleinsch.
Brandbg.,’’ p. 1 (1886); Barrt., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 343, pl. 413, figs. 2-2b
(1904). Hucnaemidophorus, Tutt, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,’’ xvii., p. 96 (1905).

This genus was described by Wallengren (Skandinaviens Fyadermott,
p. 10), under the name of Cnaemidophorus as follows :—

Antenne of both sexes with very short cilia ; forehead without any tuft, only a
few slightly prominent hairs between the antenne ; palpi, not longer than the head,
the intermediate joint thickened with down, the last joint short and pointed; legs
short, all the tibize thickened towards the apex by a tuft of scales, the posterior
tibize thickened in the middle ; first pair of spines in the posterior tibize slender and
very unequal, second pair nearly equal; anterior wings not divided to a third part
of their length, the segments broad, the posterior segment almost hatchet-shaped,
the posterior angle of both segments well marked; the divisions of the inferior
wings wide, the 3rd segment with the anal angle distinct; the anterior wings flat,
covering the inferior, the inner margin not toothed.

The name Cnaemidophorus, being preoccupied, was changed by
Wallengren to Hucnemidophorus in 1881 (nt. Tids., 11., p. 96), and it
was accepted by all workers at the group until 1890, when Meyrick
(Trans. Ent. Soc. London, p. 485) gave a comprehensive subfamily
diagnosis (that comprised the whole of the Platyptilines) under the
generic name Platyptilia, including Amblyptilia, Fredericina, Platyptilia,
Gillmeria, and Hucnemidophorus. This grouping was followed up in
1895 (Handbook, etc., pp. 432-4), but not without a protest from
Hofmann (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 23), who says that Hucnemidophorus
and Amblyptilia are good and natural genera, as shown by the different
types of their 9 genitalia, as also by the differences of their early
stages, and the very characteristic facies of the imagines. In spite of
this protest, Staudinger and Rebel (Catalog, 8rd ed., pt. 2, p. 72)
followed Meyrick, and gave the same heterogeneous mixture of species.
Hofmann gives (op. cit., p. 33) the following excellent diagnosis, which
shows that, even on imaginal characters, the genus is abundantly
distinct :—

Frons, especially between the antenne, roughly-scaled, but without actual tuft
of scales ; antennze, in both sexes, with very short ciliations ; palpi small, not longer
than head, projecting horizontally, 2nd joint somewhat thickened with scales
beneath; 3rd joint about one-half smaller, pointed; tongue rather weak; all the tibie
terminally, the hind tibizw also before the first pair of spurs, thickened by a ring
of scales; in the middle of the middle tibiz, a slight thickening by raised scales ;
the inner spur of the first pair in the hind tibia longer than the outer, the second
pair almost equal in length; forewings cleft to scarcely 4, both lobes broad, and

* Preoccupied in Lacertilia, see Ent. Tids., ii., p. 96.

256 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

with distinct anal angle; the lst plumule of the hindwing with margin running
obliquely, from within and above, to below and without, 7.e., wider at apex than at
base, the 2nd pointed, with rounded anal angle, the 3rd with a tooth of black
scales on the inner-marginal fringes near the apex; neuration perfect—II, and I,
of forewing arise, one shortly after the other, before the upper angle of the median
cell, II, and Il, ona stalk from this angle itself, Il, from the discocellular, which
is straight as far as to the origin of this vein, and from thence runs somewhat
obliquely downwards and inwards.

The main characters, however, in which Hucnemidophorus differs from
the Platyptilias (sens. rest.), are exhibited in the early stages. There is
in the larva an abundance of secondary hairs, and there is also a tendency
for the primary hairs to be associated with a few secondaries, indicating
the first step in wart structure ; indications of the accessory postspirac-
ulars are not wanting [as in the Platyptilias (sens. rest.)|, both
positions being occupied by greatly-developed secondary hairs. The
pupa resembles that of the Platyptiliids, in that there are no processes
or marked armature; the dorsal ridge, however, is barely indicated,
and the primary sete are nearly as well-developed as in the larva; the
nose-horn, however, 1s evanescent. The chief characters of the early
stages may be summarised as follows :—

Larva.—Muinute chitinous pointed spicule ; secondary hairs abundant, definitely
hair-like, with jointed base, variable in size, very short and thick, with knobbed
tops, appear first in (?) penultimate skin; primary hairs smooth and tapering;
tubercles i and 11 on same base in meso- and metathorax; trapezoidal on abdomen ;
iv and v with conjoined bases ; accessory postspiraculars indicated by well-developed
secondary hairs; vi, two-haired; one or two secondary hairs associated with
primary sete.

Pupa.—Front rounded, nose-spine evanescent; surface smooth, without
processes ; dorsal ridges simply indicated (not strong as in Platyptilias) ; sete long,
almost as in larva.

EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA, Schiffermuller and Denis.

Synonymy.—Species: Rhododactyla, Schiff. and Denis, ‘‘ Schmett. Wien.,” 1st
ed., p. 146 (1775) ; Goze, ‘‘ Ent. Beit.,”’ iv., pt. 3, p. 177 (1783) ; De Vill., ‘‘ Linn.
Ent. Faun. Suec.,’’ iv., p. 547 (1789); Ill., ‘‘ Schmett. Wien.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 130
(1801); Hb., ‘‘ Schmett. Eur. Aluc.,’’ pl. ii., fig. 8 (ante 1804) ; ‘‘Raupen,”’ etc., ix.,
Aluce. i, pl. xiii., figs. la-b (circ. 1800) ; Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’”’ p. 478 (1811); Hb.,
‘‘ Verz.,’’ p. 429 (1825); Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,’’ ix., pt. 2, p. 228 (1833); Stphs.,
‘Til. Haust.,’’ iv., app., p. 424 (1834) ; Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,”’ p. 486
(1890); ‘‘ Handbook,” etc., p. 435 (1895); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed.,
p. 72 (1901). Rhododactylus, Fab., ‘‘ Mant. Ins.,”’ ii., p. 258 (1787); ‘‘ Ent.
Sys..’’? p. 347 (1793); Latr., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,”’ xiv., p. 257 (1805); Sam., ‘Ent.
Comp.,” p. 409 (1815); Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,” fo. 161 (1827); Stphs., «Illus.
Haust.,” p. 375 (1834); Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,”’ xi., p. 644, pl. 318, fig. 4 (1838) ;
Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,”’ 1st ed., p. 237, pl. li., fig. 1645 (1839) ; Zell., *‘ Isis,” aewea2
(1841); Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Méth.,’’ p. 381 (1845); Tgstrm., ‘‘ Finl. Fjar.,”’ p. 154 (1847);
Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 326 (1852); Richter, ‘‘Stett. Ent. Zeit.,”’ p. 28 (1850);
H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 366 (1855); Frey, ‘‘ Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’”’ p. 401
(1856) ; Dbldy., ‘‘Syn. Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 36 (1859); Sta., ‘‘Man.,’’ ii., p. 440
(1859) ; Wallgrn., ‘‘Skand. Fyjad.,’’ p. 10 (1859); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ Vi.,
p. 120 (1869); Staud. and Wocke, ‘“‘ Cat.,”” 2nd ed., p. 341 (1871) ; Nolck., ‘‘ Lep.
Bao. Estl:.” p. 799 (1871); Porr., “‘Hint.,”’ vili., p. 183 (1875) ; “Hint. Moe Mag.,”’
xii., pp. 88-89 (1875); Hein. and Wocke, ‘* Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 782
(1877); Staud., ‘‘Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross.,’’ xv., p. 423 (1880); Frey, ‘‘ Lep.
Schweiz,’’ p. 427 (1880) ; South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xviii., p. 275, pl. i., figs. 3-3d (1885) ;
Sorh., ‘‘ Kleinsch. Brandbg.,’’ p. 1 (1886) ; Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyral.,”’ p. 51 (1886) ;
Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x., pp. 168, 201 (1889); ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,”’ p. 19 (1895); Hofmn.,

** Deutsch. Pter.,” p. 34 (1895); ‘Illus. Zeits. Ent.,’’ iii., p. 131 (1898); Dyar,
Jour. N.Y) Ent. oo... it.; p. 20 (1895)> << Bint: Rec.,”? xi., p. 39, pl. i., fig. 4
(1898) ; Porritt, ‘‘ Buckler’s Larve,”’ ix., p. 337, pl. 163, fig. 2 (1901); Barr. ,‘*Lep.
Brit. Isles,” ix., p. 345, pl. 413, figs. 2-2b (1904); Murtfeldt, ‘‘ Can. Ent.,” xxxvi.,
p. 334 (1904). *

EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA. 257

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION*.—Heckrosen Geistchen, larv. Rosae caninae
(Schiffermiller and Denis). [Pterophorus rhododactylus, alis fissis
flavescentibus; strigis albis, anticis bifidis, posticis tripartitis. (Alucita
rhododactyla, Wien. Verz., p. 146, no. 5.) Habitat in Saxonize Rosis,
Mus. Dom. Zschuck. Ale antice flavee, basi obscuriores strigis duabus
albis, anteriore obliqua usque ad strigam posteriorem fisse. Postice
tripartite lobis duobus anterioribus flavescentibus, tertio albo macula
magna ante apicem ferruginea. Corpus ferrugineum thoracis lateribus
flavescentibus (Fabricius, Mantissa Insectorum, li., p. 259).

Imaco.—21mm.-23mm. Head and thorax the colour of the fore-
wings; the abdomen of the same colour but variegated with whitish
scales. The anterior wings divided into two lobes, the apex pointed; the
ground colour rich ochreous-brown much peppered with white scales
along the costa, which develop into a large whitish blotch in the
centre of the costal area; a slender white fascia, parallel to the hind-
margin, extends from the costa to the inner margin ; the inner margin
whitish, and connected by some whitish scales with the pale costal
blotch ; fringes with the outer part whitish, the inner dark. The
posterior wings shiny ochreous-brown, the third plumule white along
its inner edge; a tooth of black scales towards apex; fringes brown,
with white tips to the plumules.

Genitat1a.—The 9th dorsal plate belonging to the g genitalia is
tolerably large, arched, with a notch on the hind margin; the uncus
(10th dorsal plate) strongly curved on its underside with a continua-
tion projecting vertically, lunular-shaped in front, the terminal portion
of the intestine passing through the inner half of it. The genital
valves (appendages or flaps) large, obliquely cut off behind, with a
blunt point (apex); from the lower edge of each appendage a long,
thin, continuation extends straight towards the front. The 9th
ventral appendage very small, extending backwards, pointed, beset
with long scale-hairs (Hofmann, Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 35, pl. ii,
fig. 4

oe deposited by a 2 sleeved on a rose-tree were
laid on the underside of a rose-leaf. Dieroff notes that, in confine-
ment, at Zwotzen-on-the-Hlster, a ? laid a single egg on May 28th, on
the following day two-thirds of the batch, whilst on the morning of
the 30th the egglaying was finished ; the eggs were scattered loosely,
and not attached.

Ovum.—About ‘7mm. long, and -42mm. wide. Full yellow in
colour. In outline a perfect oval, narrowing at both ends, and
scarcely any wider at the micropylar end than at its nadir; the upper
and lower surfaces somewhat flattened, the upper somewhat depressed
centrally ; the surface very shiny, with an exceedingly faint, large-
meshed reticulation [Described July 13th, 1899, from eggs received
from Mr. Whittle]. Green-yellow in colour at first, later turning
black (Dieroff).

Hasirs or tarva.—As the egg hatches in a few days, and the
larva is comparatively small in the spring, one suspects that it hyber-
nates through the winter, possibly in the second instar, as do other
ees exact knowledge on the point, howe ever, is still wanting.

* Schiffermiiller and Denis simply write (Sys. ieee wt P. 146); erenbiceeh
eaittehen. larv. Rosae canimae’’; whilst Gize (Lnt. Beit., 3, pp. 171 et seq.)
simply gives the name with Schiffermiiller and Denis’ Mesbans

——

258 _ BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Small larve may be obtained in early May, the larve being fullfed
towards the end of June. Warren says there appears to be really no
difference, except in size, between the smallest spring larve observed and
fullgrown ones; he once found, on a small isolated rose-bush, a number of
young larve, mostly close to the ground, and feeding there on the young
leaves ; a fact that led to the supposition that a number of eggs may
be laid close together near the ground; as soon as buds form, the larve
attack the inside of them, but will always feed on young top green leaves.
When coming to maturity, they undoubtedly prefer the large unopened
flowers; and, in a high hedge, where the rose-bushes rise to the top and
flower there, fullfed larve are to be obtained. The threads the larve
spin are viscous, and the frass is not granular, but in small sections,
the ends of which appear to be attached ; itis eminently characteristic ;
the best time for the larva in Middlesex appears to be from the end
of May through June (im litt., June 15th, 1904). Nolcken long since
mentioned this gregarious habit, observing that,on June 4th, 1858, on
some young rose-bushes, buried in grass, he found a colony of the
larve, whilst in his garden at Arensburg, and at Pichtendahl and
Ilpel, he has always found the larve in moderate-sized colonies.
Porritt notes (Hnt. Mo. Mag., xii., pp. 88-9) that, in May, 1875, the
larvee were found in Chattenden woods “ feeding on wild rose, beneath
the leaf overlapping the rosebud, eating into the unexpanded bud from
the side; almost as many, however, were found feeding in similar
positions at the tips of the young shoots.”’ South says that the larva
usually bores a hole through the upper portion of a flower-bud, and
feeds on the folded petals ; sometimes the larva may be found feeding
on the stamens of a flower, the petals of which are fastened together
by their outer edges with silken threads ; when feeding on flower-buds,
the larva conceals itself by drawing down, and securing, a leaf to the
bud. Chapman observes that the larve bore through the calyx into
the petals and stamens, burying themselves to various degrees; a larva
does not disdain to attack petals direct, when exposed, and goes through
these to stamens, which are, no doubt, its favourite food. South observes
that the larve feed in flowers of dog-rose in hedges, and also in gardens
on those of moss-rose, in the neighbourhood of Mill Hill. Hofmann
states that, in Germany and Austria, the larva lives, in May and June,
on garden- and wild-roses, boring into the flower-buds under the
shelter of a slight web, and being often destructive in gardens, e.g.,
in Dessau, in 1849 (see Stett. H'nt. Zeity., 1850, p. 25), The larve
have recently been recorded as attacking the rose-trees in gardens about
St. Louis, U.S.A., it being supposed that they have been imported
at some recent date with the rose-trees. The only actual dates
recorded for the larve of this species appear to be: June 4th, 1858,
at Magnusholm (Nolcken); May 26th, 1875, larve common at Chatten-
den ; very small larve, May 16th-18th, 1880, at Chattenden (Porritt) ;
fullfed larve, May 26th-June 16th, 1899, June 1st-8th, 1903, in
Middlesex (Rothschild); June 16th-21st, 1908, several larve on
dog-rose on the Kast Horndon side of Thorndon Park (Whittle) ; two
larve taken May 29th, 1901, in loosely spun leaf-buds of wild-rose ;
exceedingly common, and widely distributed, on June 24th, 1902,
feeding in a loose web both in leaf-buds and flower-buds; also
abundant in 1903, some being almost fullfed by June 4th; halfgrown
larve, May 28rd-27th, 1904, in the Bexley district, exceedingly

EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA. 259

rare, units this year, where dozens could have been taken in 1903
(Butterfield).

Larva.— Penultimate instar: The head green, marbled with olive-
green to brown, looking dark, or reddish, from the presence of the
following dark markings—a large brown-black patch at hind margin,
just above lateral line; another below, and behind, the ocelli, which are
very black; pale brownish, or reddish, markings proceed from the
first of these, at its inner extremity, down centre of head towards
clypeus, and from its lower margin towards the centre of the cheek, 7.e.,
the marblings are in two irrecular longitudinal streaks on either side,
wide in front, and soon fading out. In form, the larva is fairly
cylindrical (not flattened as is that of Aciptilia galactodactyla, nor,
perhaps, hardly so round as is that of Marasmarcha lunaedactyla),
tapering regularly to either end (the longitudinal section being
spindle-shaped, the transverse nearly circular). The colour is
yellowish rather than green, with a broad, reddish, dorsal band,
which is narrowest at the 8rd abdominal, and confined to the dorsal line
from the 3rd abdominal segment backwards, but widening in front, so
that, on the thorax, it reaches tubercle iv, and is quite lateral as well
as dorsal. Above, and behind, the spiracle, there is distinct sub-
seomentation, so that each segment is formed of two subsegments,
the anterior subsegment being about twice the width of the posterior.
A lateral flange is made up of two elements, one below the spiracle,
rather rounded and prominent, the other, below this, is a little
narrower, and slopes posteriorly towards the venter. Of the spiracles,
the first and last are larger than the others, although all are fairly
obvious, raised, and with the actual chitinous margin rather golden
above. The anal plate is not obviously a plate, being coloured
precisely as the rest of the larva, and of the same dull surface ; it has
three hairs along the hind margin, and two at front margin on either
side. The tubercles on the abdominal segments are—i (on Ist sub-
segment) with 1 long hair; 11 (on 2nd subsegment) with 1 long hair,
these two tubercles are widely separate and trapezoidally placed ; iii
immediately above spiracle (on 1st subsegment), with 1 long hair ;
below the spiracle, iv and v are on the upper element of the flange, 1
hair arising from each, that on iv pointing backward, that on v forward,
the two hairs arising from a plate, the posterior at a little lower level
than the anterior; vi on lower segment of flange, with 1 backward-
directed hair; vii carries 2 hairs at the base of the proleg. Behind the
spiracle is a rather large, secondary, accessory, subspiracular tubercle,
carrying a long hair (in same position of that in Capperta heterodactyla)
that seems to be more than an ordinary secondary hair, and there is a
corneous point above this. Short secondary hairs are very numerous,
especially dorsally (25 to 30 in the trapezoidal area), placed irregularly
and, usually, asymmetrically, and are whitish, rather clubbed at the
extremity, with serrated ends; they are about ;,th the length of the
primary sete on the anterior trapezoidals (i). The irregular placing
of some of these secondary hairs is notable, but the 8rd abdominal
segment has three placed dorsally and quite symmetrically, and
there is usually one also on the outside of 1, and two on the posterior
subseement, opposite and below the spiracle. The primary setw have
spindle-shaped swellings irregularly placed, that appear to be fluid,
but whether this fluid is their own secretion, or that of the glands of

260 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

the rose, is not determinable. On the prothorax, the posterior sub-
segment (behind the plate) has tubercles placed as 1, ii and ill; on
the mesothorax and metathorax the three upper tubercles have each
two hairs, placed—on the upper transversely, on the next nearly
level, the front one rather higher; the third also has them one in
front of the other. The abdominal prolegs are on slender props, and
have 8 well-curved brown hooks, the anal prolegs have 9. The
true legs are faintly tinged with brownish, although substantially
of the same colour as larva. The general surface has very fine raised
colourless points (Chapman, June 14th, 1899). nal instar: Of a
dark sickly green tint, becoming yellower posteriorly, and with a
marked yellow patch (ovaries, etc.) on the 4th and 5th abdominal
segments, and a purple-red, or rich brown, dorsal band, edged with a
yellow line, broadest in front, narrowing over the 4th and 5th abdo-
minal segments, and but little broader posteriorly to this. Head
yellow, or yellow with black patches dorsally and near mouth, with
other similar variation. The whole combination gives an impression
of debility and decomposition, perhaps corresponding closely with a
bud of foodplant dying off, as secondary ones often do, giving reddish
and sickly yellow tints combined with green. The whole larva is
covered with secondary hairs; these are very short and yellow, the
primary hairs are long, single (one to each tubercle), whitish, or tinted
darker apically. Tubercles i and ii are wide apart; the sete on i and
ili porrect; on ii, slightly backwards; iv and von flange, the sete
well separate, one directly below spiracle, the other a little higher, and
in front of it. The seta on tubercle vi, at back of segment, directed
backwards; three hairs at base of prolegs. A secondary hair behind
iii at back of segment is very large and strong, as is another between
itand i. The following details of the tubercles and hairs of fullgrown
larva are to be noted—on the prothorax, the usual six on each side of
plate; the three front about equal, 0‘6mm. long, the central, posterior,
about O'7mm., and the two others about 0-4mm.; apparently three
hairs in prespiracular group, 0°2mm.-0-4mm. long, not on one plate,
but without skin-points between them; two hairs at base of legs. On
the meso- and metathorax are the usual four pairs of hairs; the dorsal
pair trapezoidal, on separate plates, nearly joined on mesothorax, with
skin-points between on metathorax; the second pair on the same plate
(reversed trapezoidals) ; third pair with the addition of a third above
and behind, making an oblique row of three, all on separate bases; the
4th pair at base of legs on same plate and at the same level; the hairs
rather larger on mesothorax, the 1st, 0-4mm., the 2nd, 1:2mm., the
3rd, 0-4mm., the 4th, 1:‘0mm., the 5th and 6th, about 0:6mm., an
extra hair about 0-4mm., the 7th and 8th about O-3mm. and 0:2mm.
long. The true legs have the first two joints darkest, and the 1st joint
has a margin of very minute spicules; the 2nd joint has four or five
long bristles (half as long again as joint); the last joint is paler, half as
long again as either of others (total length of these joints about
0:-45mm.), claw, fine, straight, accompanied by a hair of about equal
length. On the Ist abdominal, the hair representing tubercle i is
about O-8mm. long, 1 about 1-‘Omm.; they are widely apart, but
placed in ordinary trapezoidal position ; that on iii is about 1:Omm.;
iv and v rather apart, but apparently with a plate in common, iv lower
and behind, about 1-Omm.,and v about 0‘6mm. in length; viis at back of

EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA. 261

segment, about 0-6mm. long; vii carries a posterior hair about 0°3mm.
and two in front about 0-2mm. long; these appear to have skin-points
between their bases; on the 8th abdominal, vii has only two hairs,
with a ventral hair below, which also occurs on all the other abdominal
seoments in front; the 9th abdominal has three pairs of hairs, each
pair on a common base, and trapezoidally arranged; below them a
single strong hair, and the usual weak ventral one. It is not easy to
homologise these hairs on the 9th abdominal; the first pair are like i
and ii; the second is iii (the second hair of this pair may be the
minute accessory spiracular); the third is in line with iv and v; if
the solitary hair is vi, then vil is absent. The anal plate carries seven
hairs on either side. All these hairs are quite smooth and unspiculated,
but most of them are slightly swollen at the tips. The secondary hairs
are very numerous, about 40 on an abdominal segment from dorsum to
spiracle. They vary much in size, the mass are, perhaps, about 0:-lmm.
long, but some are not much over 0:05mm., and a few reach to nearly
0:25mm.; all are of similar structure, nearly as thick as the primary
hairs are, t.e., proportionally very thick, tapering a little, and then
swelling out again apically, with a truncate, sometimes slightly notched,
end, sharply demarcated from the skin at their bases, but without any
separate chitinous plate; the larger examples are rather solitary,
behind the spiracle, in attendance on tubercles 1, 11, 111, etc., but equally
missing from these positions, so that no definite and constant positions
can be assigned them. The skin-points are small, sharp, with their
longest diameter usually longitudinally placed. This implies, as is the
fact, that they are really two-and-a-half times as long as broad. The true
legs are black in one specimen, yellow in another. The prolegs on long
props, hooks of prolegs about 16, of anal claspers, 20 (Chapman, June 5th,
1905). Length about :5in., and of tolerable bulk in proportion ; the body
cylindrical, and strongly attenuated towards the extremities, is consider-
ably retractile, and, when at rest, has a dumpy appearance; the head is
small, globular, smooth and shining, about the same width as, or perhaps
very slightly narrower than, the 2nd segment; the segmental divisions
distinctly marked; the skin soft, but with a slightly rough appearance,
and is sparingly, though conspicuously, clothed with short hairs. The
eround colour is a rather bright greenish-yellow, in some specimens
yellowish-green; the head is greyish, with the cheeks and mandibles
shining black. A very conspicuous purple stripe forms the mediodorsal
line; from the 2nd to the 6th segment, this stripe appears as if
composed of round purplish marks joined at the segmental divisions,
consequently, the stripe is rather broad ; on the remaining segments,
it is much narrower and more uniform, but equally distinct; the
subdorsal and spiracular lines are yellow, but only faintly indicated,
the segmental divisions are also yellow. The ventral surface and prolegs
are uniformly dingy-green or yellowish, according to the ground of the
dorsal surface; legs black and shining (Porritt). The larva is also
described by South (Hntom., xviil., p. 276), by Barrett (Lep. Brit. Isles,
ix., p. 845), and by Dyar (Jowr. New Y. Ent. Soc., ii., p. 21). Buckler
figured larve in three different stages of growth, June 22nd, 1877
(Larvae, etc., 1x., pl. clxiii., figs. 2, 2a, 2b).

VARIATION OF LARVA.—In the last instar, the larve vary in colour,
from almost pure yellow to pure green (of a dingy shade, however),
with a purplish dorsal stripe, which varies somewhat in width; the

962 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

subdorsal and spiracular lines vary in distinctness, pale yellowish in
colour.

Foopriants.— Rosa canina (Schiffermiiller), R. centifolia (Treitschke).

Puration.—The larva makes some pretension to spinning a cocoon,
although it is a very slight one; it hardly amounts to a hammock,
there being simply a few silken threads used to draw a leaf or two
together at the junction of the leaflets with the leaf-stalk, or the sepals
together over the centre of the flower after the petals have fallen, and
some silk over the leaf surface. The hooks of the 8th abdominal
segment, as well as those of the anal armature, are involved in the
support of the pupa, although the pupal position appears to be rather
that of lying in a hammock than the normal attachment to a pad of
silk (Bacot). When full-grown, the larve, that have been feeding on
the buds, affix themselves to the side of the leaf close by the bud,
and draw the leaf and the bud together by means of a few silken
threads; the others draw together, in a similar way, several leaves at
the end of the young shoot (Porritt). The pupa is attached by the
anal segment to the flower-stem just below the ovary, and protected by
a sheht network of silk, which unites a leaf with a flower-bud. The
pupa stands erect, and, in this position, bears a superficial resemblance
to a stunted rosebud (South). Barrett erroneously states that the pupa
“hangs loosely from a small tuft of silk.’’ On the contrary, it is
fixed firmly in true Alucitid fashion by the 8th and 10th abdominal
cremastral hooks, with its venter closely appressed to the stalk, leaf,
or bud, of which its loosely spun puparium is formed. Chapman
observes that the larva spins quite a cocoon of very sparse cables, forming
a loose open web, extending more than its own length in most .
directions, and pulling together the surrounding leaves, etc. ; the pupa
is suspended in a nearly inverted position, its actual attachment, how-
ever, being by the usual two sets of hooks, forming the anal and
ventral parts of the cremaster. Warren says that, when the species is
found in a high hedge, where the rose-bushes rise to the top and flower
there, one will always find the puparia, containing empty pupe (and
therefore unemerged ones at the right time), between the stunted bud
and a leaf growing hard by, but a favourite position in younger
bushes is beneath two or three leaves slightly fastened, but not drawn
altogether out of place; four pupe# were once found, one behind the
other, on an exposed stalk by the side of a dusty road, the whole branch
being both cobwebby and dusty. Hofmann notes that the larva pupates
within its feeding-place; Steudel, that it fixes itself for pupation in
a thin web between the rose-leaves. Butterfield also observes that the
larvee pupate in the webs in which they have fed up.

Pupa.—Length 7mm.-7'5mm.; width at widest part 19mm. The
colour has some claim to be called white* ; it is really green, but with
a whitish porcellanous tone that is very pronounced about the anterior
portion of the pupa and dominates the wings, especially after they
commence to get a little developed. In this respect, it reminds one
somewhat of the pupa of Gillmeria pallidactyla, Reverting to colouring,

* Grass-green in colour, paler, and white, on wings and anteriorly; a narrow
black margin round wings, of which, however, the antennze form one border; the
latter are black, but basally each segment has a little green colour; the face has a
black streak on each side, and the maxillz and 1st legs are also largely black. The
lateral dorsal ridge (containing trapezoidals) is faintly yellow, especially where it

EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA« 263

the antenne, and all the appendages behind the level of the eye,
are black, and a delicate black line encircles the wings, bringing
out very distinctly the waving of the dorsal and hind margins;
there is a dark dorsal line, and an interrupted dark shading
between ii and iii, a fainter one along spiracles, and another
below iv and v: this is more nearly a line than the others;
below it are more dark blotches; the venter is green. The pupa has a
more Sphingid-like outline (¢.y., pupa of Sesia stellatarum) than usual
in “plumes.” The head projects a little ventrally; the appendages are
not straight in ventral line, but arch forwards ; the greatest prominence
being opposite the 8rd abdominal; then the 5th and 6th abdominals
are more prominent dorsally, and the pen of cremaster points forward
again, so that the curvature of the Sphingid pupa is well reproduced.
The maxille disappear below, meeting the 1st legs, as usual, a little
less than half-way down appendages. The 1st leg is broad, and no
femur is shown. Theantenne stop at 4ths, the 1st legs at =%ths, of the
length, the 2nd legs and wing-tips equal; the extreme tips only of
the 3rd legs visible beyond, as the 2nd legs meet in middle hne beyond
the Ist. There appear to be no humps, tubercles, ridges, flanges or
processes, but the hairs are pronounced. Dorsally, i and ii arise close
together, 11 but little further out than 1; 1 has a strong hair sloping
forwards; i1 a longer one sloping backwards; these are at a little more
than a right angle with each other at origin, but their curvature
makes them seem much more so; 11s about 0-7mm. long, 1 about
0-9mm.; i is marked bya dark dot, ii has no coloration where it arises;
lll is about O'8mm. long, and points upwards and forwards ; iv and v
appear to be represented by a hair, about 0-4mm., immediately below
spiracle, another about 0-5mm., a little lower and a good way behind
it, both curved forwards; vi is at posterior margin of seement, about
O°6mm., first exposed on the 4th abdominal, where another lower
one also appears, one of a pair seen in following segments (0:'2mm.),
and representing those at base of proleg; all these are directed back-
wards. [The measurements given are the longest of each series,
others are shorter.] The spiracles are faintly brown-tinted, slightly
projecting, circles. The legs both reach up at top to eye level, the antenna
passing transversely across the top of both before turning down. The
statement as to no ridges, etc., must be modified to the extent of noticing
that the first tibia carries a rather sharp ridge. The labrum (or lower
part of clypeus) carries two hairs on either side, and there is another one
well up in front, with another on cheek below eye. There are also
two in centre of eye, 7.e., against 1st leg, on the ordinary surface, round
which the glazed (and other) eye curves, and two at base of antenna on
either side (about 0-4mm. long); hairs of i, 11 and 111 (or similarly placed
ones) on prothorax; 1 and 11 on mesothorax, two further out in front, and
one further back ; on meso- and metathorax there is just an indication
of the dorsal ridges (Platyptilia, ete.). There is no trace of hair on any
of the appendages. The anal cremaster consists of about 40 hooks or

is most distinct in front and at the tubercles ; these latter are combined (i+ii), and
carry each two hairs, one directed forwards, and one backwards ; the subspiracular
is a double tubercle on a yellowish lateral flange; there are various hairs on the
thoracic segments, the hair of supraspiracular directed forwards ; none on wings or
appendages ; each tubercle has only one hair; there is a dark dorsal shading on
the meso- and metathorax (Chapman. Another description).

264 3 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

hairs, about O-lmm. long, faintly reddish-brown, darker at the tips,
which are swollen as if recurved, and a sharp point directed basally.
The ventral cremaster has exactly similar hooks, but comparatively few
in number (Chapman, June 27th, 1905). Length of pupa measures
between 8mm.and 9mm.; width at mesothorax and 5th abdominal about
1:75mm., and thickness rather less; the pupa below the wingcases
is nearly cylindrical. It is very distinctively coloured—pale whitish-
green, with a dark green dorsal band, which is interrupted and broken
towards the anus. The wings are outlined by a narrow streak of dark
ereen, and delicately shaded towards their extremities with soft green,
not so dark as the surrounding line. The whole of the head-pieces,
eye-cases, leg- and antenna-cases, are dark green, and show up as a
most conspicuous shield. Some fainter green shading is also present
at base of wings, and on the thoracic segments dorsally, as well as a
much broken and interrupted faint subdorsal line of delicate green,
which shows towards anal end of abdominal segments. There is a
stronger, but still broken, lateral band, and also a subventral one, and
the area immediately surrounding the spiracles is faintly tinged with
darker green. The spiracles are large, and rather prominent, but are
not raised to anything like the extent that they are in Ovendenia
septodactyla (lienigianus), or even Oidaematophorus lithodactyla. The
hairs are long and tapering, either quite simple, or very finely serrated,
probably the latter, as they seem to pick up dust very readily. No
secondaries are present on abdominal segments; nor are there the
fringes of fine hairs on the wing-, leg-, or antenna-cases, like those found
in the pupe of Porrittia galactodactyla, Oidaematophorus lithodactyla,
and Ovendenia septodactyla. All tubercles are single-haired, as in the
larva, the tubercles at base being primitive and cone-shaped; i and li
are a short distance apart on a single longitudinal mound; they are
much farther apart on the 1st and 2nd abdominal segments than on
the following one, and the ridge becomes more definite, and continues
nearly the whole length of the segment, becoming higher and converging
towards the mediodorsal line, culminating in a twin ridge or process on
the mesothorax; i bears a long hair lying forwards; ii a very much longer
hair, pointing backwards ; ili is a short distance above, and slightly
posterior to spiracle, bearing a hair of about equal length toi, bending
forwards ; iv and v are well separated; v, exactly subspiracular, bears
the smaller hair; iv, posterior to spiracle, but nearly in same horizontal
plane, bears a longer hair; iv slopes ventrally; v slopes forwards; vi
carries a single hair, beneath iv; and vii, marginal, consists of 3 hairs in
line*. The pupa-case is very thin and semitransparent in parts, ex-
ceedingly finely striated or wrinkled transversely. This is also a
feature of the other species, and is well-marked in the pupe of
Ovendenia septodactyla (lienigianus) and Porrittia galactodactyla, but the
wrinkles are large and coarse in Otidaematophorus lithodactyla. They
are also present in the pupa of Adactylus bennetii, and are very
fine in this species and more regular than in others [Described
‘June 26th, 1899; additional notes made from empty pupa-cases,
December, 1903] (Bacot). Porritt says: “The pupa is about 2in. to

* Barrett says (Lep. Brit. Isles, ix., p. 345) that “the pupa is curiously
sprinkled with fine hairs or long bristles, especially on the dorsal surface.’ The
“curiously sprinkled hairs” appear to be the ordinary pupal sete, in normal
position.

EUCNEMIDOPHORUS RHODODACTYLA. 265

Zin. in length; pale green, the wing-cases whitish, the eye-,
antenna-, and leg-cases, also the edging of the wing-cases, smoky-
black.”” South writes: ‘‘ Dingy-green, with a dorsal line, strongly
suffused with rose-colour or violet; hairs as in the larva; the paler
wing-cases stand out prominently from the thorax, thus giving the
pupa a swollen appearance at this point.” Buckler figured (Larvae,
ete., pl. clxiil., fig. 2c), the pupa of this species on June 22nd,
1877. Hofmann notes (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 35-36) that the
pupal colour changes greatly as development proceeds. It is greenish
at first, then it becomes more and more violet, until at last it is of a
very dark violet hue, the markings all the time becoming less and less
distinct.

VARIATION oF puPa.—The colour of the pupa is very definite,
greenish in hue, the wings green, edged with black, often with whitish
nervures, whilst the forks between are filled up with blackish; between
the antennal sheaths the space is filled up with blackish-green; the
warts are whitish or whitish-green, as also are the hind margins of
the abdominal segments, and the upper edges of the cremaster. In
the most strongly marked pupe there is a black, longitudinal, mediodorsal
stripe, with two very similar, but less distinct, lateral stripes at the
height of the upper row of tubercles and above the spiracles; there
are also two blackish longitudinal stripes lower down the sides
(Hofmann). Butterfield says that the pupe vary in colour, from
uniform pale green, and green blotched with umber, to dark umber,
almost black.

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—In Britain, the species first appears at the
beginning of July, and continues to emerge throughout the month;
in the middle of July, 1874, imagines were reared from pupe and
larve found at Chattenden a little earlier (Porritt) ; in the next year
the imagines were on the wing for some two or three weeks, in the
same locality, from about July 5th (Tutt). On the continent, the time
of appearance varies a little according to elevation, from June to
mid-August, e.g., June at Autun (Constant); August 5th-12th, at
La Grave, in the Dauphiny Alps (Tutt) ; July and August, in Switzer-
land (Frey); June to the beginning of August, at Frankfort-on-Oder
(Metzner), also in Upper Lusatia (Méschler), Saxon Upper Lusatia
(Schtitze), and Crefeld, near Uerdingen (Stollwerck); although July
alone is given for most German localities—Baden, etc.; and Hofmann
says end of June, and July, throughout Austria and Germany. Actual
dates noted are: August 2nd, 1855,in the Waldrande, near Ziirich (Frey);
bred June 17th, 1858, and following days, from larve and pup found
June 4th, at Magnusholm ; also from July 1st-27th, from Arensburg,
Pichtendahl and Ilpel (Nolcken) ; several from July 80th, 1877, in a
garden at Schéneberg, near Berlin (Sorhagen) ; July 1st, 1903, at Duzi,
in Bosnia (Hilf-Leonhardt); May 27th, 1904, a very early season,
abundant at Zwétzen-on-the-Elster (Dieroft). | BrivisH ReEcorps ;
July 13th-18th, 1874, at Chattenden (Porritt); between July 6th and
31st, 1875, at Chattenden (Tugwell) ; bred July 7th-16th, 1877, from
larve, obtained at Chattenden, that pupated June 22nd, 1877, and
following days (Buckler) ; bred June 22nd, 1898, others bred July 16th,
1899, and following days, from larve obtained in Middlesex (Tutt) ;
bred July 4th-20th, 1899; July 7th-11th, 1900, from larve found in
Middlesex (Rothschild) ; July 22nd, 1900, at Worcester Park (Kaye) ;

266 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

bred July 4th, 1901, from larve found in Middlesex (Rothschild) ;
bred July 12th-16th, 1908, from larve found in Middlesex (Tutt) ;
bred July 12th, 1908, from larva found at Thorndon Park
(Whittle) ; imagines emerged July 5th-12th, 1902, from larve collected
June 24th, that pupated between June 25th-30th; others emerged
June 29th-July 10th, 1908, from larve collected June 4th, in the
Bexley district (Butterfield); bred July 11th-17th, 1903, from
larve obtained in the Bexley district, on June 10th (Bankes) ;
imagines also observed wild, July 4th, 1904, in the same district
(Butterfield).

Hasits.—The species is essentially a dusk and late evening flier,
yet Butterfield, who has bred large numbers, says that the imagines
almost always emerge in the early morning. In July, 1874, and 1875,
specimens were frequently observed by Mr. Ovenden and myself, flying,
after dark, around the rose-bushes in Chattenden woods, the females
apparently busily laying their eggs, and, on at least one or two occasions,
if memory serves, they appeared to be busy at the sweets. Porritt also
has recorded it as flying about the rose-bushes at Chattenden, whilst
Sorhagen says that, in Brandenburg, it sometimes swarms around
rose-bushes. Claxton has taken the species at light at Navestock,
near Romford, and Kaye, also at light, at Worcester Park ; it is further
recorded as abundant at light at Zw6tzen-on-the-Hlster (Dieroff). We
were much surprised, at the end of one or two afternoons in early
August, 1896, at finding three or four specimens on yarrow-fiowers,
under some rose-bushes, on a hedgebank at La Grave, in Dauphiny,
whence we must have dislodged them, as we were working the bank pretty
closely for micro-lepidoptera. As a rule, however, the species, even in
confinement, appears to be chary of moving in the daytime. Warren
says that he has only seen one wild imago in Middlesex; on this
occasion he beat about six yards of the undergrowth cf a hedge before
dislodging this specimen, a female, which flew about a yard, and then
settled on a grass-culm, and, being again disturbed, would only flit a
foot or so; the insect also seems strangely lazy in confinement.
-Wocke observes that, when at rest, the forewings of the insect are
spread out flat, standing at right angles to the body, and the hindwings
are hidden beneath them. Dieroff observes that, on the evening of
May 27th, the weather being sultry, and a thunderstorm threatening, he
saw, at Zwotzen-on-the-Hlster, no fewer than five pairs in copula; at
this time the @ clings with the two front legs to a grass-culm, ete.,
the g§ hanging free, and suspended only by its attachment to the ?.

Hasitat.—In Britain, the species appears to frequent the rose-
bushes on the outskirts of woods, or in the ridings and more open
parts of the woods in north Kent (Tutt); at Lewisham, it was taken in
a garden (Stainton); in Middlesex, it is reported from hedgerows and
gardens (South). Warren says that, in Middlesex, the species is
spread, to his certain knowledge, over an area of four or five miles,
and he has no doubt it extends further; it occurs round, and in, two
villages, and close to the outskirts of one fairly large town ; moreover,
it seems to prefer rose-bushes growing by the sides of roads, and is
frequently common there; it certainly does not avoid such. On the
continent, it occurs throughout the greater part of the lowlands of Central
Europe, and often does considerable damage to the cultivated roses in
gardens. Hofmann says it occurseverywhere in Germany, from the sea-

AMBLYPTILIDI. 267

level to well up the mountain valleys, and, in Austria, from the low
levels also well up the alpine valleys. It occurs freely in Heligoland.
At Zwotzen-on-the-Elster, it abounds, in some years, on the so-called
Lasur, a small chalk-range, ¢.g., in May, 1904, which was a very dry
month, and the grass burnt up, thus early, and in what is usually the
rainy-season ; later in tbe year, it was found along the margins of fields
and roads by Hecta (Dieroff). It often occurs also at a considerable
elevation, ¢e.g., Bruand notes it as occurring in the high mountains of
the Doubs dept. In Dauphiny, at La Grave, the imagines were
apparently disturbed from wild rose-bushes growing on a bank beside
the road just below the inn, in a most exposed situation, and at an
elevation of at least 5000 feet; the specimens being found below the
bushes on the herbage, or feeding at yarrow flowers. In Spain,
Chapman found it at Tragacete, on the Albarracin Sierra, and at Soria
on the Sierra de la Demanda.

Locauitres.—Very local in the British Isles, and only recorded

from the southeast counties of England. Essex: Navestock, rear Romford
(Claxton), Thorndon Park (Whittle), Loughton (Machin). Krnr: Chattenden
(Porritt), Lewisham (Stainton), Bexley district (Butterfield). MippLEseEx :
near Mill Hill Station (South), Finchley Station (Meek teste South), Kingsbury
(Bond), Hackney (Stephens). Surrey: Worcester Park (Kaye), near Coombe
Wood (Stephens). ?
Disrrisution.—Kurope, central and southern (except Batavia), Fin-

land, Livonia, Bithynia, Armenia (Rebel). Amznrca: St. Louis (Murtfeldt).
Asta: Asia Minor—near Brussa, not rare (Mann), Amasia— South Caucasus
(Staudinger). Ausrro-Huneary: everywhere from the low levels up into the
alpine valleys (Hofmann), Bohemia (Fischer v. R.), Budapest, Sopron, Nagyag
(Aigner), Briinn, not common (Gartner), Taufers valley (Weiler), Slavonia (Koca),
Fiume, Dalmatia (teste Rebel), Vienna district (Kollar). Brnte1um: Liege (Deltour).
Bosnia and Hercegovina: Dervent (Hilf), Kalinovik (Schreitter), Duzi (Hilf).
Buuearta: Varna (Lederer), near Sophia (Bachmetjew). France: widely distributed,
Paris district (Latreille), Montmorency(Bégrand), Sadne-et-Loire—Autun (Constant),
the high mountains of the Doubs (Bruand), Dauphiny Alps—La Grave (Tutt),
Aube (Jourdheuille), Cher—St. Florent, Indre—Nohant (Sand). Germany:
everywhere from the sea-level to the alpine valleys (Hofmann), West Prussia, rare,
(v. Siebold), Pomerania—Grabow, near Stettin (Biittner), Heligoland (Dalla Torre),
Stettin (Biittner), near Dessau (Richter), near Géttingen, Quedlinburg, Miihlhausen
(teste Jordan), near Berlin (Kliewer), Potsdam (Hinneberg), Havelland, not rare
(Moritz), near Schéneberg (Sorhagen), Frankfort-on-Oder (Metzner), the Schwetiger
Forest (Kretschmer), Silesia, rare—Breslau (Wocke), Upper Lusatia (Méschler),
Saxony —near Freiberg (Fritzsche), Saxon Upper Lusatia—on the Proitschen-
berg, Klix (Schiitze), near Strehla (Kohler). Thuringia, general (Knapp),
Hesse (Glaser), Frankfort-on-Main, Wiesbaden (Koch), Nassau (Réssler), near
Uerdingen, very rare (Stollwerck), near Trier, common, Crefeld (_v. Hymmen),
Aix, rare (Férster), the Pfalz (Bertram), Spires (Linz), Baden—Gailingen,
Waldshut, Freiburg, Kaiserstuhl, Lahr, Carlsruhe, Bruchsal, Wertheim (Meess
and Spuler), Saxony—Dresden (Fischer), Wiirttemberg (Steudel and Hofmann),
Regensburg district — Keilstein, Winzerberge, Worth (Hoffmann and Herrich-
Schiffer), Alsace—on the Bastberg, near Bouswillien, St. Pierre Bois, common,
La Chapelle (Peyerimhoff). Irany: Sicily (Mina-Palumbo). Roumanra: the
Dobrudscha (Caradja). Russta: Baltic provinces—Magnusholm, Arensburg,
Pichtendahl, Ilpel (Nolecken). Scanprnavia: Sweden —Schonen (Zetterstedt),
Scania, Norway (Wallengren), Akershus (Schéyen). Spain: Tragacete, Soria
(Chapman). Swrrzeruanp: Ziirich (Frey), Chur (Caflisch). Turkey: Roumelia—
Batmisch, near Slivno (Rebel).

Subfamily ; AmBLypriun2.
Tribe ; AMBLYPTILIDI.

This subfamily is much more distinctly developed in the Stenoptiliine
direction, than is the last (Hwenemidophorinae), particularly in its larval

268 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

characters. The Amblyptiliid larva has the depression of the prothoracic
scutellum black ; the fairly abundant secondary skin-hairs, variable in
size, smooth, and swollen at the tips, are very similar to those of
Eucnemidophorus; some of these secondary hairs being very large; the
primary sete are swollen just below the pointed tip, and are not blunt, as
in the Stenoptilias proper; the tuberclesiandiion either side of the meso-
thorax and metathorax are conjoined, as also, on the abdominals, are iv
and v (which are separatein Hucnemidophorus), whilst, in the later stadia,
these tubercles, as well as vi, assume a primitive wart-like structure; both
the accessory postspiracular tubercles are also weakly developed as warts,
the lower less strong than the upper*; the spiracles, too, are well-raised
(in this particular more Stenoptiliid than Eucnemidophorid). In the
pupal characters, the tribe is very specialised; the dorsal ridge,
strongly marked in Platyptilia, and indicated in Eucnemidophorus, is,
in Amblyptilia, well-developed. The trapezoidal tubercles are carried
on halbert-shaped processes, the first, terminating the dorsal ridge
on the 8rd abdominal segment, being especially large; the absence of
the nosehorn is markedly Stenoptiliid, and the well-developed cremaster
indicates a similar relationship. The imago is, in its general facies,
entirely Platyptiliid, and not Stenoptiliid, and, in this respect, agrees
with Hucnemidophorus and not Marasmarcha.

Genus: Amptypritia (Ampiyptitia, by error), Hubner.

Synonrymy.—Genus: Amplyptilia (by error), Hub., ‘‘ Verz.,’’ p. 430 (1825).
Amblyptilia, Stphs., ‘‘Illus. Haust.,’’ iv., p. 376; app. p. 424 (1834); Zell.,
‘‘Tsis,”’? p. 770 (1841) ; Staud. and Wocke, ‘“‘ Cat.,”’ 2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Hein.
and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ iii., pt. 2, p. 787 (1877) ; Frey, ‘‘ Lep. Schweiz,”
p. 428 (1880); Barrt., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xviii., p. 177 (1882) ; Willms., ‘‘ Ent.
Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., pp. 212-213 (1882); Sorhgn., ‘‘Kleinschm. Brandbg.,’’ p. 3
(1886) ; Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 54, pl. xvi., fig. 9 (1886); South, ‘‘ Ent.,” xxii.,
p. 31 (1889) ; Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x., p. 164 (1889); ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,’’ i., p. 37
(1891); <‘ Pter. Brit.,”’ p. 51 (1895); ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,”’ xi., p. 238 (1899) ; Hofmn.,
‘‘Deutsch. Pter.,’’ p. 58 (1895). Pterophorus, Fab., ‘‘ Mant. Ins.,”’ p. 258 (1787);
‘« Hint. Syst.,’’ iii., p. 346 (1793); Sam., ‘“‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,’’ p. 409 (1819);
Curt., ‘‘ Brit, Ent.,’’ fo. 161 (1827) ; Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’’ xi., p. 650 (1838) ; Wood,
‘‘Ind. Ent.,’’ Ist ed., p. 237 (1839) ; Zell., ‘‘Isis,’? p. 784 (1841); pp. 38, 902
(1847) ; Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Meth.,” p. 383 (1845) ; Tgstrm., ‘‘ Finl. Fjar.,”’ p. 155 (1847);
Zell., ‘‘Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 326 (1852) ; Frey, ‘‘ Tin. Pter. Schweiz,” p. 405 (1856) ;
Sta., ‘‘Man.,’’ ii., p. 441 (1859); Porritt, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xxi., p. 208 (1885) ;
Xxil., p. 149 (1885); xxiil., p. 132 (1886); ‘* Buckler’s Larve,”’ ix., p. 351 (1901).
Alucita, de Vill., ‘‘Linn. Ent. Faun. Suec.,’’ iv., p. 546 (1789) ; Haw., ‘‘ Lep.
Brit.,”’ 478 (1811); Hb., ‘‘Raupen,”’ etc., ix., Aluc. i., pl. c., figs. a-d (cire. 1800);
‘‘Schmett. Eur.,’’? Aluc. v., figs. 23-24 (post 1811); pl. vii., figs. 35-36 (1823) ;
Tr., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,”’ ix., p. 232 (1833); Zett., ‘‘Ins. Lapp.,’’ p. 1012 (1840).
Platyptilia, Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,’’ p. 376; app. p. 424 (1835); Zell., ‘‘ Linn.
Ent.,’’ vi., p. 338 (1852); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 485 (1890) ;
‘* Handbook,”’ etc., p. 433 (1895); Walsm., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xxxiv., p. 192
(1898) ; Fern., ‘‘ Pter. Nth. Amer.,’’ Ist ed., p. 24; 2nd ed., p. 25 (1898); Staud.

* A secondary hair takes a fixed place behind spiracle, in the position of the upper
accessory postspiracular tubercle, and might be regarded as subprimary; a lower
accessory postspiracular is not constant, and one that often looks like it is rather
accidental. In Marasmarcha (lunaedactyla) both are present, and have much more
the character of primary sete than of secondary hairs. These sete (in these two
genera) look like secondary skin-hairs, that, instead of varying in position like the
others, were selecting positions of rest. One could, of course, frame the opposite
hypothesis, that subprimary hairs ought to be here, and were just beginning to
assert themselves, but if so, one is constrained to enquire why they begin as
ordinary seeondary skin-hairs, at first doubtful as to whether they have any special
local claims (Chapman).

aie Ms den -,

AMBLYPTILIA. 269

and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 73 (1901); Dyar, ‘‘ List Nth. Amer. Lep.,” p. 442
(1902) ; ‘‘ Proc. Un. Sta. Nat. Mus.,” xxv., p. 399 (1902); xxvii., p. 922 (1904).
Platyptilus, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,”’ p. 770 (1841); H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 369 (1855);
Frey, ‘‘ Mitt. Schw. Ent. Gesell.,” i., p. 335 (1865); iii., p. 290 (1870); Nolck.,
*‘Lep. Fn. Kstl.,’’ p. 802 (1871). Amblyptilus, Wallgrn., ‘‘ Skand. Fjad.,’”’ p. 13
(1859) ; Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 121 (1869); xviii., p. 117 (1881); Wals.,
‘‘Pter. Cal. Oreg.,” p. 23, pl. ii., figs. 2-4 (1880); Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,”’ ix., p.
338 ; pl. 414, figs. 4-5 (1904).

The genus Amblyptilia (spelt, evidently by error, Amplyptilia), as
first described by Hubner (Verzeichniss, p. 430), was exceedingly hetero-
typical, containing, besides the two species here grouped under this
generic title, species of the subfamilies Ovyptilinae and Marasmarchinae.
That this alliance was, on general grounds, well-founded, may be seen
from our own grouping. Of detailed structural differences, there are,
however, many separating them. Hubner’s original description reads
as follows :—

AMBLYPTILIZ.—Die Schwingen fast buntschekig und glanzend bezeichnet—

Amplyptilia acanthodactyla, Hiibn., Alu. 23, 24. Cosmodactyla, Hiibn., Alu. 35, 36.
Trichodactyla, Didactyla, et Chrysodactyla, Schiff., Verz., Alu. a. 3,2, 11. Hibn.,
Alu. 9, 18. Phaeodactyla, Hiibn., Alu. 14, 15.
From this time onward the genus has been called Amblyptilia, not
Amplyptilia (evidently a misprint, as the coitus is called Amblyptiliae).
Zeller first dealt with the genus by removing acanthodactyla and
cosmodactyla to Platyptilus, and founding Oxyptilus for the remainder, to
which he refers Amblyptilia, Hb., as a synonym (Isis, 1841, p. 710).
This action was so evidently ultra vires, and his entirely dropping
Amblyptilia, Hb., as a valid genus, so unaccountable, that one is aston-
ished that Herrich-Schaffer (Sys. Bearb., v., pp. 861 et seq.) should
follow him. However, in 1862, Wallengren rescued Aimblyptilia (under
the name of Amblyptilus), restricting it to acanthodactyla, Hb., whilst
Staudinger and Wocke (Cat., 2nd ed., p. 87) maintained the restriction,
and restored the earlier spelling, viz., Amblyptilia. Until 1886, the genus
was generally used for the two species, punctidactyla, Haw., and acantho-
dactyla, Tr., but, in that year, Meyrick, on general family characters con-
nected with neuration, sunk the Platyptiliinae, Hucnemidophorinae, and
Amblyptiliinae into one genus Platyptilia, and has been followed in this.
retrograde movement by Fernald and Rebel. A mere glance at the larvee
and pup, of the heterogeneric species thus lumped together, would
have sufficed to show the unsoundness of this action. There is no real
excuse for either of these latter authors, since Hofmann, in 1895, had
already shown, even on imaginal characters, the unsatisfactory con-
clusions of Meyrick, and had given sufficient facts relating to all the
stages to show that his own conclusions were as incomparably ahead of
those of his predecessors, as were the detailed facts, on which the con-
clusions were based, absolutely unknown to them.

We have already noted that Wallengren first limited the genus
Amblyptilia to its present boundaries. His diagnosis thereof (Aony.
Svensk. Vetens. Akad. Handl., 1ii., p. 18) reads as follows :-—

Antenne of both sexes with very short cilia; the forehead ornamented with a
very short pyramid of scales ; palpi longer than the head, thick, laterally compressed,
ascending, with the last joint short, slender, and pointed; legs slender, long, the
tibize only in the least degree thickened towards the apex; first pair of spines in
the posterior tibiee nearly equal; longer than the second pair; the anterior wings
furnished with a tooth of scales on their inner margin, not cleft to the third
part of their length; the segments broad, the posterior segment almost hatchet-
shaped, the posterior angle of the segments well marked ; the segments of the inferior

270 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

wings slender, the third segment with the anal angle sufficiently distinct, nearer the
-apex, furnished with a tuft of scales; the anterior wings flat, covering the posterior
-when at rest.

The genus is exceedingly restricted. There are four described
‘Palearctic species — punctidactyla, Haw., seeboldi, Hofm., moerens,
‘Snell., and cosmodactyla, Hb., of which the first and last are
British. In the Nearctic region, also, there appear, according to
Fernald and Dyar (List Nth. Amer. Lep., p. 442) to be four (or
five) species — pica, Walsm., cosmodactyla, Hb., marmarodactyla,
Dyar, punctidactyla, Haw., ? edwardsti, Fish, t.e., two species are
common to the Palearctic and Nearctic regions. The closeness of
these two insects is as great as that between Gillmeria ochrodactyla and
G. pallidactyla, and, like these, doubtful specimens can be separated
by their genitalia, although Hofmann says that he cannot find any
difference in them. Chapman, however, writes (in litt.) that, although
he approached the question with the idea that Hofmann’s state-
ment was true, on examining five preparations of the brown species
(cosmodactyla), and two of the greenish species (punctidactyla), he found a
constant difference in the clasps. He says that ‘‘in the brown form
the extreme length of the clasp is 1:00mm., in the greenish 1:08mm.,
and the bird’s-head-shaped end is rounder, and with a shorter beak, in
the brown form, flatter, and with a longer beak, in the green. The
eedceagus in these specimens is much larger in the greenish form, though
obviously variable in both; its form and structure appear to be
identical, but the extreme length, over all, varies from 0°-42mm. to
0-56mm. in the brown form, and the two of the greenish form are,
respectively, 0-62mm. and 0°71mm.* It may be observed that, in these
species, there exists, as a separate small apophysis, the extra clasp that
is so well-developed in the Oxyptilids. No trace of this has been
detected in other genera, even in Marasmarcha, which appears in some
respects nearest the Oxyptilids.”’

In their general appearance, the two British species belonging to
this genus, are similar to each other, but, even on superficial
characters, are readily distinguishable, e.g., 4. punctidactyla 1s greenish
in tint; A. cosmodactyla is red-brown. In their larval characters,
they are very close, and apparently occur together on the same food-
plants, yet there is (teste Hofmann) a distinct difference in the structure of
the larval warts, and Porritt connects (Hint. Mo. Mag., xxiii., p. 188) certain

* Tt may appear desirable that I should express my opinion as to the value of
this difference in the appendages of the twoforms. I do not think it is in any way con-
clusive. Were the two forms only found at widely distant localities, I should have no
hesitation in saying the differences were merely expressions of varietal divergence,
a long way from necessarily implying specific distinction; but, as the forms occur
together in the same localities, the value of these differences is considerably greater,
and adds an additional weight to the considerations, whatever value they may
possess, that already are accepted as proof of true separation. I would, however,
say that my number of preparations is by no means sufficiently great to deserve
absolute dependence on their indications, clear as they may be, especially in view of
the considerable variation they show to exist in each form, in the dimensions of the
edceagus. A much greater difference in size in the appendages exists between
those of Erebia aethiops from Scotland, and from the Engadine, but one does not
dream (perhaps, however, wrongly) of suggesting more than geographical variety,

abundantly within the limits of specific identity in that species. Did these two
forms occur on the same ground, without intermediates, one would attach great
importance to them. A deeper research may show that there are intermediates in
the case of Amblyptilia; so far, I have not found them (Chapman).

PLATE I.

[To be bound facing p. 270.]

PuPAL ARMATURE AND ANCILLARY APPENDAGES OF AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA AND
A. PUNCTIDACTYLA X 24.

A. Figs. 1-4.—-Pupal armature of Amblyptilia cosmodactyla.
Fig. 1—Halbert-shaped process of 3rd abdominal segment.
Fig. 2.—Dorsal process of 5th abdominal segment.
Fig. 3.—Dorsal process of 6th abdominal segment.
Fig. 4.—Tubercles 11, iv, v, vi and vii of 4th abdominal segment.
Figs. 5-6.—Ancillary appendages of Amblyptilia cosmodactyla.
Fig. 5.—-Clasp.
Fig. 6.— Aideagus.

B. Figs. 1-4.—Pupal armature of Amblyptilia punctidactyla.
Fig. 1.—Halbert-shaped process of 3rd abdominal segment.
Tig. 2.—Dorsal process of 5th abdominal segment.
Fig. 3.—Dorsal process of 6th abdominal segment.
Fig. 4.—Tubercles 111, iv, v, vi and vii of Amblyptilia punctidactyla.
Figs. 5-6.—Ancillary appendages of Amblyptilia punctidactyla.
Fig. 5.—Clasp.
Fig. 6.— Aideagus.

Prarie

PUPAL ARMATURE AND ANCILLARY APPENDAGES OF (A) AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA
and (B) A. PUNCTIDACTYLA x 24.
(From camera sketches by T. A. CuapMay.)

Natural History of Pritish Lepidoptera, 1906.
[For explanation see back. ]

AMBLYPTILIA. ALE pS |

larval differences with the two species, and concludes that the larval
characters are sufficiently distinctive; Chapman also finds certain
- distinctive pupal characters (see posted).

As to the names to be applied to the two British species, there
appears to be considerable doubt. The oldest name for the red-brown
species is, no doubt, calodactylus, Fab. (Mant. Ins., 11., p. 258), a title,
however, that belongs by right to zetterstedtii, Gell. (see antea, p. 162).
In 1811, Haworth gave the name punctidactyla (Lep. Brit., pt. 3, p. 479)
to the greenish species. Between 1811 and 1817, Hubner figured (Schmett.
Eur., Alu. v., figs. 23-24) a deep dull-brown insect marked with tawny,
as acanthadactyla, having already, about 1800, figured in his Raupen,

-ete., ix., Aluce. i., pl. c, figs. a-d, the larva and pupa of the red-brown
form on Ononis spinosa as calodactyla. In 1823, he figured (Schmett.
Eur., Alu. vii., figs. 85-86), under the name of cosmodactyla, a reddish-
brown insect, marked with yellow. In other words, both acanthadactyla,
Hb., figs. 28-24, and cosmodactyla, Hb., figs. 35 36, are wanting in the
characteristic greenish colour of punctidactyla, Haw. In 1833, Treitschke
(Die Schmett., 1x., pt. 2, p. 234) described the red-brown species as
acanthodactyla, Hb., and the greenish species as cosmodactyla, Ub., giving
his own colour diagnosesas ‘‘ obscure-fuscous,” and “ olivaceous-fuscous,”’
respectively, and hence came into our lists the general use of these
names for the two species. Strangely enough, after describing the
insects in the terms just noted, Treitschke adds that his cosmodactyla
accords exactly with the Hubnerian figure, in which, however, we
detect no trace of ‘‘olive”’ or “greenish.”’ In 1890, we girded at the
application of the name cosmodactyla, Hb., to the greenish species, pointing
out that Hubner’s figures 35 and 36 of cosmodactyla were not greenish,
and, in 1891 (British Nat., 1., p. 88), we also offered some remarks on
the subject. Later, in 1899 (Hnt. Rec., xi., p. 288), we suggested that
Hiibner’s figs. 23-24, acanthadactyla, were referable to the ‘ olive-
grey’ or ‘ olive-fuscous ”’ species, punctidactyla (although the figures
were in no wise characteristic), and also that his figs. 85 and 36,
cosmodactyla, were referable to the red-brown species, 7.e., exactly the
opposite conclusion to that at which Treitschke had arrived. There
appears to besome little difference in the tinting of the figures in different
copies of Hubner’s plates, and, after much reconsideration and study,
we came to the conclusion that Hubner’s acanthadactyla, with deep
dull-brown wings, and the reddish-brown cosmodactyla, might possibly
have to be referred to the same species, @.e., that neither is sufficiently
characteristic to be placed with certainty with the greenish species,
punctidactyla, Haw. One thing is, however, abundantly certain, as we
have before said (Pter. Brit., p. 57), viz., that Hiibner’s cosmodactyla,
fies. 35 and 86, cannot possibly be punctidactyla, Haw., nor would we
assert too positively that Hiibner’s acanthadactyla, figs. 23-24,
can. In this dilemma we appealed to Bankes, and he writes
(in litt., 3, iv. 1906): ‘I have no hesitation whatever, after carefully
examining Hibner’s figures (as represented in ‘ Fletcher’s’ copy), and
then comparing them with my long bred series of both species, in
saying that figs. 28-24, which Hiibner calls ‘ acanthadactyla,’ most
certainly are intended to represent the olivaceous insect known in
Britain as ‘punctidactyla,’ Haw., and that figs. 85-86, called by
Hiibner ‘cosmodactyla,’ equally certainly represent the common reddish-
brown species to which British authors have almost invariably applied

272 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

the name ‘ acanthodactyla,’ though these latter figures do not show the
shape of the wings at all accurately, making the costa decidedly too
much arched, and the wings too short in proportion to their breadth.
In Fletcher’s copy of ‘ Hiibner’ (which formerly belonged to Zeller, and
bears his identifications written below some of the names on the plates,
though not below the names in question), the colours alone, poor as
they are, would suggest the above determinations, for figs. 23-24
recall the unmistakable olive-brown livery, characteristic of puneti-
dactyla, Haw., more uniform than that of acanthodactyla, Tr., while
fig. 85 (fig. 36 only shows the underside) exhibits, in places, and
especially on the basal two-thirds of the forewings, the equally
unmistakable ruddy hue of acanthodactyla, Tr., which is never found
in punctidactyla. But, ignoring colour altogether, the markedly pro-
duced apex, the produced tornus, and the shape and prominence of the
large dorsal scale-tooth of the forewing, together with the shape and
prominence of the dorsal scale-tooth of the hindwing, prove conclusively,
in my opinion, that figs. 23-24 can only be meant for punctidactyla, Haw.,
whereas the less produced apex and tornus and the less conspicuous
dorsal scale-tooth of the forewing, with the broader and shorter dorsal
scale-tooth of the hindwing, prove, with equal certainty, that figs.
35-36 cannot be intended to represent punctidactyla, Haw., and remind
one so strongly of acanthodactyla, Tr., that, in spite of the incorrect
shape of the wing, one feels justified in accepting these figures as
meant for this species. You will note that my conclusions are
identical with your own, as set forth in Ent. Rec., xi., pp. 288-9,
and Fletcher (in itt.) has come to the same conclusion.” Fletcher
writes (April 2nd, 1906): “ Hiibner’s figs. 35-36 are most clumsily
drawn, but show some tufts on the inner margins of the wings. If we
are to divide figs. 23-24, and figs. 35-36, between the two species, I think
the one we have known as punctidactyla must take figs. 28-24, on the
ground that the apices and anal angles of the wings are most sharply
produced in these figures, and that the general colouring of the fore-
wings and that of the blotchings do not differ much in intensity,
whilst that which we have known as acanthodactyla will have to go
with the ill-drawn figs. 35-36, so that Tutt’s verdict (Ent. Ree., xi.,
p. 238) stands. The colour of figs. 23-24 is bad; still there is the
uniformity in intensity shown.’’ One doubts very much whether our
punctidactyla was really well-known to the majority of continental lepi-
dopterists; and one supposes that, so far as his knowledge went, Zeller’s
contention that cosmodactyla, Hb., was simply a form of acanthadactyla,
Hb., was, so far as concerned most continental specimens passing under
the former name, quite true. (On this point see Walsingham, Péter.
Cal. Oreg., p. 24.) Frey, after stating (Stett. Ent. Zeitg., 1886, p. 62)
that Zeller could not discriminate specifically between cosmodactyla,
Hb., and acanthadactyla, Hb., says, in distinguishing these two forms
from his stachydalis and calaminthae, that all the Amblyptilia forms
described are brown, 1.e., acanthodactyla= brown mixed with red, cosmo-
dactyla=chestuut-brown, stachydalis=light yellow-brown, calaminthae
=light grey ; so that his preceding note on stachydalis (Stett. Ent. Ztq.,.
1871, p. 121) that it was of a bright olive-brown hue, might lead one to
suppose that his term “‘olive-brown ”’ was only ‘‘ yellow-brown,’’ and not
really greenish, as in our best-coloured punctidactyla, if his types were.
not really specially brightly-coloured examples ; whilst his remark that.

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 273

cosmodactyla is chestnut- brown does not atallapply to our punctidactylaas |

we know it, although no doubt he is here referring to the dark examples
in the “ Frey collection” in the British Museum, which are entirely differ-
ent from any British examples that we have yet seen of punctidactyla.
Nolcken, also, who appears to have known the species through Zeller
and Frey, notes (Lep. Faun. Estland, etc., p. 82) that he took examples
of cosmodactyla, Hb. (evidently punctidactyla), of a fresh light-grey
colour melting into greenish (as noted by Frey), and, later, some
perfectly typical specimens, without saying, however, what he
considered ‘‘typical,” although, according to his account of acantho-
dactyla, Tr., he appears to have considered that punctidactyla (‘ cosmo-
dactyla’’) was only distinguished from acanthodactyla, Tr., by its greyer
colour, and white-spotted costal margin. Altogether the figures of
Hiibner are very puzzling. At any rate, the greenish species must be
called punctidactyla, Haw., and, in our opinion, the brown species is
cosmodactyla, Hb. Of the two species, Hofmann says (Die Deutsch.
Pteroph., p. 60): “ The genus consists of only two species standing very
closely to each other, both of which occur in several (2-3) different
forms. Besides the difference in habits, the distinctions lie in the
coloration and scaling peculiar to each species, in which I have never
observed any intermediate forms, and in the position of the black
scale-tooth of the 8rd plumule. As the larve and pupz also exhibit
slight differences, the title to specific rank should be well founded.”
His diagnoses of the two species in the imaginal form (op. cit., p. 61)
read as follows :—
The scale-tooth on the 3rd plumule of the hindwing lies fairly exactly in the
middle of the wing (taking the inner margin as the space measured). Forewings

narrow, ferruginous-brown, reddish-brown, or brownish-grey, with darker similarly
coloured markings and sparse white scaling. Body slender... cosmodactyla, Hb.
The scale-tooth of the 3rd plumule lies distinctly beyond the middle, nearer the
apex. Forewings broader, blackish, appearing light, and as if marbled, by reason of
the rich white and yellow scaling, often with transverse rows of white scales.
Markings black, body stouter ... ... punetidactyla, Haw.

To Hofmann also we owe the aideovery at an actual larval distinction
between these two species. His distinction (since verified by Chapman)
appears to be as follows (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 63 and 66) :—

Tubercles large, white, many-haired, mostly with one longer and two or three
shorter bristles, the latter knobbed. These many-haired tubercles are different from
those of the larvee of A. punetidactyla, which have 2-haired tubercles only on the
flange. The prothorax green, with a finely drawn open black triangle in the middle,
and two small black spots oneach side... cosmodactyla, Hb.

Tubercles small, of the colour of the body, single- haired, only those on the
flange bearing two hairs. The body is also thickly covered, especially dorsally,
with fine short, white, not clubbed, hairs (only distinctly visible under a lens).
The prothorax green... A as ues ... punetidactyla, Haw.

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA, Hiibner.
>]

Synonymy.—Species : Cosmodactyla, Hb., ‘‘Schmett. Eur.,’’ Alue. pl. viii.,
35-36 (1823) 5 Au iT eey ? p. 430 (1825) ; Stphs., ‘‘Illus.,”’iv., app. p. 424 (1834); Tutt,
‘¢ Ent. Rec., 10: 238 (1899) ; Bankes, ‘*‘ Ent. Rec.,’’ xviii., P: 39 (1906). Calo-

dactylus, Habs Mant. Ins.,”’ ii., p. 258 (1787) ; ‘* Ent. Syst.,’’ iii., p. 346 (1793) ;
?Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,’’ p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘* Brit. Ent.,”? fo. 161 (1827) ;

Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,’’ iv., p. 376 (1834) ; Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,”? Ist ed., p. 237,
pl. li., fig. 1646 (1839). Calodactyla, de Vill., ‘Linn. Ent. Faun. Suec.,’’ iv.

p. 546 (1789) ; Hb., ‘‘Raupen,’’ etc., ix., Aluc.i., pl. ¢., figs. a-d (cire. 1800) :
Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 478 (1811); Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,”’ ix., pt. 2, p. 232
(1833); Stphs., ‘ Illus.,” ete., iv., app. p. 424 (1834). Acanthodactyla, Tr.,

274 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

‘* Die Schmett.,’’ ix., pt. 2, p. 234 (1833) ; Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., ps
342 (in part) (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,” iii., pt. 2, p. 787
(1877); Frey, ‘‘ Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 428 (1880); Willms., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xviii.,
pp. 212-213 (1882); Sorh., ‘‘ Kleinschmett. Brand.,”’ p. 3 (1886) ; Leech, ‘‘ Brit.
Pyr.,”’ p. 54, pl. xvi., fig. 9 (1886) ; South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xxii., p. 31 (1889); Meyr.,
‘Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,”? p. 486 (1890) ; Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,’’ i., p. 38 (1891) ;
‘« Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 53 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,” etc., p. 433: (1895); Hofm.,
‘‘ Deutsch. Pteropkh.,’’ p. 61 (1895); Fern., ‘‘ Pter. N. Amer.,’? p. 25 (1898) ;
Staud. and Reb., ‘‘Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 73 (1901); Dyar, ‘‘ List N. Amer. Lep.,”’ p. 443
(1902). Acanthodactylus, Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’’ xi., p. 650, pl. 313, fig. 6 (1838);
‘Cat. Meth.,’’ p. 383 (1845); Zell.,‘‘Isis,’’ p. 784, vars. a, b (1841); pp. 38, 902(1847);
‘¢Linn. Ent.,”’ vi., p. 338, vars. a, b (1852); Tgstrm., ‘‘ Finl. Fjar.,”’ p. 155 (1847);
H.-Sch.,‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 369 (1855); supp. fig. 5 (1853); Frey,‘‘Tin. Pter. Schw.,”
p- 405 (1856); Sta., ‘‘ Man.,”’ ii., p. 441 (1859); Wallgrn., ‘‘Skand. Fjad.,’”’ p. 13
(1859); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 121 (1869); xviil., p. 177 (1881) ; Nolck.,
‘‘Lep. Faun. Estl.,’’ p. 802 (1871); Sta., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ viii., p. 236 (1872) ;
Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x., p. 164 (1889) ; Porrt., ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xxi., p. 208;
xxii., p. 149 (1885) ; xxiii., p. 132 (1886); ‘‘ Buckl. Larve,”’ etc., ix., p. 351, pl. 163,
fig. 5 (1901); Walsm., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’”’ xxxiv., p. 192 (1898); Barr., ‘‘ Lep.
Brit. Isles,’’ p. 358, pl. 414, figs. 4-4a (1904). Cosmodactylus, Stphs., ‘‘ Illus.,”’
iv., p. 377 (1834) ; Wood, ‘‘ Ind. Ent.,’’ Ist ed., p. 237, fig. 1649 (1839). [The
first certain description of this species is given by Fabricius, under the name of calo-
dactylus, in 1787, and under this name Hiibner figured its larva and pupa on Ononis
arvensis. The name, however, had been applied by Schitfermiiller and Denis to
zetterstedtii, Zell., and, as calodactyla, the latter species was figured by Hiibner.
Two species, therefore, were for a time masquerading as calodactyla, viz.—(1)
calodactyla, Schiff., Hb. (fig. 7)=zetterstedtii, Zell., and (2) calodactylus, Fab.,
Hb. (Larvae, pl. c., figs. a-d) =cosmodactyla, Hb.=acanthodactyla, Tr. Hiibner’s
figs. 35-36, named cosmodactyla, are, we think, most probably this species. Treitschke
applied this latter name to punctidactyla, Haw. =acanthadactyla, Hb., in which he was
followed by Zeller, Staudinger and Wocke, so that punctidactyla, Haw., was generally
known as cosmodactyla, Hb. At the same time, this species was referred by
Treitschke, Zeller, and Staudinger and Wocke to acanthadactyla, Hb. Hence a
reversal of Hiibner’s names took place, which we attempted to put straight in
1899. Staudinger and Rebel quote this correction in their synonymy, but maintain
the reversal of the names. |

DESCRIPTION OF ORIGINAL FIGURES.—T'ig. 35, cosmodactyla. Exp. al.,
20mm. Forewing, in length 9-5mm., in breadth 2mm. in middle, 3°5mm.
at tornus; costa much arched throughout; apex but little produced, not
sharply pointed, decidedly falcate; tornus blunt, hardly produced ;
termen hardly concave; colour silky rufous-tawny, sparingly marked
with blackish anteriorly, much obscured by it towards termen.
Anterior two-thirds of costa blackish, strigulated with ochreous except
at base; a narrow oblique whitish fascia at 3-5mm., with a broader
primrose-yellow one at 2mm., from apex, and a subapical cluster of
silvery dots. Middle third of disc with a pale bluish-grey wash along
centre. Centres of fasciz united by a primrose streak, like an inverted
dageger-blade, but the termen, though slightly notched in the middle,
shows no fissure (set specimens resemble Hiibner’s figure in this
respect). Cilia white, tipped with black (? necessary shading), with,
on dorsum, a roundish, black, projecting scale-tooth rather beyond
middle, a small blackish spot beyond it, and a larger one at tornus.
Hindwings silky, rufous-tawny anteriorly, much obscured by blackish
posteriorly ; third plumule with ochreous dorsal vitta; upper fissure
extending almost to middle, lower one nearly to base; cilia bluish-
grey, with a mediodorsal, very broad, short, blackish scale-tooth, not
projecting beyond general line of cilia. Abdomen (suggestive of 3)
pale rufous-tawny, with a subdorsal row of primrose spots along
either side. Fig. 86, cosmodactyla, represents the imago with the
wings almost closed over the back, the undersides of the two right wings

AMBLYPTILIA. COSMODACTYLA. 275

alone being shown. Forewing silky drab-brown, much speckled and
mottled with blackish; costa posteriorly white-marked, an oblique
bright ochreous costal spot preceding an oblique whitish subapical
fascia, from the centre of which a whitish streak, hke a dagger-blade,
projects inwardly; dorsum partially washed with rufous-tawny
beyond middle; termen slightly notched in centre, but showing no
fissure ; cilia and scale-tooth much as in fig. 35, but a small, slightly-
projecting, black scale-tooth replaces the blackish spot in cilia
between central scale-tooth and tornus. Hindwing drab-brown,
speckled with blackish, darker posteriorly ; upper plumule with a
straight, bright ochreous, subterminal fascia; cilia lilac-grey, with a
broad, central, blackish, mediodorsal scale-tooth (Bankes. From
W. H. B. Fletcher’s copy of Htibner’s Europ. Schmett., pl. vii., figs.
35-36).

Des: pEscription.—TLhe oldest description of this species
reads as follows :—Pterophorus calodactylus, alis fissis fuscis; anticis
subfalcatis fissis fulvo-maculatis, posticis tripartitis. [Alwcita calodac-
tyla, “Wien. Verz.,” 146, 4.] Habitat in Austria, Mus. Dom. Schieftfer-
myller. Statura preecedentium. Ale antice cinereo fusce apice
obscuriores macula magna fulva. Margo interior dentatus, posticus
fissus. Postice tripartite nigra. Pedes albo annulati (Fabricius,
Mantissa Insectorum, p. 258).

Imaco.—20mm.-22mm. Forewings divided into two lobes ; apex
pointed, slightly falcate; anal angle of hinder lobe shghtly prolonged;
a small lobe on inner margin of hindwing. Ground-colour of fore-
wings of a rich reddish-brown, showing longitudinally along costa,
near inner margin, from anal angle to base, and above the cleft of
upper lobe ; the median area from cleft to base pale flesh-colour (due
to thick sprinkling of white scales), interrupted with two (or three)
short longitudinal dark brown discal spots; a deep velvety-brown
triangular costal spot, of which apex reaches below the cleft, its outer
edge margined with white; a deep, rich, velvety-brown (almost black
externally) band across the upper and lower lobes, the inner edge
irregular, the outer edged with a fine, white, transverse line; the
upper lobe strongly covered with white scales, the costal and outer
margin brown, the anal angle and outer margin with black scales
(variable in number); the lower lobe less thickly covered with white
scales, the margins and anal angle strongly suffused with black ;
the costa marked with short white oblique dashes, the inner margin
with white fringes chequered with black scales; the outer fringes grey
with white bases, at the anal angle black; the cleft-fringes grey,
darker towards the base of cleft, where there is a white lunular mark,
with a black discal point terminating the cleft. Hindwings divided
into three plumules, the second cleft much more deeply cut than the
first ; dark grey-brown in colour ; the fringes dark grey; those of the
outer margin of the 8rd plumule with paler bases, with a well-marked
scale-patch medially, with isolated black scales extending to base, and
sometimes to apex.

Vanriation.—Extreme colour aberrations of this species seem to be
remarkably few, yet there is considerable racial distinction in specimens
reared under different environmental conditions, and, amongst our
British examples, one notes many interesting races, and observes that,
although our specimens from the south of England—Devonshire,
Dorsetshire, Kent, Essex, Sussex, ete.—show comparatively little

2

276 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

variation, being of a fairly uniform ground colour, and without striking
markings, those from the north of England, Scotland and Ireland,
show much more marked variation in their local characteristics. The
specimens from Glengariff are almost of the same size and general.
appearance as our south of England specimens, perhaps a little paler in
the middle of the forewing, but those from Sligo are a very marked
race, rather below average size, bright in tint, of an almost unicolorous
reddish hue, with rosy tint: the costa narrowly, as well as the costal
triangle and the lobal band, of a rather darker reddish or reddish-brown
hue, with pale shading outside the costal triangle, and a pale line across
the lobes of forewing=var. hibernica, n. var. Strangely, our nearest
example to this race, in size and colour, comes from Kingsdown, in Kent,
where, however, 1t must be a pure aberration. The specimens from
Aberdeen are very fine, large in size, almost slaty in hue, and with a
violet tinge in the median area of forewings; the costa deep red-brown, as
also is the costal triangle and lobal band. Beyond the lobal line the
outer marginal area is almost white, as is also the shading on the outer
edge of the costal triangle; the costa itself, however, is little spotted
=var. scotica. An almost similar example came from Ben Donich;
but the most remarkable specimen in our collection came also from the
heathery slopes on the sides of Ben Donich, above Lochgoilhead. This
is a brilliant (rather small) specimen of var. scotica in 1ts most extreme
form, the slaty-white and red standing out in striking contrast, but
with the costa as conspicuously spotted with white as in the best
marked punctidactyla=ab. variegata,n.ab. Of the dwarf “heath’’ race,
from Selby, mention is made below; and the melanic form of this dwarf
variety in the ‘“ Frey collection,” at the Natural History Museum, is
worthy of study. The other dwarf race, var. calaminthae, grey in tint, of
which the types are also in the “‘ Frey collection,” is also dealt with infra.
The variation in the species is, on the whole, therefore, more particularly
noticeable perhaps in size than in tint, and the Selby form and
var. calaminthae appear to be, as a rule, quite dwarf races. Of this
size variation, Bankes notes: ‘‘In general, all the specimens that
I have bred and captured, whether on the heaths or elsewhere,
both in Devon and Dorset, have been of good size, many of them
showing an expanse of wing of 22mm., and some of as much as 23mm.
My smallest and palest individual, bred from Stachys sylvatica in 1892,
only expands 16mm., but I have never met with any nearly so small in
nature. The Rev. C. D. Ash, however, takes examples of a dwarfed race
near Selby, Yorks, of which my two representatives only have an expanse
of 14mm., and 17mm. respectively. Such small examples might be
called ab. minor, n. ab.” Of the colour variation, Bankes writes (in
litt.): “ With the exception of ab. nivea, I have seen no extreme
colour aberrations of this species, but, among some 1800 bred
specimens, the ground colour varies from pale ashy-brown, through
bright red-brown, to dark reddish-brown, relieved, of course, in each
case by a powdering, or partial clouding, of whitish scales.” Hofmann
writes: “Coloration of the forewings in the typical form ferruginous-
brown or reddish-brown, but intermediate forms in brown-grey of
different depths also occur.’ We may here note the acanthodactyla
var. a of South (Hnt., xxii., pp. 81-32), which is described as having
“forewings ochreous-grey with a rosy tinge; markings as in the type, but
more clearly defined, and with oblique striz, similar to the same character
in punctidactyla (cosmodactyla), but not so conspicuous,” and which was

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 217

bred from a pupa found on Stachys sylvatica, in Pelham Woods, Ventnor,
on September 1st, 1883. One of the few specimens in the Frey collection
also has these lines fairly well-marked (see also our notes on one of the
types of var. calaminthae, Frey). The following are the described forms
of the insect :—

a. ab. nivea, Bankes, ‘“‘Ent. Rec.,” xviii., p. 39 (1906)—Head and thorax
whitish, dusted with fuscous; forewings white, dusted with brown towards the
costa; the clearly-defined antemedian costal spot, postmedian costal blotch, and
subterminal bar crossing the lobes, with the terminal portion of the lower
lobe, are brownish-black; terminal cilia blackish, chequered with white;
hindwings brownish-black, with the dorsal margin of the third feather whitish ;
cilia brownish, partially dark-spotted; scale-teeth of all the cilia blackish ;
abdomen dorsally and ventrally white, dusted with fuscous, laterally blackish ;
legs white, broadly barred with brownish-black. The above description of this
most striking and beautiful aberration was recently made from two British examples
(¢ and ¢) in Mr. W. H. B. Fletcher’s collection. They were taken, either as
imagines or larvee, by Mr. W. Salvage several years ago, probably in Sutherland-
shire, though this is uncertain. If other lepidopterists secured examples of this
albinic aberration from Mr. Salvage, perhaps they will kindly make known the
data received from him, for there seems little doubt that he only met with it in one
locality, where it occurred rarely during a single season. These two specimens are
the only ones I have seen. To prevent confusion, it seems advisable to add that the
name cosmodactyla is used above for the common reddish-brown species, popularly

known in Britain as acanthodactyla, and not for the rare olive-brown insect gener-

ally known as punctidactyla or cosmodactyla. In Ent. Record, xi., 238 (1899),
Mr. Tutt showed that the former is the true cosmodactyla, Hb., while the latter is
really acanthadactyla, Hb., but in the Catalog by Staudinger and Rebel (1901),
although the reference to his note is given, the erroneous use of Hiibner’s names is
maintained (Bankes). .

8. var. tetralicella, Hofm., “ Deutsch. Pteroph.,” p. 62 (1895) ; Staud. and Rebel,
“Cat.,” 3rd ed., p. 73 (1901).—The ground colour yellow-grey, the dark markings are
partly dark ferruginous-brown, partly more blackish-brown ; in the discal area, where
the colouring is mixed, sometimes white and sometimes black predominates; the
markings differ neither on the upper nor the underside from the typical form, but
the underside of the Ist and 3rd plumules, in most examples, is rather blackish-grey
than brown ; the triangular scale-tuft of the 3rd plumule is longer, and generally
more like that of A. pwnctidactyla (cosmodactyla) in shape. ‘To this form are to be
referred several specimens received from Stettin, and bred by Hering from Hrica
tetralie. HKxamples quite similarly coloured, and agreeing in the form of the scale-
tuft of the 3rd plumule also occur at Regensburg, where, indeed, this form appears
to be commoner than the ferruginous-brown form, and is reared from larvee found
on Clinopodium vulgare (Hofmann).

Rebel says (Cat., p. 78) “ flavo-grisescens,”’ and from this it might
be assumed to be merely this colour form, not particularly confined to any
foodplant, although perhaps more frequent, as pointed out by Hofmann,
in connection with certain environmental conditions of which a special
food may be an important factor. This, however, is not so, and it is
clearly the darker markings that give character to the form. [In the
“Frey collection’’ are two gs and one ?, from which the label is
unfortunately missing, but which we suspect to have been received
from Hering. They are placed beneath the typical examples of calamin-
thae, and are unnamed, although set apart as something quite distinet.
They appear to be a “ heath ”’ form, are very dark in colour, almost as
small as calaminthac, and tending to have quite a melanic general
appearance, the ground colour being largely suppressed by the spread
ot the dark markings, in which blackish predominates. The nearest
approach we have seen to this small race among British examples, are
the specimens taken on the heaths at Selby by Ash; and we suspect that
it will be generally found to be a “ heath” form, although from some

278 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

‘‘heath”’ localities the specimens are of normal size and brightness. |
Hofmann does not note that his ‘“‘heath’’ race is abnormally small.

y. var. calaminthae, Frey, “Stett. Ent. Ztg.,” p. 62 (1886); Hofm., “ Die
Deutsch. Pteroph.,” pp. 62-63 (1895); Staud. and Reb., “Cat.,” p. 73 (1901).—
Amblyptilia calaminthae, Schmid. Schmid discovered, in 1880, very late in the
autumn, near Regensburg, this interesting species, which belongs to the acanthodaetyla
group. Zeller and I always differed on the specific value of cosmodactyla, Hibs which
he considered a variety of acanthadactyla, Hb., nor was his opinion shaken by my dis-
covery concerning the larva. Later, when, owing to the destruction of the forests
around Ziirich, the larva of cosmodactyla (i.e., punctidactyla) became very rare on the
seeds of Aguilegia in the late autumn, I discovered a larva, some four to six weeks
earlier, feeding on the bloom of Stachys sylvatica. I described it, with some
reservation, under the name of stachydalis, as being possibly the first brood of
cosmodactyla. I believe the insect is double-brooded, as I have taken cosmodactyla
from August to the end of June, and an Alucitid is not likely to exist for ten months
in a single brood. Further, I have several cosmodactyla which closely resemble
stachydalis. Now we have Schmid’s find, which has caused me much trouble, yet I
feel perfectly satisfied that his calaminthae is a distinct species, though nearly
related to acanthodactyla and cosmodactyla. First, it is considerably smaller, even
smaller than stachydalis, the forewings narrower and drawn out to a sharper point.
An important detail in its distinction is offered by the ground colour of the fore-
wings, for whereas, in the allied species described hitherto, the colour is brown (in
acanthodactyla mixed with reddish, in cosmodactyla chestnut-brown, in stachydalis
much lighter yellow-brown), this slenderly-built insect is of a light-grey ; otherwise
the markings are typical. Across the two lobes of the forewing is a distinct white
line. The costal mark is similar to those of the other species, and on this I lay no
particular stress. The third plumule of the hindwings has narrower black fringes,
and a small black scale-tooth on the margin as in the other species, but the fringes of
the hind margin are not white, but grey (Frey). Hofmann gave us the following deserip-
tion of the larva: ‘‘ Found September 12th, 1884, on the buds of Calamintha nepeta,
eating thereinto. About 8mm. long, slightly tapering at the head and anus; dirty
reddish or lilac in tint, of the colour of the flowers on which it feeds (the larvee of
cosmodactyla and stachydalis are pale green); the underside of the abdomen greenish-
yellow. Head glossy black, with yellow lines and spots about the mouth-parts ;
the prothoracic shield yellowish, bordered with white in front, with three black
spots, of which the central is largest, triangular, and bordered with white raised
lines; the tubercles are white, with white stellate hairs; these tubercles run along each
side of the body in three longitudinal lines, two rows near each other above, and one
beneath, the stigmata; the anal flap yellowish, with black dots; the anal claspers
and ventral prolegs of the same colour as the venter ; true legs black. [Described
from a living larva not quite fullgrown.] From Regensburg.”

The types of this small race (gf and @ ) are in the “ Frey collection”
at the British (Natural History) Museum. They are of a pale grey
tint, one being much marked with transverse white lines as in
punctidactyla, are labelled ‘“ calaminthae, Regensburg,’’ and are accom-
panied by the empty pupa-cases from which they were bred. Rebel
says of the form “gracilior, dilute grisescens, nigro-signata. Bavaria ”’
(Cat., 38rd ed., p. 78), and Frey himself, comparing his cosmodactyla,
acanthodactyla, stachydalis, and calaminthae, says that they were
‘‘chestnut-brown,” ‘‘ brown mixed with red,’ “light yellow-brown,”
and ‘‘light grey,’ respectively. Of this last-named form, Hofmann says
(Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 62) that the colour is ‘‘ bright grey, the dark
markings the same as in the typical form, but never brown, always pure
black. The costal triangle is often absent, and, in that case, the spots
at the fissure, either separated or united into a transverse stripe, stand
out conspicuously. The underside of the 1st and 8rd plumules is black,
with rather large and abundant white scales, which form, at the apex
of the 1st plumule, an indistinct white, sometimes angulated, trans-
verse line. The scale-tuft of the 38rd plumule is usually weakly

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 279

developed, short, with an elongated base, coming nearest to that of the
typical form. Schmid says that the imagines of var. calaminthae
‘appear from September up to late autumn, near Ratisbon. Larve were
found on the Schlossberg, in Donaustauf, on Calamintha nepeta. These
fixed themselves up in the usual manner, and changed into dark pupae,
smaller than those of acanthodactyla, on the stem of the foodplant.

CoMPARISON OF THE IMAGINES OF AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA AND
A. punctipactyLa.—Bankes says that the following appear to be the
most important, striking, and reliable distinctions between punctidactyla,
Haw., and cosmodactyla, Hb. :—

(1) In punetidactyla, the apex of the forewing is decidedly more produced,
slender, and falcate than in cosmodactyla. A comparison of the relative distance to
which the apex of the upper lobe projects beyond that of the lower lobe, shows a
great difference between the two species, while the dissimilarity in the breadth and
shape of the apex is equally well-marked.

(2) The large black scale-tooth in the middle of the dorsal cilia of the hind-
wing is, in punctidactyla, noticeably longer from the centre of the base to the apex
than in cosmodactyla, and this distinction seems perfectly constant.

(3) Punetidactyla has much of the whitish scaling on the forewing grouped
into numerous small more or less ill-defined spots, suggesting interrupted transverse
striz, whereas, in cosmodactyla, on the contrary, the whitish scales do not thus
thoroughly break up the ground colour, but only form clouds overlying it here and
_ there, or else are scattered singly over parts of it.

_ (4) In all the ordinary forms the ground colour of the forewing of punctidac-
tyla is of a strongly olivaceous tint, whieh is never present in its ally, and the few
extreme aberrations, where the colour causes any hesitation, can be recognised with
absolute certainty by the characteristics mentioned above in | and 2.

Heeiayinc.—Some eges were laid on August 27th-28th, 1904, on
Stachys sylvatica and Krica tetralix. On the latter, among the flowers ;
on the former, not on the flowers but near them ; they began to hatch
on September 1st (Chapman). A @, in confinement, deposited eggs
on the calyx of Mimulus cardinalis, growing in a greenhouse, on August
21st, 1898, from which larvee appeared in due course (McIntyre) ; eggs
laid June 17th, 1888, at Llangennech, also produced larve, etc., in due
course (Richardson).

Ovum.—When first laid, of a pale straw colour, getting yellower,
till almost orange, and finally leaden-coloured when about to hatch.
The egg is rather long, narrow, a little flattened at one end, towards
which it is just perceptibly narrower and higher; length 0:-46mm.;
width 0:27mm. at wider end, 0:-23mm. near flat end; height 0°23mm,
near flat end, falling off to about 0-20mm. at the other end: the end
view is nearly circular; the sculpturing is in irregular polygons about
0:024mm. across; the cells are flat-bottomed, the separating ribs
broad and rounded; the shrinking, due to drying, produces longi-
tudinal furrows, that are not, strictly speaking, structural, but follow
in some degree the network where its ribbing is arranged longitudinally
(Chapman). [We have a second description of eges that differed somewhat
(in tint) from the above: “Pale green in colour; considerably larger
than the eggs of Adkinia bipunctidactyla, with which they were com-
pared; oval in outline, plump, yet considerably flattened on the upper
face; the two ends appearing to be almost equally rounded; no trace
of any surface markings.” Hxamined simply with a hand-lens;
described August 17th, 1901, from four eggs, laid on a setting-board,
captured the same day at Bobbie. We had at the time, and still have,
every belief that the eggs were those of the species to which they are

referred; it is, of course, possible that we may be wrong. The appear-

280 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

ance of them when laid on leaves and on paper, respectively, may be
different, and partly account for the difference in colour noted. |

Hazits or tarva.—The young larve hatch very soon after the
eggs are laid (comparing thus, remarkably, with those of Otdae-
matophorus lithodactyla). Those under observation burrowed at once
into the flower-buds of Fvica or Stachys, and, if an unhatched egg
be in the way of a larva, it will devour it, as seen in the case of two
larve, one of which had attacked a third egg without having well
cleared up the second out of a little group of four; its anal end, at
the time, being comfortably placed between flower-buds of Erica
tetralix. A week later (September 8th, 1904), the plants were ex-
amined ; the Stachys had not kept well, and some larve appeared to
have perished in consequence; some others had wandered off the
plants, and of others no trace could be found. Of the living larve, some
were still small in the 1st instar, others not very far from moult, and not
very much smaller than some of those in 2nd instar; their being in the
1st instar was proved by the size of the head, which agreed precisely
with that of newly-hatched larve. The larva, fullgrown in Ist instar, was
all but 2mm. long, very smooth, the hairs looking very minute; the
prolegs and claspers very small, and short, in proportion to its size,
being, of course, those of first skin; those of second skin larve
were of due proportion; these larve were over 2mm. long, one oz two
nearly 3:‘Omm., but none were fullgrown in this instar. The favourite
food, at this stage, seemed evidently to be the filaments of the stamens,
both of the heath and of the Stachys, but any other part of the floral
interior seemed to be eaten. The interior of the flower is reached
whilst it is still a bud, by perforating the corolla with a minute hole.
Second stage larve were twice found at large on the plant, being
driven out of the Stachys flowers by their decay. In the case of heads
of Erica so little advanced that the corolle are still invisible, the
larva bores into the mass of flowers from the top, and throws out some
frass at the place where it entered. In the case of entering a flower, the
frass is not extruded, but left inside the corolla. Unless the small hole of
entrance can be found, the larva in a flower gives no indication of its
presence so long as it stays there. It is difficult to say whether it
should be called an internal-feeder, or no. When it is small, the residence
is always within a flower; I doubt whether it could exist on leaves,
though young leaf-buds might, perhaps, serve. It will live comfort-
ably in the head of unopened flowers of Pelargonium or Erica, eating
the filaments, and even the anthers of the stamens, and, to get at
them, acts more as a burrower or internal-feeder than when it merely
gets into a fairly-developed flower of Hrica or Stachys. It preserves
precisely the same habits up to full-growth, except when it is too large
to get into the flower, and so has to be satisfied with getting only the
anterior segments inside. It will, however, moult into last skin inside
the bell of a flower of FErica tetralix. I fed most of mine on this
plant, as I found Stachys inconvenient in several ways. Like several
‘‘plumes”’ that I have been able to follow through with precision, this
species has four larval instars. In other cases, whether the instars be
four or five is a matter of inference, or of measuring the diameters of
the larval heads, which is a very reliable method of determining the
point, but here I was able to follow individual larve from the egg
onwards. The following data, referring to the changes of some of the
latest larvee, may prove interesting :—

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 981

(1 and 2) ,», 24th. Third instar.

q 5 : ,, 28th. Laid up for moult.
pep. cam peop ae 30th. Fourth (last) instar.

, 20th. Third instar. Oct. 4th. Fullgrown(butstill feeding).

,, 22nd. Well grown. ,, 23rd. Imago emerged.
,, 24th. Laid up for moult. 4
,, 20th. Fourth (last) instar. ( )
Oct. 20th. One imago emerged. Sept. 17th. Second instar (well grown).
», 21st. The second imago emerged. », 19th. Third instar (half-grown).

» 20th. Fullgrown in third instar.
22nd. Laid up for moult.

(3) », 24th. Fourth (last) instar.
Sept. 17th. First instar. », 28th. Fullfed.
,, 19th. Second instar. ,, 30th. Hung up for pupation.
,, 22nd. Fullgrown in second instar. Oct. 18th. Imago emerged.

Of other larvee, one was noticed feeding inside a Pelargonium bud,
another feeding on Stachys, its head being buried in a bud, both larve
in the 8rd stadium. On September 6th, 1904, on some Stachys sylvatica
collected at Corfe Castle for food, two fullfed larvee were found, a sugges-
tion that larve of this species must be abundant where larve thus occur
on foodplants taken at random. The larve shoot their frass about in
all directions, as do the larve of other “ plumes,” and certain other
lepidoptera, by a jerk of the last segment, and not by the use of an
anal comb; they eat the immature seeds and the calyces around them
(Chapman. September 6th, 1904). Riding says: ‘<I cannot separate
the larve of A. punctidactyla and A. cosmodactyla, Hb. (acanthodactyla,
Tr.), and the following notes may refer to either: 20 to 80 larve taken on
Stachys sylvatica, August 20th to 21st, 1892, at Buckerell; 9 larve
and 2 pups (flowers of Stachys nearly over), in Harpford Woods,
August 10th, 1898; 2 larve on Buckerell Knap, on Stachys, July
1ith, 1895; 40 to 50 larve and a few pupae, on S. sylvatica, at
Harpford Woods, August 13th, 1898; 4 larve, on Buckerell Knap,
August 14th, 1898; more larve taken in the lanes, and by edges of
fields, about Buckerell, August 20th-24th, 1898; 9 larve of medium
size, taken at Harpford Woods, August 9th, 1899; 8 larve, in lanes
around Buckerell, August 11th, 1899; and 2 more on August 12th.”’
The following notes were made of the larve collected in 1892: ‘Some
examples of a dull reddish-purple (colour of flower of Stachys), with
darker dorsal vessel, and whitish subdorsal and spiracular lines ; others
yellowish-ereen, with darker dorsal vessel, and with band (longitudinal)
of reddish-purple along the dorsum—not continuous the whole length;
others darker green with no red colour. Head, pale yellowish-brown
with dark brown mottlings; a smail brown plate on prothorax ;
tubercles white, with one or two white hairs; feed on corolle
of Stachys mostly, and petals of scarlet geranium.’ ‘This was
followed by further notes on August 25th, 1898, which read:
“Two sorts of ‘plume’ larvee on Stachys, one green, with blackish
head, the other purplish-red, with greenish prothorax, and head
greenish, spotted with black. From watching the larve feeding, |
came to the conclusion that the difference in colour is protective, as I
have generally found the purplish-red larve on the corolle, and the
ereener larvee on the stem and green parts of the plant. The purple-
red larvee also appear to be generally the smaller, and to be met with
before the purplish-red coroll have fallen off; the latter are larger and
found on plants which are seeding. I do not think the larve of the

ae

282 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

two species are separable by colour, but a minute examination of each
detail is wanted. From the larve thus collected both species have been
reared.’ Steudel and Hofmann long since noted, at Kochendorf,
Germany, that the larve attack and eat the inactive larve of their own
species when the latter are spun up for pupation. Bankes also
observes (in litt.) that, amongst the many hundreds of larve that he
has reared at various times, none have ever shown any inclination to
prey upon one another, the weaker ones probably owing their
immunity from attack to the hairiness of their coats, but, as recorded
(Ent. Rec., xvii., p. 48), the larve have, in his experience, invariably
proved fearful cannibals towards the naked pups of their own species,
which they devour with the greatest gusto, even when supplied with
an abundance of fresh food. He suspects that they are so in nature
at times, as he has a note of a pupa being found, the greater part of
which had been eaten away, and a larva, most probably the culprit,
very suspiciously near it. In one case, he observed a pupa of this
species being devoured by a Geometrid larva (sp. ?) that had been
found on Stachys sylvatica. In another case, a pupa, of which
practically the whole had been eaten, except the posterior portion of
the abdomen, was still fully able to move this part about, when
annoyed or touched. The following actual dates of larve found wild
may be recorded: July 20th, 1846, at Meseritz (Zeller) ; August,
1855, on Ononis, at Plymouth (Reading); larve in the greatest
profusion on Ononis, at Bolt Head, on July 7th-8th, 1870 (Mathew) ;
larvee collected in September, 1871, feeding on the flowers of Bartsia
odontites in the Gravesend district (Button); August 380th, 1888, at
Ventnor (South); August 6th, 1884, July 26th, August 5th-25th,
1886, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); September 7th, 1886, at
Worthing (Fletcher); July 30th, 1890, August 15th-October 5th,
1892, very abundant in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); September
22nd, 1892, at Lee, September 23rd, 1892, at Mottingham (Bower) ;
pups, September 20th-26th, 1894, in Isle of Purbeck; larva,
September 25th-October Ist, 1902, at Dartmouth; July 2nd, young
larve, and July 24th, 1904, in the Isle of Purbeck; September 8rd-
October 3rd, 1904, at Dartmouth (Bankes).

Larva.—First instar: Fully 1mm. long when stretched ; the head
black; the anal plate, and prothoracic shield, dark; the rest of the body
greenish-white ; the spinneret very long; the claws of true legs, long,
sharp, slender. The labial palpi are longer, and more evident, than the
antenne. ‘The props of prolegs rather long, 0-05mm., and slender, of
anal claspers not quite so long (0‘06mm.) or slender. In one specimen
all the prolegs have but two crochets; in all the others, three seems to
be the normal number; this specimen has also seven crochets on the
claspers, whilst five seems to be the normal number, varying frequently,
however, to six. The prothoracic spiracle is a very large, tall, boss,
the others rather less. The bases of the tubercles are just perceptibly
tinted. The hairs are rather long, that on i about 0‘O8mm.,on 11 0:04mm.,
on ii 0:09mm., on vi 0'09mm., long. Their disposition is practically
identical with most first stage ‘“‘ plume” larve. Those on i and ii curve
forwards, iii backwards, iv a little backwards, length about 0-08mm.,
v forwards, length about 0:05mm.; i and ii are about half the width
of the segment apart; and 11 half as far again from the middle line as
i; vrather further than usual above iv; these latter are on separate bases;

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 283

on the prothorax, the tubercular group in front of spiracle appears to
have two hairs, but, in one or two specimens, a very minute third hair
is detected, so that probably it exists in all; minute hairs in these small
larvee easily evade observation, and require a very good light, and a
satisfactory specimen, if they are not to be missed. The prothoracic
plate has the usual three hairs in front, of fairly equal size and spacing;
the three posterior are much out of line, the middle one very long, and
placed rather back, the outer one very small, and forwards; the usual
two hairs at base of legs. On the meso- and metathorax the usual four
pairs of hairs occur; the third being, however, a single hair. On the
abdominal segments, vi appears not to be present. There are no skin-
points (September 1st, 1904). Second instar: 8mm. in length when full-
erown; it is rather narrow, and of nearly uniform width. Props of
prolegs rather long, with four crochets in one specimen, five in another.
Head and prothoracic plate black, and anal plate very dark; general
colour yellowish-ochreous, with a pale, nearly white, stripe in line of 1
and 11, another along iu, and a set, sloping diagonally downwards and
forwards, and between spiracles and iv and v; legs black; tubercles dark;
hairs short; vi present; skin-points well-developed,and bearing fine needle-
like points; there are, on each side, two secondary hairs, one behind
spiracle, and another higher up above this; these are secondary in
having widened ends and imperfectly articulated bases. The primary
hairs are smooth and pointed. In this stage there is often a good deal
of pink tinting. Third instar: Length 5mm. Dirty brown, with
whitish subdorsal line, and a lower line arched on each segment, also
whitish, paler below vi; head black. The whole larva so transparent,
and so much of its colour due to contents, that one is in doubt as to
whether the markings really have a fixed position; legs black; prolegs
on long slender transparent props; hairs long, especially those of
tubercle 11, about 0-8mm. at middle, and 0:4mm. at the extremities of
the larva. The larva fairly cylindrical, but tapering gradually from
about 1st abdominal segment tothe 8th, much as so many ‘“‘ plume” larve
do. In another specimen there is a subspiracular white shade, and
the spiracular one looks oblique, but the subcutaneous character of the
markings makes it difficult to see them all at once, as they disappear
at the front or back of segment, or elsewhere, according to angle of
view. In another specimen, on Frica tetralia, the subdorsal white line
is very broad, and trespasses largely, at the same time fading out, on
the broad darker dorsal band; the supraspiracular line is very plain
from front of segment to ii, then stops abruptly; a white dot behind
spiracle (an accessory tubercle); below vi is the paler undersurface ;
the posterior segments reddish, the rest transparent, and showing the dark
intestinal contents. These larvee, feeding externally, jerk the feces away,
like those in last skin. In this skin, there are five hooks to prolegs.
The secondary hairs are more numerous (about nine from dorsal line
to level of spiracle), thickened at each end (September 18th, 1904).
Fourthinstar (newly-moulted): Only about 6mm. long. Head fairly large,
with the adult markings (hitherto entirely black). Otherwise it seems
identical with full-grown larva, so that this seems to be the last skin.
The head is as wide as the larva; the fullfed larva has a comparatively
small head (September 16th, 1904). Adult larva: [Two larve of two
different varieties found on Stachys collected, at Corfe Castle, as food
for other larve being reared in confinement.| One nearly uniform

284 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

dark chocolate-brown, varied only by the white primary, and the white:
and black secondary, hairs. The other has a nearly similar ground
colour of the front segments, but becomes greener backwards, so that.
the latter segments are green, with no reddish tint. This larva has,
on either side, two longitudinal white lines, fairly white, and very
well-defined, quite linear, but interrupted. The upper is in the line of 1
and 11; it really only exists in front of 1, but the two tubercles of nearly
the same colour appear to continue it; the second, similarly, exists only
in front of iii, but 11, and the secondary tubercle behind it, are of the:
same colour ; below iv and v the green is distinctly pale, and contrasts
with the darker slightly olive tint above. The dark larva has no trace
of this, but is of uniform colour above and below. The tubercles are all
well apart, with one definite, longish, white hair; the secondary hairs are-
black along the dorsal line, but, with a few exceptions, white elsewhere:
(September 6th, 1904). These two larve have very chameleon-like
properties; looking at them to-day, I cannot say, without a little doubt,.
which is which ; one, which is apparently the green one, is laid up for
pupation, and is of very diminished bulk, only 8mm. long (the other
10mm.-llmm.). It is bright green, has black markings on anal
plate, and two subdorsal splashes on preceding segment; tubercles ii
are minute black dots, and iv and v are quite obvious black dots.
The true legs are dark, as are also the dorsal secondary hairs.
The prothoracic plate has a central black line, and a black spot.
at either side. The head is green, with black markings radiating
towards the mouth from margin of epicranium, but, except marginal
line, not reaching more than one-third to half-way. The other
larva is nearly as green as the greener was two days ago, but it.
seems more likely that both have become greener, than that the.
greener one of two days ago has remained nearly stationary, and the
dark one become quite green, the one above noted being decidedly
more brightly green than the greener was, and without any olive or
darker tints (or white lines). This second larva still has its head
buried deep in a calyx, eating seeds. It has a darker green dorsal
line, and its general tint is darker than the other one; it has very con-
spicuous yellow patches (glands) on the dorsum of the 5th abdominal...
The anal plate is not of the same, but of a similar, pattern of black.
markings to that of the other. The prothoracic plate has a black mark at
each outer angle. The head-pattern also is very nearly, but not quite,
identical with that of the other; the ground colour is brownish-ochreous,
and shows no white markings. These changes of colour (in two days):
show of what little value colour is in these plume larve, and, though:
the markings always follow a similar type, they also vary a good deal
(September 8th, 1904). The second larva, though not yet laid up for
pupation, is now as green as the other (September 9th, 1904). In the
last skin, the primary hairs are blunt-ended (not sharp as hitherto), but.
free from spicules, nor can they be called expanded at the ends. The
secondary hairs are very numerous (80 to 40 between dorsal line and.
spiracle); a large one accompanies 1, ii, and 111, tending to make them.
warts, and the postspiracular accessories are generally represented by
a large secondary hair at the usual site. They are all smooth, but.
expanded at the ends, and apparently bifid, though this may be an
optical delusion, and their usual form may be clubbed. There are:
only four (sometimes five) crochets to prolegs (Chapman). inal.

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 285

instar: Length 8mm., of a rather slender type (i.e., of the Stenoptiliid
form), of cylindrical section, without any marked lateral flange, taper-
ing considerably towards head and anus. ‘The head is small, rounded,
and partially retractile beneath the anterior skin-folds of the prothorax.

The segmentation is, as usual, well-marked, the subsegmentation also
more distinct than is usually the case. Tubercles i well separated from ii
on the abdominal segments. The skin rough and prickly, owing to the
spicules being well-developed. The tubercles exhibit distinct incipient
wart-structure, bearing, usually, one long primary seta, a medium-sized,
and one or more small secondaries, similar to those that are pretty
generally scattered over the skin-surface, and which appear sometimes to
be, but doubtfully,in association with the primary tubercles. The secondary
hairs have knobbed or spatulate tops, and are black or white in colour,
hairs of both colours being present. The scutellum and anal plates
strike one as being small; they are not distinctively coloured, and
consequently do not show up in any marked contrast with the general
skin-surface. The former has the two depressed dark-coloured spots as in
pterodactyla (fuscus), ete. Spiracles are raised and prominent, but are not
talltubesasin Ovendenta septodactyla (uenigianus), etc. The head issmooth
and polished, rounded, and of a brown colour, with mottlings of dark and
light of the same hue, chiefly restricted to the upper and posterior portions;
the ocelli, as usual, are prominent. The primary hairs are tall, shghtly
thorned, tapering, but blunt-ended, hardly knobbed, but very slightly
thickened at the tip, as though the tip had been fused. Lees are dark at
base, pale at tip; the prolegs are of the normal “plume” type, long and
rather slender, the anal ones much shorter proportionally, and stronger
looking. The prothoracic and 8th abdominal spiracles are extra large,
especially those of the 8th abdominal; the 1st abdominal does not show a
very appreciable increase. The thoracic tubercles are—conjoined i and ii
on the middle of the three subsegments, there 1s no accessory group behind
these, only the normal scattered secondary hairs; 1i1andiv form aconjoined
group, with two long hairs ; v now bears two hairs, one being probably
vi, and the usual posterior subprimary, bearing only one hair, is present.
On the abdominal segments, 1 is the larger, if anything, but there is but
little difference in size between i and i, the two pairs are well separated
from each other; iii is rather close down to the spiracle; iv and v form
a combined group beneath the spiracle; vi bears one long, and two
secondary, hairs; vii forms a small group. Only one accessory post-

spiracular hair is present, and this is slightly above the level of the
spiracle; this is of medium length, and has one or two of the small
skin-surface secondaries in doubtfulassociation with it. In coloration, the
dorsal area is a purplish-pink, shading off beneath into the green of the
ventral area; there is a slightly marked median stripe; a broadly
irregular, and somewhat broken, subdorsal band of whitish, and another
similar lateral band, rather higher up than usual, is placed above
the spiracles. Another form of the larva, or an older stage (though it
islittleif atalllarger), is of a pale, but bright, clear green, the markings as
above, but the median line shows up darker, and there is a double,
yellow, dorsal spot beneath the skin (? the testes) on the 5th abdominal
‘segment. Possibly the difference in coloration is sexual (Bacot,

July 21st, 1904). Buckler figured (Larvae, ete., pl. elxiii., fig. 5) on
July 81st, 1862, a larva of this species, after its final moult, that had
been feeding on flowers of rest-harrow; ue imago emerged August 31st,
1862. Hiibner figured (Raupen, ete., , Alue. i., pl. c., fig. a) the

286 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

larva of this species on Ononis. Stainton refers thereto, Ent. Ann.,
1856, p. 59.

VARIATION OF LARVA.—We have already noted two colour forms of
larva in this species (antea, pp. 283-285), and their connection with each
other (see also p. 287). Porritt says that, in shape, the larva is exactly
like the larva of A. punctidactyla (cosmodactyla), as described (posted),
and, as in that species, there are two distinct colour forms, whilst inter-
mediate varieties occur, partaking more or less of the characters of each
of these extreme forms. The latter, he says, may be described as:

1. The ground colour deep purple; head yellowish-grey or yellowish-brown,
marked on the crown and sides with black; the mandibles brown ; mediodorsal
stripe smoke-coloured ; subdorsal lines, and another line of equal width below it,
white, but interrupted and not very conspicuous, and, below these, is another,
scarcely so pale, line along the spiracles; hairs, and the distinct tubercles, white.
Ventral surface, and prolegs, greenish-olive ; anterior legs shining black, ringed with
paler.

2. The ground colour bright pale green; head as in var. 1; the dark, smoky
pulsating, vessel—in some specimens tinged with pink anteriorly—forms the dorsal
stripe ; subdorsal lines indistinct, whitish; below these is another line, but much
interrupted and broken into short lengths ; there are no lines along the spiracular
region ; hairs and tubercles white. Ventral surface, and prolegs, of the bright green
of the dorsal area; the legs shining black, ringed with white.

CoMPARISON OF THE LARV& OF AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA AND A.
PUNCTIDACTYLA.—The real structural differences observable in these larvee
have already been noted (antea, p. 273). Of the colour differences
Porritt writes: “ The chief points of distinction between these larvez
that appear to be reliable are: (1) The deep purple ground colour in
the larva of A. cosmodactyla as compared with the purplish-pink of
that of A. punctidactyla. (2) The white subdorsal lines less conspicu-
ous in A. cosmodactyla. (8) The head yellowish-brown, marked with
black, in place of the very dark sienna-brown, almost black, in A.
punctidactyla.” © Bankes is, however, not altogether satisfied
with this conclusion, and writes (in litt.): ‘“‘Although the imaginal
characteristics of punctidactyla, Haw. (acanthadactyla, Hb.), are of
themselves more than sufficient to prove that it is specifically distinct
from cosmodactyla, Hb. (acanthodactyla, Tr.), I have taken great
trouble to put to the test, as far as possible, the reputed larval differ-
ences to which my friend, Mr. Porritt, drew attention (Hnt. Mo. May.,
Xxlll., 182-3, 1886), but, it must be confessed, with disappointing
results, and I am still as far as ever from being able to satisfactorily
separate the larve ofthesespecies by colour. The special points of distine-
tion noted by Mr. Porritt are mentioned above. In 1892, I collected on
Stachys sylvatica, probably quite 1000 Alucitid larve and pup, mostly
in the former stage, from which about 450 cosmodactyla, Hb., and 21
punctidactyla, Haw., together with numbers of ichneumons (Apanteles
fuliginosus, Wesm.), subsequently emerged. Finding that the purplish-
pink ground colour in the larva was frequently not associated with
either particularly conspicuous white subdorsal lines, or a blackish
head, I carefully sorted out the larve, when in their last skin, into
separate, labelled, cages, to test these supposed characteristics, each in
turn, and soon proved, by breeding the imagines, that no reliance
whatever could be placed on the colour of the body of the larva, or
the conspicuousness of the subdorsal stripes. A batch, separated
solely because their subdorsal stripes were specially conspicuous,
yielded many cosmodactyla, Hb., but no punctidactyla, Haw., whereas

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 287

one in which this was not the case produced two punctidactyla among
many cosmodactylu, and the larve from which cosmodactyla was bred
showed every shade between pink and deep purple, to say nothing of
the green varieties. The heads of the larve showed wonderful
variation, from bone-coloured, dirty-white, and greenish-white, with
very faint traces of pale brown markings, or, in extreme cases, with no
markings at all, through green or yellowish-brown, strongly marked
with dark brown or black, down to wholly black. Very few larve
could be included in the batch that was kept apart, solely because
their heads were entirely black, their bodies being of various colours,
and their subdorsal stripes varying much in intensity. These, how-
ever, yielded interesting results, for, of the four moths that emerged,
three were punctidactyla, Haw., and only one cosmodactyla, Hb.!
Thus encouraged, I then sorted out a number of larve into three
cages, the first containing larve whose heads were wholly black, or
almost wholly so, the second holding those in whose heads the paler
ground colour was only about half obscured with black, whilst in the
third cage were those whose heads showed still less black marking, or
none at all. But, to my great disappointment, no punctidactyla were
bred from any of these three cages, not even from the first, of which I
had great hopes! Unluckily, 16 of the 21 punetidactyla bred that
season were collected as pups, so only 5 larve were included in these
experiments. I was still more unfortunate in 1904, for, from some
1500 larve and pup found that year in South Devon, only 8 puncti-
dactyla were bred among 758 cosmodactyla, and all three were met
with as pupe. But the immense numbers of cosmodactyla larve, then
kept under constant observation, showed the same extraordinary
amount of variation, as did those collected in J892, in the colour of
the head, as well as in that of the body, and the conspicuousness, or
the reverse, of the white subdorsal lines. It must, of course, be borne
in mind that, in cosmodactyla, and probably in its ally, the head is
black until the last larval moult, and that the larva, no matter what
its previous colour has been, becomes, for protection, quite green when
it is full-fed, and is just about to pupate. Perhaps the individual larve,
belonging to any one family of either species, often show only a some-
what limited amount of variation in the colour of the head, etc., and
this may account for Mr. Porritt having been led by the larvie, received
from me, to believe that the differences he noticed were reliable. In
this connection it is worthy of mention that whereas, referring to
larvee of cosmodactyla, presumably resulting from females I sent him,
Dr. Chapman wrote (in litt., September 29th, 1904): ‘I see little or
no variation in the colour and markings of the head,’ I was, at that very
time, collecting wild larvie of this species which showed considerable
differences in the colour of the head, and infinite variation in the
amount of the black markings thereon, some having the head entirely
black, or nearly so, whilst in others this colour was altogether absent,
except in the ocelli. Both the purple and green forms of the larva are
without doubt protective.”

Foopriants.—Almost polyphagous, especially affecting the blossoms
of leguminous, labiate and composite plants—Stachys sylvatica (Frey),
S. recta (Hofmann), S. palustris (Réssler), S. speciosa, S. coccinea
(Richter), S. officinalis (teste Sorhagen), Salvia glutinosa, S. pratensis
(von Hornig and Hofmann), Huphrasia lutea (Schmid), /. officinalis
(teste Sorhagen), Bartsia odontites (Button), Calamintha nepeta (Schmid),

288 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

C. elinopodium (Clinopodium vulgare), Mentha sp. (Jeffrey), Jurinia (Ser-
ratula) pollichti (von Heyden), Vaccinium oxycoccus (Hering), Mimulus car-
dinalis (McIntyre), Galeopsis tetrahit (Harwood), Ononts spinosa, O. repens
(Frey), O. arvensis (Stollwerck), Hrica tetralix (Freer), Calluna vulgaris
(Réssler), cultivated pelargoniums (Zeller), Geraniwn rotundifolium
(Sich), Carlina (teste Sorhagen). Bankes writes: ‘‘I have found the
larve of this species plentifully on flower-spikes of Stachys sylvatica,
and not uncommonly on those of S. palustris, and have also taken the
imago in some spots where there could be no reasonable doubt that
the larve had fed on Ononis repens, and in others where it had
probably fed on Erica tetralix, or one of its near allies.” MelIntyre
notes that he discovered larve eating the contents of the seed-pods of
Mimulus cardinalis, at Leytonstone; D’Orville, that Zeller found larve,
on July 20th, 1846, on a garden pelargonium, boring into the buds,
but that some he found at Alphington ate also the leaves, petals, and
tips of the flower-buds; South found them feeding on restharrow, and
on the flowers and unripe seeds of Stachys sylvatica, at Ventnor; N.C.
Rothschild, on restharrow, broom and geranium. Hofmann says that,
although flowers are the usual food, the larve also eat the underside
of young leaves of several of the foodplants. (See H'nt. Rec., xvii., p. 48.)

ParasitEs.—Bankes writes (in litt.): ‘‘ Probably at least 50 per
cent. of all the larve that I have collected in Devon and Dorset have
been infested with the larva of a parasitic fly, identified by Mr. Claude
Morley as Apanteles fuliginosus, Wesm., which also occurs in Belgium,
Holland, and Germany, and has been bred from four species of Tineina.
The infested larva can, when moderately grown, be readily recognised
by its sickly yellowish colour, and finally, instead of its pupating, the
Braconid larva comes forth from inside its host, and immediately
spins its neat, elliptical, straw-coloured, silken cocoon, usually on the
flower-spike of the foodplant.’’ Riding says (in litt.): ‘‘ The larve
are always very much ichneumoned, and, in 1898, I think I did not
breed 10 imagines, out of more than 60 larve taken, owing to this
cause, and this has generally been the case in other years.” (See Ent.
Rec., xvit., p. 47.)

Puparium.—The larva spins a pad of white silk, usually on the
flowering-stem of the foodplant, to which it attaches itself before
undergoing pupation. The pupa is fixed by its cremaster thereto, and,
when situated among the calyces of Stachys, is somewhat difficult of
detection. Barrett says that it attaches itself by the tailhooks to the
flower-spikes, between two of the whorls of fiowers, looking wonder-
fully like a withered blossom itself. Bankes writes (in litt.): “Careful
observations made on an immense number of pup found in nature on
Stachys sylvatica prove that, as a general rule, they are attached, by the
anal armature only, to a long slight pad of white silk, spun on the stem
of the flower-spike, and hang head downwards along the portion of
stem between two of the whorls of calyces, but exceptions are not
rare, and pupze have been met with in the following positions:
(1) horizontal; pupa attached to either the upper or underside of a
whorl, and with head pointing inwards, or, more rarely, outwards ;
(2) horizontal; pupa attached, on either the upper ov underside of a
leaf or leaflet, to either the midrib, or the margin, or the intervening
surface, and with the head pointing directly, or else obliquely, either
inwards or outwards; (8) perpendicular; pupa attached to the stem of
the flower-spike, and standing erect along it with the head pointing

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 289

upwards, thus exactly reversing the usual position; (4) perpendicular ;
pupa attached to upperside of a whorl of calyces, and standing quite
erect, head upwards, away from the stem, and with no support of any
kind except at, and close to, the anal extremity. I have only, as yet,
met with a solitary pupa in this very remarkable attitude. The precise
method of attachment is as follows: At 1mm. from the actual anal
extremity, the pupa has, ventrally, a cluster of stiff bristles with hooked
ends, which, together with the armature of the anal extremity itselt,
are firmly fixed into the long silken pad spun by the larva. The pupa
has thus the power of maintaining any position, quite independently
of any support except that afforded it by the silken pad; if, for instance,
it is attached to the underside of a horizontal leaf, it maintains a
horizontal position equally with the leaf itself. Shortly before the
moth emerges, the pupa assumes a somewhat semicircular attitude,
raising itself anteriorly, and curling itself back over its posterior
segments, probably to allow to the lengthy legs the free play which
would be impossible if the normal position were maintained through-
out.’ Chapman says that, in several instances, in confinement,
he has observed that the larval skin is entangled amongst the
dorsal spines (columns) on the back of the abdominal segments of the
pupa, either those on the 3rd abdominal or those behind. This may
be normal, accidental, or a mark of debility, but which, he has no
erounds for deciding, but he is not quite sure that it is not due to a
few threads of silk spun about the larva by other larvee searching for a
pupatine-place. He further remarks that it is to be noted that the larva
prefers to pupate on a slope with the head down, but will apparently
approve the underside of a horizontal surface, but appears to be rarely
fixed with its head upwards. This seems, he says, to be a feature with
many “plume ”’ larve.

Pupa.—The length of the pupais 8mm.-9mm. The colour is, in
all cases, varied by markings, chiefly of olive, pink, or reddish-brown,
on a green ground; ina few the ground-colour so predominates that the
pupa may be called green ; in the majority it is so largely overlaid by olive
and brown as to be little in evidence, and again, in a few cases, the pupa
may be called reddish or brown, whilst, in one or two, it is rather terra-
cotta, with reddish to black markings. The parts of the pupa where
the different colours predominate are very various; thus, one specimen has
the appendages and greater part of the dorsum of thorax, and 1st and 2nd
abdominal segments, green, with the rest brownish-red. Another has wings
and appendages beautifully tinted with pink, with abdomen (especially
beneath) green. As the markings that are practically always present,
one may note those found in the greenest (palest) pupa. (1) This pupa
is quite green throughout, except the markings. The dorsal column
on the 8rd abdominal segment is most conspicuous, almost black,
with a pale tip; from this a brownish shade runs forward a little
way alone the dorsal flange, and also downwards and forwards to the
anal angle of wing, the nearest point of the wing to column, continuing
to, and gradually fading out at, centre of wing, making an oblique
downwards and forwards stripe; parallel with this, in front, is a similar
stripe from the middle of the 2nd abdominal at the flange, where the
beginning is nearly black; the rest of the band across the wing, nearly
to antenna, is dark olive-green, as, indeed, is the wing-portion of the
other. This forward one is, in reality, more pronounced than the posterior

290 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

one, but looks less so as it wants the high spine, which exists on the
3rd, but not on the 2nd, abdominal segment. The beak, antenna-bases
(where they contribute to dorsal flange), and dorsal flange in front of the
mesothorax, are whitish, almost porcellanous. The remainder of the
flange is tinted with brownish-pink, as are the dorsal spines of the 4th,
5th, and 6th abdominal segments; the tip of the appendage-case is
fuscous. The lateral abdominal flange is whitish, and the abdomen
looks white above spiracles, but between the oblique lines is more bright.
There is a darker green dorsal line, and oblique (downwards and back-
wards, as in larva) green lines pass through this, or rather from the
dorsal abdominal spines. The 8th, 9th, and 10th abdominal segments
are faintly brownish. (2) To take nowa very dark example, the colours
are terra-cotta, pink, and black, the last, in places, as if it were thinly
laid on, so as to be dark fuscous. Green is still present on the 4th,
5th, and 6th abdominal segments, but is really (as it looks) the green
interior seen through the pinkish cuticle. White is present along theedge
of flange in front of mesothorax, and on the tipsof spines and hair-points,
except the large spine of the 3rd abdominal segment, where the tip is
brown. These amounts of white and green are too small to produce
any effect on the general appearance of the pupa, except, perhaps, to
give ita little brilliance. Pink is the prevailing ground colour, but with ©
an underlying olive, and with abundant, dark, nearly black, markings.
The dark marks, running obliquely forward on the 2nd and 8rd abdominal
segments, are very large, and practically absorb all the wing-surface,
which, however, has some olive lines between the veins, towards the
hindmargin ; the olive tint of the appendages is overlaid with fuscous, and
shows darker bands at intervals; the 4th, 5th, and 6th abdominal
segments have markings that are also apparently present in
front, but are obscured by flange, spine, and appendages; a dark
dorsal line, a dark supraspiracular line, and another between these,
somewhat interrupted; below iv and v are two broad dark bands, meeting
somewhat in the middle of each segment, so as almost to form one very
broad band. Ventrally, there is another dark band on either side.
Except subdorsally and ventrally, the ground colour is wanting on the
8th, 9th, and 10th abdominal segments. The most striking feature
of this pupa (as in that of Marasmarcha lunaedactyla) is the great
spine on the 8rd abdominal segment. This may be described as the
base of tubercle 1 of that segment. The pupa is here about 1:5mm.
thick, and the spine stands up about O0‘7mm. The double dorsal flange
of the front segments runs down the 8rd abdominal segment directly
to the spine, which has the appearance of being its culmination. The
ridge of the flange forms a curve along the front of the spine until its
extremity is directed forwards as a sharp hook. This hook is not the
tubercle ; at least, the hair of tubercle 1 stands on the front margin of
the spine, about two-fifths of its length from the base. The spine is
very flattened from side to side, and has an irregular flange-like
extension on its posterior margin ; tubercle i is not on this spine, but
on a conical offset from its posterior base. It might be said that ii
emulates i, and, without quite securing a separate base, forms a pointed
cone, directed a little backwards, and only about one-sixth the length
of i. The hair of 11 arises from quite the base of this cone behind.
The 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th abdominal segments have precisely
similar structures, but on a very small scale, and without the dark

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 291

colouring, so that they are quite inconspicuous; the 6th abdominal
segment has the largest, the 5th the next largest, then come the 4th, 7th,
and 8th. The hairs are—i from half way up the front, i1 from the
base behind ; i and ii, on these spines, might be described as arising
from the same base, or, as on separate bases, and having the bases
connected by a ridge or flange; the 1st and 2nd abdominals might
be described as having the same structures, but so reduced as to
amount to merely slight irregularities on the flanges on which they
occur. These flanges are also marked features of the pupa; they are
raised ridges, or crests, running from the anterior margin of the
mesothorax to the spine of the 3rd abdominalsegment. Atthespineof the
3rd abdominal segment they cease, there being no trace of them on
the 3rd abdominal segment behind the spine, or on the following
segments, either before or behind. On the highest point of the
- mesothorax they rather suddenly approximate, and form a high
double crest, with a somewhat abrupt slope in front. As the trans-
verse ridges of the segments (subsegmentation ?) pass over them, they
produce a finely-crenulated margin. The general form of the pupa
has little of the large thoracic swelling, characteristic of many “plumes,”’
but has some appearance of it, owing to this mesothoracic portion of
the ridge, which materially raises the dorsum here, on a lateral view.
Apart from the spine on the 8rd abdominal segment, this is about the
thickest part of the pupa, and, for the two or three following segments,
it is nearly as thick, rapidly dwindling from the 6th abdominal segment
to the apex, much like a neatly-sharpened pencil. The wing-cases extend
to the end of the 3rd abdominal segment, attached to the segments ;
beyond this, the pointed apex extends nearly to the end of the 4th
abdominal seement (but free from it), when the pupa is contracted. In the
empty pupa-case, with the intersegmental membranes expanded, the
apex is at the anterior margin of the 4th abdominal segment. The apices
of the wings and appendages, in the living pupa, thus form a sort of
sheath from the front of the 4th abdominal segment. When the pupa
bends back, the 4th abdominal, of course, is separated from this sheath, and
stands back at an angle. ‘The rest of the appendage-case, containing
the 2nd and 3rd pairs of legs, and maxille, extends further as a straight
baton, to the middle of the 7th abdominal segment, having basally, at
each side, the pointed extension of the wing-apex (beyond Poulton’s
line) as a strut or support; its length is about half asegment. Below
the spiracles (on the 8rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th abdominal
segments) is a lateral flange, which might be described as the longi-
tudinally expanded base of iv-++v, which are on its ridge, and bear two
fine hairs pointing forwards. In some specimens, iv and y look as if on
a similar base to the spines supporting i and ii. Above the spiracle,
iii also points forwards, from a very slightly-raised whitish base. The
spiracles (2nd to 7th abdominal) are easily seen as pale raised dots, with
a minute, central, black point (in specimen examined, but the colours
may vary). ‘The head-sculpturing is a httle complex. ‘There is a blunt,
rounded beak in front of the clypeal region, then the antenna presents
a raised crest, which, at the beginning, is in line with the dorsal crests,
but does not join them, and passes outwards along the antenna as far
as front spiracle, divided into two parts by the joint of the flagellum.
On the front end of the pupa (head, prothorax, and front of mesothorax)
ave a number of hairs of some length (0:3mm., and 0-4inm.) and stiffness,

292 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

of these, 5 pairs are on dorsal ridges and flanges, viz., 1 on end of
beak (which here ranges with flanges), 1 on antenna-base, 1 on
prothorax, and 2 on mesothorax. Outside these are four pairs, 2 on
prothorax, and 2 on mesothorax. The two waves of antennal flanges are
continued by the basal ridges of the wing as two more waves, completing
the margin of the front of the pupa. There are 2 pairs of hairs on
metathorax. On the abdominal segments (the 3rd and onwards) at
wing-bases, as well as the two minute ones on flanges, there are a
dozen or more (some hid under segment in front) fine transverse
ridges (subsegments?, hardly, as they anastomose a little); of these, about
6 are crossed by the bases of the dorsal spines; these are the posterior
6 ; the spine-bases reaching to posterior border of segment (apart from
intersegmentations) (Chapman, October 4th, 1904). In this, as in many
other ‘‘plume”’ pupz, in which I have not mentioned the point in my
descriptions, probably as being too familiar, the lst and 2nd legs
at their upper ends abut against the antenna, which makes its outward
sweep rather long to accommodate them ; the result is that the Ist leg
can hardly be said to come up to the eye, as is usual in most pupe, but
comes up past it, the eye being not in front of the leg, but beside its
inner border. In examining a dehisced pupa, various points may be
noted, not easily seen in the living pupa. ‘The spiracle-cover of the
mesothorax is a short domed structure covered with fine ridges and
abundant spinelets, though these look as if soft rather than hard. The
dorsal head-piece is practically absent, and it fails very often to carry
the eye-piece, which very frequently remains more or less attached to
the head-piece. The ridges on the abdominal segments appear to be
16 or 17 in number, but are difficult to count, not because invisible,
but from not being persistent for any length; they are sharp and
narrow, and with fluted sides. The minute sculpture shows the whole
surface to be formed of rounded nodules, and the ridges consist of certain
of these raised in irregular rows. The cremaster consists of a forward
portion on the bosses beneath the 9th abdominal segment, each of
which carries about 32 hooks, about 0-2mm. long, and terminating in a
fish-hook point. The posterior portion is beneath the extremity of the
cremastral spine, and is almost confined to the ventral surface, hardly
any hooks being on the margins, as is so regular a feature in Platyp-
tilia. There are 50 to 60 hooks on either side of this portion. On
the 4th, 5th, and 6th abdominal (the 3rd is covered and soft) segments,
the scars of the prolegs are very conspicuous, oval, brown ridges, paler
within, as if hollow. The hindwing passes down to just beyond
spiracle on the 2nd abdominal segment (Chapman, February 14th,
1906). Hubner figured the pupa of this species (Raupen, etc., ix.,
Alue. 1., pl. C., figs. c-d) and reference is made thereto by Stainton
(Ent. Ann., 1856, p. 59).

CoLOUR VARIATION IN PUPA.—Among the many intermediate varieties,
some of which are so decidedly olive in hue, that they look as though
they must be going to yield punctidactyla, Haw. (acanthadactyla, Hb.),
between the strongly-green and the strongly-purple pupz of cosmodac-
tyla, Hb., the most striking that I have seen has the ground-colour pure
cream-buff, with the ordinary oblique dark markings, and this form itself
includes various minor varieties, some individuals being distinctly
tinged with green, or with one of the other colours towards which the

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 293

pupa has a known tendency. The pupa becomes very dark in colour
before the escape of the imago (Bankes). See also antea, p. 289.

‘SIMILARITY OF COLORATION OF LARVE AND PUP# oF AMBLYPTILIA
COSMODACTYLA AND A. punctipactyta.—In the Clee Hill district of
Shropshire, the larve of A. punctidactyla were found feeding on
Stachys sylvatica, and the pupa remained suspended to the spike on
which the larva had fed; subsequently, at Croxton, in Norfolk, larve
that appeared precisely similar, were found feeding on the same plant,
and eventually suspended themselves in the same way, yet these turned
out, without exception, to be cosmodactyla, Hb. The larve and pupe
were so similar that the characteristic differences must be very slight ;
both were green, with a slight purplish tint in some; both slightly
hairy. Larvee since taken and reared by a friend from the same plant,
in Dorsetshire, produced A. punctidactyla. From this it is assumed
that A. punctidactyla is often overlooked, and the larve and pup
mistaken for those of A. cosmodactyla (Williams). Bankes, however,
considers this assumption erroneous, urging that an insect so rare as
A. punctidactyla has been proved to be, by his extensive experience in
the very same district of Dorset as yielded the larve alluded to by
Williams, and elsewhere, cannot be ‘‘ often ’’ overlooked, in any stage,
as A. cosmodactyla, Hb.

_ TIME OF APPEARANCE.-—The species is to be found in early March, at
sallow bloom, and on until June, the specimens observed during this period
having probably hybernated ; throughout the greater part of July and early
August newly-emerged imagines are to be obtained, followed by another
brood in September and October, the individuals of which hybernate
and reappear in the spring. Early specimens have been recorded in
the south of Europe, e.g.,in Portugal, on May 8th, in Morocco in April,
and by Mann, at Brussa, in May, but whether hybernated, or freshly-
emerged, isnot determinable. The insect has also been recorded for May
and July in Scandinavia. In central Kurope, it occurs much as in
Britain ; in the Auvergne district, Sand notes it as occurring in July and
October, hybernating and reappearing in March; in the Dauphiny
Alps we found the first brood in early August, 1896, at nearly 5000ft.
elevation, and also in the Piedmontese Alps, at Bobbie, in early August,
1901. In Germany, at Stettin, it is noted only in late autumn and
spring (after hybernation) (Bittner), but at Hamburg, from June to
September (no distinction being made in the broods) (Sauber); in the
Oberharz, it has been found in October (Hoffmann); near Wiesbaden,
in August, and at the end of October, the latter brood hybernating
(Réssler), and also at Frankfort-on-Main (Koch) ; from Brandenburg, it
is reported in June, August, and end of October (when it hybernates)
(Sorhagen) ; whilst in Silesia, it is only noted in late August-September,
and in the spring (Méschler), and, at Regensburg, in September and
October, and in the spring (Schmid); in Wirttemberg it is recorded in
May, and August to October (Steudel and Hofmann); and in Baden,
in July and early August, and September, hybernating and reappearing in
spring (Meess and Spuler). In Switzerland, Frey records it as double-
brooded, July (end)-August, and again in late August-September, the
individuals of the latter brood hybernating. Luff observes that, in the
Channel Islands, in Guernsey, it appeared in August and September,
1898. Ash says that the ‘Selby’? moorland examples certainly hyber-
nate, for he takes a few specimens every spring, and they are abundant
in August. Barrett says that ‘ the species is on the wing in June and

294 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

July, possibly after hybernation, and apparently, as another generation,
in August and throughout the autumn, even emerging in October and
November, but whether as a third generation, or only a second, or even
a deferred emergence, is not clearly ascertained.’’ Bankes notes:
‘“‘Tmagines, that presumably have hybernated, are occasionally met
with from about the middle of May till the middle of July, and during
the latter part of July, at any rate, in the south of England, young
larve may generally be found already feeding on flower-spikes of
Stachys sylvatica, etc. There must be at least two broods in the south,
for, throughout the whole of August and September, and the earlier part
of October, larve can be collected, and they are therefore obtainable,
without any intermission, over a period of nearly three months, during
the greater part of which time pup# are also procurable on the flower-
or seed-spikes of the foodplants. The moths of the first brood begin to
emergeabout the middleof August.” Reid notesitas occurring in Juneand
August in Aberdeenshire, and Henderson observes that newly-emerged
specimens are to be found at the end of July, whilst hybernated examples
are not infrequent in May and early June, at Garelochhead, in Dumbar-
tonshire. Porritt notes hybernated examples occurring.in Yorkshire in
June, newly-emerged ones in August. Although such a well-known
species, continental lepidopterists give but little detailed account of it,
and the exact records of its appearance abroad are comparatively few.
We have collected the following :—ContInENTAL RECoRDS.—May 28rd,
1846, at Syracuse, June 28th, 1846, in Catania (Zeller) ; May 17th,
1862, near Pichtendahl (Nolcken) ; April 22nd, 1870, at Marshen, in
northwest Morocco (Blackmore); May 8th, 1880, on the hill, south-
west of Almodovar (Ragonot); May 17th, 1892, at Hvaloerne; July
12th-17th, 1892, at Sireosen (Strand); August 12th, 1896, in the
Combe de Malaval, about 3 miles below La Grave; July 27th-31st, 1898,
at Bourg St. Maurice; August 9th-18th, 1901, at Bobbie (Tutt); July
21st, 1901, at Nasenica, in Bosnia (Rebel) ; July 10th, 1908, at Ktivaz
(Blachier). British rEcorps.—Hmerged October 14th-16th, 1863, from
pup found on geranium at Wandsworth (Tuely); September 22nd, 1865,
at Teignmouth (Jordan); bred October 1st, 1865, from pupe found
attached by tail-end to flower-stalks of a garden geranium, at Alphington
(D’Orville); June 9th, 1867, at Guestling (Bloomfield); end of August,
1867, at Herne Bay (Buckmaster) ; July, 1868, in Rossshire (White) ;
July 16th-17th, 1869, at Witherslack (Gregson); July 7th-8th, 1870, on
the Bolt Head (Mathew) ; bred throughout October, 1871, from larve
collected in September, in the Gravesend district (Button) ; July, 1879,
at Dutton (Hodgkinson) ; August 5th, 1879, at Folkestone (Sang) ;
abundant at Croydon, in August, 1879 (Gill); September 3rd, 1879, near
Witham (Cansdale) ; July 7th-9th, 1883, common at Dover (Coverdale);
August, 1883, at Sandwich (Shepherd); August 17th-19th, 1884,
imagines bred from larvee taken by Bankes at Corfe Castle (Porritt) ;
October, 1884, at Aberayron (Richardson); imagines bred August 80th-
September 21st, 1886, from larve collected in the Isle of Purbeck,
August 5th-25th, 1886 (Bankes); imagines bred September 21st,
1886, and following days, from larve collected by W. H. B. Fletcher,
September 7th, 1886, at Worthing (Porritt) ; bred October 7th, 1886,
from Sanderstead larve (Sheldon); July 10th, 1887, at Ham
Ponds, August 8th, 1888, at Kingsdown (Tutt); June 6th, 1888, at
Chickerell; ?, probably hybernated, captured June 17th, 1888, at
Llangennech, in Cardiganshire, eggs laid same day, produced, in

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 295

due course, imagines, August 10th, 1888, etc.; others bred from Port-
land larve, October 27th, 1888 (Richardson); June 14th, 1888,
in the Isle of Purbeck; June 20th, 1888, in the Isle of Portland
(Bankes); August 26th, 1888, at Greenhithe; August 30th, 1888, at
Bexley(Bower); early- and mid-August, 1890, at Deal (Tutt); September
23rd, 1891, at Luss (Dalglish); May 21st, 1892, at Newcastle, Co.
Down (Watts); May 25th-27th, July 18th,and August 19th, in the
Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June 5th, 1892, at Cathcart (Dalglish) ;
July 10th-27th, 1892, at Aldeburgh (Cruttwell); September 13th,
1892, at Panton (Raynor); September 22nd, 1892, imago at Lee;
imagines bred October 5th-November 8th, 1892, from larvee found at
Lee and Mottingham ; two imagines, October 7th, 1892, at Chislehurst
(Bower); 1mago bred, August 20th, 1892, from pupa forwarded from
Folkestone on Ononis; imagines bred August 20th, 1892, from larve
collected in August, in the Isle of Purbeck; also imagines bred September
19th-November 29th, 1892, from larve collected August 15th-October
5th, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); August 8rd-15th, 1893, at
Lochgoilhead ; August 10th, 1898, on Ben Donich and August 18th,
at Stronachlochar (Tutt); mid-August, 1898, near Aberdeen (Reid) ;
imagines bred September 25th, 1894, onwards, from pupz collected
September 20th-26th, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); May
30th, 1895, near Wemyss (Evans); June 20th, 1895, in the Isle of
Purbeck (Bankes) ; August 22nd, 1895, at Keswick (Beadle) ; a single
specimen, August 20th, 1°96, at Great Ayton (Lofthouse); August 18th,
1897, at Lynmouth (T. H. Briggs); August 24th, 1897, at Oxton, Devon
(Studd); June 6th, 1898, at Perry Wood (Hdwards); June 8th-22nd,
1898, at Camghouran (Porritt); July 11th-August 16th, 1898, at Oxton,
Devon (Studd); imagines bred August 8rd-5th, and September 10th,
1898, from larve found at Buckerell; imagines captured, somewhat
worn, October 24th, 26th, 28th, 1898, at Buckerell (Riding); August
12th, 1898, two imagines on Dartford Heath ; October 20th, 1898, an
imago at Lee (Bower) ; imago captured August 21st, 1898, at Leyton-
stone, eggs laid in confinement, imagines bred therefrom September
29th-October 14th, 1898 (McIntyre) ; imago on October 22nd, 1898, at
Hesleden Dene (J. Gardner); October 26th, 1898, at Lynmouth
(T. H. Briggs); early August, 1899, near Honiton; bred imagines,
August 24th, 1899, from larve from Harpford Wood (Riding) ;
July 31st, 1900, at Deal; August Ist-3rd, 1900, at St. Margaret’s
Bay (James); August 2nd, 1900, at Cofton; August 9th, 1900,
at Oxton, Devon (Studd); August 14th, 1900, at Dartmouth
(Bankes); June 21st, 1902, at Oxton, Devon; August 19th, 1902,
at Dawlish (Studd); imagines captured August 29th, 1902, in
the Isle of Purbeck; imagines bred October 2nd-25th, 1902, from
larvee and pupe collected September 25th-October 1st, at Dartmouth ;
imagines captured August 23rd, 1904, at Wareham; also August 24th-
29th, and October 22nd, 1904, in the Isle of Purbeck ; bred September
5th-October 22nd, 1904, from larvee and pupe collected at Dartmouth,
September 8rd-October 3rd; also imagines captured at same place from
early September to October 10th (see /nt. Rec., xvil., pp. 47-48) ; October
4th, 1904, at Lynmouth (T. H. Briggs); March 19th, 1905, on sallow
blossom, at Hazeleigh (Raynor).

Hasirs.—This species hides during the morning, but, in the after-
noon and late evening, haunts flowers in its neighbourhood, the nectar

296 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

of which it devours greedily. In the early spring it comes to sallow-
bloom, and in the late autumn to ivy blossom. The various flowers
said to be attractive to it are—Calluna vulyaris on the slopes of Ben
Donich and at Stronachlochar (Tutt), Cannock Chase (Freer), and at
Chislehurst (Bower); Ononis arvensis in Dawlish Warren, so
abundant that as many as 50 were observed in a single afternoon
(Jordan), also in Epping Forest (Machin’‘, at Leominster (Hutchin-
son), near Sheerness (J. J. Walker), and at Tenby (Fox); Thymus
serpyllum at Deal (Tutt); and Linaria vulgaris at Teignmouth
(Jordan). We noticed it very commonly flying about Salvia plants
at Bobbie, in afternoon and early evening, and Hudd says it is
not scarce at flowers (including ivy-bloom) in the Bristol district,
during autumn. There are also noted—several captured in
garden, hovering over flowers, in Guernsey, at dusk (Luff), flying at
dusk at Greenhithe, and among garden geraniums at Lee (Bower),
many found on ivy bloom in October, near Sheerness (J. J. Walker).
It occasionally, as may be supposed from its love of flowers, comes
to sugar, e.g., at Hesleden Dene (J. Gardner), etc.; and is specially
attracted by light, e.g., at Dutton (Hodgkinson), at Oxton, Devon
(Studd); at Lee (Bower), etc. Barrett says: ‘‘The moth hides among
herbage during the day, very often, in the summer, among restharrow
or heather, later in the year in hedges and bushes, and is of somewhat
perplexing habits. On the coast, and in sandy districts, it is thus often
common, hiding in the beds of restharrow, and keeping quite close to
that plant, but, in autumn, seems to have forsaken these spots for the
lanes and hedges, and in them it may be found till winter. It is
supposed by some that the late autumn specimens hybernate, and
reappear early in June, but this even seems to be mainly a surmise;
the June specimens are not worn, yet no larve have been apparently
observed in the spring. In autumn it will come, at night, to ivy-bloom
and heather blossom, and to sugar and light.’’ One can, however, hardly
doubt that this species really does hybernate (see antea, p. 298). In
the daytime it is sometimes to be found resting on fences, e.y.,
Dartford Heath fence, etc. (Bower); at other times among the
herbage of a hedge-side, e.g., at Oxton, Devon (Studd); or among
the heather on a moor, e.y., at Haslemere (Barrett). Bankes notes
that the moth usually flies during the evening, and continues on
the wing certainly until nightfall, and probably for some time
after it, and says that, on October 22nd, 1904, he took three
males on the wing during bright sunshine, in the latter part of the
afternoon (circ. 8.15 p m.-4.15 p.m.), but, at so late a date, one would
naturally expect them to come on flight earlier than during the longer
days. He adds that “the moths appear to emerge, indifferently, at any
time of day, either morning, afternoon, or evening, but few, if any,
left the pupa during the hours of night.”

Hasirats.—The places where this species may be met are exceed-
ingly varied. We have taken it on the chalk-cliffs at Dover and in the
Isle of Wight, on the sandhills of Deal, in the lanes near Strood, on the
downs at Cuxton, on the heaths clothing the sides of the mountains
above Lochgoilhead and Garelochhead; at an elevation of 3000ft.-
4000ft. in the Pellice Valley, in Piedmont, and at an elevation of
5000{ft. in the Dauphiny Alps, near La Grave. In Essex it occurs
in gardens (Raynor); also at Lee, among geraniums (Bower); in
Devonshire, at Buckerell, it prefers woods, copses, lanes, and hedges

AMBLYPTILIA COSMODACTYLA. 297

by the sides of fields (Riding), but in grassy lanes at Oxton, Devon
(Studd). It is found in woods having an undergrowth of ling, in
the Huddersfield district (Porritt) ; common on all heaths, especially
in the spring, in Aberdeen and Kincardine, also at Forres (Reid); on
an open heath, surrounded by young spruce trees, at Wemyss (vans);
high up on the heathery fells around Keswick (Beadle) ; on heaths
at Haslemere (Barrett), and at Chislehurst (Bower). It is abundant
in Dawlish Warren among Ononis (Jordan); also common among
Ononis in Kpping Forest (Machin); and near Leominster also among
Ononis (Hutchinson) ; it is common on the crest of the coast sandhills
at Aldeburgh (Cruttwell); and in wet places on Cannock Chase (Freer).
Barrett considers it to be most attached to coast districts in Britain,
but this is hardly borne out by our list of localities. Bankes observes
that “the species seems pretty generally distributed in Dorset, and
parts, at any rate, of south Devon, and, whilst usually more or less
common, is abundant in some seasons. It is, thanks to its being
polyphagous, able to make itself equally at home either on the coast-
line, or inland, where it is found, both in the more sheltered parts of
the open heaths, and also along the hedgerows in the arable and grassy
districts.” ‘The locality it haunted, above Bobbie, was a very rough,
steep, flower-covered slope, in the Pellice Valley, where ‘‘plumes”’ were
very abundant, and where the species was chiefly disturbed from
amongst a giant Salvia that grows there. At La Grave it was found on
the steep slopes by the side of the road some little distance down the
valley, as well as on the lower pastures above the village. In Germany
the localities appear to be much as in Britain—hedgesides and woods
where Stachys abounds ; sloping downs and fields, among various
species of Ononis; heaths, among Calluna; and gardens, among
cultivated pelargoniums, Stachys, etc. It is found, not only in the
lowland districts, but reaches up into the mountains to an elevation
of some 8000ft. or 4000ft., for example, in the Austrian Tyrol, the
Hartz mountains, etc.

British LocaLities.—Generally distributed throughout England,

Ireland and Scotland. Asrrpren: very local—Ben-na-chie (Reid). ANTRIM :
Belfast district, generally distributed (Watts). Arayiu: Lochgoilhead, Ben Donich
(Tutt), Dunoon (Chapman). Berwick (teste Barrett). Bure: Arran (Morton), Brodick
(Sharpin). Campripce: Cambridge (Stainton). Carpiean: Llangennech (Richard-
son). CarMARTHEN : Aberayron (Richardson). CHEsuHire: Bidston, Tranmere (teste
Leech). Cork: Glengariff (Tutt coll.), Glandore, Timoleague, Courtmacsherry (Dono-
van). CUMBERLAND: Keswick (Beadle), Lake district (Stainton). Drrpy: Willington
(Garneys), Burton (G. Baker). Drvon: Bolt Head (Mathew), Teignmouth
(Jordan), Dartmouth (Bankes), Oxton, near Exeter, Cofton, Dawlish (Studd),
Harpford Woods, near Honiton, Buckerell (Riding), Alphington (D’Orville),
Plymouth (Reading), Lynmouth (T. H. Briggs). Dorsrr: Isle of Purbeck,
Wareham, Portland (Bankes), Weymouth (Richardson), Swanage (Fox), Bloxworth,
fairly common (Cambridge). Down: Neweastle (Watts). DumBarron: local, Gareloe-
head (Henderson), Luss (Dalglish). Duruam: Hesleden Dene (J. Gardner). Exer:
Forres (Reid). Essex: Witham, Ravenhall (Cansdale), Saffron Walden (Jeffrey),
Leytonstone (McIntyre), Epping Forest (Machin), Hazeleigh (Raynor), Leigh
(Vaughan), Colchester (Harwood). FrrManaau (teste Barrett). Free: near Wemyss
(Evans). GuoucrsrEn: near Clifton, Westbury-on-Trym, Almondsbury (Hudd), Bristol
(Stainton), Wotton-under-Kdge (Perkins). Hanvs: Bournemouth (Ashdown), Isle
of Wight—Ventnor (South), Portsea (Button), New Forest (Stephens). Herrr-
rorD : Leominster (Hutchinson), Tarrington (J. H. Wood). HERTFORD :
Cheshunt (Boyd). Krnr: Gravesend (Button), Sandwich, Deal, St. Margaret's
Bay (Tutt), Greenhithe, Bexley, Lee, Mottingham, Chislehurst, Dartford
Heath (Bower), Folkestone (Sequeira), Dover (Coverdale), near Sheerness
(J. J. Walker), Alkham, Pembury, Farnham (Stainton), Herne Bay (Buckmaster).

298 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Kerry (teste Barrett). KincarprIne: common (Reid). Lanark: commen, Cleghorn
(Morton). Lancasnrre: throughout (Sharp), Dutton (Hodgkinson). Lincoun:
Panton (Raynor). Mrippiesex: Chiswick (Sich), Kingsbury (Bond). Norroik:
Croxton, St. Faith’s (H. Williams), King’s Lynn (Atmore), Tuddenham (Waters),
Norwich, Aldeby, Cawston, Cromer (Barrett). Pxmproxe: Tenby (Fox), Pembroke
(Barrett). PertH: Camghouran (Porritt), the Trossachs, Stronachlochar (Tutt).
RENrREW: Gourock (Dunsmore), Cathcart (Dalglish). Ross (White). RoxBureH:
Hawick district—near Cowbyres (Guthrie). SuropsHire: Clee Hill district
(H. Williams). Stico: near Sligo (Russ). Somerset: Leigh (Hudd). STarrorp:
Cannock Chase (Freer). Surrotx: Aldeburgh (Cruttwell), Tuddenham (Waters),
Leiston (Walsingham), Lowestoft (Boyd). Surrey: Wandsworth (Tuely), Battersea
Park (Canning), Sanderstead (Sheldon), Box Hill (Machin), Croydon (Gill), Hasle-
mere (Barrett). Sussex: generally distributed—Hastings district, not uncommon,
Guestling (Bloomfield), Worthing, Bramber, between Shoreham and Coombe (W.
H. B. Fletcher), Eastbourne (R. Adkin), Bognor (Lloyd). SurHErLanp (Salvage).
WestMoRLAND: Witherslack (Gregson). Wicktow: Wicklow, Woodenbridge
(Hart). Worcester: Perry Wood (Edwards), Comer Gardens (J. E. Fletcher).
York: Great Ayton (Lofthouse), Huddersfield, rare, Edlington, Doncaster
(Porritt), Everingham, common (Sumner), Skipwith, Selby, common (Ash),
Richmond (Sang), Scarborough (Stainton), York (Prest).

Distrisution.—Probably throughout the Palearctic, and part of the
Nearctic, region. Recorded from Armenia, Syria, Mauretania, Madeira,

Canaries,outside Kurope,alsofrom New York State, etc., in NorthAmerica.
Arrica: [South Africa (teste Fernald), | north-west Morocco—Marshen (Blackmore) ;
Madeira—Funchal (Baker). America: New York—West Farms (Angus), California,
Oregon (Dyar). Asta: Asia Minor—Patara (Loew teste Zeller), near Brussa (Mann),
Persia—Hadschyabad (Staudinger). Austro-Huneary: Bohemia (Nickerl), Lower
Austria—Vienna district, the Prater, Tivoli, Mauer (Mann), Gutenstein (Kollar),
Hernstein, distributed in the foot-hills (Rogenhofer), Tyrol—Glockner district, near
Bozen, Trient, the Dolomite district, Schluderbach (Mann), near Tratzberg, Tauters,
Knutten (Weiler), Carniola—near Oberfeld (Mann), Dalmatia—Fiume (Mann),
Hungary — Nagydg (Aigner), Transsylvania (Rebel). Brxe1um: rare, Foret de
Soigne, Brussels (Crombrugghe). Bosnta anv MHercxecovina: Trebevie
(Apfelbeck), Nasenica (Rebel), Jablanica (Hilf). Bunecaria anp Hast RouMELIA :
near Slivno (Haberhauer). CHANNEL IsLEs: Guernsey — Burnt Lane (Luff).
DENMARK: very rare—Fyven, Odense (Bang-Haas). France: Aube (Jourdheuille,
Cher—St. Florent, Indre—Nohant (Sand), around Pavis, not rare—Fontainebleau,
Montmorency, Bois de Boulogne, Forét de Bondy (Begrand), Dauphiny Alps—
Combe de Malaval, Savoy Alps — Bourg St. Maurice (Tutt), Sadne-et-Loire
(Constant), Doubs—Maison Rouge (Bruand). Grrmany: east and west Prussia,
somewhat rare—near Neuhauser, Kénigsberg (Speiser), Pomerania, very rare—
near Stettin, Carolinenhorst, Vogelsang (Biittner), Mecklenburg—near Neustrelitz
(Messing), Hamburg, rare, Hépen (Sauber), Hanover—Hanover (Glitz), Oberharz
(Hoffmann), Géttingen (Frey), Rhine Provinces—near Crefeld, rare, Friemers-
heimer Damm, near Trier, Aachen, near Uerdingen, rare (Stollwerck), Hesse—near
Wiesbaden (Réssler), near Frankfurt-on-Main (Koch), Waldeck—Rhoden, Arolsen
(Speyer), Nassau (Réssler), Thuringia—near S6mmerda, in the Schmiicker (Knapp),
near Erfurt, rare (Keferstein and Werneburg), Province of Saxony—near Halle
(Stange), near Dessau (Richter), Brandenburg—Frankfurt-on-Oder (Metzner),
Silesia—on the Seefelder, near Reinerz (Standfuss), Upper Lusatia—Nisky, Sarichen
(Méschler), Lichtenau—Lauban, Siegersdorf (Sommer), Kingdom of Saxony—
Saxon Upper Lusatia (Schiitze), Bavaria — near Regensburg, Winzerberge
(Schmid), Wirttemberg—Kochendorf (Steudel and Hofmann), Baden, near Con-
stance, Meersburg, Freiburg, Karlsruhe (Reutti), near Ueberlingen, Hiifingen,
Lahr, Speyer (Meess and Spuler), Alsace—(Peyerimhoff), Palatinate (Meess and
Spuler). Greece (Rebel). Iraty: Piedmontese valleys—Bobbie, ete. (Tutt),
Sicily—Sterracavallo, Madonie (Mina-Palumbo), Syracuse, Catania (Zeller),
Lombardy—Algate (Turati). PorrucaL: southwest of Almodovar (Ragonot).
Rovumanta (Caradja). Russia: Baltic Provinces—Riga, near Lips, Pichtendahl
(Nolcken), Volga district—Casan (Kversmann). Scanpryavia: Swedish Lapland
—Umensis, very rare (Zetterstedt), Barsele (Dahlbom), Scania, Blekinge, north
Bothnia (Wallengren), Norway—Smaalen district, Hvaléerne, near Bélingshaon,
Lister district—Sireosen, Aal (Strand), Saltdalen (Sparre-Schneider). Spamn :
Tragacete (Chapman), Barcelona district, abundant—Belen, San Genis, Otono

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA. 299

(Martorell). SwrrzerLaAnp: rare—Ziirich (Frey), Bremgarten (Boll), the Berneck,
near St. Gallen (Taschler), Degersheim (Miller), Ktivaz (Blachier).

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA, Haworth.

Synonymy.—Species: Punctidactyla, Haw., ‘‘Lep. Brit.,’’ pt. 3, p. 479
(1811); Williams, ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xviii., pp. 212-213 (1882); Tutt, ‘‘ Ent.
Rec.,”’ i., p. 93 (1890) ; ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,’’ i., p. 42 (1891); ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 57 (1895).
Acanthadactyla, Hb., ‘‘ Hur. Schmett.,’’ Aluc. figs. 23-24 (post 1811). Tessera-
dactyla, Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 479 (1811). Punctidactylus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef.
Comp.,’’ p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,”’ fo. 161 (1827); Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,”’
iv., p. 376 (1834); Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,” 1st ed., p. 237, pl. li., fig. 1648 (1839);
Sta., ‘‘Man.,’’ ii., p. 441 (1859); Porritt, ‘‘ Buck. Larve,’’ ix., p. 352, pl.
163, fig. 6 (1901); Barr., ‘‘Lep. Brit. Isles,” ix., p. 360, pl. 414, figs. 5-5a
(1904). Acanthodactyla, ‘‘ Verz.,’’ p. 430 (1825); Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,”’
iv., app. p. 424 (1834); South, ‘‘Hnt.,” xxii., p. 32, var. c (1889); Tutt,
**Kint. Rec.,”’ xi., p. 238 (1899) ; Riding, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,’’ xi., p. 289 (1899). Tessera-
dactylus, Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,’’ fo. 161 (1827); Stphs., ‘Ill. Haust.,”’ iv., p. 376
(1834) ; Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,’’ Ist ed., p. 237, pl. li., fig. 1647 (1839). Cosmo-
dactyla, Tr., ‘‘Die Schmett.,’’ ix., pt. 2, p. 235 (1833); Staud. and Wocke,
“‘Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 342 (in part) (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,”’
ill., pt. 2, p. 788 (1877); Zell., ‘‘ Stett. Ent. Ztg.,”? p. 163 (1878); Frey, ‘‘ Lep.
Schweiz,’’ p. 429 (1880); Jord., ‘‘Hnt. Mo. Mag.,’”’ xviii., p. 117 (1881); Barr.,
“Hint. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 177 (1882) ; Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,”’ p. 56, pl. xvi., fig.
10 (1885); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,” p. 486 (1890); Hofm., ‘‘ Deutsch.
Pter.,’’ p. 65 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Handbk.,’’ p. 433 (1895); Fern., ‘‘ Pter. Nth.
Amer.,”’ p. 24; revd. ed., p. 25 (1898); Riding, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,” x., p. 263 (1898) ;
Staud. and Reb., ‘‘Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 73 (1901); Dyar, ‘‘ List Nth. Am. Lep.,”’
p. 442 (1902); ‘‘ Proc. Un. Sta. Nat. Mus.,’’ xxv., p. 399 (1902); xxvii., p. 922
(1904). Acanthodactylus, vars. c, d, e, Zell., ‘‘Isis,’’ p. 785 (1841); ‘‘ Linn.
Ent.,’’ vi., p. 338, vars. c, d, e (1852). Cosmodactylus, H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’
v., p. 369 (1855) ; pl. i., fig. 4 (1853); Frey, ‘‘Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’ p. 406 (1856) ;
‘« Mitt. Schw. Ent. Gesell.,’’ i., p. 335 (1865); iii., p. 293 (1870); Jord., ‘‘ Ent.
Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 121 (1869); xviii., p. 117 (1881); Nolck., ‘‘ Lep. Fn. Kstl.,”’
p. 802 (1871); Waism., ‘‘ Pter. Cal. Ore.,’’ p. 23, pl. ii., figs. 2-4 (1880); Porritt,
‘* Hint. Mo. Mag.,’’ xxii., p. 149 (1885); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’”’ x., p. 164 (1889).
Ulodactyla, Zett., ‘‘Ins. Lapp.,’”’ p. 1012 (1840). Ulodactylus, Dup., ‘‘ Cat.
Meth.,”’ p. 383 (1844).

OricinaL DEscRiIptIoN.-—Alucita (The brindled plume) alis anticis
virescenti-cinereis albido. nebulosis, punctis costalibus numerosis,
strigaque postica obsoleta, albis. Habitat apud nos rarissime. Expansio
alarum 94 lin. Ale antice bifid, postice tripartite atree (Lepidoptera
Britannica, p. 479). [In adding acanthadactyla, Hb., as a synonym of
this species, we think it advisable to add here descriptions of the figures of
Alucita acanthadactyla in the copy of Htibner’s ‘Samm. Kur. Schmett.,”’
that belonged to Prof. Zeller, and made at our request by Mr. Bankes. (N.B.
— Where the colourist has failed to make the wings quite symmetrical
in colour or markings, the one showing the clearest detail has been
relied on.) The descriptions read: Fig. 23, ‘ acanthadactyla.” Eup.
al..20mm. Forewing, in length 9:'5mm.; in breadth 1mm. in middle;
3mm. at tornus; costa straight ; apex pointed and produced; tornus
produced ; termen decidedly concave; fissure circ. Imm. long; colour
tawny-brown, speckled and irregularly marked with black, and much
clouded with it near termen. A series of four costal dots begins about
middle of costa, followed by a spot, and, at Imm. from apex, by an
oblique fascia; all these, together with a dot on termen of each lobe,
and the sparingly black-spotted cilia, are primrose-coloured. Dorsal
cilia with a small, oblique, projecting, black scale-tooth at about, and a
larger one somewhat beyond, the middle, followed by a blackish spot
and another at tornus. Hindwings dull brown; upper fissure extend-
ing almost to middle, lower one nearly to base ; cilia white, blackish at

300 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

apex of third plumule, which has a long, projecting, perpendicular,
blackish, dorsal scale-tooth, rather beyond middle. Abdomen (suggestive
of 3) tawny-brown, marked with black, paler posteriorly. Fig. 24,
“ acanthadactyla”’ (abdomen suggestive of ? ; cap. al., 205mm.) differs
from fig. 28 in the following chief points: (1) forewing not dark
speckled ; dark markings dusky-brown, more decided in shape and
size, consisting, anteriorly, of a mainly-dark basal area, with one or
two oblique bars from near middle of costa; (2) the four costal dots
are placed, three before, and one after, the primrose costal spot; lower
lobe with two terminal dots instead of one; all these dots are white;
(3) cilia of hindwings dull brown instead of white; (4) abdomen
black-marked, white anteriorly, tawny-brown posteriorly. |
Imaco.—20mm.-21mm. Forewings narrow, divided into two lobes;
falcate at apex; the outer margin wide and indented; colour, pale
olivaceous-ochreous ; the costal margin darker olivaceous-brown,
conspicuously marked with white dots from the base to the costal
triangular blotch; the latter inconspicuous, only a slightly darker
shade than ground colour; the lobal area similarly rather darker, both
lobes crossed by a pale ochreous-white transverse line, almost medially ;
a large ochreous-white costal mark above end of fissure on the outer
edge of the costal blotch ; the inner margin of the wing of the darker
tint (similar to the costa); the median area rather paler; a fine white
longitudinal line from end of fissure halfway to base, a short dark
longitudinal discal mark; a series of fine white lines crossing the wing
from costa to inner margin, giving the wing a very reticulated or
mottled appearance ; the fringes of the outer margin white, externally
shaded with grey ; at the anal angle a black patch ; on the inner margin
also whitish, very narrow, chequered with single black scales and
small patches. The hindwings blackish-brown, finely mottled with
minute paler scales; the fringes of plumules 1 and 2 dark grey-brown;
of plumule 3 also dark grey-brown, but with paler bases, with a large
median scale-patch, a small black patch near apex, and a row of
scattered black scales from median scale-patch to base.
Variation.—Bankes writes (im litt.) that, ‘‘as a rule, in British
specimens, the variation in colour seems confined within rather narrow
limits, and of about 80 specimens bred from Dorset and Devon larve
and pupee, all have the ground-colour of the forewings olive-grey,
though in some this is of a much lghter tint than in others. One
specimen, probably hybernated, taken in the Isle of Purbeck on July
17th, 1884, is of a browner hue than any others I have seen, and made
one wonder whether it could possibly be a worn cosmodactyla, Hb., but
this is certainly not the case. The only extreme form known to me is
ab. albida, n. ab.—Forewings white, irregularly mottled with fuscous, and
with the usual dark markings only faintly expressed. Hindwings fuscous-grey.
My only example came to me, without data, from the “‘ Machin” collection,
and I have seen another, both being British. Haworth’s representative
of the Alucita tesseradactyla of his Lep. Brit., p. 479 (1812), bearing
his own MS. label ‘“‘ tesseradactyla,” and agreeing with the description
there given, has recently come into my hands. It is totally unlike
the true tesseradactyla, L., both in size and shape, and rather
dissimilar in colour, and is certainly a pale example of punctidactyla,
Haw., with the ground colour of the forewings ivory-white, very
faintly mottled with fuscous, and with the usual dark markings

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA. 301

strongly pronounced and clearly defined. Differing markedly from the
still paler ab. albida, I would propose that it should be known as ab.
ossea, n. ab., since the name tesseradactyla is not available for it.
The species seems fairly constant in size, nor have I seen any strikingly
large, or strikingly small, individuals.’”” Haworth’s original description
of tesseradactyla (Lep. Brit., p. 479) reads as follows: ‘‘ Alucita (The
marbled plume) alis patentibus fissis cinereo nebulosis, posticis fusco
nebulosis,”’ a mere copy of the Fabrician description under this name.
The American examples vary in size from 18mm.-23mm., and also in
the intensity of the markings, so much so that, at first, Walsingham
had doubts whether the examples (50) he captured might not be separated
into at least two species; but ‘‘a careful comparison of these with a
series of the Kuropean form, as well as the perfectly regular and gentle
gradations of size and colour by which they are distinguished, tend to
prove that they all belong to the same species. Zeller, in his abstract
of Wallengren’s ‘“‘ Scandinaviens Fjaidermott ”’ (Stett. Ent. Ztg., 1867),
treats cosmodactyla, Hb., as identical with wulodactyla, Gett., and
acanthadactyla, Hb., and I am indebted to him for specimens of what
he understands by the first and last of these three names. The two
forms which he has so kindly sent me are certainly included in my
American series, of which three varieties are here figured (Pteroph.
Calif. Oreg., pl. i1., figs. 2, 8, 4) to facilitate identification.”’ Therecan be
no doubt that theexamples figured by Walsingham are of this species, but
of forms hardly known in Britain. The first example (fig. 2) is one
tinged with flesh-colour or light brownish=ab. approwimata, n. ab.,
giving one a suspicion of the colour of the dise of the forewing of pale
cosmodactyla. The second (fig. 3) is possibly the same as, or at least
very near, ab. albida, Bankes ; whilst the third (fig. 4) is ashy-grey, and
possibly represents a very extreme ab. of the form described as wlodac-
tyla, Gett., and which wename belowab. eatrema, n. ab. Theseriesinthe
“ Frey ”’ collection is something in the nature of a revelation to those
who collect only British examples. Here one finds, under the name of
var. stachydalis (evidently the bred types, with their pupa-cases) two
specially ochreous-green examples from Ziirich. The first two examples
in the series of what were evidently considered, by Frey, typical ‘‘ cosmo-
dactyla,”’ are not unlike ordinary British puncetidactyla, Haworth, an
ochreous-grey, or slightly-greenish grey, tint pervading the wings, and
the markings not at all darkly or clearly marked; moderately typical
examples. Then come 10 dark strongly-marked specimens, such as
we rarely, if ever, get in Britain. (The nearest approach to this form
among British examples comes from Oxton, Devon.) In these, there is
practically no tinge of green, the ground colour is ashy or grey, in which,
occasionally, a little brown is mixed, the whole strongly speckled with
black scaling, which, in the darkest examples, practically blots out the
eround colour, leaving us with an almost blackish insect, finely crossed
transversely with delicate white lines; the triangular costal blotch
black-brown, the outer part of the two lobes also black, with a whitish
transverse line crossing the dark area, and with a few, scattered, white
scales thereon; the pale lunular mark, outside the triangular costal
blotch, conspicuous. The hindwings are correspondingly dark. The
paler forms of this Ziirich race, in which the ashy colour is predominant
over the brown-black or fuscous-black markings, comprise, no doubt, the
ulodactyla of Zetterstedt. There is little doubt also, that this is the var.
d of Zeller (/sis, 1841, p. 785), described as *‘ alis anterioribus cineras-

302 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

centibus parum nebulosis, punctis albis in laciniarum margine postico
obsoletis,”” of which he had one ¢ from Fischer von Réslerstamm’s
collection. An example of the brown-tinged form, just noted, isevidently
figured by Herrich-Schiffer (Sys. Bearb., pl. i., fig. 4), and this we would
call ab. dubia, n. ab. The dark forms of this race we eall freyi, n.
ab. This is probably Zeller’s var. e (op. cit.), described as ‘‘ major ;
alis anterioribus paulo latioribus, obscuris cano subreticulatis =spilo-
dactyla, Kaden, in litt.” The most extreme form of this race in the
opposite (pale) direction is labelled ‘‘cosmodactyla, aberr., Zurich.” This
specimen has the whole of the wings of an ashy-grey colour, only
relieved by faintly-darker grey longitudinal shadings, a narrowly
fuscous-spotted costa, a dark fuscous-black triangular costal blotch, and
a dark irregular band crossing the lobes, filling up the anal angle of
the lower lobe. _Walsingham’s fig. 4 (Pter. Cal. Oreg., pl. 11) might
nearly be drawn from this specimen. We call it ab. ewtrema, n. ab.
We have a specimen approaching this, bred by Studd, from a larva found
at Oxton. Of this variable and interesting species, therefore, there
appear to be only three previously named forms, viz. :—

Ashy, shaded with fuscous, a white striga parallel with hind margin=var.
ulodactyla, Zett.

Ashy-green, clouded with white, with many white costal spots, and obsolete
striga at hind-margin = punctidactyla, Haw.

Greenish-fuscous, with darker costal spot, and white costal points=cosmo-
dactyla, Tr.=vay. (et ab.) stachydalis, Frey.

a. var. stachydalis, Frey, ‘‘ Mitt. Schw. Ent. Gesell.,” iii., p. 290 (1870) ;
‘‘Stett. Ent. Ztg.,’’ 1871, p. 125 (1871) ; ‘‘ Lep. der Schweiz,’’ p. 429 (1880); Sta.,
‘«Knt. Mo. Mag.,”’ xvill., p. 213 (1882); Hofm., ‘‘ Pter. Deutsch.,”’ p. 65 (1895).—
From the seed-capsules of Aquilegia, I have bred, during several years, about 100
examples of cosmodactyla, among which appeared a single specimen which was
coloured exactly the same as those regularly produced when reared on Stachys. I
propose the name var. stachydalis for this striking form (Frey). The young larva
of the var. stachydalis, 7mm.-8mm. long, ig brown-red, with two white lateral
lines on the back (subdorsal), and a broken white line above the spiracles (supra-
spiracular) and whitish lateral flange. Tubercles white on the meso- and meta-
thorax, with two white hairs each, on the dorsum of the remaining segments, each
with one white hair, on the lateral flange, again, each with two divergent hairs.
Besides this, the whole body is thickly beset with small, very short, black bristles.
Head shining black, or also yellow-brown with black spots; thoracic shield black-
brown, divided by a fine pale median line, anteriorly whitish margined, beset with
white bristles. Anal flap black-brown with white bristles. Spiracles on white
elevations. Thoracic feet black, terminal joint brown. Ventral and anal claspers
like the venter, whitish-grey. In the fullgrown larva, the brown-red colour gradually
vanishes, and gives place to green; the dorsal stripe, and the 2nd and 3rd abdominal
segments retain the brown-red longest; at last, the red colour dies away here, and
the dorsal stripe becomes dark green; the thoracic shield and anal flap become
green as well; the rest of the markings remain unchanged. Described from larve
found plentifully at the end of July and beginning of August on the flowers of
Stachys silvatica and Salvia glutinosa (Hofmann).

The remarkable statement of Frey (supra), involving as it does no
description whatever, either of the normal Aguilegia form, or the Stachys
form, which one example from Aguilegia resembled, and which is here
named stachydalis, gives no clue as to what stachydalis is, but, the year
following, Frey noted (Stett. Ent. Ztg., 1871, p. 121) that he met with

cosmodactyla, Tr. (punctidactyla) at Zurich, in June, and that Boll, at

Bremgarten, had called his attention to a “plume”’ larva feeding on the
flowers of Stachys sylvatica, which, at first, he was inclined to consider
was that of acanthodactyla, Tr., but which produced cosmodactyla, Tr., of
strikingly bright olive-brown hue, 18 exactly similar examples being
reared altogether, and which he considered, could be nothing

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA. 303

but a variety of this species. He further noted that, in the
course of the year, he had reared a hundred cosmodactyla, Tr.,
from the seed-capsules of Aquileyia, among which was a single
specimen identical with those reared from Stachys sylvatica. It
is to be assumed, therefore, that the olive-brown form is Frey’s stachy-
dalis, an assumption borne out by the types in his own collection at the
British Museum. It is the nearest of all the forms to our ordinary
British punctidactyla, and, except for being, perhaps, a little yellower
and brighter-tinted, would fall within the bounds of punctidactyla,
Haw., very well. Boll, himself, records breeding pale olive-brown speci-
mens at Bremgarten. Stainton quoted Frey’s remarks (nt. Mo. Maq.,
Xvili., p. 213) ; and Hofmann observes (Pter. Deutsch., p. 66) that “ the
var. stachydalis varies from the type, principally in the unusually rich
yellowish-white and greenish-yellow scaling, which makes this particular
form look very much lighter, sometimes yellowish-white; the markings,
however, being the same as ‘the type.’’ Itis impossible to accept
South’s acanthodactyla var. a (see Hnt., xxil., pp. 31-32) as this form,
although it has been referred hereto, its ground colour of ‘ ochreous-
srey, with a rosy tinge,’”’ not satisfying Frey’s description of “ bright
olive-brown ”’ (see antea, p. 176). Treitschke’s cosmodactyla is perhaps
stachydalis, Frey, Treitschke’s insect being described as ‘“ Alucita, alis
anticis olivaceo-fuscis, macula triangulari obscuriore, punctis costalibus
albis.’’ The specimens described by Treitschke came from Schmidt, and
were taken at Laybach ; he further adds that ‘‘ the Hiibnerian cosmodac-
tyla accords exactly with it.’’ We can only suppose that there must be
ereat difference in the Hubnerian figures, certainly those we have seen
show no trace of olive in them (see antea, pp. 274-5). Peyerimhoff notes

' the capture of two examples of var. stachydalis at Saverne, in Alsace.
B. var. ulodactyla, Zett., ‘‘ Ins. Lapp.,’’p. 1012 (1840).—Alis anticis cinereo-
fuscoque variegatis, postice macula costali parva strigaque intramarginali albis;
apice emarginato-dentatis. ¢. long. al. exp. fere % poll. Hab. in Lapponia
Suecica Umensi rariss.; ad Barrsele d. 1 Jul. a D. Dahlbom inventa. Lappon.
meridional., Suecia inferior rariss. ¢. Similis videtur Aluc acanthodactylae,
Treits., seu odontodactylac, Charp., sed maculis alarum nigricantibus distinctioribus
deficientibus dignota. Tota cinereo-fuscoque variegata. Ale antice margine
apicali emarginato-dentato, quasi eroso 1. crispo. Ante marginem striga cum

margine parallela alba, interne fuscedine inducta. Fasciculi pilorum nigrorum
duo in margine interiori adsunt (Zetterstedt).

This, we suspect, to be the ordinary continental form of the species.
Judging by the “Frey ”’ collection, the Ztirich specimens are almost
entirely of this form, in extremely varying examples. Specimens
from Regensburg are also in the British Museum collection. The only
British examples of this race that we have seen were bred by Studd,
from larve taken at Oxton.

Comparison oF AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA AND A. COSMODACTYLA.—
Amblyptilia punctidactyla is a somewhat stouter form with broader
wings than its near ally; the forewings are very richly dusted with
yellow and white, or sometimes with greenish-yellow on a blackish
eround, so that they appear as if marbled. The white spots of the
costa are larger than in A. cosmodactyla. The underside of the fore-
wings uniform black, with deep black costa set with large white spots,
while the costa in 4. cosmodactyla is always brown. The underside of
the 1st and 38rd plumules of the hindwings black (in 4. cosmodactyla
brown), richly sprinkled with white scales. The scale-tuft of the
3rd plumule is (like the very weak indication of the anal angle)

304 _ BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

placed beyond the middle, more towards the apex of the plumule; it
is nearly as long as broad, and, in this direction, varies only very
seldom, in any case much less than in A. cosmodactyla; on the sides
of the tuft, the inner marginal fringes are white at the base for some
distance (Hofmann). I cannot see that, in Britain, punctidactyla
averages at all broader in the wing than its ally (Bankes). I should
note our Devon punctidactyla as dark green, mixed with greyish-
ochreous (losing some of this colour after a time, and getting
sometimes a somewhat redder tinge); much more mottled than
cosmodactyla; with a very large and conspicuous black scale-tooth
on both fore- and hindwings, especially that on the 3rd plumule of
hindwing ; much more prolonged apex of the upper lobe of the fore-
wing, beyond cleft, beak-like; a white costal spot immediately before
apex (both these latter characters absent in cosmodactyla). The latter
is reddish-brown, with a greenish hue in a good many specimens when
bred; smoother, neater, more unicolorous, and with a more regular
pattern than in punctidactyla (Riding). [See also antea, p. 279.|
Hasits oF rarva.—The fact that the larvee of punctidactyla are so very
similar to those of cosmodactyla, and feed on the same foodplants, has led
to very little that is reliable being written about them. In late July and
early August, Riding finds the larvee of both insects apparently together
on Stachys sylvatica, at Buckerell. He notes (in litt.): ‘They are
very uncertain in appearance, in some years abundant, in others, as in
1904, not one to be found.’ He says (Ent. Rec., xi., p. 289) that, in
early August, 1899, he spent many hours in woods, and beside hedges
and ditches, hunting for the larve of the Stachys “‘plume,”’ or ‘‘ plumes,”
and he rarely obtained more than three or four per hour. Both red and
green larve were to be obtained, the former generally the smaller, and
to be met with before the purplish-red corolla has fallen off, the latter
larger and on plants that were seeding, the colour being evidently
protective. From the few kept, two large olive-green imagines with
black and white markings (punctidactyla), and a small and reddish-
brown (cosmodactyla) one, were bred. He further notes (op. cit., x.,
p- 268) that a large percentage of the larve is ichneumoned ; in 1898,
he places it at 85 per cent. Among the imagines reared, specimens of
both punctidactyla and cosmodactyla appeared. In 1899, the larve
were found feeding on the unripe buds, as well as the other parts of the
flower, the most advanced dipping into the seed at the bottom of the
cup, just like a Diantheciid larva in the capsules of its own food. He
further observes (in litt.) that he only knew one locality in which he
could rely on getting larve of A. punctidactyla, without discriminating
the larve, viz., in Harpford Woods, between Buckerell and Sidmouth.
In the lanes and hedges, where the larve were abundant on Stachys
sylvatica, one or two would turn out to be A. punctidactyla, but the
majority A. cosmodactyla. He adds, ‘‘I generally searched for the
larvee of punctidactyla in Harpford Woods, the first and second weeks
in August, when I sometimes found them nearly fullfed, but the best
time to look for them would be, however, the second, third. and fourth
weeks of July ; I never discriminated the larve of the two species, and
only observed that (1) some larve were dull reddish-purple in colour (the
hue of the flowers of Stachys), with darker dorsal vessel, and whitish
subdorsal and spiracular bands, whilst (2) others were yellowish-brown,
with darker dorsal vessel, and a band of reddish-purple, partly, or all,
along the dorsum; (8) others darker green, with no red colour. IL

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA. 305

noted that the larve seemed to adapt themselves very readily to
environment, and that the purplish-red larve were found mostly on
the flowers, or reddish parts of the stem, and the green larve on the
green parts. Hofmann notes that “the larva lives in July on the
unripe seed-capsules of Agquilegia vulgaris, boring into the capsule
through a roundish hole, and penetrating therein as far as the first part
of the body.” Zeller observes that he found the larve also on Geranium
pratense, devouring the blossoms and seeds, as well as on Hrodium
cicutarium (Stett. Ent. Zeitg., 1878, p. 168). Frey records the larve, in
June, on Stachys sylvatica, then, four or six weeks later, on the seeds of
. Aguilegia vulgaris. Boll notes the finding of larve in the bloom of
Stachys sylvatica at Bremgarten. Bankes observes that the larvee feed
on the flowers and unripe seeds of Stachys sylvatica in the Isle of
Purbeck. In Pomerania, the larve are found eating the seeds of
Aquilegia (Paul and Plétz), and inthe Hamburg district, flowers of Stachys
sylvatica (Sauber), also in Silesia, although they feed as well on the flowers
of Aquileyia vulyaris (Wocke) ; in the kingdom of Saxony, the larve
are found on Huphrasia officinalis and Stachys palustris, as well as S.
sylvatica (Schiitze) ; in Bavaria, they are to be taken at the beginning
of July, usually in some numbers, when present at all, clearing out the
contents of the green seed-vessels of Agquilegia vulgaris, and going to
others when these are emptied; the larve will also eat the green pupe
if they meet with them (Schmid); in Wurtemberg, the larve are to be
found in July and in the autumn, feeding on the seeds of Agquilegia
and the flowers of Stachys sylvatica, in a delicate web (Steudel and
Hofmann). Dyar records (Proc. Unit. Sta. Nat. Mus., xxvil., p. 922) that,
at Kaslo, in British Columbia, he found larve in the red bracts of the
high bush-honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata), eating holes in the young
fruii through the bracts, and destroying the fruit. Frey says that the
larvee occur in July, in Switzerland. Barrett, in August and September,
at Haslemere. Other records of the capture of larve are—-August
6th, 1884; July 20th-August 8th, 1885 ; August 15th-September 16th,
1892, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); July 29th-30th, circ. 1888, in
the Isle of Purbeck (Digby, teste Bankes); and August 5th and 9th,
1899, in the neighbourhood of Buckerell (Riding).

Larva.*— Penultimate instar: Head bilobed, shining black. Cervical
shield quadrate, black; thoracic feet, and anal plate, black; tubercles
brown, angularly-plated, 1 and ii with a pale hair and very short black
one separate, 1 dorsad to 11; tubercle iii also with multiple hairs; two
secondary hairs, very short, black, below tubercle i; tubercle iiia
present; iv-+v with a secondary hair closely adjoining; vi single.
Skin with sparse, dark, secondary granules. Dorsum broadly whitish,
with dorsal reddish line; sides dull reddish; stigmatal region whitish
(Dyar. From specimen taken in British Columbia). inal instar:
Head round, vertically bilobed posteriorly, pale testaceous. Body
cylindrical, normal, green; a dull crimson dorsal line, with a small
oblique subdorsal dash on joint 6, and a dash on joints 5 to 12; a white
subdorsal line, from joint 2, posteriorly, to 18, anteriorly, and a broken
subdorsal one, the larger anterior part on each segment being oblique.
Tubercles small, hairs single, i and ii separate, iv and v approximate,
v anterior and dorsal to iv; on thorax ia+ib, ila+iib, iv+v, numerous

* Kor description of young larva, see anted, p. 302, under var. stachydalis.

306 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

fine, short, secondary hairs, shorter than, and easily differentiated from,
the primary ones, bulbous-tipped. Hairs all white, not long, inconspicuous
(Dyar. From specimen taken in Colorado). Final instar (fullgrown):
Length about -5in.; of the usual stumpy form when at rest. Head
small, and narrower than the 2nd segment; it has the lobes rounded,
and is highly polished; body cylindrical, attenuated a little posteriorly,
each segment plump and distinct, making the divisions clearly defined ;
skin soft, and sparingly clothed with short hairs (see p. 307) (Porritt).
The fullgrown larvais 11mm. long, slightly attenuated towards both ends
of the body, with weakly-developed lateral flange bright green; the
dorsal vessel shows through dark green; two white subdorsal lines
run on both sides of this; below these runs a supraspiracular line,
interrupted at each segmental division, consisting of white diagonal
dashes sloping from the anterior downwards to the posterior. Spiracles
ringed with light brown ; lateral flange white. Head yellowish-green,
with pale brown spots, or also simply green, with dark brown mouth-
parts. Prothorax and anal flap green. All the prolegs pale green ;
thoracic legs with brown claws. The tubercles are small, of the colour
of the body, and single-haired; only those on the lateral flange bear
two hairs. The body is, besides, especially on the back, rather thickly
beset with short, fine, white, not knobbed, hairs (only distinctly visible
with a lens). (Described from the living larva) (Hofmann). [I have
a preserved larva that was taken at Guarda (Lower Engadine) on July
27th, 1900, that is certainly an Amblyptilia, and certainly not cosmo-
dactyla, and must, therefore, with the highest probability, be punctz-
dactyla. It was feeding on geranium ; there were one or two others,
but I reared none; I think the others proved to be stung. It is fairly
certain that this larva is punctidactyla, as it agrees with that larva
in the very clear points that are described by Hofmann as dis-
tinguishing punctidactyla from that of cosmodactyla. Indeed, the
chief use of this specimen is to enable me to follow what
Hofmann says. His description has the great advantage that it
is absolute, and enables both species (cosmodactyla and punctidactyla)
to be distinguished, whilst Porritt’s (very able for the time it was
written) is of little use, except to anyone who has the two larve before
him for comparison, the more so since the most definite distinguishing
character of the two species, which he found in his specimens, the colouring
of the head (see p. 807), does not appear to hold good generally, either
according to Hofmann, to Mr. Bankes’ observations (anted, p. 286), or in
my own more limited experience.]| The most notable difference is in
the secondary hairs. In A. punctidactyla these are more numerous, more
generally distributed, and rather shorter. They are less various in
length ; the great majority of them are about 0:08mm. long. In
A. cosmodactyla there are few as short as this, the majority being about
0:12mm. In both there are longer ones, but these are rarer in A.
punctidactyla, and only occur near the tubercles. The form of these
hairs is very distinctive, in A. cosmodactyla they taper very little, and
then swell out at the ends, to be nearly as thick there as they are at
their bases, with bifid or multispiculate ends. In A. punctidactyla they
have, at first glance, all the appearance of ordinary hairs, regularly
tapering, and with sharp points. It is only on close examination, with
a good deal of magnification, that it is seen that they are more or less

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA. 307

blunt, and perhaps bifid. The primary hairs are also shorter. On
the 1st abdominal segment their comparative lengths are :—

TUBERCLES. IN COSMODACTYLA. IN PUNCTIDACTYLA.
1 0°66 0°64
li 0:48 0°48
lil 0°70 0:60
iv 0°54 0°38
4 0°51 0°42

This difference, it will be seen, is most pronounced in the lateral, and hardly
occurs in the dorsal, hairs. In A. punctidactyla, they also taper more
rapidly, and so seem to have also sharper points, and are more slender.
My specimen does not quite agree with Hofmann’s statement that
there are no secondary tubercular hairs. These are present, but are less
obvious and pronounced than in A. cosmodactyla, and might properly be
described as absent in i and u, but iii, especially, has a fairly-developed
secondary hair, and the postspiracular secondary tubercles are repre-
sented by some, decidedly stronger, secondary hairs, but less strong
than in A. cosmodactyla. In Lord Walsingham’s collection are two
larvee from Mr. Porritt labelled ‘‘ punctidactylus,”’ and these also agree
with Hofmann’s description. The secondary hairs, instead of being of
varying sizes and with very thickened ends as in A. cosmodactyla, are
of uniform small size, and the ends, though thickened, are only
slightly so, and exactly the same on all hairs. There is one larger
secondary hair in the position of the lower postspiracular accessory.
Certain of the secondary hairs are attached to the bases of the
tubercles, but, differing in no way from the others, though they are
probably secondary tubercular essentially, quite justify Hofmann’s
statement that such hairs are absent, as they may be equally regarded
as skin-hairs only. The heads of these two specimens are pale, but
have some dark markings of exactly the same pattern as those of A.
cosmodactyla (Chapman).

VARIATION OF LARVA.—There are two very distinct varieties of the
larva of this species :—

1. The ground-colour of a clear purplish-pink; head very dark sienna-brown,
almost black; the smoke-coloured dorsal vessel shows through as the dorsal stripe;
subdorsal stripes clear white, and very conspicuous; below them is a narrow and
interrupted white line, and another about the same width, but which, being tinged with
pink, is not so pale, along the spiracles; hairs white. Ventral surface semitrans-
lucent, yellowish-grey, prolegs purplish-pink on the outside; anterior legs of the
dark sienna-brown of the head, but with paler rings.

2. The ground-colour bright pale green; the markings the same as in var. 1,

except that the white stripes are scarcely so conspicuous; in some specimens the
smoky mediodorsal vessel is tinged with pink, and the ventral surface and prolegs
are of the same bright green as the dorsal area (Porritt).
Buckler figured (Larvae, etc., pl. clxii., figs. 6 and 6a) two larve,
after their final moult, on September 1st, 1877, showing considerable
difference in their markings ; they were feeding on the seeding flower-
spikes of Stachys sylvatica, and the moths emerged September 15th,
1877.

Fooprnants.—Seeds of Aquilegia vulgaris (Frey), flowers and
unripe seeds of Stachys sylvatica (Bankes), S. palustris, Huphrasia officinalis
(Schiitze), Salvia glutinosa (Hofmann), flowers and young fruit of

308 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Lonicera involucrata (Dyar), Geranium pratense, EKrodium cicutarium
(Zeller), Arthocarpus sp. (Walsingham).

Puration.—The larva attaches itself to the spike of Stachys
sylvatica, on the flowers of which it has fed, in order to undergo pupa-
tion (Williams). The pupa is attached to the foodplant by the tail,
and two somewhat curved pointed protuberances, which spring from
the back, give it a curious appearance (Porritt). Attached by the anal
hooks to the foodplant, hanging like a little slender butterfly pupa
(Barrett). All the pup that I have collected have been found on the
stemsof Stachys sylvatica. Their ordinary position is identical with that of
A. cosmodactyla, Hb., viz., suspended head downwards along the portion
of the stem between two of the whorls of the calyces of the foodplant,
and the method by which the pupa is attached to the stem is precisely
similar (Bankes). In almost all cases that I have noted, the pupa has
been suspended lengthwise along the stem (Riding). The fullfed larva
usually leaves the flowers of Stachys sylvatica on which it has been
feeding, and crawls somewhat lower down the stem, before spinning
its pad of silk, to which it attaches itself for pupation (Wocke). The
pupa hangs free on the flower-stalk, or on a seed-capsule of Agutlegia,
the pupal stage lasting from 14 to 21 days (Kaltenbach).

VaRIATION oF pupa.—As in the larve, there are two distinct
yarieties—(1) purple, (2) green; but both forms have oblique dark
markings (Porritt).

Pupa.—The pupa of this species is substantially the same as that
of A. cosmodactyla. The latter varies considerably in just those points
in which the pupa of A. punctidactyla differs from it, and very probably
the last-named does the same, but my specimens are too few to say
whether this be so or not. Four or five points may be noted: (1) The
great halbert-shaped process of the 3rd abdominal is, in cosmodactyla,
rough, nodulated, and angulated in outline; in punctidactyla, the
posterior border is a smooth, regular, curve, and the front margin is less
deeply notched. A good many specimens, however, of cosmodactyla
are very Close to punctidactyla in this respect. (2) The small process
of this spine, which carries 11, is rather smaller in punctidactyla, and
is less a mere process on the large spine, and nearly, but not quite,
separate. (3) The remaining processes on the 4th-8th abdominal
segments, carrying tubercles i and ii, are larger in cosmodactyla than in
punctidactyla, and, although it is the fact, in both species, that the two
processes (one carrying i, and the other carrying ii) are fused together
as one process, they sometimes have the appearance, in punctidactyla,
of being really two separate processes. (4) In punetidactyla, the
posterior portion of this process (carrying 1i) is very distinctly smaller
than in cosmodactyla. (5) The hairs of ii, iii, iv, v, and vi, are very much
shorter in punctidactyla than in cosmodactyla, in the former, being of
a length about equal to the diameter of the spiracle, and, in cosmodactyla,
several times that length, nearly, in fact, half the width of a segment.
I have examined something hke 200 pupe of cosmodactyla, a
few of my own breeding, but the mass sent me by Mr. E. R. Bankes.
Amongst these, there is much variation in all these points of difference,
but, though, in many instances, one or other of these characters
approaches very closely to the form belonging to punctidactyla, so
closely that one would be inclined to say that, in that character, the pupa
was more like punctidactyla than cosmodactyla, still, it does not quite

_— " -

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA. 309

reach the punctidactyla form. ‘This is especially the case in the
most marked of these characters, viz., the shortness of hairs on
punctidactyla, which do not vary in my specimens of that species,
though some cosmodactyla approach them so closely that, if a large
number of punctidactyla afforded some varieties, the interval would
no doubt be bridged. With regard to this variation, there is one point
about my material to be noted. Amongst some 200 undoubted cosmo-
dactyla pups, none approach very closely to punctidactyla, but a number
(50 or so) sent me some years ago by Mr. Bankes, as cosmodactyla,
afforded five pup that I take to be punctidactyla, and four that make
a very close approach to them, but are, I think, cosmodactyla. In reply
to my enquiries respecting them, Mr. Bankes says: ‘I certainly
cannot warrant them as including no punctidactyla, for | never could
satisfactorily separate the larve, even with the published distinctions
before me, when sorting them out. Probably the shells you have were
the result of my searches for larve in 1892, when I bred, with a host
of the parasite, Apanteles fuliginosus, Wesm., 443 cosmodactyla and 21
punctidactyla, every cage that produced the latter species yielding the
former also.” Those selected from these shells as punctidactyla are, then,
almost certainly that species, but what of the intermediates? They are
not typical punctidactyla, but are nearer to them than any among the
200 (odd) undoubted cosmodactyla are (Chapman). The pupa is green,
bright yellow-brown to dark brown (then reddish on the back), with
dark longitudinal lines on the abdomen and between the veins on the
wing-cases, also with two blackish diagonal streaks on the sides of the
thorax, of which the posterior arises from the sickle-shaped humps of
the 4th abdominal segment ; the latter exhibit, on the anterior side (or
slope), no such deep indentation as those of A. punctidactyla ; neither is
the apex so sharp or high. Of the bifurcated thorns on the back of
the 4th to the 8th abdominal segments, the posterior point, directed
downwards, is much smaller than the anterior point which stands
upright, through which a further difference from the pupa of A.
cosmodactyla is exhibited, in which these thorns, especially the posterior
point, are significantly larger (Hofmann).

Time OF APPEARANCE.—Hybernated examples are to be met with
from March until June. ‘The imagines of the year commence to
emerge at the end of July, and continue throughout August and
September, and may be taken during any spell of mild weather during
the late autumn*. They are rarely seen from December to February
when their hybernation seems more complete. Bankes writes (in litt.) :
“The imago seems clearly to hybernate as such. Mr. J. C. Dale took
one on March 30th, and three in April (in two different years), and J
have captured a specimen on May 29th, and another, which, from its
condition, appeared to have unquestionably hybernated, on July 17th.
There are probably two broods, at any rate, in the south of England,
for larvee may be found from about the middle of July to the middle
of September, and very likely till later, and moths may be bred from
about the middle of August until, at least, the beginning of October.”’
In Switzerland, the imagines are found at the end of July and in

* Barrett says: ‘‘On the wing in June and the beginning of July, then again
in September, but whether as two generations, or hybernating and reappearing in
the following summer, is not clearly ascertained.”

81 0 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

August, and reappear in the spring after hybernation (Frey).
Hofmann says that, in Germany, the moth emerges at the end of
July; those taken in spring have probably all hyberrated, though
Zeller found a perfectly fresh specimen on June Ist. It is
reported as occurring in Pomerania, in July (Paul and Plotz); in-the
Hamburg district it appears in August, from July larve (Sauber) ;

from the end of August until June of the following year in the
mountains of Silesia (Wocke), but in July in the lowlands (Méschler);

in August, in Saxon Upper Lusatia (Schtitze) ; in Bavaria, it appears
towards the latter end of July, and good examples are to be found in
the spring after hybernation (Schmid) ; it occurs in July and August
to October in Wiirttemberg (Steudel and Hofmann), and in Baden at the
end of July and August, reappearing again in the spring after hyber-
nation, the species being probably double-brooded in the south of the
duchy (Meess and Spuler). In Austria it is recorded as occurring, in
the Vienna district, in September and again in May (Mann); a 2 was
captured on May 26th near Flitsch (Zeller), and specimens also on
June 22nd and 26th at Bozen (Meess). Imagines are recorded as
follows :—ContInenTaL RECORDS: In June, 1869, at Zurich (Frey) ;
May 24th, August 16th, at Lechts (Huene); May 22nd, 1870, at
Pichtendahl; between May 10th and 24th, near the Jagellake; June
8th, at Lips; July 19th, at Rotsikiill (Nolcken); captured g June
Ist, 1871, bred a @ August 80th, 1871, from Tuors-Pensch, in
the Oberalbula district (Zeller); June 9th, 1879, at Saltdalen, in
Arctic Norway (Storjord teste Schoyen). In America, some 50
specimens between May 16th, 1871, in California (at San Francisco),
and the end of August, 1871 (on Mount Shasta); also taken again
in April, 1872, in the north of Oregon; and bred from larve found,
in June of the same year, in the neighbourhood of Rouge River,
in southern Oregon; the species must be at least doublebrooded
(Walsingham); June 21st, 1902, at Kaslo, British Columbia (Cockle) ;
July 11th-19th, 1903, also at Kaslo (Dyar). British recorps: April
5th, 21st, 1816, March 30th, 1817, July 4th, 1820, October 4th, 1825,
April 4th, 1831, at Glanvilles Wootton (J. C. Dale); May 26th, 1865,
at Glanvilles Wootton (H.R. Dale); September 6th, 1876, at Glanvilles
Wootton (C. W. Dale); newly-emerged, July and August (Stainton) ;
scarce in July and August, near Bristol, etc. (Hudd); September,
1864, at Haslemere (Barrett); imago bred October 1st, 1888, from
larva found in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); [August 16th, 1884, at
-Glasgow (Mackay);] imago captured July 17th, 1884, in the Isle of
Purbeck; imagines reared August 22nd-September 5th, 1884, from
larvae collected in the Isle of Purbeck, August 6th, 1884 (Bankes); imagines
mid-September, and early October, 1884, at Aberayron (Richardson) ;
imagines bred September 6th, 1885, and following days (Porritt), from
larve collected from July 20th-August 8th, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes); imagines bred September 16th-29th, 1892, from larve found
August 15th-September 16th, in the Isle of Purbeck; imago caught May
29th, 1893, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); imagines end of September,
1892, at Buckerell; imagines end of September, 1898, at Buckerell
(Riding) ; June 27th-July 16th, 1894, at Painswick (Farn) ; October 4th,
1894, one off oak, at Pease Dean (Evans); July 11th, 1898, at
Oxton, Devon (Studd) ; bred August 21st, September 14th, 23rd, 81st,
1898, from larve found at Harpford Wood (Riding) ; October 14th,

AMBLYPTILIA PUNCTIDACTYLA. Sum

1898, near St. Andrews (Rothschild); November, 1898, at Enfield
(Edelsten); bred August 25th and 27th, 1899, from larve found at
Harpford Wood (Riding) ; imagines caught September 38rd, 1904, at
Dartmouth; others bred September 7th-11th, 1904, from pup found
September 3rd, 1904, also at Dartmouth (Bankes).

Hasits.—The moth appears to hide successfully in the autumn,
being rather infrequently seen, although, occasionally, it is attracted by
the nectar of the ivy-blossom in October and November; after hyberna-
tion, it is also occasionally noticed with the early spring moths at
sallow blossom. The over-wintering examples seem to be on
the wing until June, when they lay their eggs, the egglaying being
apparently spread over a considerable period. Newly-emerged
examples are to be found throughout August and September, and are
particularly fond of flowers, having been found feeding on those of
Scabiosa succisa, Stachys sylvatica, Senecio jacobaea, etc. Barrett says
that the moth is rather secret in its habits, hiding in dense hedges, or
among thick herbage, in the daytime, but not easily disturbed, nor
very often seen; he notes it as flying in a lane at Haslemere in
September, 1867, and further observes that it flies at night, and will
come to flowers of ragwort. Richardson says that the 2 is to be
taken regularly at Aberayron, in Cardiganshire, in the autumn, by
beating furze bushes, in which, presumably, they hybernate, depositing
their ova in spring or early summer; whilst Porritt notes that he kept
two 2s in confinement in a covered pot of growing Stachys, and
various dried leaves, that they lived well into the winter, but by
February both had died. Barrett has beaten it from thatch, at
Haslemere, in the winter. Bankes observes (in litt.) that he has
never taken the moth on the wing of its own accord, but he has “ no
doubt that its actual flight begins in the evening and lasts until after
nightfall. A specimen kept in confinement for many weeks, used, in
mild weather, to regale herself towards dusk, and in the early part of
the night, on the ivy-bloom supplied to her, but to sit quite motionless
at other times. He further notes that of the only three imagines bred
of recent years, one emerged at 12.35 p.m., one at 3.10 am., and one
between 9.45 p.m. and 7.30 a.m.’ [Mackay records it as occurring at
hight at Glasgow.] Schmid says that imagines in good condition are
sometimes taken at Ratisbon after hybernation, but observes that they
are rarely noted in nature because they conceal themselves so completely
during the day, and are very slugeish and quiet.

Hasrrat.—In Britain, hedgesides and the outskirts of woods seem
to be its most frequent habitats. In south Germany it appears to be
widely distributed, and occurs in Upper Bavaria, especially in the
lower mountain districts; in Silesia it occurs in the mountain valleys
(Wocke), but in Saxon Upper Lusatia, it frequents heaths as well
as the mountain-woods (Schiitze). In the Baltie Provinces, it is noted
as occurring on dry meadow-land near Lechts, and in the forest-meadow
near Pichtendahl (Nolcken). In Austria it occurs in the woods of the
Vienna district, and in Bohemia; whilst in Switzerland it goes up to a
height of 5700ft. (at St. Moritz). Bankes writes (in litt.) : “This species
is extremely local, and generally rare, both in Dorset and South Devon,
and even in the best years for it, the larve have only been collected
very sparingly. In my experience, they only occur along hedgerows,
and seem to prefer plants growing in sheltered and shady situations,

312 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

but they are certainly found on various different geological formations.
Having always been unable to distinguish the larve from those of
cosmodactyla, Hb. (acanthodactyla, Tr. nec Hb.), the precise spots where
some of my larve and pup# have been collected are unknown to me,
but the cases where these are known for certain show that, in each
instance, the larve or pupe have all been collected in some one
particular spot where one has had the good fortune to chance upon a
brood. This is the explanation of the fact that, from some two dozen
larve that I collected in 1884, all but two or three of which were
forwarded to Mr. Porritt as the common acanthodactyla, Tr. (nec Hb.),
the whole number of resulting moths, with only four exceptions, were
punctidactyla, Haw. But one may often closely search a district where
A. punctidactyla occurs, and collect many hundreds of larve of A. cosmo-
dactyla, and yet have no success, as far as the capture of A. punctidactyla
is concerned.’’ In Herefordshire and Kent it comes to the sallow-bloom
in woods in spring, and Jordan notes it as occurring in woods at Kop-
pang, in Scandinavia. In the western parts of America it occurs in the
high mountains, and is recorded from the western United States to
Alaska; in New Mexico it has been taken at the top of the Las Vegas,
between the Pecos and Sapello rivers, at an elevation of 11000ft.
(Cockerell) ; in Colorado, at Platte Canon, at 7000ft. (Dyar). Walsing-
ham says that he has at least fifty American specimens of this insect,
taken at different times and places, ranging from San Francisco to
Mount Shasta and the north of Oregon.

Britis Locauitres.— Widely distributed, but generally rare or very
local. AsrrpEEN: Braemar (Reid). ARGyLu: very rare, Dunoon (Chapman).
Berwick : Pease Dean (Evans). Carpican: Aberayron (Richardson). CARMARTHEN :
Llangennech (Richardson). CHrsHire: Bidston, Tranmere, Claughton (Ellis),
Birkenhead (Stainton). Drvon: between Sidmouth and Buckerell, Harpford Wood,
Honiton, Tipton (Riding), Oxton (Studd), Lynmouth, Exeter (Leech), Dartmouth
(Bankes). Dorset: [Portland (Baker),] Bloxworth, very rare (Cambridge), Isle of
Purbeck, scarce (Bankes), Glanvilles Wootton, rare (Dale). Fire: near St. Andrews
(Rothschild). GuiovucrstER: near Br'stol, scarce, Redland, Almondsbury (Hudd),
Coxhorne (Robertson), Painswick district (Farn). Hrrrrorp: Leominster (Hutch-
inson), Tarrington (J. H. Wood). Kenr: Strood (Tutt), Alkham, Pembury,
Charlton (Stainton). Kerry: [Killarney (Birchall), probably cosmodactyla
(Kane).| [Lanark: Glasgow (Mackay).] Lancasuire (Barrett). MrRIONETH :
Barmouth (Horton). Mippiesex: Enfield (Edelsten). Prrtrx (Barrett). SHRop-
‘SHIRE : Clee Hill district (H. Williams). Somerser (Barrett). Surrey: Mickleham,
Farnham (Stainton), Haslemere, Witley (Barrett). Sussex: Lewes (Stainton),
Brighton, Falmer Downs, Shoreham (Vine). Westmornanp: Lake district
(Stainton). Worcester (Barrett). [Yorxs: Scarborough (Stainton). ]

Distrisution.—Apparently throughout the Palearctic and western
Nearctic regions. In north America, the western district from
California to Alaska (Cockerell) ; throughout central Europe, northwest
Russia, southeastern Scandinavia, Sicily and Dalmatia (Rebel).
America: British Columbia—Kaslo (Dyar); U.S.A.—New Mexico, top of the Las Vegas
Range, between the Pecos and Sapello rivers, at an elevation of 11000ft. (Cockerell);
Colorado—Pine Grove, Platte Cafion, at about 7000ft. (Dyar), California—San
Francisco, Oregon (Walsingham). Asta: Asia Minor, near Brussa (Mann). AvstRo-
Houneary: Bohemia (Nickerl), Lower Austria—Vienna district—Kahlengebirge
(Kollar), near Tivoli, on the Laaerberg, Bisamberg, the Prater (Mann), Tyrol—
North Tyrol (Wocke), Innsbriick, Taufers Valley, Sternbach-Moos, near Uttenheim
(Weiler), Bozen (Meess), Upper Carinthia—Flitsch (Zeller), Dalmatia (Mann).
Denmark (Bang-Haas). France: Auvergne district—Cantal, Murat (Sand).
Germany: east and west Prussia (Siebold), Pomerania— Greifswa!d, Zarrentin
(Paul and Plotz), Mecklenburg—near Neustrelitz(Messing), Hamburg—Sachsenwald,
near Reinbeck, Niendorf (Sauber), Hanover—Hanover (Reinhold), Thuringia—in the

STENOPTILIIDI. 313

valleys (Knapp), Miihlhausen (teste Jordan), Silesia, confined to the mountains—
near Salzbrunn, Charlottenbrunn, Pitschenberg, Schreiberhau, Grunewald-Thal
near Reinerz, valleys of the Gl. Schneeberg and Altvater (Wocke), Lichtenau,
Lauban (Méschler), Wiirttemberg—Hisenbach (Steudel and Hofmann), Saxony—
Saxon Upper Lusatia (Schiitze), Bavaria — Regensburg, near Maria Ort —
Schelmengraben, Alling, Kelheim (Schmid), near Munich, Isarauen, Schaft-
larn, Tegernsee, Oberaudorf (Hartmann), at the Walchensee, in the Allgau,
Immenstadt, Eisenstein (Hofmann), Baden — Thalmiihle, near Engen
Unterhélzer. Donaueschingen, Waldshut (Meess and Spuler), Alsace—Saverne
(Peyerimhoff). Irany: Lombardy—Milan, Brianza (Turati), Sicily—Catania
Zeller). Russia: northwest and southwest Russia (Rebel), Moscow district—
rochorowo (Albrecht), Volga district—Casan, Orenburg (Eversmann), Baltic
Provinces—Pehrse (Leinig), Grésen (Rosenberger), Lechts, very rare (Huene),
Lips, Rotsikill, Pichtendahl], Wanma (Noleken). Scanpinavia: Lapland (Wallen-
gren), Norway— Koppang (Jordan), Saltdalen (Sparre-Schneider), Odnaes (Strand).
Swirzertanp: Ober-Albula — Tuors-Pensch, Bergiin, St. Moritz, up to 5700ft.
(Zeller), Winterthiir, Ziirich (Frey), Bremgarten (Boll), Riffelberg (Jordan), Upper
Engadine—near St. Moritz (von Heyden), near Lenzburg (Wiillschlegel).

Subfamily; Srenoprinun#.
Tribe : STeENopriLuDt.

This subfamily and tribe obtain their name from Hubner’s coitus
Stenoptiliae otf the family Cuspides (Verz., p. 480). In this coitus, he
unites our Stenoptiliids and Leioptilids, whilst, in the other coitus,
Aciptiliae, of this family, he places the rest of our Alucitines.
Zeller, in 1841 and 1847, failed to separate the Stenoptiliids from the
Leioptilids and other allied groups, but Herrich-Schaffer came nearer
to making the necessary division, his section i of Pterophorus,
containing the Stenoptiliids, being described as follows :—

Genus IV: Prerornorvus, Zell.
1. Fasciculus frontalis conicus—miantodactylus, F.v.R.
2. Frons squamis appressis*, subquadrata.

i. Palpi squamis compressis* triangulares, als anteriores apice acuto,
puncto ante fissuram pallidius ciliatam simplici aut gemino nigro;
punctis limbi loborum amborum nonnullis.

A. Cilia basi alba, punctis nigris, uno (duobus in P. loewii) in angulo
anali anterioris, duobus versus apicem interioris.
a. Lobus anterior innotatus.
a. Cilia costalia lobi anter. alba—/fuscus, Retz., loewii, Zell.,
mannii, Gell., stigmatodactylus, Zell.
6. Cilia costalia lobi anter. alarum anter. non alba—aridus,
Zell., serotinus, Zell.
b. Lobus anterior lineola longitudinali nigra.
a. Margo anterior innotatus—mictodactylus, W.V., plagto-
dactylus, F.v.R., lutescens, H.-Sch.
B. Margo anterior lineola alba ad 3—coprodactylus, Zell.
B. Cilia dimidio basali acute fusca—graphodactylus, Tr.

In 1862, under the generic name Mimaeseoptilus, the Stenoptiliids were
treated as a separate division, which was then diagnosed by Wallengren
(Skandinaviens Hjddermott, p. 18) as follows :-—

Antenne of the ¢ fringed with very short hairs. The frontal tuft raised into
a blunt cone. Palpi longer than the head, compressed laterally, the middle joint
thickened above with hairs, the last joint short, blunt, scarcely to be distinguished
from the preceding. ‘The posterior tibie slender, not thickened. ‘The first pair of
spines in the posterior tibia equal, the second pair slightly unequal. The anterior
wings cleft to a third part of their length, the segments more slender, the upper one
with a distinct posterior angle, the posterior lanceolate, with the posterior angle
not well-defined. ‘lhe segments of the posterior wings slender, the middle segment

* These words have been transposed in printing, anted, p. 84.

314 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

dilated so as to be somewhat spoon-shaped, the third, or posterior, division without
any black scales in its short fringe. The anterior wings not perfectly flat, their
anterior margin being very slightly deflexed, their inner margin without a tooth,
and, when at rest, slightly deflexed, so as to embrace the posterior wings. The veins.
of the anterior wings ten in number; the Ist and 2nd separate from the base, the
3rd from the posterior margin of the cell, and the 4th and 5th together from the
posterior angle of the cell, all running into the posterior segment; the 6th rises from
the little transverse vein near the anterior angle of the cell, and the 7th, which is
two-branched, rises from the angle itself; these run into the anterior segment ; the
8th and 9th arise from anterior margin of the cell, and run into the anterior margin
of the wing; the 10th arises from the base of the wing, and runs along into its
anterior margin. The cell is distinct, closed, with a very slender spurious transverse
veinlet, moderately curved, with the convexity turning towards the base of the wing.
The veins of the inferior wings are four in number, the 1st two-branched, ending in
the Ist segment; the 2nd two-branched, ending, as well as the simple 3rd vein, in
the 2nd segment (this 3rd vein generally joins with the 2nd at the base), and the
4th vein simple, ending in the 3rd segment. No cell.

This tribe appears to be in some respects one of the most
generalised of those belonging to the Platyptiliids. To some extent,
larvally, the Stenoptiliines are very near the Platyptiliines, but the
alliance is much more marked pupally. The g genital appendages,
however, mark them off as a very special and homogeneous group,
standing as well separated and defined in this particular, as they do in
wing-structure, etc. Bacot notes that, on pupal characters, our three
British species are very close, but, as larvee, are much more divergent,
Stenoptilia pterodactyla, in particular, being much further advanced in
its wart development than the Adkinias. It may be here noted that
larval characters appear to be remarkably modified in accordance with
the feeding habits throughout the superfamily. The egg is inclined
to be cylindrical in outline, somewhat full, and approaching more
nearly than any others to those of the Agdistids.

The Stenoptiliine larva is a miner in the 1st and 2nd stadia, and
afterwards may hide in a burrow (not mining), but usually feeds some-
what intheopen. A structural description of the larva practically covers
also Marasmarcha and Amblyptilia (Chapman). In form, the larva is
somewhat cylindrical, the secondary skin-hairs are present, and the
tubercles comparatively generalised in position; the warts 111-developed ;
the hairs minute, clubbed, and baton-like as in the Agdistid larva. The
tubercles, however, are much more complicated than those of the
Platyptiliids (sens. rest.), but much less so than the highly specialised
Alucitines. Both these forms, however, the more simple, single-haired,
tubercles of the Platyptiliines, and the complicated warts of the
Alucitines, are very possibly developments in different directions
from an intermediate form of wart, resembling, probably, the warts of
the Stenoptiliines. Structurally, the prothoracic plate has a central
suture, and a dark-coloured hollow towards each outer extremity. The
tubercles always have the primary hairs distinguishable, but are usually
accompanied by secondary hairs that sometimes run them rather close.
The secondary skin-hairs are generally distributed, and vary in length
in different species. Adkinia zophodactylus and A. bipunctidactyla are
without post-spiracular accessory tubercles, which are well-developed
in Stenoptilia pterodactyla, and are indicated in Marasmarcha lunae-
dactyla and Amblyptilia cosmosdactyla. The prolegs have a similar
structure in all, tall, with a tubular chitinous sheath, the crochets
few, large, and dark. In A. cosmodactyla, the number is 4 or 5, in

STENOPTILIIDI. 815

M. lunaedactyla 5-6, in S. pterodactyla 6-8, in A. bipuntidactyla 6-7,
and in A. zophodactylus not only are there 9, but they are distinctly
smaller and paler, and the white colour is feebly more delicate.

The Stenopliliine pupa is rather long, slender, and generally highly
tinted with pink or green shades. It differs in outline from the
Agdistid pupa, in being rather more swollen in the thoracic region ;
the pupal skin is extremely delicate and filmy; the surface apparently
very smooth, but a lens exhibits numerous fine transverse ribs on the
abdominal segments. The tubercles are single-haired, the sete retain-
ing the baton-like character. Really, the tubercles are represented by
minute knobs, very prominent as to 1 and ii, almost like little beads
stuck on, the lower ones are eminences, only they carry minute, trans-
parent, clubbed hairs, not on their summits, but in depressions on one
side, 1 on the anterior, and 11 on the posterior, aspect, and so on; the
hairs are thus nearly parallel with the pupal surface. The relative
position of i and 11 varies in the different species, and must here be a
Specific, and not a generic, character. In 8S. yraphodactyla (giant
form), from Larche, the two beads are almost conjoined. In S. var.
pneumonanthes (from Montreux), they are apart, about 3 of their own
diameters. In S. pterodactyla, they are about the same, or a litle
closer, varying somewhat in different specimens. In A. bipuncti-
dactyla, they are closer, nearly the same as in S. graphodactyla.
In A. zophodactylus, they are more widely apart, perhaps 4 diameters
of bead, which in this species is not much more pronounced than in
the lower tubercles; yet in all the species they are on the 4th
and 2nd of the small transverse ribs. All have the dorsal flange
(on the prothorax to 3rd abdominal) fairly well marked ; it reasserts
itself also on the last three segments. The free appendages are the
2nd and 38rd legs and maxille, which extend as far as the end of the
5th abdominal segment, supported by a pointed wing extension to
nearly the posterior margin of the 4th abdominal (Chapman).

The Stenoptiliine imago presents the usual Platyptiliid characters,
e.g., it has a single spina in the ¢ frenulum; the general form of the
Platyptiliid forewing, although the squared-shape of both lobes,
i.¢., exhibiting a costal and anal angle, is somewhat obsolete; nervure
II of the forewing having 5 branches; the same character of the
divisions of the hindwing, etc. The hindwings, bowever, have not the tuft
of black scales on the third plumule, which is a constant character
of the true Platyptiliine and Oxyptilid imagines. Of the super-
ficial wing-markings, Hofmann gives (Die deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 68
et seq.) the following description: “The dot on the inner margin is
mostly either absent or indistinct, the discal spot, as a rule, present,
though sometimes only very weakly indicated, or even quite absent.
The dots at the fissure are always present, though the upper one is
often very small and indistinct. They lie sometimes close to the
fissure, and sometimes about 1mm. in front of it. A pale transverse
line on the lobes of the forewings is sometimes fairly distinct on
both segments, though usually only on the upper one, but sometimes
only more or less indicated, or even quite absent. The narrower inner
marginal portion of the forewing is, as a rule, paler in colour than the
broader costal portion. There is sometimes a thick blackish streak in
the upper segment, while, in the lower segment, there are two, one
above the other. These streaks are, however, by no means constant,

316 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

but vary much in distinctness and strength, often being quite absent.
In addition, on the forewings, especially on the fold, in front of the
fissural dots, and along the costa, are longitudinal rows of black and
white scales. The outer marginal fringes usually have a whitish, or, at
any rate, a pale, basal line, in which, at the anal angle of the upper
segment, there lies usually one, more rarely two, black or dark brown
dots. There are mostly, in this pale basal line of the lower segment,
three dark dots, one at the apex, a second a little below this, and a
third at the anal angle, which is, however, sometimes wanting. The
fringe dots are sometimes narrow, and sharply marked, sometimes
paler and more suffused, and then show a tendency to combine, which
also happens in exceptional cases. Ina smaller section, the species have
a dark brown basal line in the outer marginal fringes of both segments,
which, however, is occasionally once or twice divided by paler colour.
The hindwings are always without markings. On the underside, the
apices of the segments, and the first and the third feathers are more or
less strongly dusted with white. The white transverse line of the upper
segment sometimes shows through on the underside. The head
always has the same colour as the costal portion of the forewing; the
eye 1s margined above by a fine white line, which is continued on both
sides of the frontal protuberance along the upper ridge of the palpi
to their tips. The first, and sometimes also the second, joint of the
palpi, has a similar narrow white line on its lower edge; the antenne
are brown, but white beneath at the base. The pro- and mesothorax
have also the same coloration as the costal portion of the forewing,
while the metathorax shows the coloration of the inner margin.
Sometimes these different colours are divided by a narrow whitish
transverse line. The first and second segments of the abdomen have
the same colour as the metathorax, and are bordered laterally by two,
broad, white, longitudinal streaks; the following segments of the
abcomen, in general coloured as the forewings, are ornamented,
especially distinctly below, with white, often interrupted, longitudinal
lines, and with groups of black scales on the posterior margins. The
legs have about the same coloration as the body and forewings, and are
similarly marked in all the species. The middle coxe exhibit, on the
outer side, a broad, silver white band; the femora are finely edged
with white on both sides beneath, the front and middle tibiz are dark
above, white beneath, the hind tibie similar above and below, mostly
dark, the front and middle tarsi dark above, white below, with perhaps
the exception of the extreme apices, the hind tarsi with the first joint
dark, and the following whitish. The spurs outwardly dark, inwardly
white, black at the apex. The markings of the head, thorax, abdomen,
and legs, are the same in all the species.’”’ Hofmann gives (Die
deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 68 et seq.), under the name Stenoptilia, the follow-
ing summary of the structure of the Stenoptiliids :—

Head: Crown flatly-scaled. Forehead extended in a conical flat-scaled pro-
tuberance, with the anterior margin straight, or very obtusely-angled. Antennz of
the ¢ very weakly ciliated. Palpi laterally compressed, longer than the frontal
prominence, the second joint rough-scaled above, nearly triangular, the third joint
very small, cylindrical, not reaching beyond apex of second joint. Legs slender.
Hind tibiz without especial characteristics. Abdomen long and slender, 2nd
and 3rd segments much longer than the rest, widened posteriorly in ?. Fore-
wings cleft to one-third, the segments narrow, with very oblique margin, both with
more or less distinct anal angle. Feathers of hindwing dissimilar, the first the

Prana be

Prepared by T, A. Chapman. (Photo. A. FE. Tonge.

ANCILLARY APPENDAGES OF ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS, A. PNEUMONANTHES, A. COPRODACTYLUS,
AND STENOPHILA PTERODACTYDA X 28,

s)
Natural History of the British Lepidoptera, 1900.
[For explanation see back.!

PLATE II.

[To be bound facing p. 317.]

ANCILLARY APPENDAGES OF ADKINIA ZOPHODADTYLUS, A. PNEUMONANTHES,
A. COPRODACTYLUS, AND STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA X 28.

Fig. 1—Adkinia zophodactylus : Paler, more delicately chitinised than others
shown. The interior rod of edceagus partially exserted (this rarely happens in
these preparations). The terminal rounded lobe with delicate membranous
extension.

Fig. 2—Adkinia pneumonanthes : Shows well the relative form of the tegumen
when compared with fig. 1; the terminal lobe more rounded than in A. zopho-
dactylus.

Fig. 3.—Adkinia coprodactylus : One tip of the tegumen is blemished in plate
(that to right). The terminal rounded lobes showing delicate membrane extending
beyond scaled portion as in fig. 1. The interior rod very obvious within the
cedoeagus.

Fig. 4.—Stenoptilia pterodactyla : Larger, stronger, sickles or cusps of clasps
longer, more pointed. The terminal lobes of tegumen very rounded, with scarcely
any sulcus between them.

[The black areas on the clasps are due to unremoved hairs, and the difference
between photos in this respect are not due to any differences of structure, but to
completeness or otherwise of this removal. |

N.B.—The ancillary appendages in all are very similar. The clasps complex,
delicate, definitely different only in size, and possible slight differences in length and
sharpness of terminal sickle. The edceagus similar throughout; the slender chitinous
rod within which is part of eversible membrane. The most obvious differences are
in the varying completeness of the removal of scales and hairs. The uncus rises
(see Plate III) from the ventral surface of the terminal rounded lobe. ‘The uncus
is characteristically different as shown in the four forms.—T. A. CHapman.

Piate III.

\
(
=) iadeebe
: etree 3
pe
6 .

DIAGRAM OF DORSAL PORTION OF ANCILLARY APPENDAGES OF GENTIAN-FEEDING
STENOPTILIAS AND OF OUR TWO OTHER BRITISH SPECIES X 80.
(From camera sketches by T. A. Ciaran.)

Natural History of the British Lepidoptera, 1906.

[For explanation see back. |

PLATE III.

[To be bound facing p. 317.]

DIAGRAMMATIG REPRESENTATION OF DORSAL PORTION OF ANCILLARY APPENDAGES
OF THE GENTIAN-FEEDING STENOPTILIAS, AND OF THE OTHER
TWO BRITISH SPECIES X 80.

Fig. 1—-Tegumen of S. pterodactyla, with terminal lobes full and round,
short (2.e., with less marked sulcus), uncus broad-based, terminal part baton-like,
hairs distributed, strong.

Fig. 2—A. pneumonanthes, terminal lobes full and round, with well marked
sulcus. The uncus thicker, more robust, tapering regularly, the basal half with
complicated folds, clothed with short sensory hairs almost throughout.

Fig. 3—A. grandis, n.sp., terminal lobes full and round, with well marked
sulcus. The uncus as in pnewmonanthes.

Fig. 4—A. bipunctidactyla, with terminal lobes narrower and shorter, uncus
broad-based and triangular.

Figs. 5-6.—A. coprodactylus, showing variable, rounded, irregular membrane
extending beyond scaled portion; uncus broad-based, terminal part baton-like ;
hairs grouped at base.

Fig. 7—A. zophodactylus, delicate structure, showing triangular, pointed
membrane extending beyond scaled portion ; uncus with flattened base, the process
smooth, slender and baton-like, hairs on base.

N.B.—Except the median process and the clear extensions in A. zophodactylus
and A. coprodactylus, the whole area is scale-covered; this scaling is only
diagrammatically indicated in the figures.—T’. A. CuapMan.

¢

STENOPTILIIDI. 317

broadest, with very oblique margin and indicated anal angle; the second narrower,
with elongated apex; the third linear, without dark scales on inner margin.
Neuration: Perfect, and shows no essential difference from that of the genera,
Euenemidophorus, Platyptilia, and Amblyptilia. Genital organs: The male organs
of copulation differ from those hitherto noticed, chiefly because there is no uncus
attached to the 9th dorsal plate, which is deeply emarginated, but only a fine thin
pencil-like projection protrudes from the posterior margin (10th dorsal segment ?).
The claspers are deeply hollowed, boat-shaped, and terminate posteriorly in two
somewhat triangular-pointed delicate lobes, and a strong downwardly-curved bristly
hook, which springs from a broad base on the upper margin, and extends far beyond
the two lobes. At the origin of the hook stands a thick pencil of stiff bristles,
situated on a chitinous plate projecting towards the inner hollow of the clasper.
The outer side of the clasper is also thickly beset with bristles. The 9th ventral
plate is very small, oval, or bluntly triangular. The arcuate downwardly-curved
penis is very long, and has, close to the base, a long prominence directed down-
wards (tab. iii., fig. 6). In the different species examined I found only unessential
differences, for example, in the greater or less arching of the 9th dorsal plate, in the
form of the terminal lobes of the claspers, etc.

Hofmann says (Die deutsch. Pterophorinen, p. 72): ‘“ The species of
the genus Stenoptilia are very near to one another, and are, at the same
time, in coloration, and in certain elemental markings, very variable, so
that the determination is often very difficult. At the most, only the
position of the dark dots before the cleft appears to be constant. By
this character the species may be divided into two groups :—

I. The dots on the cleft, or at least one of them, the lower, are placed imme-
diately on the cleft.

A. The dots of the cleft are large, one directly above the other, in very
close vicinity, often united or blended into a thick transverse
streak.

1. A thick black longitudinal streak in the upper lobe more or less
surrounded by white scales, especially on the hind and upper
margins ... Hs 7 ie pelidnodactyla, Stein.

2. A black longitudinal streak in the upper lobe only very slender, or
only indicated by black scales; a very oblique white trans-
verse line of the upper lobe runs into the costal fringe (or is,
together with the longitudinal streak, entirely wanting)
... serotina, Zell. (and var. plagiodactyla, Zell.) (non St.).

B. The dots of the cleft small, the wpper somewhat distant from the
lower, and removed further in towards the base, or quite absent.
The costal fringes of the upper lobe white.

1. With one black dot in the fringes of the anal angle of the
upper lobe Ue e # stigmatodactyla, Zell.

2. With two black dots in the same ... zophodactylus, Dup.

Il. The dots of the cleft are separated by a small, often brightly coloured,
interval (about 1mm.) from the cleft.

1. The costal fringes of the upper lobe white. Forewings lighter, or darker,
cinnamon-brown...fusea, Zell. (and var. paludicola, Wallgrn.).

2. The costal fringes of the upper lobe at most, for a short distance, just
beyond the cleft, and at the apex white, otherwise dark.

a. The outer marginal fringes of the upper and lower lobes white,
only towards the anal angle brown, with a connected black
brown basal line.

a. The space between the dots of the cleft and the cleft bright
brownish-yellow, often dusted with white; at the com-
mencement of the upper lobe a bleached yellow undefined
spot... “ ch graphodactyla, Tr.

8. Without the characteristics given for a, on the contrary,
with very distinctly expressed oblique white line on the
upper lobe, which is mostly continued as two small white
spotlets on the lower lobe, var. pnewnonanthes, Schleich.

b. The outer marginal fringes of the upper and lower lobes brownish,
with a white basal line, in which one black dot lies at the

$18 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

anal angle of the upper lobe, while three (sometimes only
two) lie on the lower lobe oe coprodactylus,* Zell.

The resting-habit of the Stenoptiliids is somewhat different from
the species of any other group; they usually hang loosely from a grass
culm or plant stem, among the herbage that is generally to be found in
their haunts, the wings not stretched out at full length, as in the Platyp-
tiliines, but drawn partly back, so that they are at an angle of about
45° with the body, and at about a right angle with each other. They
are held horizontally, the hindwings beneath the forewings, the inner
margin of the latter bent under so as to hide the former.

Genus: Apxinia, Tutt.

SynonyMy.—Genus: Adkinia, Tutt, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,’’ xvii., p. 97 (1905).
Phalaena, Scop., ‘‘ Ent. Carn.,’”’ p. 257 (1762). Alucita, Vill., ‘Linn. Ent. Fn.
Suec.,’’ li., p. 535 (1789); Hb., ‘‘ Schmett. Eur.,’’ Aluc., pl.i., fig. 3 (ante 1811);
Haw., ‘‘Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 476 (1811); Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,’’ ix., p. 240 (1833).
Pterophorus, Sam., ‘“‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,’’ p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,’’
fo. 161 (1827) ; Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’’ xi., pp. 661, 668 (1838); Wood, ‘‘ Ind. End.,”’
p. 235, pl. li., fig. 1629 (1829) ; Zell., ‘‘Isis,”’ p. 837 (1841); Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Méth.,”’
p. 382 (1844); Zell., ‘‘ Isis,’’ pp. 38, 904 (1847); “Linn. Ent.,” vi., pp. 361, 364
(1852) ; H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., pp. 375, 376 (1855) ; Frey, ‘‘ Die Tin.,”’ etc.,
p. 411 (1856) ; Sta., ‘‘ Man.,’’ p. 442 (1859) ; Schmid, ‘‘ Berl. Ent. Zeits.,”’ viii.,
p- 65 (1864); Gregs., ‘‘ Knt.,’’ iii., p. 186 (1866) ; Nolck., ‘‘Lep. Fn. Estl.,”
p. 807 (1871); Porritt, ‘‘EKnt. Mo. Mag.,”’ xxi., p. 208 (1885); ‘‘ Buckler’s
Larve,” etc., pp. 358, 359, pl. 163, fig. 9 (1901). Stenoptilia, Hb., ‘‘ Verz.,”’
p- 430 (1825); Stphs., ‘‘ Illus.,’’ p. 372 (1834); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc.
Lond.,” p. 487 (1890); Hofm., ‘‘Deutsch. Pteroph.,’? pp. 75, 81 (1895) ;
Meyr., ‘‘ Handbk.,’’ ete., pp. 440, 441 (1895); Staud. and Reb., *‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 76
(1901). Mimaeseoptilus, Wallgrn., ‘‘Skand. Fjader.,’’ p. 18 (1859) ; Jord., ‘‘ Ent.
Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 123 (1859) ; Staud., “‘ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 343 (1871); Hein. and
Wocke, ‘‘Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, pp. 794, 795 (1877); Frey, ‘‘Lep.
Schweiz,’’ p. 430 (1880) ; Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ p. 178 (1882) ; Gregs., ‘‘ Ent.,”’
xvili., p. 150 (1885); South, ‘‘Ent.,”’ xviii., pp. 98, 274-275 (1885); Sorh.,
‘‘ Kleinsch. Brandbg.,’’ p. 5 (1886) ; Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,”’ x., pp. 164, 165 (1889) ;
South, ‘‘ Ent.,” xxii., p. 34 (1889); ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,” ii., 61, 107, 111, 159 (1892);
“Pter. Brit.,’’ pp. 85, 93 (1895); Barr., ‘‘Lep. Br. Isles,’ ix., pl. 415, fig. 5b
(1904).

The genus was constituted (Hint. Record, xvii., p. 87) in order to
separate bipunctidactyla, and other allied species, from Stenoptilia, as
represented by pterodactyla (fuscus). As has already been shown
(antea, p. 317), Hofmann separated (Die deutsch. Pteroph., p. 72) the

_two groups on imaginal grounds, and they form sect. I and sect. II
respectively, of his genus Stenoptilia. But there are also distinct larval
characters, of which the much weaker (almost absent) development
of the lower accessory postspiracular tubercle, the less wart-like
growth of the primary and subprimary tubercles, the weaker develop-
ment of the skin-spicules, ete., in Adkinia, when compared with

* In exceptional cases in S. var. pnewmonanthes, the dark basal line of the
outer marginal fringes of the upper and lower lobes is more than once, mostly twice,
intersected with pale, or, especially in wasted specimens, is here and there much
bleached, while in S. coprodactyla, in equally exceptional cases, the dark dots of the
outer marginal fringes of the lower lobe unite into a more or less distinct line. In
such cases, besides the other characteristics mentioned more particularly in the
description, the arrangement of the outer marginal fringes of the upper lobe is the
chief distinguishing character; in the white basal line in S. coprodactyla there is
to be found, at the anal angle, only one black dot, and very rarely, also, a second
above it, while in S. graphodactyla and var. pneuwmonanthes, a distinct brown
basal line, even if interrupted here and there with paler, is always recognisable
Hofmann .

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS. 319

Stenoptilia, may be mentioned. These details (for which we are in-
debted to Chapman and Bacot) may be summarised as follows :—

Ovum.—The ovum of Stenoptilia (as illustrated by pterodactyla) is much more
Agdistid-like than that of Adkinia (as illustrated by bipunctidactyla), the longitudinal
ribs are more marked in Adkinia. Larva.—In the larva of Stenoptilia ( pterodactyla),
the posterior accessory dorsal warts on thoracic segments are represented by strong
hairs; these tubercles are almost entirely, or totally, absent in dAdkinia (zophodac-
tylus and bipuntidactyla). In Stenoptilia, the accessory tubercles=iiia and
iiib (Dyar) are developed, the upper strongly; in Adkinia, they are practically
undeveloped (in A. zophodactylus no trace). In Stenoptilia, the warts representing
primary tubercles are well-developed, with primary and numerous secondary seta,
on fairly well-developed raised skin areas; in Adkinia, these warts are only incipient,
with primary hair, and no, or very few, ill-developed, secondary hairs. Pupa.—
The pupal structures are practically identical. Imaco.—The spotting of the fore-
wings is at the fissure in Adkinia, some distance therefrom in Stenoptilia.

We are not at all certain that bipunctidactyla and zophodactylus are
not themselves characteristic of separate little natural groups, but our
ignorance of the early stages of the allied Palearctic species forbids us
going into further subdivision, and inclines us to leave, provisionally,
zophodactylus in the same genus as bipunctidactyla. As to the larval
differences exhibited by Adkinia bipunctidactyla and A. zophodactylus,
Bacot observes that the latter has far fewer secondary hairs than the
former, whilst in this the incipient wart development is also less
distinctly marked. He suspects that the internal-feeding habit, main-
tained in the 2nd brood of A. zophodactylus, has kept the development
of hairs, warts, &c., usually connected with an external-feeding habit,
markedly in check, the greater development of hairs being useless in
internal-feeding larve.

ADKINIA ZoPHODACTYLUS, Duponchel.

Synonymy.—Species : Zophodactylus, Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,”’ xi., p. 668, pl. 314,
fig. 4 (1838); ‘‘ Cat. Méth.,” p. 382 (1844); Gregs., ‘‘ Ent.,’’ iv., p. 350 (1869) ;
Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 343 (1871) ; Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett.
Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 795 (1877); Frey, ‘‘ Lep. der Schweiz,’’ p. 430 (1880) ;
Barrt., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 180 (1882); Porr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xx., p.
228 (1884); South, ‘‘ Ent.,”’ xxii., p. 35 (1889); Tutt, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xxii., p. 104 (1889) ;
** Young Nat.,” x., p. 165 (1889) ; ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,”’ ii., pp. 111, 157 (1892); ‘ Pter.
Brit.,’’ p. 93 (1895) ; Barr., ‘‘Lep. Brit. Isl.,”’ ix., p. 377, pl. 416, fig. 1a (1904).
Loewii, Zell.,‘‘Isis,’’ pp. 38, 904 (1847); ‘Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 364 (1852); H.-Sch.,
“< Sys. Bearb.,” v., p. 375 (1855); Sta., ‘‘Hnt. Ann.,’’ p. 98 (1858) ; ‘* Man.,”’ ii.,
p. 442 (1859) ; ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,” p. 143 (1860); Schmid, ‘‘ Berl. Ent. Zeits.,’ viii.,
p. 65 (1864); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 123 (1869); Porritt, ‘‘ Buckler’s
Larve,’’ etc., ix., p. 358 (1901); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,” 3rd ed., p. 76 (1901).
Zophodactyla, Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 487 (1890) ; ‘* Handbook,”
etc., p. 440 (1895) ; Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,” p. 81 (1895); Lamb., ‘Rev.
Mens. Soc. Ent. Nam.,’’ 1904, pp. 50 et seq. (1904).

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION. — Pterophore zophodactyle [ Pterophorus
zophodactylus, mihi (pl. 314, fig. 4).] Emnvergure 9 lignes. Les quatre
ailes sont enticrement d’un brun-noirdtre obscur des deux cédtés, avec
un point noiratre oblong 4 Vorigine de la fente qui divise les premiéres
ailes-en deux parties. Cette fente est assez large, et s’étend jusqu’au
tiers de la longueur desdites ailes. Des trois divisions dont se
composent les secondes ailes, les deux premiéres sont spatuliformes et
la troisiéme linéaire. La frange des premidres ailes est blanchatre, et
celle des secondes brundtre. La téte, les antennes et le corps sont de
la couleur des ailes, ainsi que les pattes, 4 l’exception des tarses, qui
sont blanchatres. Pyrénées-orientales (M. Méret) (Duponchel, Hist.
Nat., xi., p. 668).

320 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Imvaco.—18mm.-20mm. in expanse. Forewings dark grey or
whitish-grey with a slight violet tinge in fresh examples, the costal
half somewhat darker; the median and apical areas paler; the inner
marginal area sometimes tinged with brownish; speckled with white
scales between the nervures, also a few scattered black scales; the
basal half of costa sometimes faintly dotted with white, the outer half
of costa with a strongly developed white edging, especially distinct
towards apex; a faint brownish dot near centre of disc (sometimes
absent), another near the lower extremity of fissure, inconspicuous,
scarcely darker than ground colour; two, tiny, black, outer-marginal,
dots towards anal angle of upper lobe, and two on outer margin of lower
lobe towards apex; fringes dark grey, whitish in cleft. Hindwings
dark, glossy, golden-brown in tint; fringes just a little paler than the
ground colour of the wings, very glossy towards apex of plumules.

SEXUAL DimMoRPHISM.—The @ noticeably larger than the g, of a
deeper tone in all its parts, but above all in hindwings, which are
nearly black (Lambillion).

Variation.—In the more typical British form there is considerable
minor variation, especially in the amount of black and white scaling on
the forewings, the depth of the ground colour along the costa, and the
presence of brown shading along the inner margin, particularly towards
the base. In some, the black and white scales, running along and
between the nervures, give a distinct suggestion of delicate longitudinal
striation, and, in the palest examples, the white scaling is continued
from the base, through the middle of the wing to the apex, the latter
sometimes being particularly white. There is also considerable
variation in the depth of the tint of, and size of, the discal and fissural
spots, as well as the shade above the latter, all these markings being
in some quite distinct, in others practically obsolete ; the presence or
absence of a tiny, dark, longitudinal mark in the upper lobe of forewings
reminds one also of the similar mark in A. bipunctidactyla, whilst the
black dots on the outer margin of the same lobe towards the base,
occasionally have the normal two, extended into a series of three or
four, the extra ones very faint, whilst those on the outer margin,
towards the apex of the lower lobe, also vary much in distinctness.
Compared with a long series from Canterbury, of distinctly purplish
hue, with a tendency to brownish on the inner margin, the examples
from Cuxton are particularly whitish, so much so that the forewings
could be described as whitish, with the costal area narrowly fuscous-
tinted, the discal and fissural spots faintly fuscous, the front lobe of
forewings also faintly fuscous, with a white oblique line crossing it at
some little distance from the outer margin; the characteristic sprinkling
of darker scales almost entirely absent ; the fringes pale grey, inclined
to whitish basally; the hindwings pale brownish in tint, with grey
fringes=var. pallida, n. var. We should be inclined to call the dark
Duponchelian type rare in Britain. We have an example, bred by
Whittle from Shoeburyness larvee, in which the inner-marginal half of the
forewing is particularly brown, and the costa and the lobes of the fore-
wings particularly blackish, with very little white scaling in the median
area, and practically none in the lobes, where, however, there is a
distinct sprinkling of black scales, only the extreme apex of the front
lobe being somewhat paler. Another example from there is strongly
marked with scattered white scales, throughout the median and lobal

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS. 321

areas, the inner margin somewhat browned. The race has a more
robust appearance than the Canterbury examples, which are also
somewhat browned on the inner margin, as well as the paler Cuxton
specimens. Barrett says that the species is hardly variable, except
that often the markings are hardly visible; but in the most strongly
marked specimens two black dots are sometimes visible in the cilia
of the anterior lobes of the forewings. Bankes writes (in litt.) :
‘‘Somewhat variable, the brown colour of the forewing ranging from
light brown to deep fuscous, with the whitish scaling in excess in the
former, and rather deficient in the latter, case; the tone of the hind-
varies with that of the forewing, and there is every intermediate
form between the two extremes. In my lengthy series, both the
palest and the darkest specimens hail from the same spot in Purbeck,
though some Essex examples are hardly less pale than the former. As
regards size, the largest individual therein expands 19:5mm., while
the smallest measures only 16°5mm.”’ In the Frey collection, the
specimens from Frankfurt are strongly sprinkled with white scales ;
the two dots at the end of the fissure are developed into well-marked
streaks, whilst the discal dot is also in the form of a streak; the inner
margin is very little tinged with brown. The Zurich specimens in
the same collection are rather large, also much sprinkled with white
scales, out the dots all ill-developed and the inner marginal area not
tinted with brown. The Regensburg specimen is particularly
noticeable for the development of the transverse line in the upper
lobe of the forewing. Two Kelheim specimens, bred from gentian,
are very like some British examples, in which the upper of the fissural
dots is modified into a shade stretching towards the costa. The
different forms group themselves as follows :—

1. Whitish ; the costal area greyish, with ill-developed fissural and discal
dots=ab. pallida-obsoleta, n. ab.

la. As in 1, but with well-developed fissural and discal dots—ab. pallida,
n. ab.

2. Slaty-grey, sprinkled thinly with white scales medially; with ill-developed
fissural and discal spots=ab. ardoisea-obsoleta, n. ab.

2a. As in 2, but with well-developed fissural and discal dots=ab. ardoisea,
n. ab.

2b. As in 2 or 2a, but with the inner margin brownish=ab. ardoisea-fusca,
n. ab.

2c. As in 2a or 2b, but with the median area strongly sprinkled with white
scales medially from base to apex=ab. ardoisea-variegata, n. ab.

3. Dark slaty-grey, sprinkled thinly with white scales medially ; with ill-
developed fissural and discal spots=ab. obscura-obsoleta, n. ab.

3a. As in 3, but with well-developed fissural and discal dots=ab. obscura,
n. ab.

3b. As in 3 or 3a, but with the inner margin brownish=ab. obscura-fusca
n. ab.

3c. As in 3a or 3b, but with the median area strongly sprinkled with white
scales medially from base to apex=ab. obscura-variegata, n. ab.

4. Costal area blackish-grey; inner margin brown; with well-developed
fissural and discal spots = zophodactylus*, Dup.

The reference of hodykinsoni, Gregs., to this species, as a variety, by
Barrett (Hint. Mo. May., xviil., p. 180) and ourselves (Pter. Brit., p.
95), proves to be quite erroneous; Bankes says (in itt.) that the

* Duponchel’s description, ‘‘ entirely dark brown-blackish,”’ ete., is very poor ;
his published figure little better. Our diagnosis here is taken from both.

322 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

examples in Hodgkinson’s collection under this name, and captured by
him, are simply worn A. bipunctidactyla.

CoMPARISON OF ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS AND A. BIPUNCTIDACTYLA,—
The former is nearly allied to bipunctidactyla and plagiodactyla, but
recognised at a glance by the costal cilia from the middle of the wing
to the apex being white. The ground colour of the anterior wings is
more of a slaty-grey tint than in bipunctidactyla, only the inner
margin having a brownish tinge (Stainton). Hofmann says (Die
Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 81) that, “at the anal angle of the front lobe of the
forewing, there are two distinct black dots, one above the other, by which
A. zophodactylus may easily be separated from all the allied species,
whilst at the apex of the hind lobe the two typical dots are to
be found.’ Although the white edging along the outer half of the costa
is usually a clear indication of A. zophodactylus, yet we have British
specimens that do not clearly show this character; but, in such
doubtful specimens, the presence of the two tiny black dots at the
anal angle of the upper lobe of the forewing appears to be an unfailing
indication. It is also markedly characteristic that the white scales in
A. zophodactylus, are much more irregularly and generally sprinkled
than in A. bipunctidactyla; whilst the tendency of the discal and
fissural dots to form weak lineole of a grey-brown rather than a
black tint, and for the upper of the fissural dots in addition, to fade
off into a weak shade towards the costa are sufficiently striking on
close examination of A. zophodactylus; the apex of the upper lobe
appears also to be usually rather more hooked in A. zophodactylus than
in A. bipunctidactyla.

Keerayine.—HKges were laid during the last ten days of July,
1904, on the green seed-vessels just below the flowers of Hrythraea
centaurium (Bankes); eggs laid on the bases of the flowers in some
numbers, sometimes on one another (Bacot). Some eggs were laid on,
or about, July 25th, 1904, by a captured @?, also others on, or about,
the same date by a bred @. Although this bred @ laid fertile ova,
and must, therefore, have paired with a bred § , and the other, captured
in the pink of condition, may perhaps have paired in confinement,
the moths were never observed in cop., although they were looked at,
daily, at frequent intervals between 7 a.m. and 11 p.m. They
probably paired late at night, but cannot have remained together for
many hours (Bankes).

Ovum.—When first laid, greenish-white (Bankes); of a trans-
parent pale yellow colour, when far advanced in development the
larval embryo faintly seen within the eggshell, the ocelli showing up
as a dark spot on the head. The surface is smooth and glistening ;
there is some wide and rather coarse, but poorly marked, surface
sculpturing, and this appears to be very similar to that on the egg
of A. bipunctidactyla—longitudinal corrugations on the sides, and
irregular cell-pattern on the shoulders and micropylar end. The egg
is roughly oval with flattened sides, but is somewhat irregular
in shape. The nadir is narrower and more rounded than the
micropylar end, and appears somewhat pointed in contrast with it,
the tapering to base occurring on both sides and edges. Length
‘4mm. (two eggs) to ‘86mm. (one egg); width -23mm.; thickness
18mm.--2mm. (Bacot, July 28th, 1904).

Hasits oF Larva.—Practically nothing is known of the early life of

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS. 323

the larva of this species in the spring, although we have a note stating
that, until the second moult, the young larve mine the leaves of the food-
plant (W.H.B.Fletcher). In the earliest days of July, when the flower-
buds of Krythraea centaurium are commencing to unfold, the larve are to
be found, and continue from this time onwards, almost without break, until
the end of September. Bankes says (in litt.) that, when quite young, the
larvee are most difficult to find, living concealed, at this time, inside the
very small flower-buds, and feeding on the internal parts of the bud, and
of the young seed-vessel below it; they move readily from one flower-bud
to another, entering the fresh one by means of an inconspicuous hole
bored through its side. The affected bud generally shows some
yellowish discoloration at the tip. The larve of medium size feed
inside the pink (i.e., the larger) flower-buds, their entrance holes being
more noticeable than before, but, when too large to dwell comfortably
therein any longer, they live externally, feeding either upon the
flowers, or upon the unripe seeds, which are reached by boring holes
through the sides of the seed-vessels. These, upon which the larve
are fond of resting, have, by this time, together with the stalks and
leaves, already turned rather yellow. This is the case, where he finds
the larva, even in the beginning of July; the larve, whose colour
admirably matches theirs, being thereby rendered very inconspicuous
upon them. Bacot says (in litt.) that the newly-hatched larva of the
second brood eats a minute hole through the thin, papery, outer covering
of the seed-capsule, and may eat a little beneath this before progressing
further, but, in most cases, it bores directly into the seed-capsule,
leaving so slight a sign of its entrance, that very careful search is
needed to discover it. It does not appear to attack the seeds at first ;
at any rate, the youngest found was engaged in mining vertically up
the suture, or seam, that divides the central partition of the seed-case,
but it evidently starts on the seeds before the first moult. By the end
of July, and in early August, 1904, young larve were already well
advanced, and, by August 8th, the seed-heads of centaury, on which
eges had been laid in mid-July, contained larvee, some in their Ist,
others in their 2nd, instar, and yet others more than half-grown
(probably in their 4th instar), whilst the seed-pods showed no signs
of feeding larve unless held against a strong hight. At this date
well-grown larve were found on Hrythraea heads, collected July 30th,
at Broxbourne, ten larvee being then detected as the result of careful
examination. [On the same date, Whittle writes that he had two larvx
spun up for pupation on the heads of the foodplant, picked three days
previously, and that he had failed to find larve earlier.} From this time
the larvee fed up at a great pace; several of the larve emerged from
the seed-heads when from 5mm. to 7mm. in length, and fed exposed,
spinning a slight silken web, that drew together several florets round
themselves, for the purpose of moulting. They appear to rest among
the buds, or on the stem directly beneath. The larva is particularly
quiet under examination, and, if not about to moult, rests with its head
partly retracted and turned downwards, so that it is difficult to
observe, and in this position bears a strong general resemblance to the
larva of Adactylus bennetii. The largest of these larvee began to spin up
for pupationon August 12th and the following days, and the first pupated
apparently on the 17th; by the 20th many had spun up, and the first
moth appeared on August 27th, the last about September 20th (Bacot).

324 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Lambillion notes (Rev. Mens. Soc. Ent. Namur, 1904, pp. 50-51) that
the larva rests lengthwise on the branches of the foodplant, its head
raised. It appears sluggish, its movements are very slow, and, at the
least touch, it falls to the ground ; when it wishes to feed, it crawls
into the angles of the floral stems, attacks a capsule, generally from
below, eating with rapidity ; sometimes, after its meal, it rests near the
attacked capsule, but more often goes back to the stem. He says that
its colour, size, and form make it astonishingly like the stems and
flowers of the foodplant, and it wants a keen eye to discover it; so
difficult is this, that, after having carefully examined the stems of a
bunch of flowers with a lens, and failed to find larvee, they may be found
some days afterwards, when almost adult. One suspects, however, that
this is due less to the protective resemblance exhibited than to the fact
that, by this time, they have left the inside of the capsules, and have
become external in their habits. Schmid observes (Berl. Ent. Zetts.,
vili., p. 65) that the larva lives from the end of July till September,
commonly, in many places, on Hrythraea centaurium, usually in the
green seed-capsules, which it empties; the light-brown frass that is
thrown out revealing the presence of the larva. He says that it is
possible, by selecting the affected plants, for one to collect comparatively
few plants, and obtain daily a number of larve which are about to
leave the capsules for pupation, and that, even after the earliest
imagines have emerged, and pup of various ages are obtainable,
larve still continue to come out of the capsules. This was probably
the origin of Kaltenbach’s note, that the larve feed in the green
seed-capsules, eating the contents, and keeping well concealed, but
protruding yellowish-brown frass. Schmid, however, in 1887,
records (Lep. Faun. Regensb., p. 202) that he discovered the
larve feeding, not only on the flowers and green capsules of
Erythraea centaurium, but that he found many more later, on
Gentiana germanica. Réssler also notes it as feeding, in Nassau, on
the flowers and seeds of Hrythraea centaurium, and refers to Schmid
having also bred it from the green capsules of Gentiana ygermanica.
Sorhagen records that, in Brandenburg, it feeds in the seed-capsules
of Hrythraea littoralis as well as . centaurium. Steudel and Hofmann
observe that, in Wurttemberg, the larve lve very much concealed,
eating out the green capsules of FH. centawrtum till they are quite empty,
the ejected excrement betraying their presence. Hofmann notes (Die
Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 82) that ‘‘the larve livein July and in September,
in the blossoms of Hrythraea centaurium and Gentiana germanica.’’? The
time, at which larve may be found, appears to depend on the season, and,
in different seasons, may extend from late June until the end of Septem-
ber or beginning of October. Until the flowering shoots of Erythraea
centaurium are well formed, and the larve of the early brood fairly well-
grown, nothing whatever is known of the habits of the larva, except the
statement of Fletcher, already noted, that, until the second moult, the
young larve mine the leaves of the foodplant. The variation in the
leneth of larval life is considerable, and hence the two recognised
broods overlap, whilst the possibility of a partial third brood is not at
all remote. Jeffrey notes (f’nt. Mo. Mag., ii., p. 165) that, near
Saffron Walden, towards the end of August, 1865, he found larve
feeding on seeds of Hrythraea centaurium, growing in a wood; these,
however, were late examples, as imagines were already on the wing.

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS. 325

Gregson says the larve are to be found in July, August, and September,
the time of their being full-fed varying much in different seasons. As
to the variation of the dates of finding larve we note: Larve taken
August, 1859, in the capsules of Chlora perfoliata, pupated September
2nd, etc., imagines appeared a few days iater (Henslow) ; August 8th,
1868, at Wallasey (Ragonot) ; fullgrown larve and pup mid-August,
1883, at Cattistock (Parmiter); August 11th, 1884, in the Isle of
Purbeck, imagines bred September 2nd-14th (Bankes); two larve
September 2nd, 1887, at Ventnor (South); larve August Ist, 1892,
in Tilgate Forest, also in July, 1898, over a hundred larve being found
in a bag of foodplant obtained in Addington Park (Sheldon) ; fullfed
larvee preparing for pupation, noticed among collected foodplant on July
27th, 1901, the Hrythraea collected at Shoeburyness a few days earlier
(Whittle) ; larve of various sizes obtained in the Isle of Purbeck,
July 4th-5th, 1904, pupated in a few days, and imagines appeared
from July 17th-25th; these (and captured ? at same time) laid eggs,
larvee from which were fullfed and pupated August 17th onwards,
imagines appeared August 27th-September 20th (Bankes). In Hesse,
at Mombach, larve were taken in July (Rossler); in Brandenburg
they are to be found from the end of July to September (Sorhagen) ;
in Bavaria, larvee occur in August (Schmid), and, in Wurttemberg,
in July and again in September (Steudel and Hofmann). An
account of the habits of this species is given by de Vries, in Sepp’s
Micdminssevi., Pp. 177, pl. xlv., figs. 1-8:

Larva.—First instar: Very small larva, about to moult for the
first time ; skin pale, whitish, glistening, no spicules; segments with
well-marked incisions, but subsegments poorly marked; the body
tapering somewhat posteriorly; the prothorax rather long; the head
small, polished, smoky-black in tint; scutellum and anal plates paler.
Under 1in. objective, the hairs appear short, bristle-like, pale in
colour, without thorns, slightly knobbed at apex; although no
spicules are present, a granular spotting appears beneath the skin,
probably the spicules of the next instar showing through. Spiracles
raised, black-rimmed, not very tall, but showing up conspicuously. The
tubercles form small chitinous plates, with raised buttons as hair-
bases ; on the meso- and metathorax,i and ii are on the same basal
plate, as also are ili and iv ; in these pairs of hairs the inner i and upper
iv are much the smaller ; v bears a single long hair. On the abdominal
segments, the setze of i and 11 are set trapezoidally, 1, the smaller, being
some distance in front of, and inner to, ii ; iii is close above the spiracle,
iv and v on the same plate beneath spiracle, v being the smaller, and
upper, hair. The hairs on the head are small and pointed, not
knobbed, but there are two large ones towards the crown that are
slightly knobbed. The faintly marked subsegments appear to be two
on the thoracic, and three on the abdominal, segments (August 6th,
1904). Second instar: There is now a well-developed coat of coarse
black spicules. Penultimate instar (ready to moult): 7mm.-9mm. in
length. <A rather slender, cylindrical, larva, with the usual long
prolegs, and, when at rest, its body well above the resting-surface.
The body tapers gradually, and markedly, backwards from the 2nd
abdominal segment. The segments are well-marked, with fairly deep
incisions, especially ventrally, but the segments are not noticeably
swollen dorsally or laterally; the spiracles are placed well up on the

326 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

sides at about, or rather above, the middle. The head is small,
rounded, polished, pale brown in colour, slightly mottled with darker
on the cheeks; it bears a few scattered, and rather weak, tapering,
hairs ; the ocelli situated on a dark patch. The prothorax is small,
and the first pair of legs appears somewhat weak in comparison with
the others; the scutellar plate is not conspicuously coloured, but
carries some black spotting on its posterior dorsal half, bordering the
median line; it has also a noticeable feature in the two depressed
dark-coloured spots, situated about midway between the mediodorsal line
and the spiracles. The spiracles are not highly raised, but form a
somewhat conspicuous feature, as they are rimmed with black. The
skin is wrinkled, but the subsegmentation is only poorly marked ;
there are three subsegments on the meso- and metathorax, and four
on the abdominal segments, but only one of these is strongly marked
dorsally, and this is the one that is normally present between tubercles
iand ii. The skin bears a thickly-set coat of rather coarse skin-points,
or short, stout, spicules, but, as these are not distinctively coloured,
they are not conspicuous. There is some variation as regards
coloration among the larve, possibly due to age, the larger ones being
of a more vivid green. They have a dark mediodorsal line, the dorsal
area on either side being pale olive-brown; there is a dark subdorsal
line, not, however, so heavy as the mediodorsal, and this is
bordered faintly above, and more strongly beneath, with dull white ;
the sublateral and ventral areas are paler and brighter green.
In the older (better-grown), larve, the back is pale and brighter
green, the dorsal stripe is paler and more transparent-looking,
whilst the upper white border to the subdorsal stripe is much
stronger, but, below, becomes a narrower and irregular broken hne ;
there is also a narrow, white, lateral line, which I cannot trace in the
younger larve. When the larva is feeding, and in positions of stress,
the muscular band beneath the spiracles is rendered conspicuous,
suggesting a lateral flange, which disappears when at rest. The
tubercles are small, low, skin-elevations, hardly warts (and can only be
so termed in a very loose sense); they are, however, distinctly removed
from the single-haired primitive stage, the allowance being one
additional hair for i, 11, and ii1, but not foriv and vy. There may also
be another very small dark-coloured bristle-like hair associated with 1
and 11, but not with i. In addition to these, there are a few scattered
skin-surface hairs, and these are dark-coloured, and very short and
bristle-like, with knobbed tips, the greater number arranged in
proximity to the mediodorsal line. The primary hairs are stout,
tapering, curved, and slightly knobbed at the tips, and minutely
thorned or serrated. On the meso- and metathorax, i and il are con-
joimed at the base, the lower group, iii and iv, being two hairs on a
conjoined base; the subprimary is asingle hair, and v and vi a double-
haired tubercle posterior to it, with another double hair, vii, beneath.
On the abdominals, i and ii are widely separated, but nearly in line
with one another, 111 well down towards the spiracle, iv and v with
bases on the same raised skin-area, but with actual hair-bases apart,
perhaps rather further so than is normal. Although there is no
postspiracular accessory tubercle present, there appear to me to
be indications that the lower, and perhaps also the upper, will be
developed in the next skin (Bacot, July 7th, 1904). Final instar (full-

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS. 327

grown): Of a sickly yellowish-green colour, with a red dorsal line or
rather band. In form cylindrical, tapering rapidly at each end, from
mesothorax forwards, and from 7th abdominal backwards. Each seg-
ment has a feature, common in “plume” larvee, but decidedly marked in
this species, viz., the segment is cylindrical, and ranges with its fellows,
but the incisions, even in the smaller larve, have little of the appear-
ance of one segment folding over the other, but each is a wedge-shaped
erooyve, rather sharply cut on the general cylindrical outlne, which is
also slightly affected by the subsegmentation, each segment being
divided into a rather large anterior, and a smaller posterior, subsegment,
and the latter again subdivided into two bya slightly less marked line.
As to colouring, there is a good deal of difference as to the amount of
red. There is always the dorsal band, which does not reach so far out as
tubercle 1. Then there is a broad line, occupying nearly half the space
between 11 and ill, which is often wanting, especially in older larvee
There is often also a suffused reddish coloration round the spiracles.
I should imagine a wholly red larva a probable variety, but I have not
seen one. In a larva in which the subdorsal, normally red, line is of an
olive-ereen, its upper and lower margins are bounded by a yellow line, the
lower one being waved, arched up over the spiracle, and downwards on
the 2nd of the three subsegments. It has the appearance of resulting
from subcutaneous material (fat bodies ?); a little way below iv and v
is another pale line, almost white rather than yellow. On the red dorsal
band is a diamond-mark on each segment, formed by four yellowish
lines; the two front ones are on the latter half of the 1st subsegment,
and diverge backwards, the other two, on the posterior subsegments,
reverse this arrangement, and fall a httle short of the posterior
margin of the segment. There is also a curious brown spot, just
outside each external angle. The tubercles are, 1, with a hair
(0°'3mm.) directed slightly forwards, and a short posterior hair; it
is just behind the middle of the 1st subsegment; 11, on the middle
of the 2nd (or 3rd) subsegment, has an upright hair, such as that on
i, and one short posterior hair; 111 also has one long hairand a posterior
shorter one; iv and vy are apparently very close together, but not
conjoined, the anterior being a little upper, length about O-3mm. ;
viis low down at the posterior margin of the seement, with a backward-
directed hair; below this are three hairs above the prolez; one of
these does not seem to be one of the usual three in this position, but
is rather higher up. ‘To revert to the subsegmentation— the subseg-
ments extend down to below iv and v; the 2nd subsegment curling
round under the 1st and 3rd subsegments, preserving its distinctness
however, and all ending in a need dh flange ” : below this is another
flange, with an anterior and posterior prominence ; the anterior
has a secondary hair or two, the posterior carries vi. There is
again a sulcus below this flange, as well as above, dividing it from
the subspiracular (carrying iv and y) flange. The spiracles are
hemispherical brown bosses, with the spiracular opening at top.
The general skin-surface is finely spiculated. Secondary hairs are
variable ; they are very short, and either white or brown-black. The
latter are always present on the dorsal red line, and sometimes on the
lower one; in one larva there is one, and sometimes two, between (or
slightly above) tuberces iv andv. One larva has no white secondary hairs ;
another has a little row along the anterior and posterior borders of each

328 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

segment. The second hairs of tubercles i, ii, and ili, have the appear-
ance of being rather more strongly developed skin-hairs, as there is no
raised boss marking the tubercle of the large hair (Chapman, August
17th, 1904). The larva is well-figured by de Vries in Sepp’s Neder-
landsche Insecten, vol. vi., pl. xlv., figs. 1 and 2. Adult (fullgrown) :
Slightly less than -5in. in length ; of proportionate bulk ; head much
smaller than the 2nd segment (prothorax), the lobes rounded and
polished ; body cylindrical and uniform, tapering a little posteriorly ;
seomental divisions fairly defined, and a tuft of several short hairs
springs from each of the indistinct tubercles (Porritt). The small
head is blackish-yellow, with two small black spots; the mandibles
brown, as also are the legs; the prolegs on the other hand are of the
colour of the body. Length when fullgrown 4-5 lines; colour yellow-
ereen with darker dorsal line, and a lateral line of the same colour,
but less distinct. The segmental incisions are deep, and short.
Scattered, light brown, hairs are visible all over (Schmid).

VARIATION OF LARVA.—The larve are very variable, not only in
sround colour, but also in markings; some have a red dorsal stripe,
some a pinkish one, others have scarcely any trace of dorsal or other
longitudinal markings (Tutt). In colour there are two extreme
varieties among the larve, which, in the different individuals, vary
between these forms. These extremes are :—

1. The ground colour a delicate pale green, strongly tinged indeed with
yellow; head pale yellowish-green, the mandibles and ocelli brown; the medio-
dorsal stripe dark green or purple in different specimens; the subdorsal stripes
yellow, and there are two other fine, but very faint, yellow, lines, one above, and
the other below, the spiracles; segmental divisions also yellow; spiracles black,
very narrowly encircled with white. Ventral surface, legs, and prolegs uniformly
pale yellowish-green.

2. The ground colour brownish-yellow ; head also brownish-yellow, freckled
with brown ; mediodorsal stripe broad, bright purple ; subdorsal stripes also broad,
but of a much less distinct dull pale purple, and having a fine white line running
through them ; a narrow purple line, edged with white, extends along the spiracular
region. Ventral surface, legs, and prolegs uniformly pale yellowish-brown (Porritt).
Jeffrey describes the larva as ‘dull dark green, and more sparingly
clothed with hairs than is usual in plume larve.” Gregson notes it
as “light, yellowish-green, semi-transparent, with a very narrow,
claret-coloured, dorsal line, commencing on the mesothorax and dying
away as it approaches the anal segment; the subdorsal and spiracular
lines not visible in some specimens, in others faintly noticeable as
light lines.”’

Foopriants.— Hrythraea centauritum (Schmid), EF. pulchella, E.
littoralis (Lambillion), Chlora perfoliata (Henslow), Gentiana germanica
(Schmid and Hofmann).

Parasites. — From the few larve retained in 1904, one or
two parasites were bred. Of a g sent to Morley for report,
the latter notes: ‘‘ The single § Apanteles received, and bred from
A. zophodactylus, appears to be (probably) the undescribed g of
Apanteles contaminatus, Hal., but I cannot be sure of this in the absence
of the 2, which has been bred in England from an undetermined
larva, mining the leaves of Arctostaphylos uva-ursi”’ (Bankes).

Pupation.—The fullfed larva spins a silken pad, generally selecting
a stalk of the foodplant to which it attaches itself in the ordinary
Alucitid position, and then pupates usually head downwards (Tutt).

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS. 329

The position chosen by the larva for pupation is usually on the stem
near the flowers, to the spinning on which it attaches itself by its
cremaster, in a position often oblique or semi-vertical, the head turned
upwards. Owing to its colour, form, and the position that it occupies
on the stem, one can easily mistake it for a withered flower, the corolla
of which has fallen; the similarity is absolute (Lambillion). The
inverted position is almost invariable. The pupa can throw itself
back by bending (dorsad) the free abdominal segments, and when it
does so, the head points in precisely the opposite direction to that 1t
has when at rest. This is more movement than the Platyptiliid (sens.
rest.) pups have, and much more than the hairy Alucitid pup show.
The pupa also has this attitude when the moth has emerged (Chapman).
The pupa is well shown as to usual positions and attitudes by Sepp,
loc. cit., figs. 8, 4,5, and 6. Lambillion notes the pupal stage as being
from ten to twelve days.

Pupa.—A long, narrow, straight, smooth pupa, variable in colour ;
@ prominent, but not sharp, frontal beak; dorsal flange-ridges running
down the first three abdominal segments on either side, beginning
with ridges near the middle line on the mesothorax, but so smoothed
down as to be easily overlooked. The green specimens have more
or less of a pink dorsal line or band, reduced in the greenest specimen
to a faint tinge on the thoracic segments and on the final abdominal
segments. The actual form of the pupa is that common to the
smooth pupe of the Platyptiliid “plumes,” viz., with somewhat swollen
thorax, diminishing rather suddenly to the abdomen, thence a very
trifling diminution until the final tapering of the 7th to 10th
abdominal segments. In some specimens the thoracic thickening is
wanting, in others it is best seen laterally, in others dorsally, and in
some it is very marked. Hach segment, from the 4th abdominal
onwards to the 7th and 8th abdominals, has very numerous, trans-
verse, fine wrinkles. On the 1st abdominal segment these are absent,
on the 2nd they are faintly indicated, and on the 3rd are quite distinct
in a mounted specimen. On the 4th abdominal they may be counted
21 in number just below tubercles iv and v, but as they do not each
continue round the whole segment, but fade out here and there, they
differ at other parts of the segment, e¢.g., on this same segment only 16
are reasonably definite at the horizon of tubercle vii. The finer sculp-
turing is very elaborate. Most of the allied “‘ plume’”’ pupe have a
similar finer sculpturing, of rounded pits, or of spicule, but it may be
owing to the much greater delicacy of the pupa-case of A. zophodactylus,
that a good deal more of the detail of which this consists is easily seen
in a mounted specimen. Continuing the examination of the 4th
abdominal segment, we find the posterior intersegmental portion nearly
colourless, except its margin, where it touches the solid portion of the
segment; here it is darker even than that, and is probably quite as
solid, illustrating how, even in the movable segments, the interseg-
mental subsegment is capable of solidification, as we find it in the
fixed segments of many pupe. This portion is, as usual, sculptured
into cells essentially hexagonal, but so far irregular, and with their
transverse (to segment) diameters so elongated, that they might be
regarded as spaces between fine ribs running round the segment, and
anastomosing at regular short intervals. In the coloured marginal
portion, the dark ribs and colourless cells make a marked contrast; on
the colourless (movable and flexible) portion the ribs are barely marked,

330 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

yet it is easy to see that each cell contains a central spot (probably
raised as an incipient spicule). Passing in the other direction, i.e.,
forwards into the solid and ribbed portion of the segment, the surface
is seen to be divided, in precisely the same way, by raised lines into cells
of the same size and form, as those of the interseemental membrane,
excepting that the cells are more usually hexagonal, and are more
often formed by lines between the transverse lines than by simple
anastomosis. These cells are dark in tint, 7.e., darker than the dividing-
lines, and, in the centre of each, there is a large transparent (or pale)
spot, giving the appearance of, and probably being, a pit, that is
more easily seen than the cell containing it. It occupies almost the
whole width of the cell, but leaves its ends unoccupied, the cells being
as noted, longer (transversely to segment) than wide. In the centre
and forward part of the segment, this is less so, and the hollows occupy
so much of the cells, that the unoccupied portion of the cell is not
easily distiuguished from the lines dividing the cells. At the anterior
margin of the segment, the pits are wanting, and the cells and lines
dividing them are a little obscure, but there are present numerous fine
points or spicules; these arise, not from the centres of the cells, but
from the angles where the lines dividing them meet. Laterally they
occupy three or four rows of the larger ribs, ventrally eight or nine,
dorsally three orfour. The 2nd and 38rd legs, with the proboscis, form
a free continuation of the appendages nearly as far as the end of the
5th abdominal segment (all are fixed, as usual, to the end of the 3rd
abdominal segment). Though the pupa is so smooth, there are the
usual tubercular hairs, minute clubbed batons, those on 1 and ii1 directed
forwards, on 11 backwards, those on the lateral and ventral ones (on
exposed surfaces) seem to be all present; length of that on vii about
0:045mm., of the others about 0:04mm. These batons are short and
curved (those on vil are rather longer and straighter), thickest at their
ends, and colourless; they are of the same character as those on the
pup of Agdistis, Adactylus, and Platyptilia, indeed, by comparison,
the hairs of the pupe of Platyptilia, though short, thick, and blunt-
pointed, are ordinary hairs, since they taper equally for their whole
leneth, whilst these are apically distended. Strictly, though Platyptilia
associates itself with Stenoptilia and Agdistis in the minuteness of the
tubercular hairs of the pupa, it does not do so in the form to more
than a very slight degree. The hairs on the pro-,and mesothorax, and
on the vertex, are even smaller, but are clubbed in form. The Ist legs
end at about the end of the wings (end of 8rd abdominal segment); the
proboscis is hidden beneath them towards their tips, and, though
exposed beyond them, is not very distinct till towards its extremity,
where it is apt to be more tinted. The forward set of cremastral
hooks contains about 40 in number on each side, and the terminal set
is apparently more numerous, but they are so crowded and obscured
by silk, that actual counting appears hopeless. The form of the hooks
is a little special. It is as though the end of a needle had been bent
back round a fine rod, and the new end then sharpened, but there
remains a rounded hollow in the concavity of the bend where the
supposed rod was used to bend them round; in a few instances it
is a little closed up. Amongst the forward hooks the surface is finely
spiculated; their length is about 0‘O6mm. The hindwing reaches just
past the spiracle of the 2nd abdominal segment; the spiracle has the usual
appearance of being thrust back. The forewing has the usual long point

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS. 331

supporting the free appendages. The cover of the prothoracic spiracle is a
raised, little, oval plate, with fine striz or wrinklings. The pupa is usu-
ally so colourless and delicate that, when mounted in “canada balsam, ’
hardly any structure is observable (Chapman, August 30th, 1904).
The pupa is slender, and nearly (if not quite) as long as the fullgrown
larva; it is of almost uniform width, the last two segments only
tapering to the anal point. It is glossy and cylindrical, but there 1s a
depression on the thorax and front abdominal segments; the snout
and top of the thorax are prominently and sharply defined; the
lee-cases extend a long distance down the front of the abdomen, but,
before the end, become detached from it. The ground colour is yellow,
but is almost hid with a deep pink, which is suffused all over the
surface, and almost forms a stripe from the head through the
abdominal segments; wing- and leg-cases dingy olive, tinged with pink
(Porritt). The pupa is naked, of a beautiful soft green or reddish tint;
blunted anteriorly, and showing, before the hghter vertex, a carmine-
red stripe, which is gradually lost towards the anal point (Schmid).

VaRiaTIon oF pupa.—As may be assumed from what has been
written in the last paragraph, the pupe vary almost to the same extent as
the larve, some are green, others are quite red, and there are many
intermediate forms (Tutt). Gregson describes it as ‘purplish flesh-
colour, the wing-cases changing to dark purple-brown about two weeks
after pupation.’”’ Chapman notes it as ‘‘ usually of reddish colour ; a
large proportion, however, green, and no doubt the proportion of
each depends on environment, since two or three that have fixed
themselves low down are greyish-green, or very dull brownish-red.
Some of the greenest pups, especially after the eyes take a dark tint
as the imago matures, have the head and appendages adjacent, and
even the wings, nearly white, especially the beak, reminding one much
of some Platyptiliid pups, especially that of (Gillmeria pallidactyla
(bertramt).”’ Lambillion says (Rev. Mens. Soc. Ent. Namur, 1904, p.
51) that he has observed that before emergence the g pupa scarcely
changes colour, whilst that of the ? becomes blackish-brown.

‘TIME OF APPEARANCE.—LHarly specimens of this species are occasion-
ally taken in Britain, for we have an example in our collection of our
own capturing labelled “end of May, 1889: Orpington,” and Zeller
has recorded an April-caught specimen, as also has Brabant. Besides
these, there appear to be two broods of this species in Britain,
the imagines of the first appearing from the middle to the end
of July (from larvee coincident with the early flowers of L’rythraea),
the other, from the end of August to October, varying consider-
ably, not only in different seasons, but also in the same, and
even in the same brood (the larve feeding on the seeds of their food-
plant). Little is known of the larvee of the first brood, the only
records we have being the rearing of imagines, July 20th, 1886,
and following days, from larve collected the first week of July
near Dover; imagines taken July 6th, 1893, at Cuxton, fully
out and abundant by July 22nd, on the same ground (Tutt);
imagines captured August Ist, 1889, July 10th-11th, 1908 (all worn),
and July 22nd, 1904 (fresh) ; others bred July 17th-25th, 1904, from
larve taken July 4th-5th, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ; imagines
bred July 27th-August 8th, 1904, from larve taken July 19th and
following days at Wépion (Lambillion). It appears to be the second
brood that is most frequently obtained, and the following records

332 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

seem to belong to it. Imagines reared from end of September
through October, from larve found at the end of August and in early
September on the sand-dunes of Dunkirk (Brabant); imagines bred
about September 12th, 1859, from larve pupated September 2nd
(Henslow), imagines captured end of August, 1865, near Saffron
Walden, larve obtained at the same time, pupated on September 4th and
the following days, and emerged from about September 18th (Jeffrey) ;
imagines early in August, 1868, from near Southport; in 1869, the
earliest emerged on September 19th,when some larve were not
fullfed; bred between August 23rd and September 1st, 1883, from
larvee obtained at Cattistock (Porritt) ; imagines bred September 16th,
1882, August 16th, 1888, September 2nd-14th, 1884, the last lot from
larvee taken August 11th, 1884, in the Isle of Purbeck; also imagines
captured August 31st and October 2nd, 1886, at Bloxworth (Bankes) ;
imagines bred October 5th, 1887, from larvee obtained September 2nd
at Ventnor (South); imagines caught September 8th, 1890, in the Isle
of Purbeck (Bankes); September 10th, 1895, at Hampstead (Watts) ;
August 12th-22nd, 1899, at Shoeburyness; also imagines bred
August 6th-18th, 1901, from larve found at Shoeburyness, on
July 27th (Whittle); imagines caught September 27th, 1902, at
Dartmouth, September 1st, 1908, in the Isle of Purbeck, October 10th,
1904 (¢ at sugar), at Dartmouth (Bankes); May 28th, 1904, near
Wareham (W. P. Curtis teste Bankes); imagines emerged August
27th-September 20th, 1904, at Reigate (Chapman), from eggs laid about
July 25th, 1904, by Purbeck-bred and -captured 9s (Bankes); bred
August 19th-September 5th, 1904, from larve collected in July; imago
caught at Great Wakering, August 13th, 1905 (Whittle). In Germany
the records are somewhat similar. Hofmann says that “the perfect
insect flies in July, August, and till late in autumn; an especially
large and dark ¢ is labelled ‘ Stuttgart, November 14th’’’: as, however,
Zeller records capturing the moth in April, it appears as if the species
might hybernate (see also posted, p. 333). It is also noted as being bred
September 1st near Friedland, in Mecklenburg (Stange) ; imagines from
August to October in the Rhine Provinces (Stollwerck) ; at end of
August and in September, near Frankfort-on-Main (Schmid), and
during the same period at Mombach (Rossler); the end of August to
October, in Brandenburg (Sorhagen); in October, near Breslau (Wocke);
end of August, from larve found at commencement of month at Regens-
burg, in Bavaria (Schmid), and from July to September, in Baden
(Meess and Spuler).

Hasits.—The moth is very inconspicuous and easily overlooked ;
its comparatively small size, and pale colour after a very little exposure,
add to the difficulty of distinguishing it. It appears, however, to be
easily disturbed during the daytime, in fine weather, from among the
rough herbage among which its foodplant grows, especially in the late
afternoon ; in fact, it was flying quite freely on two sunny afternoons
between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m., on July 6th and July 22nd, 18938, at
Cuxton. At Bourg d’Oisans we found it also flying freely in mid-
August, 1896, and it certainly had the same habit at St. Michel-de-
Maurienne, in 1897. It also appears to fly voluntarily during the
evening, and, perhaps, is most abundant at dusk, though difficult to
see. Bankes notes (in litt.) that it is to be found on the wing amongst
its foodplant, in calm and hot weather, rather before sunset, and
continues to fly until dusk, and sometimes later, for it has occurred at

.

ADKINIA ZOPHODACTYLUS. 383

sugar after dark (at Dartmouth); it was on flight as early as 7.45 p.m.
on July 10th, 1903 (in the Isle of Purbeck). Jeffrey found it flying
among the foodplant in the daytime at Saffron Walden, at the end of
August, 1865. It would appear that the 9s of the summer (July)
brood lay their eggs almost at once, yet this would not appear to be
the case with the ?s of the autumn brood, for on September 26th,
1904, Chapman notes of some 60 imagines that had been out some
days, that some had died (? from keeping them in closed jars), and the
2 s of these were absolutely void of eggs, though containing fat bodies
and other tissues. ‘The first 80 or so out (between August 28th and
September 5th) were sleeved on a flowering plant about the latter date,
and careful examination on September 26th showed nearly all alive,
but no trace of an egg; by November, however, all the imagines of
this species had died, whilst specimens of Amblyptilia cosmodactyla,
kept under similar conditions to the Adkinia zophodactylus, went on
satisfactorily with their hybernation. It is remarkable that we do not
yet know how this species hybernates. We have long since suspected
that it did so as a young larva hidden within the foodplant,* as is the
case with its nearest allies. It has been reported, however, by
Lambillion (Rev. Mens. Soc. Hint. Namur, 1904, p. 56), that Brabant
has found the imago in April, in France, and that Colignon, in
January, 1899, found, hybernating in a grotto in the valley of the
Meuse, worn imagines, referred by Lambillion to this species.}
We ourselves have an example of our own capturing, labelled
“Orpington. End of May, 1889,” and Bankes states (in litt.) that
a worn g, which, however, he was able to identify with certainty,
was taken near Wareham, by Mr. W. P. Curtis, on May 28th, 1904.
Hofmann notes the capture of a dark 3 at Stuttgart, on November
14th, and adds that, on the other hand, Zeller found the imago in
April. Still we feel doubt about the imago hybernating.

Hasirar. — On the chalk-hills at Cuxton, where Hrythraea
centaurium grows, among and near great patches of tall, rough, chalk-
frequenting plants, stunted rose, and blackthorn bushes, Adkinia
zophodactylus is not uncommon. At the foot of the steep mountain
Slopes behind the Grand Hotel, at Bourg d’ Oisans, a similar over-
grown, tangled, wilderness, a slope covered with wild flowers and
grass, that had once been a field, but had been allowed to go out of
cultivation, produced this species in great abundance, w hilst it was
also frequent in another wild uncultivated field, where the foodplant,
however, grew abundantly, at St. Michel-de- Maurienne. Hudd notes
it as occurring on the Leigh downs; on railway-banks near Hartlepool
(Gardner); on the slopes of the upper cliff at Ventnor (South); in a
field where a great deal of Hrythraea centaurium grows, at Shoebury-

“ It has been objected by various lepidopterists that this is impossible,
Hrythraea centaurium is an annual. We are quite aware that many within
state this, but it is not so (see Wnt. Ree., xvil., p. 72); the plant is no doubt
biennial, and flowering-shoots can be found under favourable conditions well into
November in some years.

t Lambillion’s statement (op. cit., p. 56) runs: “ En janvier, 1899, si nos souvenirs
sont exacts, M. Colignon, en visitant une grotte de la vallee de la Met use, trouva une
énorme quantité de Ptérophores, de différentes espéces, hivernant li, collés A la
volte, en compagnie de nombreux diurnes, du genre Vanesse et des noetuelles.
Il nous en apporta quelques- uns pour les déterminer; mais ils étaient pour la
plupart si défraichis, qu'il était presqu’impossible de les reconnaitre ; peu d’espdeces
furent déterminées. Plus tard, dans le nombre, nous reconnimes des S. zopheo-
dactylus.”’ ‘This after all is not very convincing, because of their condition, ete.

334 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

ness ; no doubt the insect occurs all over this district, but I usually
collect it in this old brickfield near Shoeburyness, where centaury 1s
one of the commonest plants (Whittle); at Broxbourne, in a very
sheltered spot on the Boulder Clay, surrounded by woodland
(Bacot) ; on very dry sandy wastes on the coast, and inland, where
vegetation is scanty, but Hrythraea centaurium common, in the Isle
of Purbeck (Bankes). Schmid notes that in Hesse-Darmstadt it
occurs in dry places, where there is, however, plenty of vegetation—
near Frankfort-on-Main, the insect occurs on the Babenhiauser highway,
and in the Ginheimer Wood, as well as on the Bieberer height, near
Offenbach. In Mecklenburg, it occurs in a plantation of young trees,
in the Sandhiger pinewood (Stange) ; in the Rhine Provinces, also it
is found in the woods of the Bergheim district (Stollwerck) ; and in
Wiirttemberg, on the Feuerbacher Haide (Steudel and Hofmann), etc.

Locatitres.—Exceedinegly local, but possibly overlooked. Asmrpren:
once near Pitscurrie, and once on Ben-na-chie (Reid). CHESHIRE: occasional (Arkle),
Wallasey (Ragonot). Cornwatu: Bodmin (Tellam). Devon: Dartmouth (Bankes),
Dorset: Isle of Purbeck, very local, not uncommon (Bankes), Wareham district—
distributed, Bloxworth, etc. (A. W.P.Cambridge), near Dorchester (Porritt), Cattistock
(Parmiter). Dusii: Howth, Portmarnock (Sinclair). DurHam: near Hartlepool
(Gardner). Essex: Shoeburyness, Great Wakering (Whittle), near Saffron
Walden (Jeffrey), Leigh (Vaughan), West Bringholl near Colchester (Harwood).
Hants: Bournemouth (Robertson teste Bankes), Hayling (W. H. 3. Fletcher),
Isle of Wight — Ventnor (South). Hrrrs: Broxbourne (Bacot), Sandridge
(Griffith). Hrererorp: Tarrington (J. H. Wood). Kent: Orpington, Cuxton (Tutt),
Deal (Vaughan), Dover, Folkestone (Austin), Canterbury (Parry). LancAsHIRE:
Southport (Hodgkinson). Mippnuesrex: Hampstead (Watts). Norronk: Hunstan-
ton (Porritt), Norwich, Merton (Barrett). Prmproxs (Barrett). Somerset: Leigh
Downs, ete.(Hudd). Surrorx: ?Hitcham (Henslow). Surrey: Addington Park,
Croydon (Sheldon), Red Hill, Haslemere (Barrett). Sussmx: Tilgate Forest (Sheldon),
Hastings district (Bloomfield), Abbott’s Wood (Vine), Clapham Wood (W. H. B.
Fletcher). Writs (Barrett). Yorks: Bramham (Smith), Sandburn, York (Prest).

Distripution.—Central and southern Europe (except Balkan penin- ~
sula), Asia Minor, and Armenia (Staudinger and Rebel). Asta: Asia
Minor—Smyrna (Kruper), Brussa (Mann). Avustro-Huneary: near Vienna (Hof-
mann), Lower Austria—Hernstein (Rogenhofer), near Tivoli, Mauer, near Baden,
ete. (Mann), Breitenfurt (Hornig), Bohemia (Nickerl), Budapest district (Aigner).
Betcium: Ri de Flandre—Wépion, Fort St. Heribert, common (Lambillion),
Brussels, Louvain (Donckier). Franck: Dauphiny Alps—St. Michel-de-
Maurienne, Bourg d’Oisans (Tutt), Pyrénées-Orientales (Méret teste Duponchel),
Aube (Jourdheuille), Indre—Nohant (Sand), Sadne-et-Loire (Constant), Dunkirk
(Brabant). Grruany: largely confined to south Germany, and here very local
(Hofmann), Mecklenburg—Friedland (Stange), Rhine Provinces—Kreise Bergheim,
near Quadrath, Schlendorf, Kénigsdorf, not rare (Stollwerck), Hesse-Nassau—
on the Babenhauser road, and at Ginheim, near Frankfurt-on-Main, the Bieberer
height, near Offenbach (Schmid), Mombach, Wiesbaden (Roéssler), Thuringia—Jena
(Knapp), Province of Saxony and Brandenburg (Sorhagen), Silesia, very rare, near
Breslau (Wocke), Bavaria—near Regensburg (Schmid), Wiirttemberg—Feuerbacher
Haide (Steudel and Hofmann), Baden—Lahr, Carlsruhe (Reutti), Alsace—St.
Pierre-Bois, La Chapelle (Peyerimhoff), Rheinpfalz, rare (Bertram). Ivrany: Sicily
—Messina (Zeller). NEerHER LANDS (de Vries). [Russta: ? Caucasus district (teste
Christoph).] Sparn: Moncayo (Chapman). Swirzertanp: Iccal and rare—near
Zirich (Frey). Turkey: Rhodes (Loew).

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA, Scopoli.

SynonymMy.—Species : Bipunctidactyla, Scop., ‘‘ Ent. Carn.,’’ p. 257 (1762) ;
de Vill., “* inn. Ent. Faun. Suec.,’”’ ii.,.p. 535 (1789); Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brits,’ ype
476 (1811); South, ‘“‘ Entom.,”’ xviii., p. 98 (1885); Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,’’ pl. xvii.,
fig. 5 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,”’ ii., p. 61 bis (1892); ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 85 (1895);
Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,”’ etc., p. 441 (1895) ; Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 76
(1901). Mictodactyla, Hb., ‘‘ Eur. Schmett.,” Aluc. pl.i., fig. 3 (antead 1811) ;
‘*Verz.,’’ p. 430 (1825) ; Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,’’ ix., p. 240 (1833). Bipuncti-
dactylus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,’’ p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,’’ fo. 16]

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 335

(1827); Stphs., ‘Illus. Haust.,’’? p. 372 (1834) ; Wood, ‘Ind. Ent.,”’ 1st ed., p.
235, pl. li., fig. 1629 (1839); Sta., ‘‘ Man.,”’ ii., p. 442 (1859); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 178 (1882); Porritt, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xxi., p. 208 (1885); Tutt,
‘« Young Nat.,’’ x., p. 164 (1889); South, ‘‘Entom.,’’ xxii., p. 34 (1889); Barr.,
‘“‘Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 375, pl. 415, figs. 5-5c (1904). Mictodactylus, Dup.,
‘¢ Hist. Nat.,’’ p. 661, pl. 314, fig. 1 (1838); Zell., ‘‘ Isis,” p. 837 (in part, var. b)
(1841). Aridus, [Zell., ‘‘ Isis,” p. 904 (1847); ‘‘Stett. Ent. Ztg.,”’ p. 210 (1850) ;
‘‘Tinn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 366 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 376 (1855) ; ]
Gregs., ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,” vii., p. 88 (1870) ; Knaggs, ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,’’ p. 94 (1871);
Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 343 (1871); Tutt, ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 88
(1895). Serotinus, Zell.,‘‘Linn. Ent.,’’ p. 361 (1852); H.-Sch.,‘‘Sys. Bearb.,”’ v.,
p. 376 (1855); Frey, ‘‘ Die Tin.,” etc.,’’ p. 411 (1856); Wallgrn.,‘‘ Oefvers K. V. A.
Foérh.,’’ p. 222 (1856); ‘‘Skand. Fjad.,’’ p. 18 (1859); Tgstrm., ‘‘ Anmaerk,”’ etc.,
p. 200 (1859); Ross., ‘‘Wien. Ent. Monats.,’’ p. 201 (1864); Jord., ‘‘ Ent.
Mo. Mag.,”’ p. 123 (1869); Nolck., ‘“‘lhep. Fn. Estl.,” p. 807 (1871); Hein.
and Wocke,‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,” iii., pt. 2, p. 794 (1877); Frey, ‘‘Lep. der
Schweiz,’’ p. 430 (1880); Snell.,“‘ De Vlind.,”’ ii., 2, p. 1038 (1882); Sorhgn.,
‘« Die Kleinschm. Brandbg.,”’ p. 5 (1886). Plagiodactylus, Sta., ‘‘ Sys. Cat.,”’
app. p. 28 (1849); Zell., ‘‘Linn. Ent.,’”’ vi., p. 368 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,”
v., p- 377 (1855) ; supp. fig. 22 (1853); Frey, ‘‘ Die Tin.,’’ p. 412, im part (1856)
Sta., ‘‘ Man.,’’ ii., p. 442 (1859); Jord., ‘‘Hnt. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 123 (1869) ;
Staud., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 343 (1871) ; Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,”’
lii., pt. 2, p. 796 (1877) ; Zell., ‘‘ Stett. Hint. Zeitg.,” p. 164 (1878); Frey, ‘‘ Lep.
der Schweiz,’’ p. 430, in part (1880); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xvili., p. 178 (1882);
Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Pter.,” pp. 87-89 (1895) ; Porritt, ‘‘ Buckler’s Larve,’’ etc., ix., p. 359,
pl. 163, fig. 9 (1901). Plagiodactyla, Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Hint. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 487
(i890). Serotina, Hoffm., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,” p. 75 (1895).

b)

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION.*—Phalaena bipunctidactyla. Long. lin. 4.
Alz anticz cinerez; punctis tribus, nigris, lineaque fusca longitu-
dinali in limbo. In sylvestribus. Ale superiores bifide; incisura
lin. 14 longa, segmentis parallelis, supra pari uno punctorum
nigrorum, intervallo lin. 12 ab ale apice distantium, punctoque alio
minore eodem intervallo, a basi aluisque punctis remoto. Alz postice
trifidee, fusco-ferruginee nitide. Abdomen alis posticis concolor, lineis
argenteis dorsalibus binis, lateralibus denuo binis sed ad medium usque
non productis, infra iterum binis; preter has, est lineola nigra lateralis
ad basim abdominis (Scopoli, Hint. Carn., p. 257).

Iwaco.—20mm.-23mm. Forewings greyish-brown ; the costal area
distinctly darker than the inner marginal area ; a double blackish spot
at the end of the fissure, another single small one between these and
the base of wing j» sometimes a faint longitudinal streak in the inner
half of upper lobe, and two towards the outer margin of lower lobe; a
faint dot at anal angle of upper lobe, and two on outer margin of
lower lobe ; scattered white scales are situated along the nervures in
costal half, and a series of short dark streaks sometimes give the
appearance of a longitudinal line close to, and parallel with, the middle
of the inner margin; a faint transverse pale line sometimes crosses the
upper lobe, and rarely both lobes ; the fringes dark grey, paler towards
the apex. ‘The hindwings glossy brownish-grey, fringes glossy dark
grey, paler at bases.

Variation.—This is a somewhat variable species, although the
variation is confined to comparatively narrow limits. In Britain, there
* Length 4 lines. Forewings grey, with three black dots, and a fuscous
longitudinal line towards the border (inner margin). In woody places. Upper
wings bifid; the incision 14 lines long, segments parallel; above, one pair of two
black dots, distant from the apex of the wing by an interval of 12 lines, another
smaller dot separated by the same distance from the base, and from the other dots.
Hindwings trifid, fusco-ferruginous, shining, ete.

336 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

are usually said to be two well-recognised forms: (1) A larger southern
or lowland form, generally less distinctly marked with black spots and
streaks. (2) A smaller northern mountain and moorland form, much
more intensely marked. Toa certain extent this distinction holds,
and the races are more or less to be recognised, but each of these
forms varies, inter se, and considerable overlapping appears to occur.
The former, or more typical form, occurs freely, in very varied localities,
on the chalk-hills, woods, fens, etc., and varies from specimens of an
unicolorous drab or ashy tint, almost without any indication of mark-
ings, to others distinctly tinged with brown, but still with indefinite
markings, and yet on to both greyish and brownish forms with the
dots at the end of the fissure of the forewing, and other black dots, fairly
well marked. Still these southern forms have rarely any of the con-
spicuous brightness frequent in the form from the Cumbrian moun-
tains and other similar localities, the specimens of which were referred
by Stainton to his plagiodactylus, and were called by Gregson, scabio-
dactylus, or the small size and uniform yellowish-grey tint of Zeller’s
aridus. Barrett (Hnt. Mo. Mag., xviu., pp. 178-179 ; Lep. Brit. Isles, ix.,
p- 178) confused the larger, more typical, form from the southern
chalk-hills with the barely smaller mountain and moorland form, united
them under the name of plagiodactylus (scabiodactylus), and attempted to:
connect them with Scabiosa columbaria, whilst he refers to two other
forms—a small one found among S. succisa in moist open pastures, and
a large umbreous form found in the fens. South’s remarks (Hnt.,
XXll., p. 84) on the variation of this species are largely discounted by
the remarkable statement that he cannot discriminate the various forms
of A. bipunctidactyla from A. pelidnodactylu and Stenoptilia coprodactyla,
two very distinct and separate continental species. We have often taken
the species abroad, and, in some localities, very interesting examples.
occur ; at La Grave, in early August, 1896, we took several, one form
having a very dark costa; another form was of a delicate pale dove-grey,
others again being very like our southern British examples. Even in
the same locality there is considerable difference in the specimens of the
different broods in the same year; and Hofmann notes that “the moths
that emerge in June are much more brightly coloured than those which
fly in August; they are richer in the white scales on the dise of the
wing, and have the white transverse line through the black longitudinal
dash in the upper lobe much more distinct, and running into the costal
fringe; they much resemble the moths of the var. playiodactylus, Zell.”
He further notes: ‘*Of the typical markings, the dot on the inner
margin is wanting, or is very indistinct, the discoidal spot is usually
distinct, although rather less so than in A. pelidnodactyla. He considers
plagiodactylus a variety of this species, being unable to tind any constant
character between undoubted bipunctidactyla and examples of playiodac-
tylus. {Among others examined, are four from Herrich-Schiffer’s col-
lection, from Neustrelitz, and the Schneebere,* in the Vienna district
(which are evidently those referred to by Herrich-Schiiffer, Sys. Bearb., v.,
p. 877, and from which the description was drawn up, and which exactly
agree with his Suppl. fig. 22), and two of Zeller’s original specimens from
Bergin]. I have caretully compared these latter with 44 examples of
bipunctidactyla, and found the characters usually relied on excessively

* These are evidently some of Mann’s original specimens, see posted.

key...

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 337

variable in both; they cannot, therefore, have specific value. He adds
that the species mentioned by Bittner and Hering (Stett. Hint. Zeity.,
1880, p. 472; 1891, p. 225; 18938, p. 117), and which was erroneously
referred by Stainton to playiodactylus, is not that insect, but S. var.
pneumonanthes, Schleich. He then writes: ‘‘ In his analytical table
Heinemann places playiodactyla among the species which have a thick,
dark, longitudinal streak in the upper - seoment of the front wings, and
which are said by this to be separated from bipunctidactyla (ser ‘otina) :
this character, however, as in bipunctidactyla, is very variable. Among
the six examples above mentioned, it is absent in three, very indistinct
in one, and only distinct in two; the same thing happens, however,
often with bipunctidactyla. Again, the costal fringes in plagiodactyla
are said to be brown, narrowly white towards the apex; this character,
also, is only to be found distinctly in two of my original six specimens,
while, on the other hand, it occurs in many a specimen of bipunctidac-
tyla. The position of the dots at the fissure 1s exactly the same as in
bipunctidactyla, namely, just on the fissure, never somewhat distant
from it as in yraphodactyla and coprodactyla. I, therefore, can
only consider playiodactyla as a variety of bipunctidactyla, which
latter, according to Zeller (Linn. Hnt., vi., p. 861), has less brightly
marked forewings, fewer white scales on the disc, not such a thick,
blackish-brown, streak on the upper segment, which is also a little
shorter than in playiodactyla.’ We quite agree with Hofmann’s
conclusion. Hofmann also notices the important detail, viz., that Frey
merely quotes Zeller’s diagnosis of playiodactylus, and that his larval
reference ‘‘ belongs’ in all probability to graphodactyla,’ the latter
having been bred by Hofmann from Gentiana asclepiadea. This
suggestion is abundantly proved by the fact that the whole series of
specimens in the ‘“‘ Frey”’ collection, labelled ‘“ plagiodactylus’’ are
pneumonanthes. Haphazard records, combined with ignorance of the
character of plagiodactylus as a race, have led to many more or less
ordinary specimens of A. bipunctidactyla being recorded in Britain as
plagiodactylus and scabiodactylus, the two names given to a slightly
darker and more strongly-marked form than the type, and reams of
paper have been wasted, in the British magazines, in trying to prove
the specific distinctness of the latter form. That both forms are
specifically identical, there can be no question, and that A. bipunctidactyla
develops, in most localities, well-marked specimens of the playiodactylus
form, where the greater number of tbe examples are typical, is
undoubted, but there are localities, chiefly those of higher latitudes,
higher altitudes, and more exposed places, where the greater number
of ‘examples are of this form, and where it has developed into a well-
marked race. The variation of a long series of British examples
suggests the following subdivisions :—

1. Unicolorous greyish-white, with fissural and discal dots=ab. albescens, n.
ab.

la. Unicolorous pale drab-grey or ashy, scarcely sprinkled with black, or with
white, scales, with fissural dots, but without discal dot=ab. pallida, n. ab.

1b. Pale drab-grey or ashy, sprinkled with black, and with white scales, with
fissural dots, but without discal dot=ab. pallida-mixta, n. ab.

lc. As 1b, but also with discal dot=bipunctidactyla, Seop.

ld. As 1c, but with black lineolw in the upper or lower lobes, or in both =ab.
pallida-excessa, n, ab.

2. Costal area greyish-drab, or darkish-grey, the inner marginal area ochreous
or brownish, scarcely sprinkled with black, or with white, scales, with fissural dots,
but without discal dot=ab. bicolor, n. ab.

338 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

2a. As in 2, but sprinkled with black and with white scales=ab. bicolor-
mixta, n. ab.

2b. As in 2a, but also with discal dot=ab. bicolor-typica, n. ab.

2c. As in 2b, but with black lineolz in the upper or lower lobes, or in both=
ab. bicolor-excessa, n. ab.

3. Unicolorous brownish (or brownish-ochreous), scarcely sprinkled with
black, or with white, scales, with fissural dots, but without discal dot=ab.
brunnescens, n. ab.

3a. As in 3, but sprinkled with black and with white scales=ab. brunnescens-
mixta, n. ab.

3b. As in 3a, but also with discal dot=ab. brunnescens-typica, n. ab.

3b. As in 3b, but with black lineole in the upper or lower lobes, or in both=
ab. brunnescens-excessa, 0. ab.

The A. bipunctidactyla in the Frey collection are particularly inter-
esting. One tiny example is only about 18mm. across=ab minor,
n. ab.; most of the examples are strikingly brown, especially along
the inner margin of the forewing, whilst one specimen has the whole
of the forewings of a brown tint; the transverse lobal line is, in this
example, fairly well-developed, less so, however, than in an example
from Glogau. The costal area of one Frankfurt example, and of
three from Zirich, is particularly dark; the former is also particu-
larly well marked with black scales, especially in the upper lobe;
the white scaling, too, is conspicuous, and the costa towards the base
is speckled with white, reminding one of the same character in
Amblyptilia cosmodactyla. The described forms of the species are :—

a. var. (et ab.) plagiodactylus,* Sta., ‘‘ Sys. Cat.,” app. p. 28 (1851); Zell.,
‘‘Tuinn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 368 (1852); H.-Sch..‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p.377 (1855); supp. fig.
22 (1853); Sta., ‘Ent. Ann.,”’ ii., p. 45 (1856); ‘‘Man.,”’ ii., p. 442 (1859); Gregs.,
‘‘Kint.,” iii., p. 186 (1866); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 123 (1869); [Barr.
and buckl., ‘‘ Hint. Mo. Mag.,’’ viii., p. 156 (1871);] Staud., ‘‘ Cat.,’’? 2nd ed.,
p. 343 (1871) ; Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,” iii., pt. 2, p. 796 (1877) ;
Zell., ‘‘ Stett. Ent. Ztg.,’’ p. 164 (1878); Frey, ‘‘ Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 430, in part (1880);
(Barr., ‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xviii., pp. 178-9 (1882);] Gregs., Kant.’ xvas
pp. 150-1 (1885) ; South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xviil., pp. 273-5, pl. i., figs. 1-lc (1885); Hoim.,
‘Pteroph. Deutsch.,”’ p. 78 (1895); Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Pter.,’’ pp. 87-89 (1895); Porrt.,
‘‘Buckl. Larve,’’ ete., p. 360 (1901); Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,” ix., pl. 415, fig. 5a
(1904). Scabiodactylus,+ Gregs., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 115 (October, 1869) ;
<cfint..” iv., p. 363 (1869); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xvili., p. 179 sss2e
Gregs., ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xvili., p. 150 (1885); Porrt., ‘‘ Buckl. Larve,” etc., ix., p. 361
(1901). Scabiosae, Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 122 (1882). [Htrundo-
dactylus, Gregs., ‘‘Ent.,’’ iv., pp. 363-4 (1867).|—-Pterophorus plagiodactylus.
Very closely allied to mictodactylus, but the anterior wings have an ochreous tinge
towards the inner margin, and the black streak in the anterior lobe is much more
strongly marked ; in the second lobe are also two distinct black streaks (Stainton,
Sys. Cat., app. p. 28). [Stainton observes that plagiodactylus was obtained from
Joseph Mann, of Vienna, in 1849, by Herrich-Schaffer. Mann had discovered it
on the Austrian Alps—Schneeberg.] Ovum.—Pale [green] in colour, oval in

* Plagiodactylus, Mill., ‘‘Icon.,’’ i., p. 209, pl. xxvii., figs. 8-12, is not
plagiodactylus, whatever species it may be. He says the larva feeds openly, but
what marks it as not even a Stenoptilia is the pupa, which is ‘‘ brown and covered
with numerous hairs.”’ It might even be Alucita monodactyla. Milliére says that
millieridactylus is a variety of his plagiodactylus, and is described from a single
specimen taken by Milliére near Lyons. I should be quite satisfied to leave it
where Rebel has put it (Chapman).

+ Head and face fuscous ; forewings irrorated with dark scales on the anterior
portion; inner margin ochreous, irrorated ; a small dark spot on the third part of
the wing ; then a large wedge-shaped one at the head of the cleft, anda dark streak
in the first lobe, the cleft edged with a whitish streak; underwings, together
with their cilia, brownish; thorax dark; first segment of abdomen triangular,
ochreous, edged with white; upper surface of the legs dark, spurs and feet light
(Gregson, Ent., lii., p. 186, ef. Ent., iv., p. 363).

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 339

outline, very small, noticeably long in comparison with width, plump and some-
what cylindrical in shape; surface shiny, apparently smooth, with what looks
like a faint reticulation at the ? micropylar end. [Tutt. Described with a hand
lens on August 17th, 1901, from seven eggs laid, in a little heap on a setting-board,
by a dying ?, captured the same day at Bobbie.| Haxirs or narva: The spring
larvee feed on Scabiosa columbaria in April and May, eating down into the heart
of the plant before the flowering stem is thrown up, and thus utterly destroying it.
Larva: The young larve were found abundantly at Llanferres, on March 25th, 1873.
They are hirsute, the dorsal region suffused with lightish pink as seen through
the rather dense hairs ; each change of skin reduces the colour of the pink streak
until the larva is fullfed, when it has no pink upon it (Gregson). Fullfed: Three-
eighths to half-an-inch long. One of a pale yellowish-green slightly inclining to
olive, the other a fuller and rather deeper green, more the colour of the leaf of the
foodplant; the body not very stout, and very slightly tapering to the rounded hinder
extremity; the head is smaller than the 2nd segment, which last is less than
the 3rd, so that it tapers in front from the 3rd. There is a faintly darker
dorsal line or pulsating vessel, though, on the shining 2nd segment; this is
represented as a double line of faint blackish, and, on either side of it, on the
subdorsal region, is a black amorphous spot. The head is much of the same tint
as the body, though faintly browner ; the jaws are darkish-brown, with a rather
large black spot at the lower side of each cheek in the usual situation of the ocelli;
the head is very lustrous in polish; very faint indications exist of a rather paler
stripe along the subdorsal region, but so softened at the edges as to be so ill-defined
as not to warrant its being noted until the larva has fixed itself after being fullfed ;
the whole surface of the body is covered with very short bristles of a dirty whitish
colour, mixed in places, or sprinkled, with a few blackish ones, notably on the 2nd,
3rd, and 4th (the thoracic) segments, and more sparsely along the dorsal vessel
and last segment ; in addition to these which clothe the body, are regular series of
long bristly hairs, dirty-whitish, issuing chiefly from the usual tubercular positions,
sometimes in twos or threes; the spiracles are of the ground colour ringed with
darkish-brown (Buckler, Larvae, ete., pp. 360 et seq. From larve sent May 9th,
1872, as scabiodactylus, by Gregson). FooprLanr: Scaliosa columbaria (Gregson).
VARIATION OF LARVA: Fullfed larve received from Gregson, June 5th, 1885, were
characterised by the absence of dorsal markings of any shade of either red or
brown ; a slight rosy suffusion of the anal segm+nt took place as soon as the larve
attached themselves for pupation, whilst the pink or rose-coloured dorsal markings
are developed in the pupa, one of the latter being suffused over the whole dorsal
area with rose-madder; with the exception of the obsolete dorsal markings, the
larvee are identical with those before described, viz., whitish-green; dorsal stripe
reddish-pink (or rose-madder), most distinct on the 9th and 12th segments. The
larvee (typical) from Folkestone appear to be identical with those sent as scabio-
dactylus by Gregson, from Lancashire, and have the same habits (South).
Popatrion : The fullfed larva suspends itself by the tail to its foodplant on a blade
of grass, or any other object it may find in the neighbourhood of its food, the
pupal stage lasting about fifteen days (Gregson) ; larva fullfed on May 9th, 1872,
fixed itself by its tail on May 10th, and pupated in due course, the pupa being
figured on May 27th, the imago emerged June 9th (Buckler) ; larvee (from Gregson)
fed until May 23rd, 1881, pupated May 27th and following days; in 1885, full-
fed larvee from North Wales, received on June 5th, pupated almost at once, imagines
appearing from June 20th onwards (South). Pupa: Slender, with green
wing-cases and a pinkish body (Gregson). ‘hree-eighths of an inch in length,
slender; the wing-cases long, the tips well-produced and projecting a little, though
lying close along the abdomen; the head and thorax rise a little at the top to a
ridge; the tail is pointed. Colour green, slightly inclining to olive, the wing-covers
darker green; a purplish-brown dorsal stripe, and two parallel lines of the same
colour along the subdorsal region (Buckler, figured May 27th, 1872, Larvae, ete.,
pl. clxiii., fig. 92). Timm or appearance: It occurs in June and July in Switzer-
land (Frey), and Constant notes it in June at Couches-les-Mines, but in Savoy,
Dauphiny, and Piedmont, our captures have all been made in the Jatter part of July
and the first half of August. Whether it is single- or double-brooded in the moun-
tuins, we do not know. Thedates we have are—July 23rd. near Raibl (Zeller); August
dth-12th, 1896, at La Grave; August 13th-20th, 1896, at Bourg @’Oisans; July 26th-
30th, 1897, at Grésy-sur-Aix ; August Ist-5th, 1897, at St. Michel de Maurienne :
August 6th-12th, at Lanslebourg; July 27th-81st, 1898, at Bourg St. Maurice; August

3rd, 1898, on the Little St. Bernard; August 8th-12th, 1901, at Bobbie: July

340 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

30th-August 3rd, 1902, at Chavoire (Tutt); July 29th, 1901, on the Prenj; June
27th, 1902, at Maklenpass (Rebel) ; April 6th, 1902, in Malta (T. B. Fletcher). In
Britain it appears to be only double-brooded, the first brood in late May and June,
the second in late July and August. June 19th, 1860, at Elston Barrows
(Gregson); June 26th, 1861, at Black Halls, Hartlepool (Sang); July, 1868, in
Rossshire (F. B. White) ; July 4th-15th, 1869, at Witherslack (Hodgkinson); July
16th-17th, 1869, at Witherslack (Gregson); May 28th, 1870, at Witherslack
(Hodgkinson) ; June 13th, 1870, at Witherslack (Porritt); July 23rd, 1871, at
Shields (Sang); July 19th, 1872, at Grange; July 10th, 1877, at Witherslack
(Hodgkinson) ; July 13th, 1878, at Witherslack ; August 14th, 1879, at Hartlepool
(Sang); July 17th, 1890, at Aberdovey (Arkle); July 9th, 1896, at Corsemalzie (R.S.
Gordon) ; June 10th, 1902, common at Keswick (Beadle). Haxnirs: The imagines
fly freely among Scabiosa columbaria at Witherslack (Gregson); also in Hesleden
Dene among scabious, and on railway banks at Black Halls (J. Gardner) ; flies at
dusk on honeysuckle flowers in garden at Corsemalzie (R. 8S. Gordon). Hasnrrar:
Usually in hilly, moorland, or mountainous localities in Britain. At Llanferres,
the insect is found among scabious plants growing on the ledges of rocks, along
which only sheep and goats can travel (Gregson) ; on the Cumbrian mountains it
is usually found in or near woods, and haunts such a locality among rough
herbage at Keswick (Beadle). In France it occurs on the pasturages of the high
alps above Pontarlier (Bruand); in Savoy and Dauphiny among the hills above
Lac Bourget, also in the high mountains, to about 5000ft., at La Grave and on the
Little St. Bernard Pass. In Piedmont, at Bobbie, itisalso found among the mountains
where the herbage is not at all stunted, and the scabious is luxuriant. In Switzer-
land, in damp localities in mountain woods, and on both shores of Lake Ziirich
(Frey). In Germany, on the turfmoor at St. Leonhard, in Baden (Reutti), ete.
In Bosnia and Hercegovina it is also a mountain species, going up to nearly 6000 ft.
at Treskavica, and 5500ft. at Velezi (Rebel). Locanrrres: Carnarvon: Llandudno
(Porritt). Cumprrntanp: Keswick (Beadle), Lake district (Stainton), Carlisle
district (Day). DrnpicH: Llanferres (Gregson). Durnam: Darlington, Black
Halls, Hartlepool, South Shields (Sang), Hesleden Dene (J. Gardner). GLOUCESTER :
Cotswolds (Merrin). Istn or Man (Gregson). Kenr: Folkestone (Purdey).
LANCASHIRE: Grange (Hodgkinson). MerrionptH: Aberdovey (Arkle). Norroik:
Norwich (as an aberr.) (Barrett). Ross (F.B. White). Warwick: Knowle (Bradley).
WESTMORLAND: Witherslack( Hodgkinson), Kendal district, Coot Scar (Gregson). Wie-
town: Corsemalzie(R.S.Gordon). York: Great Ayton (Lofthouse). DisTRrBurion:
Mountains of Central Europe, including Great Britain (Rebej). Austro-HuneGARry :
distributed everywhere in the Austrian Alps (Rebel), Hernstein district —Gahns
(Rogenhofer), Schneeberg (Mann), Hochschwab, Stelvio (Rebel), Trafoi (Wocke),
Carinthia (Hofner), Carniola (Mann), Tyrol—Innsbriick, to 6600 ft. (Weiler),
Franzenshohe, Lafatscher Joch (Heller), Bozen (Hedemann), Kaiser (Hofmann),
Glockner (Mann), Upper Austria (Aigner), Galicia (Garbowski). Bosnia and
Hercecovina: ‘Trebevic (Apfelbeck), Treskavica, at 1800m. (Rebel), Maklenpass
(Hilf), Prenj, Velezi, at 1700m., Gacko (Rebel). Corsica: Monte Corte (Curo).
France: Doubs—Pontarlier (Bruand), Seine-et-Loire — Couches-les-Mines (Con-
stant), Savoy—Lanslebourg, Bourg St. Maurice, Petit St. Bernard, Grésy-sur-Aix,
Chavoire, Dauphiny—La Grave, Bourg d’Oisans, St. Michel-de-Maurienne (Tutt).
Germany : Baden—Ueberlingen, St. Leonhard (Reutti), Wiirttemberg—Hisenbach
(Steudel and Hofmann), Mecklenburg—Friedland (Stange), Neustrelitz (Herrich-
Schaffer), Pomerania — near Stettin (Bittner). Iraty: Italian Alps (Curo),
Piedmont—Bobbie (Tutt). Maura (T. B. Fletcher). Swirzernanp: near Ziirich,
on the Uitliberg (Frey), Bergiin (Zeller), Degersheim, Giabris (Miiller).

Stainton’s two descriptions of playiodactylus (Syst. Cat., app. p. 28;
Ent. Ann., 11., p. 45) make this a darker, yet more brightly-tinted,
insect than the type, the anterior wings with (1) an ochreous tinge towards
the inner margin; (2) the black streak in the anterior lobe much more
strongly marked ; (8) two distinct black streaks in the second lobe ; (4)
the costa, beyond the middle, much clouded with dark fuscous. The
original specimens, on which the first description was based were taken
on the Schneeberg, one of the Austrian mountains, by Mann, but
Stainton had no hesitation in admitting the insect as British, and in
concluding that the insect that Gregson took in Juneand July, 1853, in
North Wales, was the insect he had named plagiodactylus, and further, that

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 341

it had also been taken in Cumberland, thus uniting plagiodactylus, Sta.,
with scabiodactylus, Gregs. Jordan described it under the name scabiosae
(Ent. Mo. Mag., xviii., p. 122) as the small bright-looking form of the
Lake district, at first sight very different from German specimens,
which have a much larger blotch on the costa, but the ‘‘ plagium ”’
distinct in both. South says that specimens bred from Gregson’s
Llianferres larve in 1881 and 1882, are more strongly marked, and
perhaps smaller than imagines from Folkestone, but that others, bred
in 1885, were somewhat larger than those bred in 1881 and 1882, one
or two less strongly marked, so that they did not differ at all from
specimens from Folkestone (Hnt., xvill., pp. 274-5); but, as he further
states that he could not distinguish between these and S. coprodactyla and
A. pelidnodactyla, his opinion is somewhat discounted. Barrett appears
to have fallen into a sad muddle (Hnt. Mo. May., xviil., p. 179) by
trying to separate the more typical examples into plagiodactylus and
bipunctidactyla. He also attempted to connect the latter with Scabiosa
succisa, and the former with Scabiosa columbaria. He states that, at
Ranworth Fen, a patch of S. succisa produced examples that leaned
altogether to the playiodactylus form, whilst at Brandon, among S.
columbaria and S. arvensis, the two forms were so mingled that one
could not separate them. As, however, he goes on to make plagiodac-
tylus the larger, and bipunctidactyla the smaller form, and also says
that, in some specimens of plagiodactylus, the characteristic markings, as
defined by Stainton, disappear, whilst in some bipunctidactyla these
markings are seen pretty distinctly, one may conclude that he was
only dealing with the usual aberrative conditions found in all localities
where the type is common, in fact, he shows that he had not the local
race described by Stainton and Gregson in his mind, for he further
goes on to say that scabiodactylus from the Lake district has the cloud-
ing of the costa and the black streak much exaggerated. He appears
to be later in the same confused condition of mind (Lep. Brit. Isles,
1x., p. 875), although he gives a very good description of plagiodactylus
(scabiodactylus), stating that, in the northwest of England, the tendency
to the development of small black dashes on the lobes of the forewing,
and a bordering of white between them, etc., becomes exaggerated, the
costa above the fissure being blackened, so as sometimes to form a
flattened dark triangle with the usual two dots at its apex; these dots are
also joined together, and the hind marginal dots elongated into streaks.
He then unaccountably connects this with the “ umbreous form”’ of
the fens, which he says, with considerable variation in colour, has the
precise markings of the typical form. Unfortunately, he does not define
the latter. We have already (anted, pp. 386-7) referred to Hofmann’s
notes on this form, and his reference to original specimens captured
by Mann (on the Schneeberg) and Zeller (at Bergin). Bankes observes
that, in the ‘‘ Mason coll.,”’ the plagiodactylus only contained one speci-
men of the darker form, whilst the series of scabiosae, Gregs., though
including several typical A. bipunctidactyla, were mostly of the darker
form (playiodactylus, Stn. Man.) with the forewings distinetly speckled
with black and white, tinged with ochreous towards the dorsal margin,
and with a strong black streak in the upper lobe. He adds (tn Jitt.) :
«“ T secured 15 outof the 80so-called scabiosae, and, of the 15, the majority
are of this dark form, though only one shows the ‘two distinct black
streaks in the second lobe,’ referred to above, whilst a few are typical

342 - BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

A. binunctidactyla. Most of them are unlabelled, but 6 of the dark form
are labelled (by C. A. Briggs) ‘ Purdey, Folkestone.’ ’’ Staudinger and
Rebel diagnose (Cat., 8rd ed., p. 77) the variety shortly as follows:
“ Alis anterioribus saturatioribus, squamis albis mixtis, striga fusca
digiti primi longiore et crassiore.”’

6. var. hodgkinsonii, Gregs., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ iv., p. 178 (1868). Hodgkinsont,
(Hodgk.,‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ iv., p. 38 (1867);] Knaggs, ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,”’ p. 111 (1868) ;
Jord., ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., pp. 123-5 (1869); xviii., p. 122 (1882) ; Barr., ‘‘ Ent.
Mo. Mag.,’’ xviii., p. 180 (1882); Hodgk., ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 212
(1882); ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xxi., p. 295 (1888); South, ‘‘ Ent.,” xxii., p. 35 (1889) ; Hodgk.,
“Hnt. Rec.,’’ viii., p. 190 (1896). . Zophodactylus var., Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,’’ xviii., p. 180 (1882); Tutt, ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ pp. 94-5 (1895); Barr., ‘‘ Lep.
Brit. Isl.,” ix., p. 379 (1904). Bipunctidactyla var., South, ‘‘ Ent.,’”’ xxii., p. 38
(1889).—Alar expanse 7-8 lines; head, face, thorax, body, and legs, of a light,
creamy, ashy-grey, lightest towards the cleft; very slightly irrorated with darker
atoms; the discoidal and cleft-spots scarcely perceptible. Underwings rather darker
than the upperwings. P. hodgkinsonii differs from P. lowei (loewit), to which it
is nearly allied, in the general colour being lighter, the less irrorated or suffused
appearance, its lesser size, and its want of the light canary-coloured terminal costal
edging to the tip, and also in its time of appearance; from P. plagiodactylus it
ditfers in its smaller size, much lighter colour, the entire want of the bright buff
and light ashy-white upon the thorax and body,* the absence of the dark blotches
SO conspicuous upon good specimens of that species, the absence of any light
edging to the cleft, and in being devoid of any light colour upon the terminal joints
of the legs; from P. bipuntidactylus it differs in its smaller size, more yellowish
ashy-colour and lighter-coloured legs, and from the spurs being of the same colour
as the legs, those of bipwnctidactylus being lighter than the legs. A single specimen
captured in early June, circa 1860, in a small pasture-field at Witherslack (between
the inn and “‘moss’’); three captured later in the juniper field near, by Hodgkinson,
of which one each was given to Gregson, Doubleday, and Burney. One or two others
taken since by Hodgkinson. Very closely allied to P. lowei (loewit) ; indeed, none
but a practised eye would detect the differences (Gregson, Ent. Mo. Mag., iv.,
p. 178).

Whether this is a form of A. bipunctidactyla or A, zophodactylus has
long been a matter of controversy, but, in spite of our remark (Pter.
Brit., p. 95), South was the first British lepidopterist who rightly
suggested that this insect was a form of bipunctidactyla. That this
is so, is abundantly proved by the example in the ‘‘ Doubleday
collection,’ mentioned by Gregson (anted), which is an undoubted
specimen of A. bipunctidactyla, and Bankes observes that he is in
possession of six examples that stood as “‘hodgkinsont”’ in Hodgkinson’s
own cabinet series; they are all worn A. bipunctidactyla, and appear to
have been, when fresh, almost typical examples of the species. He has
also six others from the ‘‘ Mason collection,’’ which were also part of
Hodgkinson’s original series, and of these, five are very worn A. bipuncti-
dactyla, and probably, when fresh, not really paler than typical specimens,
whilst the remaining one, wasted to a mere shadow, may not be this
species, and is certainly not A. zophodactylus. Bankes further observes
that he examined the whole of the series in Hodgkinson’s collection,
and concluded that all were worn A. bipuntidactyla, some of normal size,
others small. Hodgkinson himself observes (Hnt. Rec., vili., p. 190)
that ‘there is, in all specimens, a light (very pale) streak on the lower
side of the upper wing, and the heads of all are of a very pale ash-
colour, as also are the legs.’’ He further says that he took, ‘‘ with
hodgkinsoni, some examples of playiodactylus, with the tips moré
hooked.” He records the capture of eight examples at Witherslack on
May 19th, 1867, three others in 1868, and observes that it appears to

* Very indistinct or obsolete in the ¢s of this species.

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 3438

be a very early species, differing from its allies in its manner of resting.
Four of the 1867 examples were very fine, and a few eggs were obtained.
Others, he says, were captured on June 12th, 1888, at Windermere. He
rightly maintained (Ent. Mo. May., xviii., p. 212), when Jordan (Int. Mo.
Maq.,vi., p. 122) and Barrett (op. cit., xviii., p. 180) referred to the insect
as a slight aberration of A. zophodactylus, that it was quite distinct from
the latter, and that centaury did not grow within miles of the spot
where the insect was taken. He further observes (Hnt., xxi., p. 295)
that the insect is without the slaty shade that is on both A. bipunctt-
dactyla and A. zophodactylus, and that none of the foodplant of the latter
grew in the localities where hodykinsoni had occurred. South records
(//nt., xxil., p. 35) the capture of two specimens in North Devon that
agreed with Gregson’s description, and he suggested that these, as well
as hodykinsoni, were probably referable to bipunctidactyla. In spite of
the overwhelming evidence that is offered by the specimens themselves
of the accuracy of this suggestion, Barrett repeats (Lep. Brit. Isles, 1x.,
p. 879) that hodykinsoni ‘“‘ appears to be nothing more than the first
brood of zophodactylus from northern Lancashire and Westmorland.”

y- var. aridus, [Zell., ‘‘Isis,’’ p. 904 (1847); ‘‘Stett. Ent. Ztg.,’’ xi., p. 210 (1850);
‘‘ Linn. Ent.,” vi., p. 366 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 376 (1855) ;
Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ p. 795 (1877);] Sta., ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,’’ p. 143
(1870) ; Gregson, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag., vii., p. 88 (1870); Knaggs, ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,’’ p. 94
(1871); [Buckl., ‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ x., p. 182 (1874);] South, ‘‘ Ent., xiv., p. 77
(1881) ; Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 179 (1882); [Pal., ‘‘Nat. Sic.,” p. 193
(1885-6); Mill., ‘‘ Nat. Sic.,”? p. 223 (1885-6) ;] Tutt, ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,”’ pp. 87-8
(1895).—Alis anterioribus gilvescenti-griseis, juxta costam obscurioribus, puncto
sub fissura fusco, ciliis coste apicalibus fuscescentibus, puncto in ciliis anguli postici
lacinie anterioris unico fusco; ciliis digiti tertii breviusculis. Var. B, puncto sub
fissura obsoleto. Var. C, strigula albida per laciniam anteriorem obsoleta (3, 2).
The size is like that of the smallest fuscus of the autumn generation, and the
colour has a similar reddish dusting, only still paler. ‘{he parts of the wings are
more slender, especially the front lobe of the forewings, which is narrower and
longer. ‘The fringes of the hind margins of the lobes are whitish at the base, and
on those of the front lobe the brown spot shows out distinctly. The costal fringes
of this lobe are very narrowly whitish only at the beginning of the fissure of the
wing, but, from there to the tip, the brown gradually increases in width. Before
the fissure is a brown spot, somewhat variable in shape, smaller than in fuscus, and
not reaching so far above the fissure, like the lower part of the same spot in fuscus ;
this spot is in var. B entirely obsolete. Sometimes the front lobe has, in the
usual position, a faint, whitish, transverse line. On the underside, the wings are
greyish-brown, the apical half of the lobes of the forewing, and the first feather
of the hindwing, are tinged with whitish. The legs are dirty whitish. This-species.
appears to be not rare in Italy and Sicily, and to be the local representative of
fuscus. It flies near Syracuse in May (on the 23rd, an especially large and dark
example of var. C was captured; on the 30th, a ¢; on the 81st, two ordinary ¢s
and one ¢), and in June (4th, 6th, 7th, 19th). Near Messina, at Castellacio, it
was not rare throughout the whole of July, amongst dry grass. Singly, I have
obtained it near Rome (August 27th), Narni (September 4th), Tolentino (September
6th), and Ancona (September 11th). Its localities were always dry grassy places
(Zeller, Isis, 1847, p. 904). Middle of May, near Ardivoza, on the pastures, not
scarce, and collected at the time as small specimens of mictodactylus (Zeller, Stett.
Ent, Ztg., Xi., p. 210).

Whether this insect is really only a southern race of A. bipuneti-
dactyla, of which similar aberrations occasionally occur in other
parts of its range, whether if is a form of some other allied species, or
whether it is a distinet species, we have no means of judging without
a sight of Zeller’s original specimens. Hofmann favours (Die Deutsch.
Pteroph., p. 72) the last-named view, noting it as ‘“ manifestly a
species that only occurs in the Mediterranean region, where the larya

344 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

feeds on Coris monspeliensis, a plant belonging to the Primulaceae,”’
although, strangely, we cannot find, in Zeller’s notes on the species,
that he confines it to this particular foodplant, this conclusion having
been reached by Buckler (Fnt. Mo. Mag., x., p. 182). In the Frey col-
lection are two specimens labelled ‘ aridus,’’ ‘‘Brussa (Mann),” and
“Corsica (Mann),”’ of pale greyish colour and very doubtfully to be
referred to A. bipunetidactyla, and quite possibly distinct therefrom.
Rebel, however, does not even query it, but makes it a var. of A. bipune-
tidactyla, and diagnoses (Cat., 8rd ed., p. 77) it, as ‘‘ Minor, multo
dilutior, lutescens. Southern Europe, Armenia, Hyrcania, Pales-
tine.” In 1852, Zeller wrote (Linn. Fnt., vi., p. 366) that ‘the
principal difference between it and loewti (zophodactylus) is the
presence of a small blackish-brown dot at the inner angle of the
upper lobe. The best species with which to compare aridus is
stigmatodactylus, which occasionally agrees with it almost exactly in
size. It (aridus) is paler at the apex of the anterior wings, which is
less produced; the blackish-brown dot at the end of the cleft is less
distinct, and, if enlarged, is increased upwards towards the costa;
whilst stigmatodactylus usually has a sharp black dot situated in a very
oblique direction inwards above the lower one, and the fringes of
the anterior border of the apex of the forewings are not edged with
white.’’ Mulhere records (Nat. Sic., 1885, p. 223) the insect from the
Histerel and Cannes,in October; and Palumbo notes (op. cit., 1888, p. 193)
it from May to July,at Monte Medio, Syracuse,and the Madonie mountains,
all in Sicily. Turati says (Bull. Soc. Fint. Ital., 1879, p. 207) that it
occurs in the Brughieri di Alzate, in Lombardy, in September. In
favour of supposing that a form of A. bipunctidactyla occurs in this
country, agreeing with aridus, is Stainton’s remark (Hnt. Annual,
1870, p. 148) that Zeller writes that, amongst the specimens of Ptero-
phorus which he had received from Jordan, was one which had been
captured by D’Orville, in Devonshire, and which appeared to be
identical with the Italian P. aridus, and raises the question whether
aridus is only a pale variety of serotinus (bipunctidactyla), or whether the
_ English and Italian climates are sufficiently in accord for the same species
to exist in both. Gregson observes (Ent. Mo. May., vil., p. 88) that
he captured a specimen in the Isle of Man, which, on comparison with
D ’Orville’s example, was found to be identical with it. Since then,
several supposed examples have been taken of this particular British form,
and referred to aridus, the name, in Britain, being thus used merely for
an aberration of A. bipunctidactyla. Hofmann, referring to the German
records of aridus, says: ‘‘ The examples recorded from the Baltic coast
of Russia, are probably (teste Wocke) based on incorrect identification ;
the same is probably the case with the statement of its occurrence at
Heudorf, in Wurttemberg.”’ Bankes refers to fifteen so-called aridus
in the ‘‘ Mason” collection, as “all typical bipunctidactyla, except
three, the worse for wear, which, when fresh, were perhaps rather
paler than usual, though by no means so pale a form as is occasionally
met with in Britain ; but it 1s quite possible that their pallor is solely
due to absence of scales.” Crombrugghe de Picquendaele says that, in
Belgium, aridus only occurs in the Campine, on the edges of the little
lakes distributed over the large lande or plain of Calmpthout ; here it
was common in July, 1900. [Buckler’s account of the insect he referred
to aridus, is given at the end of our notice of A. bipunctidactyla.|

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 345

Eeeiavinc.—The eges of the August moths are laid freely on the
flower-buds, generally between the florets, or between the florets and
involucre, none on the leaves or stem. Eggs laid between August
23rd-28th, 1904, commenced to hatch on August 31st (Bacot).

Ovum.—Pale yellow in colour, a rather long ovoid in shape, with
flattened sides; for so small an egg it is coarsely sculptured, in some
places with an irregular cell pattern, in others with rude longitudinal
corrugations; these are chiefly on the sides towards the smaller end,
the cell pattern on the shoulders and micropylar end. Length,
0:475mm. to 0'5mm.; width, about 0:25mm. ; as I cannot manage to
balance the egg on its edge, I can only guess at its thickness, but this
is probably about 0-2mm. [Bacot, July 27th, 1904. Several eggs laid
in a small cluster, forwarded from Folkestone by Purdey.] Clear
yellow in colour, form ovoid; length, 0-45mm.; width, 0:°24mm.,
narrowing a little more acutely to the non-micropylar end ; height,
0:21mm. towards micropylar end, a little less towards nadir. The
ribs are very bold, but the pattern is not polygonal, at least the cells
tend to run together into longitudinal waved furrows, i.e., in somewhat
sinuous lines from end toend of the egg. The ribs are not, as is usual,
like fine beads laid on, but are merely the tops where the regularly-curved
hollow of one furrow meets the next one. Towards the micropylar
end, or rather just on it, and round the micropylar area, the sculpture
is in more ordinary polygonal pattern. [Described August 25th, 1904.
Eggs laid by 2 a few days before.] Some eggs laid August 29th,
differed somewhat from these, smooth and shining, the sculpturing
was much less pronounced, and the hollows were here represented by
mere flattenings; they were also somewhat shorter than the others,
viz.,0°40mm. The height was 0:2lmm. towards the micropylar end,
0:19mm. towards the nadir (Chapman).

Hasits or tarva.—From eggs laid in August and September,
hybernating larve hatch, the autumn habits of which are practically
unknown, but, in the early spring, the larve may be found actively
boring into the main central stem, clearing out the leaf-bud, and going
down for some distance, even below the surface of the ground. On May
23rd, 1904, in Raindene Wood, Folkestone, the young scabious plants
had begun to make good growth, and were some six inches above the
eround, and, in these scabious plants, larve of A. bipunctidactyla were not
uncommon. They were feeding in the central shoot, mining down the
length of the two central leaves, eating out the bud and into the shoot,
causing considerable lateral growth, and filling up their burrows with
dark, thick, frass. The affected shoots were easily recognised, when
found, by their dark colour, and, generally, by a hole in the upper part
of the two leaves, which close over the central shoot, by which hole
they seem to have entered rather earlier, when leaving their hyber-
nacula. Pulling these leaves apart, at once discloses their workings,
the larve being generally fairly well down in the mine, and of various
sizes, from about 4mm. to 9mm. (é.e., nearly fullgrown), and very
variable in colour. Some of the mines were quite cleared out, and the
larva was then found in one of the adjacent lateral shoots, which it
appeared to have entered from the side of the two enclosing leaves.
Although one speaks of the larva as a burrower, it really feeds entirely on
the leaves forming, and enclosing, the bud, but does so entirely from the
inside. It is hardly a burrower in the sense that the Platyptiliid larvee
are. Barrett says he found larve on May 19th, 1871, near Norwich,

346 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

that the work of a larva ‘‘causes the shoot to droop, when it is quickly
hidden by the young plant,” but this is hardly so, for the bud of the main
shoot, even when almost cleared out, remains enclosed in two upright
folded leaves, which do not droop, although the growing is very effectively
stopped, and the attacked shoots are usually exposed, not hidden, pupa-
tion taking place before the unattacked lateral shoots are tall enough to
hide those in which the larve have fed. Hofmann writes (Woch. fur
Ent., iii., p. 807) that the little larvee of the spring generation, are found
from April 25th to May 18th, deep in their burrows in the central shoots
of Scabiosa columbaria, which, he says, they forsake later in order to live
openly on the leaves. Gregson makes (F/nt., xvill., p. 150) a similar
observation, viz., that the young larve eat into the central unopened
leaves of Scabiosa succisa, and later eat the radical leaves. We have
never been able to confirm this external mode of feeding in nature,
although we have found an abundance of fullfed larvee in the mines.
The moths from these larve appear from May to early July. The feed-
ing-habits of the second brood are entirely different, although little again
is known of the life-history of this brood. Chapman notes thata plant, on
which eges must have been deposited, wassleeved on July 4th, 1904, and on
August 18th he found pupe, as well as living and dead moths, therein.
Examination showed that the tips of all the branches were dead, that they
had been mined inside, the cavity extending into the living tissue; in
one case the cavity was very large, suggesting that the larva was
very large before it left it (quite half-grown) and had a hole attached
much like that of Adaina microdactyla, whilst those of the others
were smaller. One lying and one dead imago, and two empty
and two full pupa-cases, were on the muslin on August 13th, but
the two living pupe yielded imagines the next day. The
suggestion, therefore, is that the larve finally fed up externally.
The habits of the larve of the next brood are the _ best
known. Larve, hatched on August 31st, 1904, and following days,
disappeared at once between the florets and flower-head; by
September 5th, several florets on one or two heads looked very
unhappy ; some half-dozen larve also were mining in the leaves near
the flower-heads (not the lower larger leaves), either from eggs on stems
overlooked, or wanderers from the overstocked flower-heads. By
September 8th, the florets in many places obviously failing, only a few
coming out well, larvee were now visible elsewhere on the plant mining
in several of the narrow stem-leaves, generally in direction from tip to
base. On September 12th, a young larva was noticed walking down flower-
stem (it was well grown in first instar) ; two heads have the stem beneath
them dying, and are drooping, one of these is found to be drying up,
and has the receptacle well mined by larve, butallhavegone. Theother
is less dry, but the larvee have all gone except one that is fullgrown in first
skin,andthatisminingintothestem. Theleavesorflower-stemsseem to
have more miners than they had; the larve in them, seen against the
light, are growing, but not fullgrown, in first skin. On September
16th, a flower-head is seen to be drooping. This is a rather small
flower-head with abundant eggshells. It looks all right, though it has
not developed at all for a week or more; the stem for an inch below
it seems all right, but, at the node below, and for some distance above,
it is withered. The flower-head, when opened, has had the interior,
especially the layer of ovaries, eaten out, but all the larve have
gone ; one larva, about half grown in first skin, is found at the node

2 AT
ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. vo

mining in the stem, and is apparently the cause of the withering.
Where are the others from the flower-heads? Various mined leaves
are also withered, and drying up. The mines show a small hole of
the larval escape. Some mines are still occupied; in one a larva can
be seen with the head dislocation that indicates preparation for a moult
(in this case the first); an adjacent mine hasa larva witha distinctly larger
head, z.e., in the second instar. This and one or two others eject the
frass from the mine, the smaller ones leave it in the mine (Chapman).
In another lot that Chapman had, belonging to this autumn brood, a
larva was buried deeply in the bud, on August 17th, which, little
disturbed outwardly, had the bases of many flowers replaced by frass ;
on September 20th, one of these moulted and burrowed into a
flower-bud, spinning a few threads to the involucre; smaller larve
were completely buried, the place of entry being marked by a trace of
frass. On the 22nd, a large larva, partly exposed the previous day,
was also practically out of sight, the bud not being quite large enough
to allow it to be within and retain its outer form unimpaired, so that
some flowers are so far destroyed, by the feeding, as to allow the larva
to be discerned, apparently in a curved attitude, near the centre of the
bud; by the 28rd, this larva had so eaten out the centre of the bud as to be well
exposed, and, in the afternoon, descended to a lower flower-head, on
which it was fully exposed; it seemed to be nearly fullgrown. By the
24th it had cleared out this bud and had entered another in which
the front segments were buried ; after this, the larva ate a flower-head
per day until the 27th, when it fastened itself up for pupation
(Chapman). Bacot also notes (in litt.) the habits of this brood; the
ova, placed on the flower-buds of a growing plant, gave larve that
immediately bored between the flowerets and involucre of the buds on
the main and lateral stems ; another bud had been bored through by a
larva that remained invisible, a small heap of frass being seen when
the outer leaves of the involucre had been removed; the interior of the
bud had been removed, and there were large quantities of fresh frass
low down among the flowerets. The larve are by no means easy to
find, in spite of unmistakable signs of their presence, and require
some search before they can be finally run down ; as they increase in
size, they feed at a great rate, emerging to seek fresh feeding-places,
entering buds that have just commenced to open or are unexpanded, and
often leaving the bud of the main stem for the smaller lateral buds.
Their feeding makes little difference to the outward appearance of the
bud, a small quantity of silk being used to spin around the portion of
the bud attacked (Bacot). Larvee found at Newbury in early September,
1890, were feeding on the flowers of scabious; they were then very
sluggish, and ate through the bases of several florets, being completely
hidden, and, until the flower-head was pulled apart, there was no sign of
the larva within (Kimber). In Germany, we observe that, in Mecklen-
burg, Stange found larvee at the end of June and July, in the flowers
of Scabiosa columbaria and S. succisa ; Réssler found the lary in the
Wiesbaden district in the beginning of May, in the stalks of Scabiosa
columbaria, whilst he describes the feeding-habits of an autumal brood
found at Wiesbaden in early September, 18638, in the flowers of Scabiosa
succisa, the larve only betraying their residence therein, by small threads
on the blue petals; he observes that they pupated in a few days, and
emerged 10 days after pupation. He also says that the statement
that the larve feed on Galiwm appears to be very doubtful, and

348 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

requires verification. Feeding in the blossoms at the same time,
he discovered the larve of Nemotots scabiosellus (Ent. Mo. Mag.,
Xvill., p. 188; Wien. Ent. Zeitschr., 1864, p. 201); in Silesia,
Wocke found the larve in April, in Succisa pratensis, and again in
the summer; whilst, in Wirttemberg, Steudel and Hofmann record
it in May in the shoots, and in July-August in the blossoms, Ol 15:
pratensis. Hofmann observes that he found the larve, on July 21st,
1895, in the interior of the hollow flower-heads of Scabiosa columbaria,
the flowers offering no outward indication of the larvae within; when
fullfed, the larve were seen sitting on the blossoms, feeding thereon,
and boring holes from the outside through the separate florets.
According to Sorhagen, “the larva lives in May, July, and September,
on Scabiosa succisa, S. arvensis, Scutellaria galericulata, Linaria
cymbalaria (in France), Galium mollugo (Herrich-Schiafier), Saaxitfraga
granulata (Angerer), in spun-up flowers or shoots.” Hartmann also
notes that the larva is said to feed on Saxifraya granulata in April-
May, and September ; and Koch on Galiwm mollugo in mid-September.
No doubt, Hartmann’s reference is to Stenoptilia pelidnodactyla, the
larva of which feeds on Savxifraga granulata, whilst, of Koch’s record,
evidently copied from Herrich-Schiffer, one would like confirmation.
Larva.-—First instar (newly-hatched): Barely 1mm. long. Head
about same width as body, which tapers a little towards tail. The
head dark, body whitish, or faintly yellowish (or colourless). Pro-
thoracic plate large, faintly tinted. Amongst a number of ordinary
hairs on head (about 0:015mm. long) are two from the eye-region, very
long, at least four times the length of the others (about 0-O6mm.), and
standing forwards like horns or antennez. ‘Two lateral hairs on the
prothorax are about as long, and several on the 9th and 10th
abdominal segments; the rest are about 0-03mm. in length, stiff
and straight, slender, and faintly clubbed at tip. The tubercles
are faint black dots, the hairs colourless, or faintly tinted towards
the tip; each tubercle has only one seta or hair; 1 and ii are placed
about + length of segment apart, and rather farther than this from
middle line, ii being decidedly further out than i; the sete upright,
that from i inclined slightly forwards, from ii rather backwards,
ili has a seta directed forwards; iv and v are well separate, the
forward one (v) higher, and with a shorter hair, about three-fifths of
that on iv, which is about equal to the seta on 11 or i11; the long hairs
on the 9th and 10th abdominal segments are apparently ili or v; on
the prothorax, the long hair is subspiracular. The spiracles on an
elevation. The prolegs on longish pedicels, with three minute hooks;
the anal claspers larger, hooks also larger, but apparently only two
hooks, a third merely vestigial (Chapman, August 29th, 1904).
Second instar; Head rounded, black, highly polished, and partly
retractile beneath the skinfolds of the prothorax. The scutellum
large; anal plate small, both very dark, but not quite as dark as head.
The body is of nearly even thickness, only slightly tapering to anus; the
segmental divisions sharp, but not particularly deep. The colour is a
dull pinkish, and the skin-surface very rough, owing to spicules.
Hairs rather short and tapering, not serrated. Tubercles on the meta-
and mesothorax are—i and 1i side by side, 1 the inner, and slightly to the
front; l1and ivon the same plate, v having a longer hair with a small
- one below and behind it; vii has two hairs. On the abdominals, i and

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. BAD

ll are somewhat separated ; 111 close above the somewhat raised spiracle ;
iv and vy together beneath it, as usual. The spicules are dark points
[The facts that v has another hair close to it, and that the spicules are
present, show that this larva is in the second, not the first, instar. |
(Bacot, August 4th, 1905). ? Third instar (small): 8mm. long.
Deep brown-red in colour, with traces of paler subdorsal and spiracular
lines. Each tubercle (1, 11, 111, iv, and v) carries a long hair, nearly as
long as the larva is thick, slightly thickened at the tip, and quite white;
it has also a number of short, white, secondary skin-hairs, about 4+
length of tubercle-hairs; no secondary hairs on tubercles. Head pale
in front, but, dorsally, ‘deep brown-red; this tint runs into the pale
as three or four interrupted broad streaks, narrowing downwards.
Third instar (grown) : [Another bud contained another larva very much
larger, but apparently in same skin; this one is ready to moult;| the
thoracic segments being very swollen, with a pale, long, white neck ; legs
widely separate, etc.; the hairs relatively short; length, perhaps, 6mm.,
but I did not fully disturb larva. Its colour is pale, with two irregular
longitudinal red bands on either side (very like that of Platyptilia
gonodactyla) ; the extension of the skin by growth, affecting chiefly,
apparently, the pale portions (Chapman, August 17th, 1904). /” Fourth
instar : Colour dark green, with a darker dorsal shade, that fades into
a paler area, ending just outside 11, as a sudden change from whitish-
ereen to dark green, but, even here, there is no definite demarcation,
though it is more sudden than the change from the dark dorsal to the
whitish subdorsal area; there is a paler lateral line along flange below
iv and v, and obscure paler lines above this; spiracles black; tubercles
1, 1i, and ii each has a single white hair; iv+v carry two, the front
one higher; the hairs on i, ii, and v incline forwards; those on 1i
and iv backwards; all with a sheht curve, length about 0'5mm. The
secondary skin-hairs are numerous, black on the darker dorsal area, white
elsewhere, except a long one behind 11, which is rather a secondary
tubercular hair, and several that seem also rather tubercular, than skin,
_ hairs, round iv+-v. These are about 0-lmm. long, that of ii 0:15mm.,
whilst the ordinary skin-hairs are about 0‘08mm., but vary a good
deal, some round 1 and ii are rather longer, and seem to incline to be
tubercular. These, like the other skin-hairs, have dilated tips, which
is hardly so with the black ones of 111, and iv+v, and are fine skin-points.
Prothoracic plate with black markings (Chapman, August 25th,
1904). [These larve hung up for pupation August 27th and 28th. ]
Final instar (spring larva, not fullgrown) : Only 6mm. in length.
It differs chiefly from the fullgrown larva in that itis reddish-purple i in
colour, without any green, and thatthe skin-areas at the bases of tubercles
are more raised ; this, of course, may be partly owing to its not having
filled out and so stretched its skin. The dorsal tubercles have not, as
a rule, a second medium-sized hair in addition to the normal primary
one, and the upper accessory post-spiracular is not so conspicuous,
owing to its small size. inal instar (spring larve, fullgrown) :—
Length of the largest larva when crawling (it will not rest), 12mm. ;
width shehtly less than 2mm.; in form, a long slender larva, nearly or
quite cylindrical, and tapering gradually in both directions to a small
head and rather pointed anus. The segments are plump and full, with
well-marked incisions, but no noticeable overlap. The subsegments are
only slightly in evidence on the abdomen when crawling, but are rather

350 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

better marked on the thoracic segments. The body is bright green,
softened somewhat by the secondary hair growth; a broad crimson
mediodorsal band, and a narrow, somewhat interrupted, white subdorsal
line. Hairs, and the bases of tubercles, white, but some of the secondaries
are dark. Head smooth and glassy in appearance, very pale brown, with
black ocelli, and a black spot on either lobe near the crown; there is
also a slight mottling of pale brown on the cheeks. Body: the pro-
thoracic scutellum fairly distinct, but the anal plate less so, although
both are more chitinous in appearance than the general skin-surface.
The scutellum bears the two, dark-coloured, depressed, spots as in S. ptero-
dactyla, etc. The spiracles are large, but not highly raised, their dark
brown chitinous rims showing up in marked contrast against the pale
skin; as usual, those on the prothorax and the 8th and 1st abdominal seg-
mentsare larger than the rest, the two former considerably, and the latter
shghtly so, but there is no marked difference in shape. The spicular coat
is a marked feature, being both coarse and dark-coloured as well; one
hardly knows whether to call the spicules buttons, or spines, but, perhaps,
the latter is more correct, as they seem to be low, broad-based, pyramidal
spines. A strong development of secondary hairs is fairly evenly
scattered over the general skin-surface; these are short and bristle-like,
shehtly knobbed at the top; some are dark, but they are mostly pale ;
these are much more numerous than in Stenoptilia pterodactyla, and
remind one, when viewed under a hand-lens, rather of the coats of
Gillmeria pallidactyla and Platyptilia gonodactyla, but a lin. objective
shows up the difference at once, the hairs, in comparsion with those
of G. pallidactyla, in its last skin, being much sparser, but individually
larger, and knobbed at the tip, those of G. pallidactyla forming a finer,
more even, and much thicker, growth. Tubercles are not primitive,
yet can hardly be called warts; the hairs are white and have white
bases, and they appear fairly smooth, but are, I think, very finely
thorned, and slightly knobbed at the tips. Asa rule, there is one large
primary hair and a medium secondary, and possibly one or two of the
small secondary hairs, similar to those scattered over the skin-surface,
associated in each tubercular group ; though, whether the proximity of
the small skin-surface secondaries is a matter of accident, or really an
association, is not clear, but Iam inclined to think the latter, as these
smali hairs, when so placed, seem to my eyes to be slightly larger than
those elsewhere. On the meso- and metathorax, i and ii are united at
their bases, the inner and forward hair, probably i, being the larger ;
iii and iv form a similar pair; v and the subprimary vi form another
pair; beneath them, and the posterior subprimary, is a single hair slightly
above the level of the last-named pair; vii is a two-haired pair at the
base of legs. [Only the larger hairs are noticed in the above remarks. ]

On the abdominal segments i and li are set trapezoidally, their bases
well apart, both having, usually in close proximity to their bases, a
hair rather larger than the normal secondaries, as well as two or three
of normal, or only very slightly above normal, size, these latter
are not infrequently dark; iii is also a large hair with another much
smaller hair adjoining its base, and one or more of the normal or nearly
normal secondaries ; iv and v conjoined at base, directly below spiracle,
each with long hair. The upper post-spiracular, accessory group is
represented by a single medium-sized hair as in S. pterodactyla. This
hair is not nearly so large as the primary hairs; there is, however,

no trace of the lower subprimary postspiracular group of hairs which is

i
OO ——————————

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. S51

represented in Stenoptilia pterodactyla. Below the pale, whitish,
lateral line, is vi, with a single large hair, and two rather smaller ones
at, or close to, the margin, represent vii; there is a slight tendency to
develop a lateral flange. The true legs are dark; the prolegs tall as
usual, and pale-coloured (Bacot. Larve received from Tutt, May
24th, 1904. Larve described at once). inal instar (fullgrown) :
A deep summer grass-green, as compared with the delicate, light,
spring green of Letoptilus tephradactyla, with a broad, brown-red,
dorsal stripe, and the same colour tints the rest of the larva, giving the
green its dark tint, when, on a general view, one calls it green with
red dorsal line; really the colour is not green, but red; but, except
dorsally, it is so thinly spread, that the green contents show through.
There are two very distinct subsegments; tubercles i and i11 with single
long white hairs (no other tubercles) on the 1st subsegment, and i1 on
the 2nd subsegment; outside i and 11 is an irregular, almost green,
line; above i and 11 are short secondary hairs, regularly scattered, 7.e.,
about equally spaced, but not in any symmetrical position; of these,
about 10 or 12 are black, 25 to 30 white; they are placed similarly
over the rest of the larva. Immediately below the spiracle is a tubercle
with two long hairs (iv and v), one forward, one backward ; lower
down, a tubercle with a solitary hair, and yet another nearly at base of
proleg. The prolegs are on long props. The underside of the larva is
more definitely green; the head green, marbled with brown (Chapman).
Fullerown: About 5 lines in length, of moderate proportion, neither
stout nor slender, tolerably cylindrical, tapering a little posteriorly ;
the head rounded and rather smaller than the second segment, of a very
pale colour and shining; the body is very pale olive-yellow, with a
conspicuous brown dorsal line attenuated at each end, and with two
faint limes along the side a little deeper than the tint of the ground
colour ; on the lowest line are the black spiracles, each on a slight
swelling; the tubercular wartsare of the pale ground colour and furnished
with rather long curved whitish hairs; the head and other parts of the
body emit short hairs (Buckler). Larva spindle-shaped, verdigris-
green; a broad, dull, red, dorsal line, margined on both sides with
whitish-green, as far as the usual position of the subdorsal line. Head,
anterior legs, and spiracles, brown-black, the anterior segments with
some brown dots; the body clothed with isolated whitish hairs (Réssler).
Buckler figured (Larvae, etc., pl. clxiii., figs. 9, 9a, 9b, and 9c) larve of
this species in various stages of growth, of which fig. 9 was drawn on
May 10th, its imago appearing on June 17th, 1872 ; 9a was figured on
May 21st, 1871; 9c was also figured on May 10th, 1872, its
imago appearing on June 9th, 1872). He also figures (fig. 9/7) the
attacked foodplant, showing the point of ingress of larva (9)) in a
shoot of Scabiosa columbaria. He further figures the pupa, a poor figure
compared with some of the other figures. The larva is also described
by South, Hnt., xviil., pp. 2738-4.

ComPARISON OF LARV® OF ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA AND STENOPTILIA
prERopAcTYLA.— The larvaot A. bipunctidactyla agrees with that of S. ptero-
dactyla in—the curve of the primary hairs, the presence of the depressed
black spots on thescutellum, the pale lateral line, the faint subdorsal band,
and dark median band; it also agrees somewhat in shape and slender-
ness ; 1t is very closein regard to the growth of secondary, or skin-surface,
hairs, and there are also a good many minor points of resemblance

852 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

that would be difficult to enumerate, but which all help the general
likeness. It differs at least, in the following points, the absence of the
lower accessory post-spiracular group of hairs (or secondary post-
spiracular tubercle), and also in regard to the greater strength of the
spicular growth which is much more marked than in S. pterodactyla.
The development of the tubercles has also not advanced so far in the
direction of the formation of warts, the instar compared being the final
one (Bacot).

Fooppiants.—Scabiosa columbaria, S. arvensis, S. succisa (Barrett),
[Galium mollugo (Herrich-Schiiffer), Scutellaria gallericulata (teste
Sorhagen), Linaria cymbalaria (test. French authors),| Saaifraga
granulata (Angerer teste Sorhagen).| One would like confirmation of
the four last-named as foodplants of this species. There is little doubt
that the larve found on Sawxifraga granulata were those of Stenoptilia
pelidnodactyla and not A. bipunctidactyla. The various statements
that the species is connected with Galium mollugo (e.g., South, Ent.,
Xiv., p. 52, etc.) are to be traced to that of Herrich-Schaffer, which
was quoted by Sorhagen. Hofmann long since noted that the state-
ment was probably due to an error of observation, and apparently had
no foundation in fact.

ParasitEs.—Linneria rujicincta, Gr. (W.H.B. Fletcher teste Barrett),
Apanteles difficilis, Nees (Carrington), A. sericeus, Nees (Fitch).

Pupartum.—The larve of the spring brood appear to leave their
feeding-burrows for pupation, spinning a silken pad on an adjacent
object, and, attaching themselves thereto by the cremaster, change to
pup thereon. Gregson says that the fullfed larva suspends itself by
the tail to the foodplant, or a blade of grass, or any other object it may
find in the neighbourhood of its food, the pupal stage lasting about
fifteen days. Buckler observes of a larva that suspended itself May 10th,
that the imago did not emerge until June 9th. South observes that
larve that commenced to pupate on June 5th, 1885, appeared from
June 20th onwards, etc. The larva attaches itself like a butterfly
larva, the pupa hanging, head downwards, by its anal attachment
(Réssler) ; it is attached to a stalk of the foodplant (Hofmann) ;
fastened either to a leaf or stem (South).

Pura.—Long, slender, smooth, without distinct nose-horn or
snout; green in colour with red dorsal lhne; this may be merely
indicated, or it may invade most of the pupa. The usual colour
forms are: a. Green, whitish on head and prothorax, with
pink line from middle of prothorax to cremaster, where the red
extends round the pupa. . Red, in which the head and
prothorax are still white, the mesothorax green, but with a pink line
across the front; elsewhere the pink overlies the green, producing a
brick-red subdorsally, a modified green laterally, and an olive-green
on the wings and appendages, which are much darker than in the
ereenest pupa, but without any definite red tint. Length 10mm. ;
antero-posterior diameter at mesothorax 2mm.; 1:7mm. from 8rd to
5th abdominal segments, but with slight tapering. The mesothorax
is swollen both laterally and dorsally, and gives this, with other
Alucitid pup, much suggestion of dipterous pupe, such as Culea,
with swollen thorax. The swelling of the thorax is assisted by the
subdorsal flanges rising here more markedly than elsewhere; they are
somewhat close together, and form a double hump. These flanges

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 353

extend backwards, separating gradually to the 8rd abdominal segment,
but are not very evident on the 4th, though the hairs, etc., of tubercles
1 and ii give a superficial appearance of their continuing to the tail.
Though described as smooth, it has these flanges or ridges, and also has
the tubercles well expressed. The wings, etc., are fixed to the end of the
brd abdominal segment, and the points of the wings extend a little
further, forming a base to the penlike 8rd legs, which extend nearly to
the end of the 5th abdominal segment, but quite free. The free
seoments are the 4th, 5th, 6th (7th in the g) abdominals. On the
head and prothorax several hairs are found, but only one on either side,
definitely, on meso- and metathorax; these are all short, curved,
clubbed hairs, clubbed in that they gradually get thicker to the end.
On the 1st abdominal segment, similar (but smaller) hairs occur on
the extreme anterior (i) and posterior (i1) ends of the subdorsal ridges,
and tubercle 111 is observed laterally. The 2nd abdominal segment is
a comparatively long segment; the ridge is divided into three nearly
equal portions by 1, just inside it, and 11, on it; tubercle i11 and the
spiracle being well-spaced laterally, 7.e., not at all crowded together or
with others. On the 3rd abdominal segment, the ridge extends down
to the intersegmental membrane, which occupies the posterior fourth
of the segment; tubercle ii is at the extreme end of the ridge, and i,
in front of it, one-fourth the length of the ridge (segment without
membrane) infront of it. Their structure is curious; 11s a round knob
with a hair pointing forward from its anterior face; ii has the hair
shghtly more from the summit and pointing backwards. These knobs
are whitish, but too small to have any colour effect on the pupa unless
seen through a lens; iliis directed forward. The transverse wrinkling or
ribbing is much the same here as over the rest of the pupa. The ribs
are about 22 in number, and are fairly pitted along their ridges; they
are too numerous to be subsegments, and too regular and continuous to
be regarded as the anastomosing wrinklings occurring on many pupe.
They may, perhaps, be called ribs, without any theory being involved.
The 4th abdomina] segment has 20 ribs, and no flange-ridge ; i, i1, and i
are aS on the 8rd abdominal segment; the large white beads here,
carrying the hairs, have, very definitely, the air of being erect and
symmetrical, and then bent or rotated forwards (e.g., 1 and iii) or
backwards (e.g., 11); below the spiracle are two hairs, curved and
clubbed as the others, but without raised bases ; they are about at the
same level, the anterior one below the spiracle, and with two ribs
between them; the next lower is four ribs behind the last, is strongly
directed backwards, and has a raised base in front of it. The 5th
abdominal segment has only about fifteen ribs, and is narrower; the
tubercles, etc., are the same; the length of the hairs is about
0-08mm.-0:09mm. The 6th and 7th abdominal segments are narrower,
but the same otherwise, still with fourteen or fifteen ribs, but they tend a
little to anastomose. On the 8th abdominal segment, tubercles
1 and 11 have a ridge between them, which is continued down the 9th
and 10th segments as a support to the cremaster, but seems to be the
same ridge that has been obsolete from the 4th-7th abdominal segments.
There are about 50-60 hooks to the cremaster under the 8th abdominal
segment, but they are much more numerous on the 10th abdominal.
The eyes are well marked, the head projects forward (i.e. ventrally’
beyond the otherwise straight front line; such beak as there is, is

354 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

directed ventrally. The maxille reach to half the length of the
wings, the antenne to three-fourths, and the Ist legs fall just short
of the wings. The neuration of the wings is strongly marked by pale
ridges (Chapman, May 29th, 1904). Pale green with an obscure
reddish-pink dorsal line or stripe, which, in some examples, is only
represented by short dashes behind the thorax and on the last four
segments; the anal segment and tip of leg-cases pale pinkish;
sometimes the whole of the dorsal area is also suffused with pinkish ;
wing-cases tinged with yellowish; leg-cases detached from the
abdomen (South).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—The species appears to be double- or treble-
brooded, according to the season. In forward seasons, larve, collected
in April-May, give imagines in late May and June; from eggs laid in
June, imagines may be reared in August; and from eggs laid in August,
the imagines emerge in late September and October. In backward
seasons, one finds larvee still feeding throughout May and June, which
rarely give imagines until late June or early July; eggs laid in early
July rarely produce imagines until late August or September, when
a third brood :s rarely attempted. On the continent, in central Europe,
the same times of appearance are noticed, e.g., Réssler says that, in
Germany, the imagines appear in the end of April and through May,
then at the end of July, and on into August, and lastly, in late autumn.
Reutti states that, in Baden, it is common in May, July, and September.
Stange says that, in Friedland, the imagines are to be found from the
end of May to September, apparently in three broods. In Pomerania,
the insect occurs through the summer and on to September (Buttner).
Speyer observes that, at Waldeck, it occurs in June, and again at the end
of August and beginning of September. In Silesia, it occurs rather
rarely in May, then much commoner from the end of July to beginning
of October (Wocke). At Médling, in Lower Austria, the imagines appear
in May and June (Mann). In Roumania, it occurs almost everywhere
in meadows in August (Caradja). In the Baltic Provinces, Noleken
notes its occurrence in May and June, again July 15th-August 8th, and
yet again September 24th. In the mountains, the var. plagiodactylus
occurs, and appears to have only two broods (at most) in the year.
We have made no attempt to distinguish in the following dates those
referring to the type, and those referring to var. plagiodactylus.
CoNTINENTAL RECORDS: Just appearing May 29th, 1869, worn examples
found July 11th, 1869, near Meseritz (Zeller); April 20th, 1870, at
Marshen, in Morocco (Blackmore); July 18th-28rd, 1890, at Tancar-
ville (Leech); July 20th-August 17th, 1892, at Erfjord (Strand); July
29th, 1894, at Bourg St. Maurice; August 22nd, 1894, at Grésy-sur-
Aix; July 25th-31st, 1895, at Mendel Pass (Tutt); July 28th, 1896,
at Odde (Chapman); August 5th-12th, 1896, at La Grave; August
13th-20th, 1896, at Bourgd’ Oisans; July 26th-30th, 1897, at Grésy-
sur-Aix; August 1st-5th, 1897, at St. Michel-de-Maurienne; August
6th-12th, 1897, at Lanslebourg; July 27th-31st, 1898, at Bourg St.
Maurice; August 8rd, 1898, on the Little St. Bernard Pass (Tutt) ;
July 31st, 1900, at Coq-sur-Mer; July 28rd, 1901, at Calmpthout
(Crombrugghe) ; July 29th, 1901, on the Prenj (Rebel); August 8th-12th,
1901, at Bobbie (Tutt); June 27th, 1902, at Maklenpass (Hilf); July
30th-August 3rd, 1902, at Chavoire ; August 4th-12th, 1902, at Megéve;
August 18th, 1902, at Chamonix (Tutt) ; July, 1908, at Ottignies, and

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. BH,

August, 1904, at Bergh (Crombrugghe); July 26th, 1904, on the
Faucille; August 9th, 1904, between Balen and Huteck, August 19th,
1904, at Stalden (Tutt); May 30th, 1905, at Velthem, August, 1905, at
Uccle (Crombrugghe); May 30th, 1906, at Namur (Dufrane). Britisx
REcoRDS: July 13th-27th, 1864, at Bournemouth (Knaggs) ; common
last week of July, 1864, at Portland (Blackmore); July 19th, 1872, at
Witherslack (Hodgkinson); August 16th, 1876, at High Force (Sang);
August Ist-7th, 1877, at Witherslack (Hodgkinson) ; July 3rd, 1878,
on Coniscliffe Moor (Sang); June 22nd, 1880, at Kilkerran Bay
(J. J. Walker); August 22nd, 1880, at Witherslack; August 4th, 1881,
at Hellkettles; August 21st, 1881, on Coniscliffe Moor (Sang); August
4th, 1881, at Kingsdown (Tutt); imagines on the wing from June 12th-
October 14th, 1882, at Lepton Great Woods, but in greatest abundance
in July (Porritt); bred July 24th, 1882, from larvee collected July 2nd,
1882, at Brandon (South); August 17th, 1882, in Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes) ; September 5th, 1882, at Llangennech (Richardson) ; July
drd-7th, 1883, between Deal and Dover (Coverdale); mid-August,
1883, between Deal and Sandwich (A. H. Shepherd) ; August, 1888, at
Ventnor (South); August 6th-13th, 1883, at Llangennech (Richardson);
August 15th-September 14th, 1883, in the Morthoe district (Riding) ;
September, 1883, in Epping Forest (Sheldon); May 28th-31st, 1884,
in the New Forest (Bankes); June 5th, 1884, at Kingsdown (Sheldon);
July 10th, 1884, at Oaks (Sang); July 5th, 1885, on Sandwich
Marshes; July 20th-24th, 1885, at Cuxton (Tatt); bred July 28th-
30th, 1885, from larve taken at Gravesend (Whittle); September
19th, 1885, and following days, at the Lizard (Riding); bred June
9th, 1886, caught July 81st, 1886, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ;
July 13th, 1887, at Corrie (Dalglish); August 2nd, 1887, in the Isle of
Portland ; August 5th, 1887, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); August
4th, 1887, at Kingsdown; August 6th, 1887, by the Old Haven, on
the Deal sandhills; June 2nd-11th, 1888, in Chattenden Woods; June
12th, 1888, at Cuxton; August 6th, 1888, at Kingsdown; August 19th,
1888, at Cuxton; June 11th, 1889, in Chattenden Woods (Tutt); July
18th, August 31st-September 6th, 1889, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes);
August Ist-12th, 1889, at Freshwater (Tutt); May 24th, August 30th-
September 9th, 1890, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June 6th, 1890,
on the Belfast Hills (Watts); May 27th, 1890, in Chattenden Woods; July
4th, 1890, on the Deal sandhills; August Ist-10th, 1890, at Deal and
St. Margaret’s Bay (Tutt); August 18th, 1890, at Swanage (Raynor); bred
October 1st-14th, 1890, at Newbury (Kimber) ; June 8rd, 1891, in the
Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June 8th, 1891, in Chattenden Woods
(Tutt) ; abundant mid-July, 1891, in the fens near King’s Lynn (Atmore);
September 21st-24th, 1891, at Brentwood (Raynor); June 11th, July
21st, 1892, in Chattenden Woods (Tutt); June 18th, August 17th,
1892, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); July 15th, 1892, at Mauchline
(Dalglish); July 22nd, 1892, at Cuxton; July 27th-August 17th, 1892,
in Wicken Fen; August 8rd-7th, 1892, in Chippenham Fen; June
80th, 1893, in Chattenden Woods; July 2nd-22nd, 1893, at Cuxton (Tutt);
July 22nd-30th, 1898, at Hastwood (Whittle); second week in July,
1894, at Stonehaven (Dalelish); July 26th, 1894, at Mansfield (Daws);
June 2nd, 9th, 22nd, 1895, at Cuxton (Tutt); June, 1895, in Glen
Lochay (Morton); October 21st, 1895, quite fresh, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes); July 4th, 1896, at Milngavie; August 12th, 1896, at Cadder

356 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

(Dalglish) ; July 9th, 1896, at Corsemalzie (Gordon) ; June 2nd, 1897,
at Tuddenham; August, 1898, at Mucking (Burrows); July 30th, 1898,
at Eastwood (Whittle); August 15th, 17th, 1898, at Buckerell
(Riding) ; August 28rd, 1898, at Campsie (Dalglish); August 12th-
22nd, 1899, at Shoeburyness (Whittle); June 29th, 1900, at Crookston ;
July 14th, 1900, at Dundonald (Dalglish) ; abundant mid-July, 1900,
about Chester (Arkle) ; July 22nd-September 8th, 1900, at Shoebury-
ness (Whittle); August 1st-8rd, 1900, common at St. Margaret’s Bay
(James); July lith, 1901, at Oxton, Devon (Studd); June 10th, 1902,
common at Keswick (Beadle); June, 1903, at Waldridge Fell (Harrison);
July 11th, 1908, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June 18th-80th, July
23rd-August 10th, 1903, on the Norfolk Broads (Edelsten); June 16th,
1903, at Wicken; June 18th, 1903, at Chippenham (Burrows); July
16th, 1908, in Hesleden Dene (Harrison); July 23rd, 1903, at Keswick
(Beadle) ; August 13th, 1908, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June
20th, 1904, at Folkestone (Purdey): June 21st, 1904, in Chattenden Woods
(Ovenden) ; July 6th-12th, 1904, at \Witherslack (James) ; June 10th,
August 11th, 1904, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); September 5th,
1904, at Gomshall (Chapman); June 23rd, 1905, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes).

Hazits.—The species is on the wing naturally before dusk, flying
freely, from just before sundown, about the scabious plants on which
the larve have fed. The imagines, too, are readily disturbed in the
daytime, when they hide among the lower parts of the plants of
scabious, or the surrounding herbage, flitting away softly, gently, with
their conspicuous long legs hanging stiffly below, and then clinging to
supports, where they are turned round, or moved from side to side, by the
slightest breeze. Bankes says that the moth flies at dusk, and Barrett
states that it can hardly be said to hide during the day, for it hangs on
the scabious plants, and, when disturbed, dances away with a curious
Tipula-like flight, its long legs conspicuous, and apparently buoyant,
but only flies a few yards to a similar resting-place on the scabious or
srass. It must, however, fly also at night, for we have taken it at
light on Wicken Fen, and EKdelsten has found it similarly on the
Norfolk Broads. Here, also, the same entomologist has taken it on
the wing at dusk, as well as at flowers of Sedum spectabile, in August
and September, and at flowers of rocket in May, at Enfield. Reid used
to take it flying among Scabiosa succisa at dusk, at Pitcaple, and
Gordon asserts that it came to flowers of honeysuckle at Corsemalzie.
Rossler notes that it flies in dry sunny weather among Scabiosa
succisa, at Wiesbaden. He also suggests that the imago may
hybernate, but there appears to be no doubt that the insect hybernates
in the larval stage.

Hasirat.—We find it difficult to say what are not the habitats of
this insect. Wherever Scabiosa grows abundantly, there the species
may be expected. In the ditches at the sides of the ridings in
Chattenden Woods, in the rough ash plantations there, and in the
fields outside, we have taken this species regularly and commonly;
it is abundant among the thick herbage that grows on the
chalkhills at Cuxton and Halling, particularly on the borders of the
cultivated ground, where great clumps of Scabiosa, Centaurea,
Hypericum, etc., come down to the ploughed edge of a field. In the
thick growth of the hedgesides between Strood and Cuxton; on the

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 357

banks leading down to the Ham Ponds, at Sandwich ; in the rough
pastures at Freshwater, in the Isle of Wight; in Wicken, Chippenham,
and Ranworth Fens, and on the Breck sands at Tuddenham; again,
on the undercliff at Shanklin and Ventnor, in the Isle of Wight, and
between Kingsdown and St. Margaret’s Bay, as well as on the chalk
downs at Dover and Folkestone, we have taken this species in the
south of England. It appears also to be as abundant by the sides of
the drives running through our large woods, e¢.g., Chattenden
Woods and Raindean Wood, near Folkestone. On the continent its
habitats are just as varied; we have taken it on the hot sun-baked
slopes at Bourg d’Oisans, the mountain uplands at La Grave, up to
the moraines of the Meije, on the Brévent and the slopes of the
Chapeau at Chamonix, and the billowy slopes of the Mendel Pass ;
from sea-level to at least 6500ft. above the level of the sea, the insect
has in some haunt or other occurred to us. Constant notes it on the
heaths of Sadne-et-Loire. Barrett reports that, near Norwich, it haunts
chalkpits, the sloping banks of which are covered with a profusion of
wild flowers, including Scabiosa columbaria and S. arvensis; also, he
says, it is to be met with in boggy meadows, marshes, and open damp
woods, among Scabiosa succisa. It is also reported in woods at Saffron
Walden (Jeffrey), in woods among scabious at Hastwood, etc. (Whittle),
in or near woods, among rough herbage, at Keswick (Beadle), abundant
in rough fields overgrown with scabious, adjoining Lepton Great Wood
(Porritt), by the hedgesides in fields and orchards, at Buckerell (Riding),
in the hedgerows about Chester (Arkle), in old pastures at Wilsden
(Butterfield), on rough ground at Mansfield (Daws), common in rough
weedy meadows, where Scabiosa succisa abounds, in Dorset (Bankes),
in the chines to the west of Bournemouth (Knaggs), on downs amongst
scabious, near Bristol (Hudd), on a wet heath at Pitcaple (Reid),
and among the herbage by hedgesides bordering pasture-fields, where
scabious grows in the pastures (South), etc. In Germany it is to be
found in similar places to those already noticed in this country, e.g., it
is recorded as common in upland meadows in Nassau (Réssler), common
in sunny flowery spots at Friedland (Stange); in wet meadows in
Silesia (Wocke), on the St. Leonhard turf-moor in Baden (Reutti);
throughout the limestone district of Hernstein, in Lower Austria
(Rogenhofer), and not at all rare on the hillsides at Médling (Mann).
In Roumania it is recorded as occurring almost everywhere in
meadows (Caradja).

British Locauitres.—Generally distributed throughout England and
Scotland, and not uncommon in Ireland (Tutt) [for localities see also
antea, p. 840, var. playiodactylus|, common throughout Ireland
(Kane). Axsrrprrn: distributed, Pitcaple, ete. (Reid). Anrrm: Belfast
Hills (Watts), Belfast (Birchall). Ayr: Barr, Mauchline, Dundonald
(Dalglish), Berks: common — Aldermaston Park, ete. (Hamm), New-
bury (Kimber). Bure: Corrie, Arran (Dalglish). Campsriper: Chippenham
Fen, Wicken Fen (Tutt), Cambridge (Stainton). Carmarrnen: Llangennech
tArkle), Wall Cavan (Kane). Crrsnrre: occasionally, Sealand, near Chester
Arkle), Wallasey (Prince), New Brighton, Knutsford (Ellis), Birkenhead, common
(Stainton). Cork: Glandore, Courtmacsherry, Ummera Woods, near Timoleague,
common (Donovan), Cork (Carpenter). Cornwanu: Land’s End, St. Levan,
common (Baily), The Lizard (Riding). CumpBrrtann: Hayton Moss (Routledge),
Keswick (Beadle), Lake district (Stainton), Carlisle district (Day). Drrsy: Burton
district—Repton (Garneys), near Derby (Baker). Drvon: Buckerell, Morthoe
district (Riding), Oxton (Studd), Alphington (d’Orville). Dorser: Portland
(Richardson), Isle of Purbeck (Bankes), Bloxworth, abundant (Cambridge), Swanage

358 > BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

(Raynor). Dvuszrx: Howth (Birchall). Dumparton: Garelochhead (Henderson),
Milngavie (Dalglish). Durnam: Waldridge Fell (Harrison), Darlington, common,
near Edder Acres (J. Gardner), High Force, Conisclifie Moor (Sang), Hesleden
Dene (Harrison). EprxsurcH: Edinburgh district (Evans). Essex: generally
distributed (Harwood), Shoeburyness, Eastwood (Whittle), near Saffron Walden
(Jeffrey), Epping Forest (Sheldon), Rainham, Mucking (Burrows), Brentwood
(Raynor), Colchester (Harwood). FrrmanacH: Enniskillen (Partridge). Fire
(Barrett). Garway: Kilkerran Bay (J. J. Walker). Guovuczster : Bristol, Clifton,
Almondsbury, Woodchester (Hudd). Hanrs: generally distributed in New
Forest and Isle of Wight (Fletcher), Isle of Wight—Ventnor (South), Yarmouth,
Freshwater (Tutt), New Forest—Brockenhurst (Bankes), Rufus Stone (Gill) ;
Bournemouth (Knaggs). Herrrrorp: Tarrington (J. H. Wood). HERtrorp : near
Hitchin, Knebworth (Durrant), Sandridge (Griffith), Cheshunt (Boyd). IsLE oF
Man: Maughold—Glen Mona, Dhoon Glen, Lonan-Garwick, Ballaugh-Curraghs
(Cassal). Kent: Folkestone (Courtice), Gravesend (Whittle), Alkham, Pembury
(Stainton), Sandwich, Deal, Kingsdown, St. Margaret’s Bay, Raindean Wood, near
Folkestone, Chattenden, Cuxton, Orpington (Tutt), Dover (Coverdale). KiNcaRDINE:
common (Reid), Stonehaven (Dalglish). Lanark: Carluke (Morton), Possil Head,
Glasgow (Henderson), Cadder (Dalglish). Lancasuire: Grange (Hodgkinson),
Manchester (Stainton). MrrtonerH: Aberdovey (Arkle). Mippiusex: Enfield
(Edelsten), Mill Hill (South), Kingsbury (Bond). Moray (Barrett). NoRFoLx:
Norwich, Merton, Croxton, Swaffham, Ranworth Fen (Barrett), Norfolk Broads
(Edelsten), King’s Lynn (Atmore). NortHumpertanp: Newcastle (Stainton), Morpeth
(Finlay). NorrtmvcHam: Mansfield (Daws). PERTHSHIRE: Glen Lochay (Morton).
RenrreEw: Paisley (Dunsmore), Crookston (Dalglish). Roxsureu (Barrett). SomERSET:
Leigh, Clevedon (Hudd), Castle Cary (Macmillan). Srrrrixne: Campsie (Dalglish).
Surrotk: Brandon (Barrett), Tuddenham (Burrows). Surrey: generally common
(Briggs), Gomshall (Chapman), Lowestoft (W. C. Boyd), Elveden (H. Williams).
Sussex: generally distributed (Vineand Fletcher), Hastings district, common (Bloom-
field), Lewes (Stainton), Abbott’s Wood (Porritt), Bognor (Lloyd). Warwick: Knowle
(Bradley). Wrsrmortanp: Witherslack, Windermere (Hodgkinson). Wierown:
Corsemalzie (Gordon). York: Wilsden, Grassington (Butterfield), Lepton Great
Wood, Huddersfield, abundant (Porritt), Sandburn, York (Prest), Scarborough, com-
mon (Stainton), Doncaster district (Corbett), Bramham (Smith), Edlington Wood
(Porritt), Flamborough Head (Horton), Redcar (Sang), Sheffield (Doncaster),
Great Ayton (Lofthouse).

Distripution.*—Europe (except the polar region), Asia Minor,
Mauretania and Teneriffe (Rebel). Arrica: Morocco—Marshen (Black-
more). Asta Mryor: Brussa (Mann). Austro-Huneary: Galicia (Garbowski), Tyrol
district— Innsbruck, Taufers district—near Schlafhaus, Jagdhaus, Knutten,
Klammel (Weiler), Héttinger Berg, Brenner, Serles, Seiser-Alpe (Heller), Mendel- .
pass (Tutt), Carinthia—Raibl and Preth district (Zeller), near Vienna (Rebel), Lower
Austria—Hernstein (Rogenhofer), Médling (Mann), Bohemia, Styria (Hofmann),
Dalmatia—Ragusa (Mann), Buda-Pest district—Nagyag (Aigner), Siebenburgen
(Czekelius). Brnerum: Calmpthout, Rochefort, Velthem, Bergh, Uccle, Ottignies,
Cog-sur-Mer (Crombrugghe), Yernée (de Radigues), Namur, Dinant, rare
(Lambillion). Bosnta and Hercecovina: Trebevic (Apfelbeck), Treskavica,
1800m. (Rebel), Maklenpass (Hilf), Prenj, Velezi, Gacko (Rebel). Buiearia
anD East Rovumeria: near Slivno, singly (Rebel). Corsica: Monte Corte
(Curd). Denmark (Bang-Haas). France: Normandy — Tancarville (Leech),
Seine-et-Marne—near Paris, Montmorency, Aulnay (Duponchel), French Juras
—Gex, La Faucille (Tutt), Savoy Alps—Grésy-sur-Aix, Bourg St. Maurice, Petit
St. Bernard, Lanslebourg, Chavoire, Megeve, common, Chamonix, Dauphiny
Alps—La Grave, St. Michel de Maurienne, Bourg d’Oisans (Tutt), Doubs dept.— _
Couches-les-Mines (Bruand), Indre—Nohant (Sand), Sadne-et-Loire—Autun,
etc. (Constant). Grrmany: distributed throughout north and south Germany
(Hofmann), southwest Germany, Prussia—distributed (Speiser), Pomerania—Neu-
Vorpommern, Riigen, near Danholm, Rénkendorf (Paul), Stettin, near Grambow,
Tantow (Bittner), Mecklenburg—near Friedland (Stange) , Posen—Meseritz (Zeller),
Hamburg—Lower Elbe district, near Bahrenfeld (Sauber), Hanover — near
Hanover (Reinhold), Rhine Provinces—Aix, Crefeld, near Uerdingen (Stollwerck),

* The following also include the recorded localities for var. plagiodactylus, the
difficulty of determining those which refer to the latter only, being too great to
attempt to separate them. 3

ADKINIA BIPUNCTIDACTYLA. 359

Neuenahr, Altenahr (Maassen), Hesse-Nassau — Wiesbaden, common (Réssler),
Frankfort-on-Main (Koch), Cassel (Knatz), Waldeck (Speyer), Thuringia
—Jena, Sprotau, Sémmerda (Knapp), Saxony—Miihlhausen (Jordan), Halle
(Stange), Anhalt (Gillmer), Brandenburg— Potsdam (Hinneberg), Frankfurt-
on-Oder (Pfiitzner), Silesia, distributed—Schwoitsch, Oswitz, Lissa, Glogau, Reinerz,
Lauban (Assmann), Schonberg, Siegersdorf (Sommer), Saxon Upper Lusatia, dis-
tributed (Schiitze), Bavaria, Regensburg (Hofmann), Bayersdorf (Gillmer), Munich
(Hartmann), Wiirttemburg—Hisenbach, etc. (Steudel), Baden—Constance, Ueberlin-
gen, Thalmiihle, Geisingen, Schweigmatt, Freiburg, Lahr, Herrenwies, Rothenfels,
Carlsruhe, Durlach, Heidelberg, Tauberbischofsheim, Wertheim, common (Meess),
Rhine Palatinate (Bertram). Iraty: Piedmont—Little St. Bernard Pass, Bobbie
(Tutt), Italian Alps (Curo), Lombardy—Alzate (Turati). Neraertanps: Friesland,
Hilversum, Gelderland—Hattem, Overijssel—Malden, Wijhe, Zwolle, Limburg,
Maastricht—Venlo, Valkenburg, north Brabant—Rijen, Breda, Bergen-op-Zoom,
Ijsselmonde (Snellen). Rovumanta: generally distributed (Caradja). Russ1a: Moscow
district—Konobeewo (Albrecht), ? Casan district (Eversmann), Orenburg (Hansen),
Baltic Provinces—Rambdau, Kokenhusen (Lienig), Frauenburg, Groesen (Rosen-
berger), Lechts (Huene), Ebelshof (Beinert), Kurtenhof (Berg), Magnusholm, near
Neuhof, Pichtendahl, Rotsiktill (Nolcken). Scanprnavia: Norway — Stavanger
district, Erfjord, Suldal (Strand), Scania, Blekinge, Smaland, West Gothland,
East Gothland, Oeland (Wallengren), Odde(Chapman). Spatn: Tragacete, Moncayo
(Chapman). Swirzeruanp: distributed in the lowlands, replaced by var. plagio-
dactylus in the mountains (Frey), Orsiéres (G. B. Baker), Weissbad, Gais, common
(Peyerimhoff), Ziirich, Baden (Frey), Bremgarten (Boll), Villeneuve (La Harpe),
the Juras (Rothenbach), the Saas-Thal—Stalden, Balen, Hiiteck (Tutt).

[ADDENDUM (pp. 348-4).—It has seemed advisable, since pp.
343-4 have been passed for press, to add the following notes on the
SaVUEARGNOO US:

Variation.—y. var. aridus, Zell.—Buckler writes [Hnt. Mo. May.,
x., p. 182 (1874)] that, on April 25th, 1878, he received from Stainton,
larvee, feeding on shoots and flower-buds of Corts monspeliensis, one of
the Primulaceae, taken at Mentone. The young larve seem, at first, to feed
in the stems of the young shoots of the plant, the heads of which then
hang and become bleached ; as they grow, they enter the flower-buds,
feeding on the calyx and its contents; at this time, the only sign of the
presence of a larva consists of a hole in the lower part of the calyx,
and two or three minute grains of frass just within the cavity. As they
advanced towards maturity, their assimilation to the flower-buds, in
point of colour, was very close; and they were often noticed either
outside among the flower-buds, or on the stems of the plant. The
larvee pupated on May 6th, 11th, and 13th; the imago from the first
appeared on June 12th, but the other two pupe dried up. The moth,
although somewhat dwarfed in size, appears to be, without doubt,
aridus, Zell. The youngest larvee, when first detected, were described
as being :—

About 2 lines long, of a deep purplish-pink colour, slightly subdued by a
greenish tinge; the skin much covered with exceedingly minute, short, bristly
points; the wart-like tubercles on the back each bearing a single white bristle,
rather long, and a trifle thickened at the tip; the small head greenish, and marked
on each lobe with dark brown, and studded with white hairs; dorsal and subdorsal
lines of darker purplish-pink than the ground colour could also be seen.

The fullgrown larva was noted as :—

Attaining a maximum size of little more than 4 lines in length; the figure
slender in proportion; cylindrical above, anda little flattened on the belly, tapering
in front from the third segment to the head, which was small; the theee hinder
segments also a little tapering ; all the legs tolerably well-developed; the segments
plump, with divisions deeply indented, and the subdividing wrinkles well-defined ;
the colour greenish, suffused with pink; the inflated spiracular region a little paler
than the rest, no trace of any lines; the head brown; the spiracles dark brown,
circular, and very small ; all the hairs brownish.

360 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

The slender pupa was 4 lines in length, smooth, and without hairs, with the
head blunt and broad; the broadest part being at the top of the thorax, just at
the junction of the wing-cases, from whence it gradually tapered to the point of the
tail, by which it was attached to the stem of its foodplant ; in colour the body was
pale yellowish-green, the head ochreous-green, the wing-cases of a darker greyish-
green tinged with pink; a faint darker green dorsal line was just visible, and, along
either side, a row of subdorsal, elongate, black spots (Buckler).

Whether this belongs to aridus, Zell., or not, we are not prepared
to say, on the determination of the one specimen bred by Buckler. If
it does, we suspect that the British specimens referred by British lepi-
dopterists to aridus, are not aridus, Zell., and that aridus, Zell., is not
a form of Adkinia bipunctidactyla ; in this respect, our opinion agrees
with that of Hofmann. Herrich-Schiffer says (Sys. Bearb., v., p. 376)
that he received his examples of aridus, from Mann, as loewti, but that
they are quite different, being a little larger than loewit, and much
smaller than serotinus. |

Genus: Srenoprinia, Htbner.

Synonymy.—Genus: Stenoptilia, Hb., ‘‘ Verz.,”’ p. 430 (1825); Stphs., ‘ Ill.
Haust.,’’ iv., p. 372; app. p. 424 (1834); Meyvr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,” p. 487
(1890); *‘ Handbook,’’ p. 440 (1895); Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ p. 82 (1895);
Fern., ‘‘ Pter. Nth. Amer.,’’ p. 56; revised ed., p. 58 (1898); Staud. and Rebel,
“¢Cat.,” 3rd ed., p. 77 (1901) ; Dyar, ‘‘ List Nth. Am. Lep.,” p. 447 (1902) ; Tutt,
‘¢ Ent. Rec.,’’ xvii., p. 35 (1905). Alucita, Linn., ‘‘ Faun. Suec.,”’ 2nd ed., p. 871
(1761); ‘‘ Syst. Nat.,’’ 12th ed., p. 900 (1767); Miill., ‘‘ Faun. Ins. Frid.,” p. 59
(1764) ; Géze, ‘‘ Ent. Beit.,”’ iv., pt. 3, p. 173 (in part) (1783) ; de Vill., ‘* Linn.
Hunt. Faun. Suec.,” 11., p. 535 (1789); Haw., ‘‘Lep. Brit.,”’ p. 476 (1811); ibe
‘¢Schmett. Eur.,’’ Aluc. ix., figs. 16, 25 (circ. 1819); Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmeitt.,”
ix., p. 244 (1833); Evers., ‘‘ Faun. Volg.-Ural.,’’? p. 606 (1844). Pterophorus,
Fab., ‘‘ Syst. Ent.,” p. 671 (1775); Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,’’ p. 409 (1819) ;
Curt., ‘Brit. Ent.,’’ fo. 161 (1827); Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’’ ix., p. 666, pl. 314, fig. 3
(1838) ; Wood, ‘“‘ Ind. Ent.,” p. 235, pl. li., fig. 1630 (1839) ; Zell., ‘‘ Isis,”” p. 277
(1839); p. 841 (1841); Dup., ‘‘Cat. Meth.,”’ p. 382 (1844); Tgstrm., ‘‘Finl. Fyjar.,”
p. 155 (1847): Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 371 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘“‘ Sys. Bearb.,”
v., p. 375 (1855); Frey, ‘‘ Tin. Pter. Schw.,”’ p. 413 (1856); Sta., ‘“ Man.,”? m:;
p. 442 (1859) ; Schmid, ‘‘ Berl. Ent. Zeits.,’’ viil., p. 66 (1864); Nolck., ‘‘ Lep.
Faun. Hstl.,”’ p. 808 (1871); Porritt, ‘‘Ent.,” xv., p. 44 (1882); ‘‘ Buckler’s
Larve,’’ ix., p. 365 (1901). Mimaeseoptilus, Wallgrn., ‘‘Skand. Fjaderm.,”’
p. 18 (1859); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 123 (1869); Staud. and Wocke,
“¢Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 343 (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ iii.,
pt. 2, p. 797 (1877); Frey, ‘‘ Lep. der Schweiz,’’ p. 431 (1880); South, ‘‘ Ent.,”’
xv., p. 148, pl. iii., figs. 4a-4c (1882); Sorh., ‘‘ Kleinschm. Brandbg.,’’ p. 6 (1886);
Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x., p 165 (1889); ‘‘Brit. Nat.,’’ ii., pp. 160, 226 (1892) ;
‘« Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 100 (1895) ; Snell., ‘‘ Vlind. Ned.,’’ ii., 2, p. 1040 (1882).

The genus Stenoptilia, Hb. (Verz., p. 480), was created by Hubner
for a mixed assemblage of species belonging to very different groups
of the ‘“‘plume”’ stirps, e.g., the modern genera Stenoptilia and Adkinia
on the Platyptiliine side, and Emmelina, Leioptilus, Hellinsia, and
Adaina on the Alucitine side. His diagnosis reads as follows :

The forewings narrow, speckled with scattered black spots—Stenoptilia micto-
dactyla, Schiff., Verz., Alu. A,3; Hiibn., Alu. 3. S. ptilodactyla, Hiibn., Alu.,
16, 25. 8S. pterodactyla,* Linn., Syst., Phal., 458; Hiibn., Alu. 4. S. scarodac-
tyla, Hiibn., Alw., 21, 22. S. tephradactyla, Hiibn., Alw., 17. SS. carphodactyla,
Hubn., Alu., 19, 20. SS. microdactyla,+ Schiff., Verz., Alu. A, 12, Hiibn., Alu.,
26, 27.

It would be difficult to find a more heterotypical genus than this.

* Hiibner’s Alucita pterodactyla, *‘ Eur. Schmett.,’? Alu. fig. 4=Alucita
monodactyla, Linn.

+ Schiffermiiller and Denis, Verz., p. 320, Alu. A, 12, is nan.ed mictodactyla.
These authors mention no species under the name microdactyla so far as we can
discover.

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 361

Stephens, in his application of the Htbnerian classification to our
British species (lllus. Brit. Hnt. Haust., iv., app. p. 424) maintains it
in its original form, whilst Zeller (sis, 1841, pp. 756 et seq.) also keeps
the Htbnerian hotch-potch, but sinks the name Stenoptilia as a synonym
of Pterophorus. He was followed in this by Herrich-Schaffer, who,
however, separated the Platyptiliine part of the group as Sect. i, leaving
a very mixed lot as Sect. ii. Wallengren isolated the Platyptiliine
section (Kony. Svens. Vetens. Akad. Handlingar, ii., p. 18) under the
name Mimaeseoptilus, his grouping being followed by Staudinger and
Wocke (Cat., 2nd ed., p. 848) under the same name. Meyrick,
however, in 1890, restored (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., pp. 487) the
Hiubnerian name to this group, and was followed in this by Hofmann,
in 1895 (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 62), who gave us our first true grip
of the group, without, however, naming the separate parts, or fixing
a type for Hubner’s genus. This we did in 1905, dividing (Ent. Rec.,
Xvul., p. 35) the Stenoptilia of Hofmann into its two constituent parts,
and naming one Adkinia, with bipunctidactyla as type, and retaining
Stenoptilia, Hb., for the group of which pterodactyla, Linn. (= ptilo-
dactyla, Hb.) was named as the type. It is in this limited sense that
Stenoptilia is here used. Hofmann’s subdivisions may be referred to
(anted, p. 817). It will be observed that we have not followed these out
in detail, as, at the present time, much too little is known of the early
stages of the species to support his further subdivision on imaginal
characters. That much difference exists, however, within the two
Stenoptiliid genera we have no doubt. There is no real need to
repeat the comparative diagnosis of Adkinia and Stenoptilia already
given (antea, p. 319).

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA, Linné.

SynonymMy.—Species: Pterodactyla, Linné, ‘‘ Faun. Suec.,’’? 2nd ade p. 371
(1761) ; ‘‘ Syst. Nat.,’’ 12th ed., p. 900 (1767); Miill., ‘‘ Faun. Ins. Frid., » p. 59
(1764) ; Gdze, ‘‘ Ent. Beit.,”’ iv., pt. 3, p. 173, in part (1783); Meyr., “Trans.
Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 487 (1890) ; ‘‘ Handbook,”’ etc., p. 440 (1895) ; Tutt, ‘* Brit.
Nat.,’’ ii., pp. 160, 226 (1892); ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 100 (1895); Fern., ‘‘ Pter. Nth.
Amer.,’’ p. 56; revised ed., p. 58 (1898); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 77
(1901) ; Dyar, ‘‘ List N. Amer. Lep.,’’ p. 447 (1902); Tutt, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,’’ xvii.,
p. 35 (1905). Pterodactylus, Fb., ‘‘Syst. Ent.,” p. 671 (1775); Wallgrn.,
‘*Skand. Fjaderm.,”’ p. 18 (1859); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘Cat.,’? 2nd ed., p. 343
(1871); Nolck., ‘‘ Lep. Fn. Estl.,’’ p. 808 (1871) ; Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett.
Deutsch.,”’ ili., pt. 2, p. 797 (1877); Porrt., ‘‘Ent.,” xv., p. 44 (1882); South,
‘« Hint.,” xv., p. 148, pl. iii., figs. 4a-4b (1882); Barrt., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii.,
p. 180 (1882); Sorhgn., ‘‘ Kleinschm. Brandbg.,’’ p. 6 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Young
Nat.,”’ x., p. 165 (1889); Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,” ix., p. 380, pl. 416, fig. 2
(1904). Fuscus, Retz., ‘‘Gen. et Spec.,’’ p. 35 (1783); Zell., ‘Isis,’ p. 841
(1841); Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Méth.,’’ p. 382 (1844); Tgstrm., ‘* Finl. Fjir.,’’ p. 155 (1847);
Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 371 (1852) ; H.-Sch., ‘‘Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p.375 (1855) ;
Sta., ‘‘ Man.,’’ ii., p. 442 (1859) ; Sahimids ee Berl. Ent. Zeits.,’’ viii., p. 66 (1864);
Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 123 (1869); Frey, ‘‘ Lep. Schweiz,’ p. 431 (1880);
Porritt, ‘‘ Buckler’s Larvee,” ix., p. 362 (1901). Fuscodactyla, de Vill., ‘‘ Linn.
Ent. Faun. Suec.,” 1i., p. 535 (1789); Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,” p. 476 (1811).
Fuscodactylus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. See p. 409 (1819) ; Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,”’
fo. 161 (1827); Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,’’ iv., p. 372 (1834) ; Wood, “Ind. Ent.,”’
Ist ed., p. 235, pl. li., fig. 1630 (1 839) ; ‘bey, ‘*Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’’ P 413 (1856).
Ptilodactyla, Hb., ‘Eur. Schmett.,’’ Aluc. ix., fig. 16 (1811-17), fig. 25 (cire. 1819);
‘*Verz.,” p. 430 (1825) ; Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,’’ ix., p. 244 (1833 E Stohs.. ‘*Tllus.
Haust.,’’ iv., app. p. 424 (1834); Evers., ‘* Faun. Volg.-Ural.,’’ p. 606 (1844).
Ptilodactylus, Dup, ‘Gist. Nat...” xi... p, 666;, pl 314, fig. 3 (18388); Zell.,
‘«Tsis,’’ p. 277 (1839). Fusea, Hofmn., ‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’> p. 82 (1895).

362 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

OricinaL pEscRIptiIoN.—P. Alucita pterodactyla, alis patentibus
fissis testaceis; puncto fusco. Habitat in nemoribus. Ale superiores
ferrugineo-testacezx, bifide, sed fissura, nisi flectantur, non apparente;
in medio punctum nigricans (Linné, Fauna Suecica, 2nd ed., p. 371).

Imaco.—22mm.-23mm. in expanse. Forewings of a rich ochreous-
brown colour, rather darker along the costal half, and paler along the
inner marginal half; the outer margin and borders of cleft finely
edged with whitish; the basal half of costa marked with white scales;
two small blackish spots at end of cleft, one (often ill-developed) diseal
spot; a sprinkling of black scales along the upper and lower edges of
the discal cell, and along the basal half of the cubital nervure; the
upper lobe with a few scattered black scales, and many white ones
towards the apex; the fringes of the upper lobe dark grey, whitish at
their bases, with a small dark brownish dot at anal angle; the fringes
of the lower lobe similar, but with two dark brownish dots towards the
apex. The hindwings glossy brown, slightly darker towards outer
margin and apex of plumules; cilia dark grey, brown at their bases.

Variation.—This species is not particularly variable, the main
feature, in this direction, being the tint of the ground colour, which
varies from dull greyish-ochreous to bright ochreous-brown. In size,
however, there is great difference, our British examples varying from
16-4mm.-25mm., the average being about 22mm. The smallest form
we would call ab. minor. The Linnean type appears to be an inter-
mediate colour-form ‘“ferrugineo-testacee’’; the paler greyish-ochreous
form we would call ab. pallida ; for the extreme red-brown form we
retain the name ab. fusca. Jordan describes (Hnt. Mo. Mag., vi., p. 124)
a very remarkable specimen sent to him from the Lake district by
Hodgkinson. It is noted as:

The size of a very large fuscus. Anterior wings cinnamon-brown, the outer
half rather more dusky than the inner portion which has an ochreous tinge, the
spot at the fissure replaced by a very narrow black streak beginning at the fissure
and extending more than half-way towards the base of the wing; below this is
another faint black streak along the fold; in the upper segment, parallel with the
fissure, near the apex of the wing, is another well-marked black streak; fringes
dusky-brown, almost unicolorous, though there is rather a fainter line marking the
border of the wing. At the extreme apex of the superior angle of the lower
segment is a minute black dot. Posterior wings dusky-brown, with fringes of the
same colour.

In the Frey collection there are two forms, one distinctly brown,
the other decidedly greyish, especially on the costal half of the wing.
The brown forms are from Géttingen and Zermatt, the grey form
from Zurich and Trafoi. There is, also, in this series, considerable
variation in the irroration along the nervures longitudinally, both
of the white and of the black scales. Hofmann says (Die deutsch.
Pteroph., p. 88): ‘“ The spot on the inner margin and the discoidal
spot, usually found in the Stenoptiliine imagines, are absent. The
fissural spots are small, as a rule, one lying directly over the other,
but moved somewhat from the fissure towards the base; in other
respects they are rather variable, being irregularly formed, sometimes
more streaklike, at others rounder, whilst sometimes they are dissolved
into a small heap of black scales. The lower spot is, as a rule, some-
what larger, and lies with its upper edge at the same height as the
costa of the lower lobe. The upper spot lies, in exceptional cases,
also a little nearer the base; this is also occasionally the case with

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 363

the lower spot; in one example from Hanover, there is only a very
slight trace of the upper spot to be seen, and no trace at all of the
lower one. The costal fringes of the upper lobe have a fine white
line. Kqually variable with the fissural spots are the typical spots in
the outer marginal fringes of the lower lobe. The dark spot at the
anal angle of the upper lobe is always distinct and constant, the spots
at the apex of the lower lobe, on the other hand, are variable ; occasion-
ally there are, instead of two, three present, or four (in one example
received from Staudinger as paludicola), or the two spots are lengthened,
nearly coalescing, so as to form a brown line round the apex of the
lower lobe, as described in ab. paludicola; in yet other cases, the spots
of the lower lobe are very pale and indistinct, or they are, in excep-
tional cases, quite absent (e.g., a specimen from Frankfort-on-Main).
It not rarely occurs that the dots in the fringe, as well as those
before the fissure, are different on the right and left wings; an
example in my collection, taken at Immenstadt, has a distinct brown
line in the fringe of the right lower lobe, but two distinct dots in
the left one. The same is the case in an example received by Dr.
Rebel, from Tegel, as S. paludicola, in which a distinct brown line
is present at the apex of the left lower lobe, whilst, in the right, this
line is divided by a rather broad whitish space into two large dots.”
‘Rebel notes the specimens from Sophia as being unusually large.
This species, like others already noted, extends into North America,
having been taken (teste Fernald) in the New York State. His descrip-
tion of the American form (Pter. Nth. Amer., p. 58) reads as follows:
Forewings reddish-brown; the entire costa, and the apex of the second lobe,
heavily sprinkled with dark brown scales; a dark brown reniform spot at base of

fissure; fringes ashy-brown, with a very pale line at their bases. Hindwings
fuscous, with ashy-brown fringes.

Zeller describes five forms of this species (Linn. E'nt., vi., p. 371), viz:

(1) Alis anterioribus fuscescenti-luteis, juxta costam obscurioribus, dorso late
gilvescente, puncto gemino fusco ad fissuram, cost totius linea externa angustis-
sima albida ; ciliis digiti tertii breviusculis (¢ ¢ ).

(2) Var. a.—In ciliis puncto uno ad angulum internum lacinie anterioris,
duobus ad apicem lacini posterioris nigris, distinctis; major.

(3) Var. b.—Ut a, sed litura longitudinali fusca obsoleta in lacinia anteriore.

(4) Var. c.—In ciliis puncto uno elongato duobusve ad angulum internum
laciniz anterioris, linea circa apicem lacinie posterioris fuscis obsoletis ; minor.

(5) Var. d.—-Ut b, sed strigula obsoleta canescente in lacinia anteriore.

Of these, vars. c and d are, by common consent, referred to the form (or
species) paludicola, Wallgrn. (see postea). Zeller himself writes (Linn.
Ent., vi., pp. 371 et seq.) that ‘‘it is probable that the vars. ¢ and d
(to which possibly also the var. g of Haworth belongs) are specifically
distinct from fuscus. The latter, including vars. a and 3, is of the size of
mictodactylus, and is, therefore, larger than serotinus and aridus, and easily
recognised by its fawn colour, and the white edge which surrounds the
outer half of the upper lobe. Specimens of a dull brown colour come
near the somewhat smaller stigmatodactyla, which always looks paler
and has narrower forewings and more slender lobes, whilst the upper
black spot at the cleft does not stand vertically over the lower, as in
fuscus, but at an angle inwards ; the discal spots also are sharper, and
the white margin, as a rule, surrounds the apex only, and does not
extend so far towards the base as in fuscus. P. mannii differs from
fuscus by the less pointed apex, the darker colour of the costal half of the

364 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

forewings, the blacker, more conspicuous, dots, and the brown-grey
hindwings. It differs from vars, c and d by its larger size, less dark
and dull ground-colour, by the edging of the costa extending further
towards the wing-base, by the marking of the fringes of the lobes, the
upper one having one sharply defined black spot at the imner angle,
and the lower one two such spots, one of which is at the apical point,
and the other below it, whilst in the var. in question, there is, on the
front lobe, a somewhat distinct brown spot, elongated towards the
apex, and which has not infrequently, behind the extension, a tiny
dot; the apex of the lower lobe is surrounded by a brown line, which
thickens somewhat at the points where vars. a and b have spots.
Finally, vars. a and b have not the light, greyish, transverse line so
frequent in the smaller vars. c and d, across the first lobe. ...- . The
var. b is not scarce, the black scattered scales forming the longitudinal
dash in the upper lobe, being more or less numerous and mixed with
white ones, so that the shade is sometimes very inconspicuous and
incomplete.’ Although treated by Staudinger and Rebel (Cat., 3rd ed.,
p. 77) as distinct species, both paludicola, Wallgrn., and mannii, Zeller,
are, by many competent authorities, considered to be only geographical
races of this species. For this reason we think it advisable to add here
the original descriptions of these two insects. These read as follows:

a. var. (an sp. dist.) paludicola, Wallgrn., ‘‘ Fjaderm.,’’ p. 18 (1859); Zell.,
‘““Stett. Ent. Zeit.,”’> p. 337 (1867); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘Schmett. Deutsch.,”’
p- 798 (1877); Hofm., ‘‘Deutsch. Pter.,’? p. 85 (1895); ‘‘Staud. and Reb.,
“Cat, 4 ord. ed-, p. 77 (1901). Fuseus,. Zell., “Isis,” vat ree parte,
p. 84 (1841); vars. c etd, Zell., ‘Linn. Ent.,” vi., p. 371 (1852).—Alis
anticis supra cinereo-fuscescentibus, juxta costam obscurioribus, dorso late gilves-
cente, puncto gemino fusco ad fissuram, coste totius linea externa angustissima
albida, puncto uno duobusye ciliarum ad angulum internum lacinie anterioris
lineaque circa apicem lacinie posterioris fuscis obsoletis. The forewings above
brownish-grey, darker towards the costa, the inner margin broadly yellowish, a double,
dark, brown spot at the end of the fissure, and a very narrow whitish line along
the whole costa ; one or two indistinct black spots at the base of the cilia of the
hinder angle of this lobe; the bases of the cilia of the lower lobe edged with
an indistinct blackish line at its apex. [P. fuscus, Zell., Isis, 1841, var.
c, ex parte; Linn. Ent., vi., 371, vars. c et d.] This species is to be found in
Scania (the southernmost part of Sweden), but is much more scarce than the
previous species, at the end of July and in the beginning of August, and haunts
only damp meadows and mosses. Its later time of appearance, different habitat,
and the difference in the coloration, as well as its smaller size, make us consider
it to be specifically different from the previous species, with which it has (with -
reservation) been united by Zeller. It is considerably smaller than the preceding
species, and the forewings are grey-brown, or more slaty-grey than pterodactyla,
which it otherwise resembles very much. It has often, like the latter, a light grey
transverse line across the upper lobe of the forewings, which, however, does not
reach the fringes of the front edge, and consists of scattered scales. There is also
often an indistinct brownish vertical streak. In the anal angle of the upper lobe
of the forewings, there are also to be found, in thecilia, one or two indistinct blackish
spots, but, on the lower lobe, there are no signs of spots, their place being taken by an
obscure brown line passing round the apex at the base of the cilia. As regards the
ground colour of the forewings, it resembles very much that of MW. serotinus
(bipunctidactyla), but is easily differentiated by the narrow white line on the
front edge (Wallengren).

Hofmann observes (Die deutsch. Pteroph., p. 85) that “8. paludi-
cola, Wallgrn., is a variety of S. fusca; Zeller has described it as fusca,
vars. c et d (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 871). This form, which appears to differ
solely in the somewhat darker coloration, and in the presence of an
indistinct brown line running round the apex of the lower lobe at the

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 365

base of the fringes, I cannot, on account of the variability of the mark-
ings above described, bring myself to recognise as a distinct species, as
clearly intermediate forms prove that the line in question arises solely
from the coalescence of the two spots typical to the genus. The var.
paludicola, according to Zeller, flies in Glogau from the end of July
to the beginning of September, in damp meadows, or on the borders
of swamps, not rare, and generally several together; Veronica chamae-
drys does not occur in these situations, but probably other species of
Veronica do grow there, such as V. serpyllifolia, V. arvensis, and V.
triphyllos.”’ The vars. c and d of Zeller, referred to by Hofmann, have
been already described (supra, p. 860), and Zeller himself considered
(Linn. Ent., vi., p. 871) that his vars. c and d were most probably not
specifically identical with pterodactyla (fuscus),and writes: ‘My vars. ¢
and d, which certainly go together, and of which d is the commoner,
are smaller, darker, and marked differently in the fringes from the type
form. This fringe-marking separates them very readily from the
paler sttgmatodactylus, which, in this particular, agrees exactly with
fuscus, the upper lobe of which has also a pure white edging, whilst the
black spots at the end of the cleft, have a different position from those
of the four fuscus vars. The vars. c and d frequently come close to
_serotinus in darkness, but the latter has the fringe-spots as in fuscus,
and no white or whitish costal edge appears, which is also the case
with aridus. P. loewit has a white costal edge, and has, as have these
doubtful vars. of fuscus, two spots at the inner angle of the first lobe,
but, in this species, these spots are sharp, and deep black, like those at
the apex of the lower lobe ;_ besides, loewti is smaller, more delicate,
almost grey with longer lobes. . . . The var. d has, crossing the upper
lobe, an indistinct light grey, transverse line, consisting of scattered
scales, which does not reach the costal fringes, and frequently more
distinct to the naked eye than when observed through a lens. In some
examples, one wing may have this transverse line faintly expressed,
whilst, on the other wing, it is quite absent. The vars. c and d fly near
Glogau, from the end of July till the beginning of September, and are
to be found in damp meadows, or in swampy places, which have
previously been inundated, and are generally abundant where they
occur at all. The larve cannot feed on the same species of Veronica
as vars. a as, b, as, in several places where I found them abundantly,
no other species but V. serpyllifolia, \. arvensis, and the early |.
triphyllos was to be found.” A @, with a hardly indicated transverse
line across the upper lobe, was received from Mann, who had taken
it in Dalmatia. Crombrugghe de Picquendaele observes the occurrence
of this form in the Ixelles district of Belgium, at Uccle and Groen-
endael, in July, each year, with typical pterodactyla. Other localities
noticed are: Baden—Constance (Reutti), Berlin (Stern), Jungfernhaide
(September 3rd), Finkenkrug (Sorhagen).

. var. (an spec. dist.) mannii, Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 375 (1852);
Heh.-Schaff., ‘‘Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 375 (1855); fig. 21 (1853); Staud.,
‘¢ Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross.,’’ xv., p. 428 (1880); Staud. and Reb., ‘* Cat.,”’ 3rd ed.,
p. 77 (1901). — Alis omnibus ochraceo-lateritiis, anteriorum costa angustissime
albo-marginata, laciniis acuminatis, punctis duobus minutis fusecis ad fissuram ;:
ciliis digiti tertii breviusculis (¢). Readily distinguished from /fuseus var. a, to
which it comes nearest as far as colouring is concerned, by the pale light-red colour
of all the wings, the more elongated upper lobe, the smallness of the black dots,
which are separated widely at the fissure, the entire absence of dots in the outer

366 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

margin of the lobe. Described from a single ¢. Head and thorax reddish-grey;

the antenne, at the basal half, white, ringed sharply with brown, then unicolorous
reddish-grey ; on the upper ocellar edge is a white line, which expands and con-.
tinues to the end of the frontal protuberance; the palpi deep rusty-brown, above,

and narrowly white, below. The abdomen light ochreous-yellow; the first two
segments above white, owing to the two wide longitudinal stripes almost uniting ; the
remaining segments have, in the centre, a broad, and on either side a very narrow,

yellowish-white, nearly obsolete, longitudinal line; at the posterior edge of the five
hindmost segments, the central line has, on either side, a black dot; the venter is
marked similarly, only the central line is whiter, and the lateral lines on either side
of the abdomen interrupted. The anal flap yellowish-white. The legs dark
ochre-yellow, almost rust-coloured, the hind femur and the first two tibial joints

externally light ochre-yellow ; the spurs smaller and more delicate than in fuscus,

brownish, but white on sides. The forewings almost 54’’’ long, reddish-ochreous

in colour; towards the costa gradually becoming darker, striated weakly with white

and brown scales, the brown costal line extending from the base to the beginning

of the upper lobe ; the brown discal spot is entirely absent; just before the cleft is
a small black-brown dot, not sharply defined, whilst, considerably above it, but

somewhat outside, is another, still less distinct, of similar colour. The costa, from

the end of its first third to the commencement of the last fourth of the upper lobe,

is edged by a fine whitish line, which has its greatest width at the upper lobe.

The lobes are more sharply pointed than in fuscus, with a very blunt inner angle,

and only marked in the centre with a faint, fine, whitish, longitudinal shade.

Fringes reddish-grey at the outer edges of the lobes, with whitish basal line, almost

without any indication of the spots which are found in fuscus; a careful examina-

tion shows that, at these positions, the fringes are of the same tint as the ground

colour of the wing. Hindwings of the colour of the forewings. The fringes greyer,

with fine pale reddish basal line; the 1st and 2nd plumules more pointed than in

fuscus, and the 2nd is almost without an inner angle. The underside is reddish-

brown ; the costal edge of the front wings, from the base up to half of the upper

lobe, with a sharp yellowish line; the apical half of the 1st plumule, and the entire

3rd plumule, are dusted with pale yellow. Habitat near Brussa, in Asia Minor.

Flies in July. Taken by Mann (Zeller).

Zeller describes this as a distinct species, and Rebel (Cat., 8rd ed.,
p. 77) also treats it as such. Staudinger, however, says (Hor. Soc.
Eint. Ross., xv., p. 428) that he caught “two examples on June 24th,
at Amasia, and on July 18th, at Ak Dagh, which appear to belong to
Zeller’s insect, and which may be only a southern form of pterodactyla,
Linn. (/uscus, Retz.). One example has only one black spot at the
end of the cleft, the second has none at all. According to Zeller, there
should be two small black spots, widely separated. These vary, how-
ever, and others also, as shown by an examination of ten specimens of
mannii from the Balkans, Greece, Brussa, south Caucasus, and north
Persia. Zeller described the species from one male example only,
taken at Brussa, where Mann captured some in June, in the mountain
meadows. We have seen none of Mann’s or Zeller’s original examples.

Hieciayine.—The eggs of this species, appear to be laid almost
without exception on the underside of the leaves of the foodplant, with
the colour of which they harmonise very strikingly. Eggs of Stenop-
tilia pterodactyla, laid on June 28rd, 1904, on the underside of the
leaves of Veronica chamaedrys, are of a yellowish-green tint, not quite
that of the leaf (Chapman).

Ovum.—The form of the egg is very similar to that of the Agdistids,
more so than that of any other plume examined. The micropylar
end is very flattened, but is not so squared at the angles as is the
Agdistid egg, nor is there any special sculpture of its margin, which is
rounded and not definitely marked off, as the beading marks off that of
Adactylus. The length of the egg is 0-49mm. Seen from above, the
micropylar end is a transverse line, 0:16mm. long, the egg widens out

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 367

towards the other end to 0°:°25mm., and terminates in an oval or
circular end. Seen laterally, the flat micropylar endis highest, 0°21mm.,
and, towards the nadir, the egg is only 0:15mm.; the nadir seen in
this view is a good deal flattened, unlike the round margin as seen
from above. The sculpturing on the micropylar end shows cells
arranged rosette fashion, in several rows, to a width of nearly half the
diameter of the end. The rest of the ege has longitudinal ribs, rather
faint, and difficult to make out and count, rather waved and irregular,
but fairly parallel to each other, eight or ten visible in a top view of
the egg. It is also possible, in some illuminations, to glimpse
transverse ribs, dividing the furrows between the primary ribs, much
as those of an ordinary upright egg, are divided; there are about ten of
these to half the length of the egg; more cannot be seen at one view
(Chapman, June 23rd, 1904). By June 27th the eggs were showing
dark eye-spots through the eggshell (Chapman).

Hasits oF LARvA.—Some larve that left the egg on June 27th,
1904, were put on the tops of a sprig of Veronica chamaedrys; an hour
afterwards no trace of them could be found, nor any indication of what
had become of them (the piece of plant being in a closed tube, escape was
impossible).* Next day, tearing open a piece of one of the above-
mentioned tops, two tiny larve were found in the interior of the stem,
thus solving the mystery; other larve hatched this day, and were put
at once on a covered plant; the larve mace straight for the axils, and
soon disappeared. The young larva, therefore, as soon as hatched,
seeks out the axil of a young leaf, and mines into the pith of the
leading shoot; each had entered a stem near the top and burrowed
down the pith. Later examination exposed, in one or two cases, a trace
of frass, which showed that entry had been made at an axil less than
4in. (probably much less, if the shoot grew at all after entry was made),
from the end of the shoot. In other cases, it was not clear, but, in all,
the shoot had been mined downwards for a greater or less distance, in
one case past two nodes and for a distance of about 14ins., but in some
instances decidedly less, as the larva was less than this, in one or two
barely 4in., from the end of the shoot. This appears to depend largely
on the vigour and size of the shoot. Im all cases the end of the shoot
was dead down to just beyond the larva. This was always in a living
stem, once tin. from the dead portion, but usually quite close to it.
Though fat in their present instar, they seem to be still eating. The
larva feeds in the pith until fullfed in its 2nd stadium, at which time
it is about 2mm. in length, and finds ample accommodation in the pith
of a slender stem of speedwell. Here it makes a neat little cavity,
shuts off the terminal end with one or more screens of silk, and enters
on its hybernation period whilst we are still in the midst of summer.
A search in the open, on August 27th, 1904, showed that the
hybernating larvee are easily found in hedge-bottoms, existing in their
habitats, the dead ends of the branches of Veronica being conspicuous ;
a few were collected, and some of them were found to have a definite

* The larvee commence life as complete miners in the stems of Veronica,
starting in a terminal shoot, and travelling downwards. I noticed, a few days since,
that the upper 4in. or lin. of the Veronica stems was withering, though I did not
connect this with the hatching of the ova at the time; I can now detect the
extrusion of a minute amount of frass, with a strong hand-lens (Bacot, July 11th,

1904).

368 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

hybernating cocoon, consisting of the end of the burrow in the living
stem, with one or more, generally two or three, diaphragms of silk
cutting it off from the rest of the burrow containing frass, and, no
doubt, acting as a protection against animal or vegetable parasites
using the frass-filled burrow as an approach to the dormant larva ;
several of these larvee were placed in the split ends of branches of
erowing plants, and appeared to make their way into them. On
January 25th, 1905, a plant was examined, and a larva found much as
in August last ; it was in a cavity in the stem, 2ins. from the end, and
with a little protective spinning (Chapman). Bacot notes that, in
April, the stems of a plant, in which larve had wintered, began to
wither, although previously they had been flourishing, suggesting that
the larvee may do some boring in the spring. About this time, however,
the larve leave the stems and feed externally, the approximate date
not yet determined, and by mid-April may be found lying on the
extending bloom-spike, or almost hidden among the flower-buds, and,
when resting on the spike, which is usually a little yellowish, are
rather difficult to see, so well does their colour respond to that of their
resting-place. Ovenden notes (May !7th, 1904) that “the larve are
best found on warm mornings, before the flowers are fully out, looking
exactly like a peculiar bud, when, with only the hind segments show-
ing, they have pushed their heads into one of the buds to eat out the
heart of it; when not too badly bitten, the flowers subsequently
expand, and the remains of the corolla are to be observed adhering to
the calyx. When the flowers are fully expanded, the larve are more
difficult to find, and are then often found on the underside of the
leaves, where their resemblance to the midrib of the leaf makes their
discovery very difficult.”” On the afternoon of May 28rd, 1904, just
outside Folkestone, small larvee of this species were not at all un-
common, generally resting within one of the two upper leaves that
expand directly below the flower-spike. They were not very difficult to
find, although the larval hairs, and those of the plant, especially on
the edge of the calyx, are very similar, and help in their protective
resemblance to their surroundings. Their small size was very
remarkable, as some, taken some three or four weeks before at Strood,
were spun up for pupation at the time. Bankes observes that, on
May 7th-9th, 1904, at Corfe Castle, he found young larve living in
slightly spun-up shoots of Veronica chamaedrys, eating out the tender
heart of the shoot. Some (2°5mm. in length) were preparing to moult,
(an operation which two had already completed). They were sent to
Bacot, who reports that, “‘ by the 10th, the others were preparing to
moult, each resting along a young leaf of the shoot, and casting off, at
this change, the generalised appearance that it has hitherto possessed,
and which makes it look rather unlike a typical plume larva in
its earliest stages.” For moulting, the larve spin together a few
leaves or flowers, making a sort of cocoon in which the change takes
place. Ovenden further notes that ‘“larve varied very much in
size at Cuxton, on May 4th, 1904, none, however, being at all
well-grown, but, on May 26th, 1904, at Higham, larve were very
abundant, feeding on the speedwell that covered a bank, and now
in full bloom, most of the larve evidently quite fullfed, and resting,
exposed to the full glare of the sun.”’ Sich writes: ‘I received some
larvee from Mr. Ovenden, May 11th, 1904. The first spun up May

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 369

30th, and was a pupa May 28rd; a second spun up May 23rd, and a
third spun up May 24th, a fourth May 29th, and two more May #Oth.
The larve attach themselves to the stalk of the foodplant for pupa-
tion, and the 9th and 10th segments turn brown and have a shrivelled
appearance. The larva of S. pterodactyla is of a much more lithe and
pliant nature than many other Alucitid larvee, such as those of Porrittia
galactodactyla and Ovendenia septodactyla for example. These latter
seem rather stiff and prefer to keep their bodies all in the same plane,
but that of S. pterodactyla will twist round a spike of its foodplant, so
that half its body may be parallel with the stalk and the other half
bent round at right angles toit. It is very fond of eating the large
blue petals of the Veronica chamaedrys, but will also eat the young seed-
vessels and young leaves. When this larva is placed against a white
or other definite back-ground, it is sufficiently conspicuous, but, when
seen among its foodplant, there is a certain indefiniteness about it.
The outline is much softened and broken by the larval hairs, and also
by the hairs growing from the surface of the racemes of the speedwell,
on which it usually rests; besides this, the pale hairs and markings of
the larva seem to allow the eye to see, and the sight to pass beyond, the
larva without the brain perceiving what it is.’’ Larve can be obtained
from mid-April until the commencement or middle of June, in most
seasons. Fletcher found fullfed larve June 13th, 1881, at Worthing, and
imagines flying at the same time. Larve from May 4th-27th, 1904,
at Cuxton (Ovenden) ; as late as June 14th-16th, 1904, in Thorndon
Park (Whittle). Hofmann observes that the larve live in May,
exposed on Veronica chamaedrys, eating the flower-buds, unripe seeds,
and also the leaves. Schmid says that he finds the larvee, varying in
size, from the end of May, feeding openly on flower-buds and unripe
seeds of Veronica chamaedrys, at Frankfort-on-Main.

Larva.—Virst instar (newly-hatched): Pale greyish-white in
appearance, really white with black dots. Head black, a dark
prothoracic scutellum; the larva is just 1mm. in length, and has
single hairs on each tubercle; its width is about 0:16mm., and the
length of the hairs about 0°05mm. ‘Tubercles i and 1i are situated
widely apart; the hair on i is directed forwards, that on 11 backwards,
on i rather forwards, those on iv and v outwards and a little
divergently, the front one, v, higher and shorter than the hind one, iv;
that on vi is long, touching the surface on which the larva walks.
The hairs on the prothoracic plate are the usual ones. The prolegs
and claspers have four hooks, and the former possess long pedicels.
The true legs have very long claws, and no observable battledore palpi
(Chapman. June 80th, 1904). First instar (fullfed): Long, slender,
of rather even thickness, but tapering off slightly at head and anus;
segmental incisions very marked. Head rounded, almost black, the
prothoracic shield (scutellum) and anal plates dark brown, not black ;
skin-surface apparently quite smooth; spiracles raised, but not very
highly, of brown colour; hairs as in larva of Capperia heterodactyla,
smooth and tapering, not thorned, and of dark colour, basal plates large.
Tubercles on the abdominal segments are, i and ii, set trapezoidally with
their bases well separated, iii as usual; iv and v also normal, forming
twin spots. On the meso- and metathorax, i and ii are close together, not
so widely separated as on abdominal segments; i, the inner and smaller,
slightly in front, ii, the larger and outer; iii and iv are close together as

370 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

usual, ili, in front and the larger; vy, a large single seta below them, and
vil, a twin-haired plate. I cannot trace any spicular growth (Bacot.
July 11th, 1904). Second instar (before hybernation) : In length the
larva is nearly 2mm.,stout, and, magnified, has a very great resemblance
to the fullfed larva of Platyptilia gonodactyla in form, and especially
in colour and marking, having a pink dorsal line, and asubdorsal extend-
ing downwards to the supraspiracular network of pink, in a definite
pattern. The tubercles have each one hair (about + the diameter of the
larva in length), viz., on i, 11, 11, iv, v, vi (half-way from iv to prolegs,
and rather to the back of the segment): three hairs at the base of the
prolegs (? vu) placed triangularly, not in a row. The head is black,
and the prothoracic and anal plates are very dark. The red marks
are hardly present on the thorax, but are bright on all the abdominal
segments (August 27th, 1904). Third instar: 3mm. long (feeding
externally on stamens and petals of flowers); tubercles i and 1i well
separated ; 1 carries one long, white, slightly-clubbed, hair, and two
short, black, clubbed secondaries on its inner side; outside is another
secondary hair, sometimes black, sometimes white, and another
longer one, the origin of which gives the idea of its being rather a
subsidiary tubercle than an appendage to i; ii is constructed
similarly, so as also to look like two conjoined tubercles; it has a
second white hair outside and behind the first, and two black hairs on
the inner margin, sometimes also a third. There are similar black
secondary hairs arising from the skin-surface by the dorsal line, three
in the middle lne, and two, paired, behind; there are also white
secondary hairs, like the black, except in colour, two or three on
either side in front of 1. The disposition of these secondary hairs
differs much on different segments, and on opposite sides of the same
segment. [I am examining this larva as it lies with its head buried in a
flower-bud of V’. chamaedrys, and observe that the margin of the calyx has
a row of hairs which are identical, even to minute details, with the primary
hairs of the larva ; their length is identical, they are a little thick and
colourless, but this gives them exactly the same value as the more
slender white hairs of the larva; they are somewhat knobbed, or
clubbed, at the extremity, and they spring from a raised, coloured,
disc, which is very like the tubercular base of the larval hairs.]
Tubercle iii is a large boss with one long white hair, two black
secondaries behind, and often another above, in front, or with the
other two. Directly behind the spiracle, on the 2nd subsegment, is a
small tubercle with one long white hair (shorter than those on i, il,
and iii), and one or two black hairs; iv + v, directly below the
spiracle, have two long primary hairs, the front one rather higher, two
or three secondary ones above and behind; this is on the flange; some
way below is a tubercle (vi) with one solitary long hair (no
secondaries), and then the three hairs (vii) at base of prolegs. The
spiracular region is without secondary hairs, but several occur below iv
+ y, and others near supplementary tubercle which is towards the
posterior margin of the surface. The general surface is covered by fine
black-tipped skin-points. There is a curious bare pit between i and iil.
The colour is the result of colourless skin over most of the surface,
the black skin-points, and a brown colour below i and ii down the
dorsum. Head black; prothoracic plate nearly black (Chapman).
Third instar (fullfed): Length 4mm., width hardly lmm.; rather

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. OTL

long and slender ; greatest girth at 4th abdominal segment; it tapers
gently from this towards the rather small head and towards the
pointed anus; segments somewhat swollen; well-marked segmental
incisions. Head rounded, polished, of a black hue, with a few whitish
hairs; the prothoracic shield and anal plate are of chitinous
appearance, dark smoky-green, the former with the two depressed
dark-coloured spots as in the later stages. In addition to the two
large subsegments that are present in the next instar, there
is a small, poorly-marked, central subsegment situated centrally
between the anterior and _ posterior dorsal tubercles, while, on
the meso- and metathorax there is, in addition, a very distinctly
marked, but small, subsegment in front of the three poorly-marked
ones, which make up the bulk of the segments. The skin is pale
(whitish or yellowish), glistening in appearance, with a well-marked,
and relatively coarse, coat of brown spicules. The prolegs are tall and
slender; the true legs dark smoke-coloured, and the anal claspers show
some tendency to extend backward as in the older larve, and are
chitinous in appearance. The colour is white with a yellow medio-
dorsal band; also a very broad and much broken subdorsal one,
extending downwards, as detached streaks and blotches, as far as the
spiracular level; below this, the white extends as far as the ventral
area, which itself is of a dull, and less vivid, white. The spiracles are
large and conspicuous, of a pale brown colour, but not much raised for
a plume larva; as usual the prothoracic and 8th abdominal spiracles
are larger than the others. The tubercles are cone-shaped buttons, each
bearing one, long, pale, white hair, tapering, but at the same time
slightly knobbed at the tip, and minutely thorned. There are, in
addition, a few short, dark-coloured (black or dark brown), knobbed
bristles, apparently correlated with the primary hairs, but not always
in close proximity. On the meso- and metathorax the dorsal tubercles
i and 11 are in close proximity, but their bases do not touch; they are
set somewhat obliquely, i inner, 1i outer; iii and iv are situated close
together, their bases almost, or quite, touching; below these, rather
posteriorly, there is a weak ‘subprimary hair, and, in front of this, a
“strong v, and near it the usual subprimary vi; vii has two hairs.
On the abdominal segments, 1 and ii are set trapezoidally and are well-
separated, 111 1s close above the spiracle, while iv and v, with bases
clearly separated but close together, are in the usual position beneath

; below these is vi, bearing a single hair, and a double- or treble-
haired marginal vii just above the prolegs, on the segments bearing
prolegs, three-haired, but on the other abdominals only two-haired.
The black bristles above referred to are—one on either side of i, and
one on either side of ii, making four dorsal rows; occasionally these
are either missing, or very pale-coloured and inconspicuous; usually
this happens to the row nearest the middle line; there is a similar
secondary hair situated immediately behind ui, and another posterior
to the spiracle (occupying about the position of the secondary wart in
the larva of Porrittia galactodactyla, etc.). On the 5th abdominal, but
on the right side only, there is, in this particular larva, an additional
bristle (of only about half the normal length, however) between the
postspiracular and the one beneath 11. A well-marked lateral flange is
present (Bacot, May 4th, 1904). ? Fourth instar: Complete change from
generalised to specialised conditions; 4mm.-5mm. in length, compara-

372 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

tively slender and of even thickness, with a large head. The segments,
though well-marked, are not accentuated; of blunt-ended appearance,
with little or no tapering exhibited; anal claspers large, and curiously
stretched out posteriorly (after the manner of Liparid larve). There
is a well-marked, chitinous, prothoracic shield; spiracles not raised, and
rather large, with black rim and white centre. Hach segment is,
apparently, roughly subdivided into two large sections; this is, perhaps,
partly, if not entirely, due to the tubercles i and ii being somewhat
raised, and only narrowly separated, which gives the appearance of a
dorsal subdivision. Colour dull yellowish, with dark median stripe.
Head : Pale yellowish, slightly mottled at sides with brown, two large
brown blotches round ocelli, and two dark triangles near crown of the
same colour. Body: There is a deep brownish depression, or shallow
pit, on either side of the scutellar plate, in line above the spiracles,*
and a few dark (black) spots across the middle line of scutellum. The
long hairs are tapering and very finely thorned ; on the dorsal area they
have an oxhorn-like curve, that is, curve outwards laterally, and
then turn in again towards the middle line at the tips. They are blunt-
ended, or very slightly knobbed, and have opaque white tips like those of
the larva of Capperia heterodactyla. The larva has, also, short, scattered,
body-hairs; these appear slightly knobbed at the tips, and are, for the most
part, white, though a few are black. The tubercles are not developed
into definite warts ; but round the primary sete there are raised skin-
areas, and some of the previously mentioned, scattered, secondary hairs
approximate to, or are accidentally near, them in position; a fine
spicular growth covers the skin, except on these raised areas surround-
ing the primary sete ; the raised skin-areas are, therefore, shiny, which
gives them a chitinous wart-like appearance that is not altogether
warranted. ‘T'ubercles: On the meso- and metathorax, i and ii are
combined in a single group, on the anterior of the two subsegments;
there is also a large secondary seta on the posterior subdivision. On
the abdominal segments, i and 11 are separate, both raised and wart-
like, bearing two or three large, and several smaller, hairs; ili is a
large, somewhat wart-like, tubercle, and the secondary postspiracular
group of hairs forms a wart; this is present on the meso- and meta-
thorax, but it is by no means certain that the group on these segments
is homologous with the group in the same position on the abdominal
segments. There is a somewhat marked flange beneath the spiracles,
and, on this, beneath the spiracle, are situated iv + v, forming a single
wart; posterior to it, also on the flange, is another small group of
hairs. The black, secondary, scattered hairs appear curiously irregular
in position; on some segments they occur on the middle line, while,
on other segments, the hairs in this position are white; one gets the
idea that these secondary hairs are alike, but, by some accident, some
become black; possibly, however, a careful comparison would show a
regularity in this apparent disorder. A large, chitinous, anal plate is
present, and bears three longitudinal rows of spots (Bacot, May Ist,
1904). Length, four larve are 4mm.-5mm. ; thickness less than 1mm. ;
two others are rather larger, but in same skin, laid up for moult; these
two looked fatter and balder than either of those that are smaller but

* This is probably a good generic or tribal character, as the depression can be
found on all the allied larvee (Bacot).

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 373

in same skin, or than larger ones in next stadium (vide infra), due to the
stretching of the skin and consequent dispersion of hairs. [These larve
were mostly on flower-spikes, but had just left finishing the terminal
buds of the shoot. For moulting, they make a little cocoon amongst
the leaves and buds at the top of shoot. The smaller larve were dull
dusky-green, with a slightly darker dorsal line and black spiracles.
Dorsal tubercles two (or three), white-haired; secondary hairs few,
inconspicuous, black above, below the flange white; tubercle iii
with black hairs (?).| (Chapman, May 18th, 1904). Penultimate
instar: 6mm.-8mm. in length, and show but very little alteration
in appearance from that of the last instar; the spiracles are a
little more raised in this individual, and the hairs appear less
numerous, at any rate they are less conspicuous. The colour is
brighter, more of an orange-yellow, while the median band
appears to owe its existence to the large central blood-vessel that lies
just beneath the surface. Most of the warts bear one large and one
medium-sized hair, and from two to four small ones. The skin has
the appearance of being shagreened, due to the development of the
spicular coat. The same apparent want of symmetry is present, as
regards the situation of the scattered black secondary hairs; in this
skin these can be definitely seen to be trumpet-topped (Bacot, May 4th,
1904). 8mm.-9mm. long, 1:6mm. thick ; numerous hairs, or warts ;
secondary hairs much more numerous, ‘with many white ones (as
well as black dorsally). Colours much the same, but the dark green
is a marked dorsal line, and a broad band from below up to nearly u.
This band contains, on each segment, three paler patches. Between
this band and dorsal line is a band of about the same width, much
paler, whitish-ereen, which includesi and ii; below the lateral dark band
the colour is again pale whitish-green. Primary hairs white; spicules,
and some secondary hairs, black, but most of these latter white. Prolegs
appear as long props. Seen at a proper distance, the lateral dark band
has a chain-like aspect, owing to the white patches in it (Chapman, May
18th, 1904). Final instar (young) : About 10mm. long, 1:6min. wide,
tapering to anus, blunter at head; more slender than the larve of
many of the exposed feeders, which, again, are more so than those of
the Platyptilias. Colour of body pale yellowish-green, with darker
ereen dorsal line, and lateral band between dorsal (i “and il) and supra-
spiracular (i11) tubercles; it is darker again below flange, which gives
the impression that the flange, and above e, is paler from the skin being
denser, and that below it is delicate, and shows green contents. The
tubercles are disposed as described in small larva, but have now a larger
number of hairs, and, though one may be selected as being the primary
hair, on i, two others come rather near it, on 11 two others are nearly
identical, as also on 111; the postspiracular has two approaching the
primary; iv-+v have two primary hairs without strong competitors, vi
also is still alone as a primary, but has five or six secondaries round it.
Secondary bairs are abundant, scattered over the whole surface, and
also on the tubercles; nearly all of them are now white, there are,
however, a few black dorsally, and two or three on most tubercles
(Chapman). Jinal instar (full-grown): The larva has a very trans-
parent skin, and, consequently, presents two very different aspects,
according to whether it is feeding or whether it is laid up for pupation,
the feeding larva having the colour much dominated by the dark green

374 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

contents of the alimentary canal. [Probably the feeding larva would
vary in colour if the larve could be got to feed exclusively on petals or
seeds, instead of leaves. The young larva eats the buds; in inter-
mediate stages it rests largely on the flower-spikes, and eats the
flower-buds ; the older larve prefer the leaves, or, at least, do not
confine themselves to the flower-spikes.] Length now about 14mm.,
thickest about the 4th and 5th abdominal segments, thence tapering
to each end, fairly cylindrical, with long slender pedicels to prolegs.
When young, in last skin, certain paler skin-markings and black
secondary hairs give the larva a muddled, dirty, look. The general
surface is clothed with minute black skin-points, except on certain
paler (white ?) marks, where they are colourless. These white marks
have the look of depending on some white substances beneath the skin.
They form, especially, a line below i and ii, and a lateral (subspiracular)
line. There are also other islets between; these must be fat-bodies, as
they do not appear before the larva has grown a little in this skin, and,
before they appear, the skin-points have not become black. Tubercles
i and each carry one long white hair, and a good many secondary ones,
black and white; one of these black ones on each, but especially on ii, is so
long and spiculated, that doubt arises whether it, or the white (smooth)
one, is the primary bristle; the secondary hairs on iilare 7 black and
2 white. There is a postspiracular tubercle carrying 5 black and 2
white hairs, all of which look secondary. Tubercles iv + v carry 2
long hairs (upper in front), and 4 black and 4 white secondary hairs.
There is a small tubercle with several short hairs a little below this
at the postspiracular margin of segment. Below the flange is a tubercle
with 1 long hair and several short secondaries, a double one (with
secondaries) lower down. The secondary hairs scattered over the
surface are generally white—a good many, however, black dorsally ;
between the two white lines there are about 30 to 35, the neighbour-
hood of the spiracles is clear of them (Chapman). Length 10mm.-
12mm., width 2mm. Lateral view: Head very small, yellowish-
green, mottled with deep brown; three pairs of elongate marks
down the suture, a curved mark with a straight one below it on
the lobes above the ocelli, which are situated in a deep brown patch ;
mouthparts brown. Head retractile within prothorax. Prothorax
small, mesothorax much larger, metathorax slightly larger than meso-
thorax. The 2nd abdominal segment is the largest, and the body
tapers off from this segment to the 10th abdominal. The legs are
small, and the claspers long and slender. The pale subdorsal line and
pale lateral flange are very noticeable. Segmental divisions very well
marked. [When the larva is at rest, it certainly reminds the observer
of an Attacid larva. The small head is held down close to the legs,
and partly buried in the prothorax, which is, in its turn, much
overshadowed by the mesothorax. The warts, with their fascicles of
black or white hairs, also tend to heighten the resemblance to an Attacid
larva.| Dorsal view: Head hidden by the prothorax, which is nearly
itself hidden by the mesothorax. The mesothorax is larger, and,
though the body increases slightly in width to the 2nd abdominal
segment, and from there tapers to the 10th abdominal segment, yet
the difference in the width is so small, that the body appears almost the
same width from the mesothorax to the 6th abdominal segment. The
dark mediodorsal line and the pale subdorsal lines are conspicuous,
as well as the black dorsal hairs, and the long pale lateral hairs (Sich,

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 375

May 21st, 1905). Quiescent staye preceding pupation: When laid up
for pupation, the larva is shorter and more slender, and gets
enlarged thoracically; its length is only about 1lmm. These changes
are usual in larvee preparing to pupate. The special change here is one
of colour, due not to a change of the skin itself, but, apparently, merely
to the emptying of the prienae irae. The result is a tolerably uniform
and paler green, with nearly white subdorsal and lateral lines; these
also are straighter, and of more uniform width than before. The black
skin-points, and black secondary hairs, seem to have less effect in
modifying the colour. There are pale patches between the two lines,
but these are less visible than before. The white lines are sometimes
nearly so, but really always have a creamy tint, and may be, especially
the lateral one, quite yellow (Chapman). ‘The larva is described by
Schmid (Berl. Ent. Zeit., viil., p. 66), by Porritt (Hnt., xv., p. 44),
by South (Hnt., xv., p. 148), and Buckler (Larvae, etc., ix., p. 362).

VARIATION OF LARVA.—Chapman observes (supra) that the larva
presents two very distinct aspects, according to whether the larva
is feeding or laid up for pupation, dark green dominating the former,
owing to the contents of the alimentary canal showing through the
transparent skin. Porritt says that there are two distinct varieties
among the fullfed larve :
| (1) The ground-colour bright grass-green, with dark green dorsal stripe.

(2) The ground-colour bright yellow-green, the dorsal stripe dark green or
dark brown.

Pupation.—The fullfed larva usually selects in nature a part of the
foodplant for pupation, whilst, in confinement, it often comes off, and
pupates on the side of the receptacle in which it is confined. It
spins a silken web on which it takes up its stand; one was observed
settling down thus on May 20th, 1904 ; next day the thorax was rather
swollen, the body contracted; on the 22nd the thoracic area was more
swollen, the head drawn in a little ventrally, and the larval colour very
uniform; on the 23rd there was no apparent change, nor was there on
the morning of the 24th, when, at about noon, another larva touched
it, and it threw up its head and oscillated violently. Between 2 p.m. and
6 p.m. the larva changed to a pupa; the change was not observed. At
6 p.m. the newly-formed pupa was described (see infra). A second larva
fixed itself in position on the 21st, a day later than the one already
described; this changed to a pupa in the afternoon of the 25th, and
was as yellow as the one that changed the preceding day; a third larva
that fixed itself on a stalk of the foodplant on the 22nd pupated on
the 27th ; a fourth larva that had been wandering for 4 or 5 days, and
disturbing the others laid up for pupation, finally came to rest on the
evening of the 25th, and pupated on the 27th on the bottom of the box,
without attachment; although so active, it had, during the 28rd and
24th, quite the appearance (swollen thoracic segments, ete.) of a larva
in the quiescent stage preceding pupation. Porritt says that the pupa
is attached by the tail only, and is capable of considerable movement ;
on being disturbed, it turns up sharply the thoracic and upper
abdominal segments. Bankes notes a pupa that was suspended by
the anal extremity from the glass lid of the cage by means of a silken
pad spun upon the glass. Schmid observes that the pupal stage lasts
fourteen days.

CoLOUR CHANGES DURING PUPAL DEVELOPMENT.— Newly twmed: Of

376 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

a most delicate yellow-green colour, the tips of the limbs and the anal
segment being somewhat transparent yellow; no dark markings any-
where on the pupa except a tiny black point within the eye-collar ; two
slender, whitish, subdorsal lines on either side of a fine mediodorsal
line, rather darker than the ground-colour, and a somewhat similar
prominent subspiracular line slightly raised, representing the larval
subspiracular flange; the shiny spiracles very conspicuous, also
the distinct transverse wrinkling; the abdominal segmental incisions
of a bright yellow colour (Tutt, May 20th, 1904). Colour changes
on maturation (June 4th, 1904): By June 4th the oldest pupa
had undergone considerable change. It was now much paler in
tint. The eyes were quite dark, of a greyish-black tint, the legs, etc.,
whitish; the thorax also was paler, and the green of the abdomen
rather duller in tint. The double dorsal ridge (containing the medio-
dorsal depression) was also pale in tint, and the character of the ridges on
the thoracic segments, uniting almost on the summit of the mesothorax,
widening again from henceas they pass back over theabdominalsegments,
gave an unmistakable suggestion of the same character (still more
marked, however, than in this species) in Gillmeria ochrodactyla and G.
pallidactyla. Hinal appearances: June 8th, the wings turning
brown. June 10th, the wings and appendages quite dark; the tiny
slip of hindwing, lying along inner margin of forewing, almost black ;
the thoracic segments also brown, the mesothorax rather browner than
the pro- and metathorax. (Imago emerged in the early morning,
before 8 a.m., of June 12th.) Another pupa, on June 12th, showed
the wings dark; the narrow slip of hindwings blackish ; the apex of
mesothorax dark; the rest of the thorax and abdomen pale brown,
except the movable abdominal incisions which appeared greenish
(Imago emerged from this pupa on June 138th.) (Tutt).
Pupa.—Lenegth of pupa 10°5mm., width at thorax 2mm., at 4th
abdominal, 1-6mm. Form and structure almost identical with that of
Adkinia bipunctidactyla, and the colouring is also very close. The
peculiar character of the tubercles, with their globular bases, and the
hairs situated on their anterior (or posterior) faces, instead of springing
from the top, are precisely the same. The pupa is also very like that
of A. zophodactylus, a little larger, about 12mm. long, equally cylindrical,
and nearly as slender; its colour, however, is less brilliant. There is
a little rise to the top of the mesothorax, but otherwise the pupa tapers
equally, and very shghtly, from the mesothorax backwards, more
rapidly, however, on abdominal segments 8, 9, and 10, which run to a
sharp point, and, with two subdorsal and two subspiracular ridges
very pronounced, give a quadrangular section. The dorsal ridges in
front are well-marked, smooth, and rounded, except on posterior slope
of mesothorax, where there is some crenulation ; they are very close
together here, but separate both in front and behind. They run back
and include i of the 38rd abdominal segment, stopping there
abruptly, although ii is in the same line, and only separated from i by
two of the narrow transverse ribs. The tubercles i and ii arise from
the front and back respectively of two of these ribs, with two between;
the ribs they arise from here project almost as a little ball, and the
hair comes from quite the side of it, and is nearly parallel with the
pupal surface, 1 pointing forwards, ii backwards. They are all minute
clubbed batons, about 0-03mm. long. It is curious how they suggest,

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 377

in their directions and the swelling of their bases, the complicated
structure of the Amblyptiliines. Tubercle ii is just above the spiracle;
iv and v are on a level, and also on a little smooth antero-posterior
ridge, that breaks through all the small transverse ribs, after the front
three or four; tubercle vi is on nearly the last rib; vii has three hairs
in an antero-posterior curve. The free appendages reach to about the
end of the 5th abdominal segment; the appendages have fine transverse
ribs, with apparently minute pits. The wings have fine dark lines with
arborescent branches, invisible without strong magnification. The for-
ward cremastral group of hairs is very distinctly in two buuches, one on
each side, each radiating from a centre, and consisting of 35 or 40 hairs,
0:14mm.-0°3mm. long, with fine fish-hook points. The anal group is
quite as numerous, closely packed in an area of 0-4mm. in length,
shorter than the other set (about 0°2mm.). The transverse ribbing is
rather bolder than that of A. zophodactylus, and the ribs are only
about 12 in number in the dorsal line. The finer sculpturing of pits
is not very clear, even in the spaces, and does not appear to go over the
ribs. Theribsare, in fact, somewhat smooth on top, and have irregular
mareins, minute subridges branching down from the sides. This is,
perhaps, as marked a difference from that of A. zophodactylus as the
pupa presents (Chapman, May 27th, 1904). Length about 11-5mm.
Width at thorax slightly over 2mm. Long and slender, of unmis-
takable Platyptiliid shape, but less robust. In outline, it forms
almost a straight line medioventrally, and up the extended legs, and to
the head. Beyond a very slight projection of the ventral headpiece, the
contour sweeps backwards, in the segment of an arc, to the slightly
raised hump on the posterior of the mesothorax; from here, to the
extremity of the pupa, the dorsal outline is quite even, but either curved
or straight, according to the posture of the pupa. Ventrally, from the
extremity of the wing-cases, there is little or no tapering until the 5th
abdominal seement, but, from here to the 8th abdominal, there is a
quite noticeable curved tapering; from the 8th to the anus, the pupa
has the usual Alucitid, sharply-cut, tapering, reaching to the termination
of the anus. This gives the pupa the appearance of having been cut at
an oblique angle, from the ventral side of the 8th abdominal segment to
the extremity of the 10th, with a sharp knife. It is quite smooth and
without hairs, except for the minute primary sete. The diameter at
the 38rd abdominal segment is about 2mm. (measured from empty
pupa-skin). The 2nd and 8rd abdominal segments are the longest;
the other segments shortening off in both directions, except the meso-
‘thorax, which is, as usual, of large size. The interseemental area at
the posterior end of the 8rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th abdominal segments, is
a very marked feature of the pupal skin, after the emergence of the
Imago, owing to its smoothness and opacity; it comprises quite a
quarter of the length of the 4th and 5th segments, and slightly more
than a fourth of the 6th abdominal segment. The transverse striations,
or ribs, are a marked characteristic of the dorsal area of all the seg-
ments from, and including, the metathorax, and, on the lateral and
ventral areas of the free segments, on which their development is
stronger—upwards of 20 may be counted on the 4th abdominal seg-
ment. Viewed ventrally, the tapering towards the anus is long and
gradual, but, laterally, it is more abrupt, chiefly from the posterior end of
the 6th abdominal. A marked double dorsal ridge rises on the promi-

378 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

nence of the mesothorax, and is continued in both directions, widening
out gradually asit descends downwards to the end of the 8rd abdominal
segment, where it is interrupted by the intersegmental membrane ; on
the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th abdominal segments, it exists only as a low
ridge on the central area; on the 8th, 9th, and part of the 10th, it
again becomes a continuous and conspicuous double ridge, narrowing
down towards anus, owing to the diminishing size of the pupa, but, in
reality, becoming relatively wider, as it gets nearer and nearer to the
lateral area, and actually forms a sharp corner between the lateral and
dorsal areas. In a forward direction the ridge widens out as it is con-
tinued forwards towards the head. A marked lateral ridge is also
present from the anal segment forwards to the anterior of the 7th
abdominal, where it becomes low and broad, and completely interrupted
by the intersegmental membrane, like the dorsal ridge; its line is,
however, continued forwards beyond the 83rd abdominal segment, by
the edge of the hind margin of the forewings. This system of dorsal
and lateral ridges gives the pupa a very angular appearance, and
probably assists in its general scheme of cryptic resemblance. The
narrow slip of hindwing does not extend so far as the end of the 2nd
abdominal seement, but, owing to the length of the segments, it is a
fairly long slip in relation to its width. The leg- and antenna-cases
(as is usual in this group) project very far as free appendages, v7z.,
over the whole of the 4th, and the greater part of the 5th, abdominal
segment, a supporting corner (formed by the apices of the wings)
extending as far as the middle of the 4th abdominal segment. The
spiracles are considerably raised, but not tube-like, as in those of may
Alucitid larve; they have slit-like openings. The hairs, or sete, are
short, and the dorsal ones curved, and either knobbed or club-shaped.
Tubercles 1 and 11 are placed on the dorsal ridges, situated near together
on the free segments, their bases back to back, the sete pointing
respectively in a posterior and anterior direction, in a manner
suggestive of their position in the pupe of some of the allied Oxypti-
lines. The intersegmental membranes are strongly, though finely,
pitted ; the pits having a diamond-shaped wall, but stretched length-
wise; on the ribbed areas pits are also present, but they are less
numerous, of irregular or circular shape, and without walls. The sculp-
turing, so minutely described by Chapman in the pupa of A. zophodac-
tylus (anted, pp. 829-330) seems to be nearly, if not quite, identical in this
species, with the possible exception that, in the pupa of S. pterodactyla,
the sculpturing seems to be somewhat coarser. The sete in S. ptero-
dactyla are certainly longer than those of A. zophodactylus in the
mounted specimens examined (Bacot. Described from pupa-ease,
November 25th, 1905). Rather long and slender; the head, which is
the thickest part, is abruptly rounded, and has the snout very promi-
nent; thorax and abdomen rounded above, rather flattened beneath,
and attenuated strongly to the anal point; eye-, leg-, and wing-cases
fairly prominent, the last prolonged a considerable distance over the
abdominal segments (Porritt). South gives a short description of
the pupa (Hnt., xv., p. 148).

VARIATION OF PUPA.—Porritt, who describes two forms of the larva
(antea, p. 375), finds two somewhat parallel forms of the pupa, which he
diagnoses as: |

(1) Bright green, with little of any other colour; the abdominal incisions pale

9

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 379

grey ; two indistinct pale lines on the dorsal area; several faint purplish spots
behind the thorax and on the anal segment being the only markings noticeable.

(2) Dingier green in tint, with a distinct purple dorsal stripe, edged on each

side with greyish ; the abdominal incisions and the tip of the prolonged wing-cases
also purple. :
In May and June, 1904, we examined many pupe of this species,
from larve found in different localities. In these, when at the same age,
there appeared to be very little variation, some were of a little brighter
ereen, t.¢., of a more yellowish-green, others rather duller in tint, and,
on the dorsum, there was a slight variation in the amount of purplish
shading on the mediodorsal line, on the metathorax, and 1st and 2nd
abdominal segments (always, however, in the specimens examined,
very small). There certainly was none of the clear dimorphism
exhibited, in the eight examples examined, like that spoken of by
Porritt. In one example, the mediodorsal line was marked throughout,
from the mesothorax to the anus, very slenderly, with purplish-red.
Chapman says: There is much less range of variation in colour than
in pups of Adkinia bipunctidactyla. A few seem to be altogether green
in colour, except for a pale or white tint on the dorsal flanges on the
mesothorax. Most have some pink or reddish between these flanges,
extending, usually, a little way into the abdomen, and most have the
last three segments more or less reddish-brown, darkening to the apex.
The dorsal, subdorsal, and sublateral lines are generally of a slightly
darker shade of green. On a well-marked specimen, there is a white
lateral line, with a faint reddish, or brownish, shading below it; the
leg-cases, beyond wings, are slightly ruddy, distinctly so at the tips.
In one specimen the wing-cases are darker, and there is a suspicion of
a ruddy tinge over the abdominal segments. Yet even this specimen
presents very little difference from the others, on a casual view, unlike
the red form of A. bipunctidactyla which contrasts strongly with the
ereen (May 27th, 1904). On June 1st a pupa appeared of an uniform
brownish-red colour, the markings being very faintly indicated by a
slight difference of tint.

Foopriants.— Veronica chamaedrys* (Stainton), {V. serpyllifolia, J
arvensis, V. triphyllos (Zeller), Gratiola officinalis (Disqué, Iris, xiv.,

p. 227+)].
TIME OF APPEARANCE.—The species appears to be absolutely single-
brooded.| Emerging, in Britain, over a period of some five or six

weeks in a season, and varying from early June to early July, for the
earliest specimens in different years, it remains on the wing in late
seasons until mid-August. It ogscurs at about the same time throughout
central Europe, but, in the high alps of central Europe, and in
Scandinavia, is rarely on the wing until mid-July, and often occurs
well into late August. In Germany, it is recorded at Friedland from

* Hudd says: ‘‘ Plentiful amongst Veronica and in strawberry beds.’? We can
hardly think the larva has any connection with strawberry, although Crom-
brugghe de Picquendaele observes that it occurs in the Ixelles district, where
Veronica chamaedrys is entirely absent.

+ Disqué observes that he found fullgrown larve of the second brood on July
7th, on the Haderwiese, upon Gratiola officinalis. As S. pterodactyla is not double-
brooded, one wonders whether he is really referring to this species.

{ Hmmelina monodactyla, L., was long known as pterodactyla, Linn., and one
finds many records of Stenoptilia pterodactyla being double-brooded, occurring in
June and July, and again in September-October, that must belong to the former
species.

380 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

the end of June till the beginning of August (Stange), in the Hamburg
district in July (Sauber), in Hanover during June (Glitz), at Frankfurt-
on-Main in June and July (Schmid), in Hesse-Nassau during the last
half of June (Rossler), mid-June till the beginning of August in
Waldeck (Speyer), and in June and July in Silesia (Wocke), also in the
Kingdom of Saxony (Schiitze), in July in Bavaria (Schmid). In
Lower Austria, it is noted as occurring in July and August in
Carinthia from the end of June to the end of July, and in Carniola at
the end of June (Mann) ; in the Tyrol we found it late in July on the
Mendel Pass, and throughout the first fortnight of August in the Cortina
district. In Switzerland, it occurs in June at Zurich, but in July in
the Bernese Alps, and on the Simplon. In Belgium, it is recorded as
occurring in July and August (Lambillion). In the lowlands of France
—Tancarville, Fontainebleau Forest, etc.—the species occurs through-
out June, but, in the Savoy mountains, it is well-out in mid-August,
and is possibly on the wing until the end of the month. In the more
northerly parts of Scandinavia also, the species occurs in late July and
August. Zeller observes (Linn. Fint., vi., p. 878) that he took the
species from late June to early August near Glogau ; on the Seefelder
he caught two gs on July 15th, and received a somewhat brownish-
grey Swedish g¢ from Zetterstedt, labelled ‘‘ Furllen, July 21st,
1841”’; he also notes a worn g from the Sommering (from Fischer
von Réslerstamm’s collection), taken on August 6th; he concludes,
therefore, that there is only one brood, which emerges through
several months and lasts longer on the mountains than in the
plains. The following details will give some idea of the range in the
time of appearance of the species. ConTINENTAL RECORDS.—Harly July,
1869, on the Simplon (Jaggi); June 19th, 1869, just appearing near
Meseritz (Zeller) ; July 12th-30th, 1870, at Pichtendahl and Rotsikull
(Nolcken) ; a worn specimen, probably referable to this species, at
Marshen, April 20th, 1870 (Blackmore); June 4th-16th, 1890, at
Tancarville (Leech); July 28th-31st, 1894, at Courmayeur ; July 28th-
Sdlst, 1895, at Mendel Pass; August 6th-12th, 1895, on the Monte
Cristallo (Tutt); mid-July, 1897, at Wolfsberg (Chapman) ; common,
July, 1897, at Aal (Strand); June 28th, 1897, in the Forest of
Fontainebleau; August 4th-12th, 1902, at Megéve; August 17th, 20th,
1902, at Chamonix; July 26th, 1904, at Gex; August 7th-9th, 1904,
at Saas-im-Grund (Tutt). Bririsa recorps.—July 16th-i7th, 1869, at
Witherslack (Gregson) ; July 16th-28th, 1879, at Skegness (Porritt) ;
imagines bred June 13th, 1881, at Worthing (W. H. B. Fletcher); others
bred June 29th, 1881, and following days from same locality (Porritt) ;
July 14th, 1883, in Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); July 14th, 1883, at Wood
Ditton (Raynor); August, 1883, common from Walmer to Kingsdown
(Shepherd); June 2nd-28th, 1884, at Grange (Hodgkinson) ;
June 20th-26th, 1884; in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); July 21st,
1885, at Cuxton; July, 1886, at Higham (Tutt); July 31st, 1886,
in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June 27th, 1887, at Sanderstead
(Sheldon); July 7th, 1887, at Kingsdown; July 20th, 1887, at
Cuxton; August (?) 18th, 1887, in Chattenden Woods (Tutt) ;
July, 1887, at Sligo (Russ) ; August 4th, 1888, between Llangollen and
Loggerheads; August 15th, 1888, at Rhydymwyn (Arkle); August
4th, 1888, at Kingsdown; June 28rd, 1889, in Westcombe Park; June
28th, 1889, at Maidenhead; July 28th, 1889, at Freshwater (Tutt) ;

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 381

July 2nd, 1889, at Portland (Richardson) ; July 18th, August 2nd,
1889, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June 4th, 1890, on the Belfast
Hills (Watts) ; July 14th, 1890, at Bundoran (Johnson); July 16th,
1890, at Greenhithe (Bower); late July, 1890, at Deal and Kingsdown
(Tutt) ; July 28th, August 4th, 1890, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ;
July 5th, 1891, at Shoeburyness; July 3rd, 1892, at Leigh (Whittle) ;
July 5th, 1892, at Panton (Raynor) ; July 5th, 12th, 1892, in Chatten-
den Woods (Tutt); July 18th, 1892, imago at Sidcup (Bower); July
29th, 1892, at Witherslack (Arkle) ; June 15th, 1893, imagines common
at Lee (Bower) ; June 17th, 1893, in Chattenden Woods, getting worn on
July 1st, 1898, but still odd specimens to be seen until July 22nd,
18938, at Cuxton (Tutt); July 7th, 1898, at Panton; July 14th, 1893,
at Legsby (Raynor); July 12th, 1893, at Mansfield (Daws); June 27th-
July 16th, 1894, in the Painswick district (Farn); July 13th, 1894,
at Purley (Studd) ; July 15th, 1894, at Eastwood (Whittle) ; 2nd week
in July, 1894, at Stonehaven, near Cowie (Dalelish); August 1st,
1894, at Panton (Raynor); June 25th, 1895,in Chattenden Woods; June
26th-July 7th, 1895, at Cuxton (Tutt); July 17th, 1895, imaginescommon
at Shoreham, Kent (Bower) ; July 31st, 1895, at Keswick (Beadle) ;
common at Oxton, Devon, June 30th-August 21st, 1896, and intermediate
dates (Studd); July 4th, 1896, at Newball (Raynor); July 21st, 1896, at
Cromer (McIntyre); July 11th, 1897, at Great Orton (F. H. Day); July
11th, 1897, at Cromer (McIntyre); July 24th-Aueust 23rd, 1897, and
intermediate dates at Oxton, Devon (Studd); August 3rd, 1897, imago at
Sanderstead (Bower); common at Oxton, June 30th, 1898 (Studd) ;
July 8rd-10th, 1898, at Hastwood (Whittle); July 5th, 1898, at
Hazeleigh (Raynor) ; imago August 8th, 1898, at Buckerell (Riding) ;
June 2nd-29th, 1899, at Birtley (Harrison); July 4th, 1899, at
Hazeleigh (Raynor); July 12th, 1899, at Eastwood (Whittle) ; July
3rd, 1900, at Danbury (Raynor) ; July 11th, 1901, in Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes); July, 1901, at Enfield (Edelsten); August 2nd, 1901, and
following days at Yoxford (Pyett); June, 1902, at Lamesley, in the Der-
went Valley, and at Birtley (Harrison); July 5th-28th, 1902, at Thunder-
sley (Whittle); July 5th, 11th, 12th, 28th, 1902, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes); July 2nd, 1908, at Tuddenham (Burrows); June 27th,
1908, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); July 11th, 1903, at
Wendover ; July 28rd-August 7th, 1908, at Dawlish (Turner); July
16th, 1903, at Hesleden Dene (Harrison); July 25th, 26th, 1903, at
Tring (Barraud); bred June 29th-July 8rd, 1904, from larve at
Thorndon Park (Whittle) ; bred from Halling larve, June 15th, 1904,
on wing June 19th, 1904, at Halling; imagines flying at Cuxton, June
24th, 1904, larvee still obtainable (Ovenden); bred June 12th-29th,
1904, from Folkestone larve; and June 12th, 15th, 1904, from Halling
larvee (Tutt); bred June 21st, 1904, from larvie collected in Isle of
Purbeck (Bankes); June 15th-20th, 1904, at Hailsham (Sich); June
25th-30th, 1904, at Dereham (Clutten); July 15th, 1905, at Clandon
(Kaye).

Hasirs.—In the afternoon of June 29th, 1904, at 6 p.m., an imago
was seen to emerge from the pupa and run along, coming to rest
on a stem of Veronica, clinging tightly by the first two pairs of legs,
holding the hindmost pair right over the back, at about an angle of
30° to abdomen, and stretched out so as to cross each other a little
way beyond the lower pair of spines; the antenne stuck out well on

382 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

either side of head ; the undeveloped winglets about 45° apart. After
about a minute the bases of the wings were pulled together, and the tips
curled outwards; the hindwings quite separate, much behind the fore-
wings. The forewings then began to expand; the two points now only
curved, the two lobes very distinct; the hindwings grow up to, and
become level with, forewings; the tips of forewings now only slightly
curled; tip of 1st feather of hindwing curled, others straightened out; all
the wings have finished growth now, hanging down quite vertically,
being parallel and close together; antennz thrown back; fringes (at first
solid-looking) now getting quite distinct; wings absolutely closed, back
to back, touching throughout, except just at base; the third plumule
of hindwing hangs just separate, the other plumules of hindwing
directly behind the forewing, the clefts fitting each other. Complete
expansion occupied only about fourminutes. Twelveminutesafterwards
the wings were put down horizontally, the lowest plumule of hindwing
still separate; the hindlegs stuck out directly under the wings, form-
ing, as it were, a rest for them, the tips of the hindlegs standing out
beyond the apex of the wings; this appearance of wings resting on
legs is very peculiar and striking. Thirty minutes after this, its hind-
legs had been put by the side of the abdomen, the tips of the legs
touching but not crossed, the wings still horizontal and about 60° apart.
Ten minutes later the tips of the legs were crossed (Tutt, June 29th,
1904). (Bankes observed an imago, just emerged, drying its wings
behind its backat7a.m.| Onthe move, the moth runs quickly, coming to
rest somewhat suddenly, and, in nature, is not very conspicuous, as it
rests on a grass culm, or similar object, although, when disturbed, it is
seen readily enough. Its natural time of flight appears to be in the
evening, just before, and at, dusk, but it is very easily disturbed as
one walks through the rough herbage among which it hides, and it
may be sometimes seen on a still day flitting about naturally in the
afternoon sunshine. Bankes says that he has taken the imago on the
wing, towards dusk, and that it is easily disturbed from amongst its
foodplant during theevening. We havealso seen it at light, after dusk,
and Studd notes that it comes freely to the light trap at Oxton, Devon.
Bower notes it as flying among Veronica chamaedrys in the afternoon,
at Lee and Sidcup, and Gregson says that it is easily disturbed therefrom
at Witherslack. Commonly as we have seen this species, we have
never noticed it so abundantly as in the pasture-meadows at Megéve,
in Haute-Savoie; here, on several still afternoons, in early August,
1902, as one walked along the pathway through the fields, the species
swung from stem to stem of the tall coarse herbage, on either side, in
great numbers. Still it is sometimes exceedingly common in Britain,
and we have seen it in abundance at Cuxton, Folkestone, and other
places, always flitting in the same lazy fashion, towards the end of the
afternoon, becoming most active just as the sun slants off the chalk
banks, which they love there so well.

Hasirat.—One may expect to find this species in almost any place
where Veronica chamaedrys grows in Britain—roadside banks, hedge-
sides, edges of woods, ridings in woods, rough overgrown fields, edges
of cultivated fields, chalk-hills, sand-hills, on old landslips and cliffs
near the sea, ground at the sea-level, and moors and mosses at high
elevations; whilst abroad, from the sunny shores of the Mediterranean
to the bleak wastes as far north as the Arctic circle, this species finds

t

STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA. 383

some suitable spot in which to breed. At Cuxton and Halling, it
abounds on the chalk-hills; at Chattenden Woods, on the outskirts of the
woods, as well as in the sunny ridings; in or near woods among rough
herbage at Keswick, and also commonly at Purbeck, where it occurs on
clay and other soils; swarming in a wood near Horsley, at 7 p.m. ;
at Strood on the railway banks, and on grassy slopes and railway
banks at Harrow; on railway banks near Hartlepool, in disused chalk-
pits all over the downs of Kent; in a marl-pit at Shobnall; on
the undercliffs at Kingsdown, Folkestone, and Shanklin; on the coast
at Wexford; by the roadsides between Canterbury and Folkestone; on
hedge-banks at Great Orton and at Worthing, and in grassy lanes
at Oxton,in Devon. At Maidenhead it is found along the banks of the
Thames, and, at Freshwater, on the banks of the Yar; at Sligo it occurs
on the sandhills; whilst, until 1889, the species was to be found in
Westcombe Park, and still occurs on waste spots in the neighbourhood
of Blackheath. On the continent it is equally abundant, in some places,
at a fair elevation (although usually over before the end of July, when our
visits are paid), ¢.y., in Fontainebleau Forest it is fairly abundant at the
end of June, and in the Savoy Alps 1t 1s common at a considerable eleva-
tion, occurring on the mountains round Chamonix up to 5000ft., whilst at
Megeve it swarmed in the meadows, leading up to the ‘‘Calvary.’”’ On the
other side of the Mont Blanc range, the insect occurs at Courmayeur, etc.
#0 Germany, we note that, in Pomerania, it is widely distributed, and
is especially so in ditches by the sides of the roads about Stettin, Tantow,
etc. (Bittner); in Hanover, it is more usually found in meadows in
woody districts (Glitz); in the Crefeld district the species occurs in open
sunny places on the south border of the ‘‘ Kleinen Hees,’ where shrubby
plants of broom and bramble abound (Stollwerck) ; in Hesse-Nassau,
it occurs in meadows and on the edges of woods (Réssler) ; especially
in bushy places (Koch) ; also in open grassy spots near woods in Upper
Hesse (Glaser); in Brandenburg, it frequents woods (Sorhagen) ; in
Silesia, it is frequently found in damp overgrown places (Wocke),
although everywhere pretty frequent in wooded districts (Schiitze) ;
near Glogau, on slopes shaded with bushes, or in open meadows (Zeller);
in Moravia, near Brinn, it 1s widely distributed and abundant on dry
sandy slopes (Fritsch), whilst, at Tivoli, it haunts the game-coverts,
and at Médling is found on bushy slopes (Mann) ; in the Tyrolean
district it is very frequent, near Innsbruck, at gon 1800 ft.-6000 fi.
elevation (Weiler), common on the summit of the Mendel Pass and
on Monte Cristallo, near Cortina, at considerable elevation (Tutt).
Locaritizs.—Distributed throughout England, lreland, and Scotland.
[ABERDEEN : local—Pitscurrie Moss, Piteaple, common (Reid).| Anrrim: Black
Mountain, Belfast, abundant eee Belfast Hills (Watts). Ayr: Ardrossan
(Colquhoun), Barr (Dalglish). Brps: Bedford, Luton (Barrett). Brrxs: common
(Hamm), Maidenhead (Tutt). Bucks: Wendover (Turner). CamBripge: Wood Ditton
(Raynor), Cambridge (Stainton). Cursurre: Wallasey (Prince), Dunham Park (Ellis),
Birkenhead (Stainton), Sealand, near Chester (Arkle). Cork : Glandore, Ummera
Woods, near Timoleague, Courtmacsherry (Donovan). Cornwani: East Cornwall
Marquand), Scilly Isles —'Tresco (Norgate). CumBrernanp: common — Keswick
Beadle), Carlisle district, Great Orton (F. H. Day). Densiau: Rhydymwyn,
Llangollen to Loggerheads (Arkle). Drrsy: Burton district (EH. Brown), Shobnall
(G. Baker), Repton (Garneys). Dnvon: Buckerell (Riding), Oxton (Studd), Dawlish
(Turner). Donreau: Bundoran (Johnson). Dorsrr: Glanville’s Wootton (Dale),
Portland (Richardson), Isle of Purbeck, generally common (Bankes). Dustin:
Howth (Birchall), Kingstown, ete. (Kane). Dumparron: Luss (Dalglish), Gareloch-
head (Henderson). DurHam: Lamesley, Derwent Valley, Hesleden Dene (Harrison),

884 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Darlington. common (Sang), near Hartlepool (J. Gardner), Castle Eden Dene(Robson).
EprinpureH: Edinburgh district—Braid, Longniddry, Pettycur(Evans). Essrx: gen-
erally common (Harwood), Danbury, Hazeleigh (Raynor), Saffron Walden (Jeffrey),
Thorndon Park, Southend, Thundersley, Eastwood (Whittle), Mucking (Burrows).
GuovcEstER: Bristol district (Hudd), Wotton-under-Edge (Perkins), Painswick dis-
trict (Watkins). Hants: Isleof Wight (W. H. B. Fletcher), Freshwater (Tutt). Herz-
ForD: Leominster, common (Hutchinson), Tarrington (J. H. Wood). Hxrrs: Tring
(Barraud), St. Alban’s (Gibbs), Sandridge (Griffith), Hitchin (Durrant), Cheshunt
(W.C. Boyd). Istror Man (Porritt). Kenr: Folkestone (Courtice), Alkham, Pembury
(Stainton), Sidcup, Lee, Greenhithe, Shoreham (Bower), Dover, Deal, Kingsdown,
Cuxton, Chattenden, Farnborough (Tutt), Walmer to Kingsdown (Shepherd),
Higham, Halling (Ovenden). Kerry: Killarney (Kane). KincarpinE: Stone-
haven, near Cowie, common (Dalglish). Lanark: Cambuslang, Glasgow district
(Dalglish). LancasHtrE: Grange (Gregson), Manchester (Stainton). Lincoun:
Legsby, Newball, Panton (Raynor), Skegness (Porritt). Lourn: Clougher Head (Russ).
Mrppirsex: Enfield (Edelsten), between Pinner and Rickmansworth (South), Kings-
bury (Bond), Harrow (Rothschild). Moray (Barrett). Norroik : Dereham (Clutten),
Cromer (McIntyre). NorruumBerntanp: Killingworth, Harnham (Robson), New-
castle (Stainton). NorrmncHam: Mansfield (Daws). [Orkney Istanps (Hnt., xxi.,
p- 98).] Prmproxe: Pembroke (Barrett). Renrrew: Crookston, Giffnock
(Dalglish), Paisley (Dunsmore). [SHETLAND AND ORKNEY: Orkneys (Curzon).]
Stico: Sligo (Russ). SomrErsrer: Castle Cary, common (Macmillan). Svurrorx:
Blaxhall Common (Harker), [Yoxford (Pyett),] Bentley, Tuddenham (Burrows).
Surrey: generally distributed (Barrett), Sanderstead (Sheldon), Box Hill (South),
Purley (Studd), Reigate (Chapman). Sussex: generally distributed (Vine), St.
Leonard’s-on-Sea (Ford), Worthing, Goring (W. H. B. Fletcher), Bognor (Lloyd),
Hailsham, Horsley, (Sich), Hastings district—common (Bloomfield), Lewes (Stain-
ton). Warwick: Knowle, Sutton (Bradley), Hockley Heath (Blatch), Rugby district
—Overslade, Frankton (Rugby lists). Warrrrorp: Cappagh, Dunmore (Kane).
WestmorLAND: Witherslack (Gregson). Wrxrorp: near Wexford (Kane).
WoRCESTER: common throughout the county (Rea). Yorks: Castle Howard
(Porritt), Scarborough, York (Stainton), Doncaster district (Corbett), Skipwith,
common (Ash), Boroughbridge (Prest), Bramham (J. Smith), Doncaster (Warren),
Huddersfield (Inchbald), Richmond (Sang), Sheftield (Doncaster).

Distrisution.—Hurope (except the polar region), Asia Minor, Armenia
(Rebel), ? Mauretania (Blackmore), North America—New York State

(Fernald). Arrica: Morocco—near Marshen (Blackmore). Amerritca: New York
State (Fernald). Asta: Kentei Mountains (Staudinger), Asia Minor—generally
distributed (Rebel), Brussa (Mann), Armenia (Haberhauer). Austro-HuncaRy:
Bohemia — Prague (Fritsch), Moravia— Briinn district, Czernowitz (Gartner),
Neutischein, Upper Austria, distributed—Linz (Fritsch), Lower Austria—Vienna
district (Kollar), the Prater (Rebel), above the Wienerwald (Schleicher),
Hernstein district (Rogenhofer), Tivoli, Médling (Mann), [Salzburg—Salzburg
(Fritsch), | Tyrol—Giockner district, Bozen, Trient (Mann), near Innsbruck, from
1800 ft.-6000 ft. (Weiler), Lafatscher Joch, Taufer Alps, Monte Baldo, Trafoi,
Franzenshohe (Heller), Kaprun, Moserboden (Hofmann), Mendel, Monte Cristallo,
Cortina district (Tutt), Carinthia — Raibl, Bruck-on-Mur (Zeller), Wolfsberg
(Chapman), Carniola—Gradischa, Croatia—near Josefsthal, Dalmatia (Mann),
Slavonia (Koca), Transsylvania (Czekelius), Neu Sandec (Klemensiewicez), Buda-
Pest district (Aigner). Brnerum: Ixelles (Crombrugghe), Namur (de Radigués),
St. Servais, Bouge, Dinant (Lambillion), Louvain, Brussels, Uccle, Forét de
Soignes (Crombrugghe). Bosnta anp Hercecovina: Dervent (Hilf), Sarajevo
(Apfelbeck), Vucija-Bara (Rebel). Buncgarta anp Eastern Roumenia: Sophia
(Joakimow), the Rilo (Rebel), Varna, Slivno (Lederer). CHannen Isnanps:
Guernsey, common (Luff). Drnmarx (Bang-Haas}. France: Normandy—Tan-
earville (Leech), Saone-et-Loire (Constant), Savoy Alps— Megéve, Chamonix (Tutt),
Aube (Jourdheuille), Doubs dept.—Maison Rouge (Bruand), Indre—Nohant, Cher
(Sand), Seine-et-Marne—Fontainebleau (Tutt), Seine-et-Oise, near Paris, common,
Boulogne, Bondy, Montmorency (Begrand), French Juras—Gex (Tutt). Grrmany:
distiibuted throughout north and south Germany (Hofmann), east and
west Prussia, very common — Neuhauser, Dammbhof, Gross-Raum, Koénigs-
berg, Kleinheide, Rastenburg, Sorquitten, Lyck, Elbing, Ohra, Danzig,
Langfuhr (Speiser), Pomerania, distributed — Stettin, near Tantow, Nemitz
(Bittner), Mecklenburg — Friedland, Garz (Stange), Parchim (Gillmer), Siilz,
Neustrelitz, Riilow (Boll), Hamburg — Bahrenfeld, Boberg, Hépen (Sauber)

’

MARASMARCHIDI. 385

Hannover—Quedlinburg (Jordan), the foothills of the Harz (Gillmer), Gottingen
(Jordan), Rhine Provinces—([Krefeld, Trier, Aachen, Uerdingen (Stollwerck), |
Frankfurt-on-Main (Schmid), Hesse-Nassau— Nassau (Rossler), Frankfurt, Taunus,
Wiesbaden (Koch), Waldeck (Speyer), Thuringia—Kihlhausen, Sommerda (Jordan),
Province of Saxony—Erfurt (Keferstein), Halle-on-Saale (Stange), Anhalt—Dessau
(Richter), Mosigkauer Haide (Gillmer), Brandenburg, everywhere—Frankfurt-on-
Oder, Potsdam, Havel district, Schwetiger Forst (Kretschmer), Silesia, distributed—
Upper Lusatia (Méschler), Kingdom of Saxony—Freiburg (Fritsche), Bavaria—
Regensburg (Hofmann and Herrich-Schaffer), Oberaudorf, near Munich (Hart-
mann), Augsburg (Freyer), Wiirttemberg (Steudel and Hofmann), Baden, every-
where—Freiburg, Carlsruhe, Feldberg, Constance (Reutti), Alsace (Meess and
Spuler), Palatinate (Bertram), Posen—Meseritz (Zeller). Grezce: Parnassus
(Kriiper). Iraty: Piedmont — Courmayeur (Tutt), Sicily—Palermo, Messina,
Madonie Mountains (Mina-Palumbo). Netaerntanps: North Holland —
Overijssel, Gelderland, in Zeeland, Gravenhage, Tiel, Zeddam, in Hulst,
Limburg, near Maastricht (Snellen). Roumanira (Caradja). Russia: Baltic
Provinces, common—Lechts (Huene), Riga district (Berg), Magnusholm, Aathale,
near Segewold, near Neuhof, Pichtendahl, RotsikiiJl (Nolecken), Moscow district
(Albrecht), Lower Volga district—Casan, Orenburg, etc. (Eversmann). ScANDINAVIA :
Scania, Blekinge, Smaland, Gothland (Wallengren), Norway—Bergun (Jordan),
Aal, common (Strand). SwirzeRLanp: rare—near Ziirich, singly (Frey), Lenzburg
(Wullschlegel), Bernese Alps (Boll), St. Gallen (Taschler), Degersheim (Miiller),
Bergin (Zeller), Simplon (Jaggi), Zermatt (Frey collection), Saas-Thal—Saas-im-
Grund (Tutt).

Subfamily : MarasmarcHina.
Tribe: MarasmarcuHipt.

The position of the genus Marasmarcha (lunaedactyla, etc.) has
puzzled all our systematists, nor can we do more than indicate the
characters that may aid in a right appreciation of its position.
Hubner (Verz., p. 480) placed it in the Amblyptiliae with acantha-
dactyla, Hb., cosmodactyla, Hb., and certain Oxyptilid species, i.e.,
quite separate from the Stenoptiliines. In 1827, Curtis (Brit. Ent.,
fo. 161) grouped it with the Stenoptiliids, on the Alucitine, and not
the Platyptiliune, side of the plume phylum; as also did Stephens
(Illus. Brit. Hint. Haust., iv., p. 374), although, in his appendix (p. 424) to
the volume, he combines it with the Amblyptilias and Oxyptilines,
under the name of Amblyptilia. Zeller, in 1841 (Isis, p. 884),
separated it both from the Amblyptiliids and Oxyptilids, and brought
it into connection with the Stenoptilids, placing both the latter and
the Marasmarchids as sections of the same group as the Leioptilids,
etc., whilst, in 1852, he united it with the Stenoptiliids, making the
whole a group of Pterophorus, Zell. Herrich-Schiiffer separated it
entirely, and placed the group quite on the Alucitid side of the
plumes ; whilst Staudinger and Wocke (Cat., 2nd ed., p. 87) brought
it into the Stenoptiliines under Wallengren’s name, Mimaeseoptilus,
the grouping of this list being followed for a time by most continental
authors. In 1886, Meyrick separated (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,
p. 11) lunaedactyla, together with a species named liophanes (from
Réunion), under the name of Marasmarcha, his diagnosis being given
under our account of the genus. In 1890, he gave (op. cit. 1890,
p. 488) a slightly modified diagnosis under the same name, and, for
the first time, grouped the Marasmarchid species —ehrenbergiana, Zell.,
agrorum, H,-Seh., rhypodactyla, Staud., trimmatodactyla, Christ.,
phaeodactyla, Hb., cinnamomea, Staud.—-to which he unaccountably
added microdactyla, Hb. He observes that ‘* Marasmarcha is a small
eenus, occurring in Europe, central Asia, and Africa. It closely
approaches Alucita, and is a development from it.’’ The heterogeneric

386 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

character of lunaedactyla (phaeodactyla) and microdactyla led us, in
1892 (Brit. Nat., u., p. 61), to fix lunaedactyla as the type of the
genus. In his Handbook, etc., p. 487, Meyrick places Marasmarcha
(still containing these two divergent species) between two Alucitine
groups, represented by Pselnophorus (brachydactylus) and Alucita (osteo-
dactyla, tephradactyla, lienigiana, monodactyla, lithodactyla, etc.), with
which, certainly, Junaedactyla has no really close relationship.
Hofmann accurately, in our opinion, places it between the Stenopti-
limes and Oxyptilines, but Rebel, after eliminating microdactyla, leaves —
Marasmarcha among the Alucitines (Cat., 8rd ed., p. 75).

The fact is, Marasmarcha has such mixed structural characters, ©
that it is difficult to place it really satisfactorily. Its early stages, and,
up to a point, its imaginal structure, show it to be, in its broad
characters, on the Platyptiliid, and not the Alucitid, side of the plume
stirps. The larva is essentially Stenoptiliine, the pupa shows alliance
with the Amblyptilines and Oxyptilines, whilst the imaginal
characters are very confusing. The genital organs show no close
relationship with the Amblyptiliines, Oxyptilines, or EKucnemido-
phorines, with which one is inclined, on the characters of the early
stages, to place it. Concerning this, Chapman writes (in litt.) :
“ Marasmarcha occupies a somewhat solitary position, and yet has a
more central position than any other of our British genera (central, not
basal). It is, in fact, an extreme Oxyptilid in some aspects, and has
close affinities with the Alucitids, such as do not occur elsewhere on
the Platyptiliid side of the group. The post-spiracular larval tubercles
ally it with Amblyptilia (and suggest relationship to Alucitids); the
larval habits are very close indeed to those of Capperia heterodactyla.
The pupa may be described as an extreme Oxyptilid. In common with
the Amblyptilines, it possesses the dorsal processes associated with
tubercles i and 11, and which attach both these genera to the Oxypti-
lines, but it possesses also the mediodorsal processes so characteristic
of some Oxyptilids, and it possesses not only the median series that
occurs in some Oxyptilids, nor only the lateral series found in others,
but both sets. With this extreme development, and with the Alucitid
features yet to be referred to, it is curious that the pupa of Capperia
heterodactyla (teucrizt) should exhibit the hair-processes so common in
Alucitids, and that Marasmarcha should be entirely without them.
Not, perhaps, entirely, however, as the appendage-cases and wing-
nervures are roughly nodulated. The imago, in wing-form and
-marking, is closer to the Alucitids than any other Platyptiliid. The
hind-margin shows a strong tendency to be lost in the pointed form of
the Alucitids, and, especially, the loss of submarginal line and other
markings in, and parallel to, the hind-margin is notable. The ancillary
appendages of the g$ are still more remarkable. The Platyptiliid
appendages differ from the Alucitid in two marked particulars. The
Alucitids have spines on the clasps, often developed into long, almost
hair-like, processes; these are wanting in all Platyptiliids (with the
possible exception of Hucnemidophorus, where a beginning of this
structure may be claimed) except Warasmarcha. Here, in lunaedactyla
(phaeodactyla), two such spines are present, coiled round in a circle,
and giving a curious appearance of carrying a disc, let into its middle
to the clasp. These two spines are probably united at their bases. In
any case, they are so close together, and parallel, that they often look

MARASMARCHA. 387

as if united for their whole lengths. They are certainly separate for
some distance at their tips. The relationship to Alucita does not,
however, end here, for in an allied species (agrorum, H.-Sch.), of which
the var. tuttodactyla* replaces lunaedactyla in the French Alps—from
Larche, in the Basses-Alps, up to Mont Blanc—these spines are not
only shortened and lose something of the disc aspect on one side, but,
on the other side, are very much shorter, and stand across the clasp, a
definite asymmetry identical with that of the Alucitids.’’

Genus: Marasmarcua, Meyrick.

Synonymy.—Genus: Marasmarcha, Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. London,”
p. 488 (1890); Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,” ii., p. 61 (1892); ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 81 (1895) ;
Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,’’ p. 487 (1895); Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,’’ p. 91 (1895) ;
Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,”’ 3rd ed., p. 75 (1901). Alucita, Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,”’
p. 477 (1811); Hb., “‘Schmett. Hur-,”’ Aluc. ix., figs. 14, 15 (circ. 1819); Tr.,
‘“‘ Die Schmett.,”’ ix., p. 240 (1833). Pterophorus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,”’
Pees (S19) Curt.) “Brit. Hnt.,”” fo. 161 (1827); Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,”’ xi.,
p. 657, pl. 313, fig. 10 (1838) ; Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,’’ lst ed., p. 236, pl. li., figs.
1640, 1641 (1829); Zell., ‘‘ Isis,’ p. 834 (1841); Dup., ‘“‘ Cat. Méth.,”’ p. 382
(1845); Zell., ‘Linn. Ent.,” vi., p. 356 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v.,
p. 378 (1855); Frey, ‘‘Tin. Pter. Schweiz,” p. 410 (1856); Sta., ‘‘ Man.,”’ ii.,
p. 442 (1859); Nolck., ‘‘Lep. Fn. Estl.,’? p. 805 (1871); Porritt, ‘‘ Buckler’s
Larvee,”’ etc., ix., p. 357 (1901). Stenoptilia, Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,’”’ iv., p. 374
(1834). Amblyptilia, Hb., ‘‘ Verz.,’’ p. 430 (1825); Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,”’ iv.,
app. p. 424 (1834). Mimaeseoptilus, Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 343
(1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,’’ iii., pt. 2, p. 793 (1877); Frey,
‘“‘Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 430 (1880); South, ‘‘ Ent.,’? xvi., p. 75 (1883); Leech,
“ Brit. Pyral.,” p. 59 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,” x., p. 164 (1889). Mimaesi-
optilus, Barrt., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ p. 373, pl. 415, figs. 4-4b (1904).

The genus Marasmarcha, as we have already noted (anted, p. 385),
was created by Meyrick for phaeodactyla, Hb. (lunaedactyla, Haw.), and
liophanes, Meyr., a species from Réunion (Trans. Mint. Soc. London,
1886, p. 11). His diagnosis reads :—

Forehead with projecting tuft of scales. Antenne of ¢ ciliated. Palpi
moderate, ascending, slender, terminal joint moderate, pointed. Tibiew simple.
Forewings bifid, cleft from before two-thirds, 2 from near angle, 3 and 4 from point
of angle or stalked, 5 and 6 short, 7 from near below angle, 8 and 9 stalked, 10
absent, 11 from near angle. Hindwings trifid, 3rd segment without black scales in
cilia; 2 from before middle of cell, 3. and 4 short-stalked, 5 and 6 very short, 7 and
8 divergent from beyond cleft—phacodactyla, Hb., liophanes, Meyr.

In 1890, he gave a slightly modified diagnosis (op. cit., p. 488)
which reads thus :—

Face with more or less projecting tuft; ocelli obsolete; tongue developed.
Antenne two-thirds, in ¢ ciliated (one-third). Labial palpi moderate, ascending,
slender, terminal joint moderate, pointed. Maxillary palpi obsolete. Tibi
simple, outer spurs nearly equal inner. Forewings bifid, cleft from before two-
thirds ; vein 2 from near angle, 3 and 4 from a point or stalked, 5 and 6 short, 7
from near 8, 8 and 9 stalked, 10 absent, 11 from near angle. Hindwings trifid,
3rd segment without black scales in dorsal cilia ; vein 2 from before middle of cell,
3 absent, 5 and 6 very short, 7 and 8 divergent from beyond cleft—ehrenbergiana,
Zell., agrorum, H.-Sch., rhypodactyla, Staud., trimmatodactyla, Christ., phaeodac-
tyla, Hb., cinnamomea, Staud., microdactyla, Hb.

The inclusion of microdactyla, Hb., in the genus made it so hetero-
typical that, in 1892, we thought it advisable to restrict the genus to
lunaedactyla (Brit. Nat., 1., p. 61). In bis Handbook of Brit. Lept-
doptera, p. 487, he still maintained the genus for these two isolated

* Characterised by the extension of the white markings along the dise of the
wing to (nearly) the base, and the general very pale coloration (see Ent. Ree.,
vol. xviii., p. 178).

388 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

species, but Hofmann (Die Deutsch Pteroph., pp. 91-92) rightly
restricted the genus to its present limits, and diagnosed it as follows :

The scales of the crown, directed downwards between the antenne, form, with
those of the forehead, an obtuse, very unstable, tuft. Palpi small and thin, Ist
joint below rough-scaled, 2nd and 3rd smooth-scaled, rather ascending, 3rd joint
rather drooping. Antennz of the ¢ extremely shortly ciliated. Fore and middle
tibize at the end, and hind tibie in the middle, and at the end, very moderately
thickened with dark scales. Forewings cleft to one-third; upper segment without
anal angle, obliquely pointed ; lower segment with distinct anal angle and elongated
apex. The Ist and 2nd segments (of hindwings) of the same shape as the upper and
lower segment of the forewings. The 3rd segment linear, without dark scaling on the
inner margin. When at rest the forewings are not folded, at the most the inner
margin of the lower segment is hent downwards. The neuration differs from that
of the genera already noticed in so far that II, (branch 10, HS.) is entirely absent
from the forewings. The common stem of II, and I], arises from the upper angle
of the median cell, Il; from she very weakly indicated discocellular which runs
rather vertically. Stem IV has three branches on the forewings and hindwings.
According to Meyrick, branch 3 of the hindwings, representing our IV,, is said to
be absent, which, however, at least in M. phaeodactyla is not the case. The typical
markings, as well as the characteristics of the larva and pupa, may be gathered
from the description of the only German species. The typical markings of the
forewings approach those of rhododactyla.

Rebel, who follows Meyrick very strangely in many details, separates
(Cat., 8rd ed., p. 75) microdactyla from the true Marasmarchids, and
uses Marasmarcha for lunaedactyla, Haw. (phaeodactyla, Hb.), ehren-
bergiana, Gell., agrorum, H.-Sch., rhypodactyla, Staud., trimmatodactyla,
Chr., and fauna, Mill.

The following larval and pupal characters of the genus may be
noted :

Larva—The depression of the prothoracic scutellum inconspicuous, unpig-
mented (in this respect inclining to Oxyptilines); skin-spicules small, spiny,
closely set, with chitinous bases; the secondary skin-hairs markedly knobbed at
the tips, with basal joint well-developed but not perfect, variable in size, some
being quite as large as the primary tubercular hairs; the primary hairs on a
well-defined base, smooth, with blunt tips; the warts developed almost as in
Stenoptilia ; tubercles i and 11 conjoined into a single wart on the thorax, on the
abdomen trapezoidal, well apart; iv and v on the abdominal segment united into a
wart; both accessory postspiraculars present, but weakly developed; vi forms a
small wart.

Pupa.—wNo definite nose-spine; sete long, well-developed (less so than in

Huenemidophorinae) ; halberd-shaped dorsal processes very like those of Amblyp-
tilnae, but also with processes dorsal to these (suggesting alliance with
Oxyptilines).

In the larva the secondary hairs are large on the warts. The warts
of the Amblyptiliines may easily be regarded as simple tubercular
sete with a few attendant secondary hairs; in Marasmarchinae the
secondary hairs are so much on the same plate as the primary sete
that the tubercles can hardly be refused the name of warts.

The almost identical appearance of the Marasmarchine and Am-
blyptiliine pupz shows that the groups are very closely related, whilst
the differences between them are sufficient to throw the former much
nearer the Oxyptilines than would otherwise be the case. With the
Stenoptiliimes, Marasmarcha has no very close relationship, although
it was long placed in the same genus with them. Of this, Hofmann
says (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 92), “The separation of the genus
from Mimaeseoptilus, Wallgr. (Stenoptilia, Hb.), is perfectly justified
by the quite different formation of the palpi, the absence of the
frontal cone, and the different shape of the upper segment of the fore-

_—_

ea tine,

MARASMARCHA LUNADACTYLA. 389

wing and the first segment of the hindwing, and, finally, by the
absence of branch II, of the forewings.’ Chapman’s discovery of
Alucitine characters in the structure of the g genitalia of some of
the species in this group is most important, as these characters have
no parallel in any other group on the Platyptiliid side of the
‘‘plume”’ stirps.

MarASMARCHA LUN&DAcTYLA, Haworth.

Synonymy.—Species: Lunzedactyla, Haw., ‘‘Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 477 (1811).
Lunedactylus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,”’ p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘‘ Brit., Hnt.,”’
fo. 161 (1827); Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,”’ iv., p. 374 (1834). Pheodactyla, Hb.,
““Schmett. Eur.,” Aluc. ix., figs. 14-15 (circ. 1819); ‘‘ Verz.,’’ p. 480 (1825) ;
Treits., ‘‘ Die Schmett.,’’ ix., p. 240 (1833); Stphs., ‘‘Illus. Haust.,’’ iv., app. p. 424
(1834); Tutt, ‘Ent. Rec.,’’ i., p. 92 (1890); ‘Brit. Nat.,’’ ii., p. 63 (1892);
‘«Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 82 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,” p. 488 (1890); ‘‘ Hand-
book,” p. 438 (1895); Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,’’ p. 93 (1895); Staud. and Reb.,
‘““Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 75(1901). Phzeodactylus, Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,’’ fo. 161 (1827);
Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,’’ xi., p. 657, pl. 313, fig. 10 (1838); Zell., ‘‘Isis,’’ p. 834 (1841);
Dup., ‘‘Cat. Méth.,’’ p. 382 (1844); Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,”’ vi., p. 356 (1852); H.-Sch.,
“« Sys. Bearb.,” v., p. 378 (1855); Frey, ‘‘ Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’’ p. 410 (1856); Sta.,
““Man.,” ii., p. 442 (1859); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 124 (1869) 5 5 Staud.
and Wocke, “Cat., ond ed. , p- 343 (1871); Nolck., ep. Faun. Est.,’’ p. 805
(1871) ; Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ ‘Schmett. Deutsch., iii bp die 245 (0s TN (1877) ; Frey,
‘‘Tep. Schweiz,’ p. 430 (1880) ; South, SOV ias 2 ce Dp. 75, pl.ii., figs. 3-3¢ (1883) ;
ikeechy Brit. Pyr.,”” p: 59, pl. xvii. , fig. 4 (1886) ; Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x., p. 164
(1889) ; Porritt, ‘ Buckler’s Larve,’’ ix., p. 357 (1901); Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,”’
ix., p. 373, pl. 415, figs. 4-4b (1904). Lunadactylus, Wood, ‘‘ Ind. Ent.,’’ Isted.,
p. 236, jolla, Migs sales 1640 (3) (1839). Pallidactylus, Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,’’ p. 236,
pl. li., fig. 1641 (¢ pale) (1839).

ORIGINAL DEScRIPTION.—Alucita lunaedactyla (The crescent Plume).
Alis anticis fusco-brunneis lunula postica albida. Habitat in Cantio
prope Darn Wood Graminosis, at infrequens. Expansio alarum 11 lin.
Descriptio: Ale antice bifide sordide brunnes immaculate, fascia
lunuleeformi seu paululum arcuata ad fissuram albo-flavicante. Postice
tripartite fusce (Haworth, Lepidoptera Britannica, pp. 477-478).

Imaco.—18mm.-20mm. in expanse. Anterior wings, with the two
lobes almost pointed, of a dark cinnamon-brown colour, darker on the
costa; a pale lunar mark extending from the costa to the inner margin
just before the fissure, and continued into the fringe; a pale transverse
hne crossing the upper and lower lobes, commencing from apex;
the discal area streaked longitudinally with pale ochreous; the inner
margin also pale ochreous, markedly so towards the base; fringes
rather darker than the ground colour of the wing, with a pale dash at
apex of upper lobe, and pale latticings in lower lobe. The posterior
wings clossy golden- brown, the plumules narrow, the lower border of
each plumule narrowly ochreous ; fringes dark grey; a bright brown
patch of cilia at apex of each plumule.

SEXUAL DrmMorPHISM.—There is a very marked distinction in the
colour of the sexes; the gs being much darker brown, the ? s paler, more
ochreous. ‘This is accompanied by a stumpier build in the 2, which
has a particularly heavy body when freshly emerged from the pupa.

Mauer eenrratia.—The male genitalia are very peculiar (Deutsch.
Pteroph., taf. iii., fig. 7). The 9th dorsal plate is narrow, divided in
the centre, laterally rather produced downwards. Instead of the
uncus (10th dorsal plate), there is here a roundish process to be
noticed, springing from a broad base, pointed behind, hollow below,
which is furnished outwardly, on both sides, with a tuft of bristles.
Bélow this 10th dorsal plate, and below the anus, there is here, in

390 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

contrast with the genera hitherto noticed, where this structure is
absent, a second small chitincus plate, domed above, and terminating
on the hind-margin in two short thick pointed processes ; under this
lies the short, stout, straight penis. The prensors are hollowed like a
spoon, furnished thickly with stiff bristles in the interior, and
exhibit at the base a round recess, in which is hidden a double
chitinous structure rolled round as a watch spring, posteriorly ending
in two points. The 9th ventral plate is very small and narrow (Hof-
mann).

Variation.—Besides the sexual difference in colour noted above,
there is considerable variation in the amount and brightness of the
ochreous mottling and markings present. Reutti notes that at Carls-
ruhe, in Baden, a pale specimen with more extended yellow markings
was captured, that might almost be taken for ehrenbergianus, Zell.
Bankes observes that each sex shows an appreciable amount of
variation in the depth of the ground-colour, and that, although the
females average decidedly paler than the opposite sex, his lengthy
series of bred Purbeck specimens includes females quite as dark as
the average male, though a trifle lighter than the very darkest males.

Heerayinc.—The eggs are laid chiefly on the underside of a leaf of
the foodplant, usually singly, but sometimes two or three not far
removed from one another. Bankes notes, of eggs laid in confinement,
that a ?, caged with a shoot of Ononts arvensis, laid a number of ova
on the undersides of the leaves during the night of July 11th, 1904.
Bacot observes that the eggs thus laid were very numerous, placed in
all conceivable positions, one little lot being placed in a mass, a feature
which appears not to take place in nature, when the eggs are much
more scattered. We received, on July 10th, 1899, a considerable
number of:eggs that had been laid in a chip box ; although of the flat
type, many were laid on one end, with the micropyle at apex, some,
however, quite normally with the long axis horizontal, whilst others
were inclined at angles varying from about 80° to 90°. The eggs hatched
on July llth and 12th, 1899. Chapman observes that the eggs are laid
singly on stems, leaves, and leaf-stalks of Ononis. Nolcken observes
that, on July 3rd, he enclosed a number of moths in a cage with a
branch of Ononis in bloom; he observed moths in copula the next’
morning, and, on the 5th, a number of eggs were observed mostly laid
singly on the underside of the leaves, but occasionally two near
together; several also were laid on the stem, and, when this was so,
they were usually placed in small groups; some were also laid on the
walls of the cage; the earliest larvee appeared on July 17th, 7.e., the
ego-stage lasted twelve days.

Ovum.—When first laid, pale greenish-yellow in colour (Bankes,
July 12th, 1904). In shape oval or ovoid, the sides flattened, but not
depressed, colour bright yellow-green, with a semitransparent, highly-
varnished appearance ; the surface roughly and irregularly sculptured,
or faceted, but the facets crude and vague, not at all clear-cut or sharp,
yet much plainer than in other plume ova examined up to date
of observation. Length -550mm.--575mm., width :85mm.--4mm ,
thickness shghtly over ‘2mm. (Bacot, July 18th, 1904, ova received
from Bankes on July 18th). Egg of flat type, oval in outline, notice-
ably depressed on upper surface; shell much wrinkled, evidently very
delicate, but no trace (under low power) of any regular sculpturing,

MARASMARCHA LUNADACTYLA. 391

Length about :‘55mm., breadth nearly -4mm. Colour entirely yellow,
surface exceedingly shiny; when near hatching, the yellow colour
still remains, but the micropylar area is occupied with a com-
paratively large black-brown spot, which is exceedingly conspicuous
(the head of embryo). When hatched, the eggshell is colourless and
perfectly transparent, so that colour is derived from embryo. | Iiggs
laid in a chip box, commenced to hatch July 11th, 1899, directly after
description was made] (Tutt). A large oval egg, with a faint suspicion
of flattening at one end. Length 0-60mm., width 0°35mm., height
024mm. The sculpturing is of cells of about 0:024mm. diameter,
roughly hexagonal, without well-marked demarcations, rather as if
each cell were a flattening, as by a hammer, than that any raised ribs
separated them (in this respect very like the egg of Merrifieldia tridac-
tyla (tetradactyla) (Chapman). The egg is light greenish-yellow when
laid, but, before it is hatched, a dark spot appears towards the apex
(Nolcken).

Hasits or tarva.—The newly-hatched yellow larva is exceedingly
active, crawling quickly and restlessly. What happens to it between
the time that it hatches and the following spring is unknown.
(One suspects that it mines, like the Stenoptilids, into its foodplant,
_hybernates therein in its second instar, and comes out to feed openly
the following May.) Chapman says (in litt.): ‘‘ Where the larva goes,
as soon as hatched, has not been discovered. Analogy would suggest
that it fed somewhere, fed up till it was well-grown in its second
instar, and then hybernated. No trace of it, or its hybernaculum, has,
however, yet been found, after several searches, both on pot plants and
in the field. In the spring, larvee were found; the smallest of these was
presumably in the third instar, 7.e., one moult beyond the second instar
(hybernating stage), and, as there were two further moults, this would
give the larva five instars. A careful measurement of the head, how-
ever, upsets any such inference, and shows the smallest spring larve to
be in the second instar, and, if they have moulted once since hyber-
nating, the larva must hybernate in first instar. The question then,
not only as to how they hybernate, but at what stage they hybernate,
remains unsolved. The sizes of the heads of the larva at the four
stages is as follows :—

MEASURED. || CALCULATED AT RATIO QRDS.
1}
—||— pete:
MARASMARCHA LUNZE- LENGTH OF :

WIDTH. LENGTH. WIDTH.
DACTYLA. HEAD. |
a a EE |e ee ee : ||
mt

First stadium. . ate 0'105mm. | 0:165mm. | 0-108mm. 0-180mm.

Second stadium (first |

spring instar) 0-180 ,, 0°300 ,, 0-180 ,, 0-300 ,

Third stadium ue 0:300 ,, | Q:480 ,, 0-300 ,, 0-500 ,,

Fourth stadium a 0°540' ,, | 0:820 ,, 0-500 ,, 0:820 ,,

|

Comparing this with similar measurements of Amblyptilia cosmodactyla,
Hb., in which we know there are only four instars, and using grds
the same multiplier), we get :— :

392 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

MEASURED. CALCULATED.
|
|
AMBLYPTILIA COSMO-

Sh ee LENGTH. WIDTH. LENGTH. | WIDTH.
Sees ES FI ee eee
First instar .. -- | 015mm. Q-21mm. | 014mm. | 0-21mm.
Second instar.. Ss 0:24 ,, 0°36 ,, We O27 5. | “OsGice
Third instar .. een Os39" Ord! a i O:acmee | 0-595
Fourth instar.. .. | 0°63 ,, 0-99, || 0-63, |) \0ssaie

These are all, in fact, more accordant than we have any right to expect,
allowing for the fact that the measurements are made by taking nearest
mm. on camera outlines, made from specimens in which the heads (on
microscopic slides) are often a good deal distorted. In late May, the
larve are first to be noticed on the young leaves, near the centre of a
shoot, but they grow rapidly, and soon spread over the plant, and, by
mid-June, are often fullgrown; at that time, however, there is con-
siderable difference in the size of various larve, and some are not full-
fed till well towards the end of the month, or even until the end of
July ; they feed, in their later stadia, fully exposed, and, on a warm
sunny afternoon in mid-June, may usually be taken in considerable
numbers, their colour, however, harmonising remarkably well with the
tint of the foliage of their foodplants. Bankes notes that, ‘‘when very
young, they feed on the tenderest leaves in the heart of the shoot, and
afterwards generally on the more expanded leaves of Ononis arvensis,
either eating out portions of them from the margins inwards, or some-
times gnawing holes through them; they may be found in almost any
position on the plant. The well-grown larva, in nature as well as in
confinement, is also very fond of biting through the stout shoot-stalk
(completely detaching the upper part of it) in order to feed on the
lower remaining portion of the stalk itself. Sitting upright along this,
it devours its whole substance, rind and all, from above downwards for
a short distance, and then, apparently, often moves on to attack a fresh
stem in the same manner. I have not tried the larve with growing plants,
but have found them extremely difficult to rear indoors on cut shoots of
Ononis, however often renewed, hardly any, out of large numbers, except
those almost fullfed when collected, having reached the pupal state, all the
rest gradually pining away and dying. Perhaps they require sunshine, or,
when collected close to the sea, as has been the case with all my larve,
it may be essential to their welfare that their food, if gathered inland,
should be sprayed with salt water.” Chapman writes (in litt.): ‘“‘ The
fashion the Jarva has in the last instar of gnawing through the stem a
little below the top, or occasionally the petiole of a large leaf, is
precisely like that described about Capperia heterodactyla on Teucrium.
It seems to do much imbibition of sap, as well as eating. My experi-
ence of the larva in confinement is the same as that reported by Mr.
Bankes. I think the plant has much to do with this; it is one that
withers rapidly, and must become unwholesome if kept succulent
artificially. I brought home some of the larve of the closely allied J/.
fauna this spring (1906). One lot had already all but perished, another
was beginning to suffer, but to a great extent recovered, and some
finally pupated satisfactorily on being put on a growing plant of
Ononis arvensis, though its foodplant is another species, very like

MARASMARCHA LUNASDACTYLA. 393

Ononis arvensis in the young shoots, but later more woody and spinose,
and like our O. spinosa. On May 16th, 1906, I brought home
some branches of Ononis arvensis; some of these had a couple of
inches of the portion of the stem that often occurs between the
branch above ground and the great root-stock. Thinking they might
prove useful later, I potted them, hoping they would strike. To assist
them I covered the pot with a glass. They were potted on May 18th.
On May 20th, looking to see how they were going on, I saw on them
two young larve of M. lunaedactyla, that were probably not there on the
17th. Examining them more carefully, I found three larve, all in the
supposed second skin, one quite small, the other two a good deal larger.
I put these on slides, and carefully examined the portions of plant
they were on. One larger one was on one plant, and the other two,
and a (beetle ?) larva very like the small one, on the other. In
neither case could I find a hibernaculum, though, in both cases, the
central stem was abortive, with a dead and partly destroyed end, and
the branches were two or three lateral ones, about two inches long
(the weather had been cold and dry, and most plants were only a few
incheslong, only afew favoured ones being oversixinches). Still, [think
it tolerably certain that, at least the smallest larva was brought bome
in its hibernaculum, and left it after the plants were potted, as, before
gathering them, I searched the patch of Ononis carefully for minute
larvee, and could not see a trace of one. ‘The size of the smallest
larva certainly suggested that it was not in the skin in which it had
hybernated, 7.¢., it seemed to have only recently moulted, being much
smaller than the other two larve that were certainly in the same instar.
This wouldsuggest that the larva hybernates in the first instar, and moults
on, or before, leaving the hibernaculum.’’ Ovenden notes that, in 1904,
the larvee were very small in early June at Cuxton, and each then rested
in the middle of a leaf of Ononis, choosing either the upper- or
underside, the larve not restricting themselves to either side ; when older,
the larva seems to eat a shoot from its apex, going downwards for two or
three joints, and, when the lowest harder material is reached, the larve
bury their heads in the centre of a shoot until they are only half
exposed. Barrett observes that the larva rests on the leaves of
restharrow, to which, from its colour and downy appearance, it bears
an accurate resemblance. South notes that it feeds on the terminal
leaves of Ononis, but is difficult to see owing to the similarity in
colour to the leaves, and is best beaten, if the situation be favourable.
Bacot observes that, on August 3rd and 4th, 1904, he found two larve
resting on leaves of the foodplant, that they were weak-looking, and
that their bodies looked knotted and unhealthy, sluggish crawlers,
though somewhat restless. In Hesse, the larve are to be found
throughout May, June, and July, living gregariously, and feeding on
the leaves and tender stems of Ononis spinosa and QO. repens (Réssler) ;
near Ratisbon, the larve are to be found sometimes in numbers,
mostly on the terminal twigs of the foodplants, the tender stems being
often eaten through (Schmidt); livesin June, and early July, on Ononis
repens and other species of Ononis, mostly on the terminal shoots of
the plants, the tender stalks of which are often eaten through; Zeiler
‘states that the larvee eat the flowers (Hofmann). Larve are noted as
occurring on July 9th, 1848, near Rhoden (Speyer); June 38rd-July
8rd, 1866, at Cdlljall (Noleken); June 26th, 1886,at Bookham (Briggs) ;

394 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

abundant on June 24th, 1890, at Dursley (Griffiths) ; also at Dursley,.
May 9th-22nd, 1898, and June 8rd, 1895 (Bartlett) , June 11th, 1898,
at Reigate (Adkin); larve and pupe, at Benfleet, July 1st, 1900
(Whittle); June 11th-14th, 1908, at Dover (Tutt); some very small.
on June 4th, 1904, others fullgrown (and with a few pupe) on June
22nd, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ; also on June 5th, 1904, at.
Cuxton (Ovenden); June 8th, 1904, at Benfleet (Whittle); June, 1905,.
a fullgrown larva found feeding on one of the plants over which moths.
were enclosed to lay their eggs the previous July (Chapman).
Larva.—First instar (newly-batched): Barely 1mm. in length, nearly
colourless; head very slightly tinted with black eye-spots; without skin-.
points, tubercular setz in usual positions, but vi absent; spiracles
very prominent, as hemispherical projections. Tubercles all separate,
each with one hair—i with a short porrected hair about 0:-02mm..
long; 11 with a long hair directed backwards, 007mm. long (i.e., about
width of a segment); 111 with a rather longer hair, 0‘08mm., directed
outwards and forwards; iv very long, about 0-09mm., directed outwards ;:
v short, well above and in front of iv, length about 0-03mm.
Prothorax with the three front hairs of plate about 0:05mm. long, the
central back one very long, 0-08mm., two others quite minute; one
long hair, 0-08mm. long, in prespiracular set, one (perhaps two) minute
ones with it, two at base of legs. The meso- and metathorax, with
the usual four pairs of hairs, except that the second hair of the third
pair is not made out. The true legs not dark, long, with long, slender,
sharp claws. The prolegs long, slender, delicate, apparently with two-
hooks, but the whole so delicate and colourless that most specimens
look as if only a fleshy pad existed; claspers with apparently three
hooks. Hairs all smooth and sharp-pointed. A very long hair on the
9th abdominal (? seta on ii). Second instar [stadium preceding
penultimate moult (see anted, p. 891)|: Length, 33mm. Greyish in
tint, really white, with numerous black skin-points. | Head black }.
prothoracic and anal plates also black, but not so densely so as not to
become translucent on magnification. The prothoracic plate with
three hairs on either side of front margin, and three others at each
side, one at middle of posterior margin, and a smaller one on either
side of this, and a little forward of it; the outer at outer margin
of plate; in front of, and a little below, the pale rufous projecting
spiracle, is an angular tubercle with three (?) hairs. All the tubercular
plates appear black (but magnified are seen to be translucent); the
hairs nearly white. On the meso- and metathorax, the usual double-
haired tubercles occur, with a small accessory behind the third pair.
On the abdominal segments tubercle i has a short porrect hair; 1 has
a longer hair directed inwards and backwards; on abdominal
segments 1-6, 11 has a secondary hair outside, and behind this one;
in all cases, the base extends in this direction; iii has a long hair
directed upwards and backwards, and there is a faint indication of a
secondary hair behind it (actually developed in one or two instances,
e.g., on the 5th abdominal) ; iv and v each carry one hair, the front one
(v) forwards, and slightly higher than the other (iv), which is directed
backwards; vi has a short solitary hair, directed slightly backwards ;.
the marginal tubercle, vii, has the three usual hairs. On the 9th
abdominal segment, i and 11 are conjoined. The anal plate carries.
five hairs on each side. The hairs are nearly all rather swollen at the-

MARASMARCHA LUNADACTYLA. 395

extremities, but not spiculated. Prolegs moderate in length, with the
usual chitinous tube forming the “prop”; crochets, three in number.
There is nowhere any trace of secondary skin-hairs (Chapman, June
8th, 1904). Third instar (stadium preceding last moult): Length,
5mm. Shape cylindrical, of fairly even thickness, tapering at the
thoracic segments (chiefly the prothorax) towards the medium-sized,
polished, black head, and, at the posterior segments suddenly to the
blunt anus. The larva, as usual, well raised on tall prolegs, the anal
pair set backwards as in that of Stenoptilia pterodactyla, giving it a
straddling appearance. The segmentation is distinct, but the sub-
segmentation much less so on the abdominal segments, where the only
division, viz., that between i and ii, is only slightly apparent. On the
thoracic segments the subseementation is much clearer, and consists
of three subsegments, viz., small anterior and posterior, and a large
central one, which bears the dorsal warts. The spiracles are large and
raised, but not tubed, as in the larva of Ovendenia septodactyla (ienigianus),
those on the prothorax and the 8th abdominal segment being larger
than any of the others, although that on the 1st abdominal is also
slightly larger than usual; in colour, they are pale brown. The skin
bears a very noticeable coat of coarse, black, spicules, or skin-points,
rather large gaps occurring in this coat where the primary and
accessory tubercles arise. There are no secondary hairs in this skin
unassociated with the primary or accessory tubercles. The primary
hairs on tubercles ii, iii, and v are very long, and either taper, or are
blunt-ended, but on i and iv they are shorter, and are slightly expanded
at the tips. The secondary hairs, associated with the primary hairs,
are considerably shorter, and have expanded or trumpet-shaped tops.
While the accessory postspiracular tubercles bear single hairs of this
character, most of the primary ones have one or more secondary hairs
associated with the long primary ones, but iii and iv, on the meso- and
metathorax, are exceptions to this general rule. All the hairs are
white, and the long ones minutely thorned. Head black and polished,
and bears a few weak hairs, some of which are dark-coloured. The
prothoracic and anal plates are plain and well-developed, but not
distinctively coloured. The primary hairs are mounted on large
chitinous bases, and these, together with the associated secondaries,
are mounted on raised skin-areas, forming primitive warts. Tubercles
1 and 1i are remote, iv and v approximated as usual. On the thoracic
segments, 1 and 11 are on the same wart, and the secondary groups on
the posterior subdivisions of these segments are represented by two
slightly separated hairs behind each group (Bacot, June 12th, 1904).
Same instar (lying up for last moult): Length, 6mm.; very like larva
when lain up for previous moult, but looks a little greener. The skin
is covered with black skin-points, but there are no hairs on general
surface. The tubercles are larger than in last skin, and have various
secondary hairs. The prothorax is much the same, but, on the meso-
thorax, the first and third pairs of tubercles each have one secondary
hair in addition. The little tubercle behind ii and iii has two hairs
(one above the other); immediately behind i is a tubercle with two
hairs (one above the other) ; and behind ii is a hair that may be called
a tubercle, or a secondary hair simply ; its base is hardly tubercular.
On the metathorax, the same changes have taken place, except that the
tubercle behind i is a single hair, like that behind ii, and without base.

396 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

On the abdominal segments, i, il, ili, and iv+v have each two
secondary hairs varying to one, or three in some cases; ili has most
frequently only one; vi has one; vil usually the three ordinary hairs (on
one plate); there is an accessory hair like a secondary behind the spiracle,
but, except this, there are no secondary skin-hairs on the abdominal
segments. The secondary hairs on the meso- and metathorax are
those already noted on the first and third paired tubercles, a small one
on the accessory tubercle behind the third pair, and three that are skin-
hairs (or accessories), two behind the first double tubercle, one above
the other, and a third, also posterior, a good way below the third paired
tubercles ; none of these seem quite constant as to presence, or position,
except one of those behind the first tubercle; the props of the prolegs
are tubes of dark chitin; there are five black crochets to each. The
primary hairs are all somewhat thickened at end, and the secondaries
are markedly so (Chapman, June 8th, 1904). Fourth instar: Qmm.-
10mm. long; build, rather long and slender, tapering gradually to head
and anus. The warts much more developed, yellow in colour; the
raised skin-areas, which carry them, bear no spicules, so that the warts
stand out in marked contrast with the dark green skin, and its dense
coat of small dark spicules; a few scattered skin-surface secondary hairs
now present, and there is a structural (caused by the absence of
spicules) mediodorsal line extending forwards across the meta- and
part of mesothorax. The head black, mottled with very pale brown.
A depression on either side of the prothoracic scutellar plate, in the
same position as in Stenoptilia (pterodactyla), but the depressions
unpigmented. The secondary hairs (accompanying primary sete) on
the warts much more numerous than in preceding instar. The skin-
surface is of a bright and vivid green, but, to a general view, it appears
a dull green, owing, I take it, to the dulling effect of the hairs, and the
coat of black spicules. There are many secondary hairs present, in
addition to the tubercular hairs, all the secondary, and some of the
tubercular, hairs, being bulbed at tip. A darker green mediodorsal
line is present on all segments. The 1st to 7th abdominal segments
have a slight circular pit, or depression, in the centre of dorsum. On
the 8rd abdominal segment there is a small black spot, or wart, in the
centre of the depression. Head very small, smooth, and shiny, with
longish hairs; partially retractile; in colour green, with a good deal
of black mottling on face and down cheeks. Body stout, tapering at
either end; segments very distinct. Certain parts of the medio-
dorsal line on thoracic segments are shiny, the skin-surface being bare
of spicules at these points. The tubercles are not nearly so prominent
as in the Alucitine species (Porrittia galactodactyla, Alucita penta-
dactyla, Ovendenia septodactyla (lienigianus), and Oidaematophorus
lithodactyla. The spiracles are low, with walls but slightly raised
above skin-surface; the chitinous rims are pale brown. ‘The
prolegs long and slender, as in other species. Tubercles i and ii are
in trapezoidal position, well apart in comparison with their position in
Porrittia galactodactyla, but near in comparison with Adactylus bennetia,
ii slightly larger than i [although on the meso- and metathorax i 1s very
large and ? 11 is reduced (so far as I can judge, owing to the confusing
secondary hairs) toasingle hair]; 111 is large and directly above spiracle;
iv and v form a conjoined wart below the spiracle, situated on lateral
ridge; both the posterior secondary warts observed in Oidaematophorus

MARASMARCHA LUNDACTYLA. 397

lithodactyla, the upper in line behind 111, and the lower behind iv and
vy, are represented by large single-haired tubercles; vi and vii are also.
present. If the dark ring round the base of the large central hairs on
each wart may be taken as a proof that it is identifiable with the
primitive setz#, around which the large wart, bearing numerous
secondary hairs, has developed, and I think that such an assumption
is not unwarranted, we have, in this species, an excellent clue to the
identification of the primary from the secondary warts in the other
species. Tubercles i and 11, on abdominal segments, both bear one large,
central, dark-based hair; ii1 also bears one, and the large oval sub-
spiracular bears two; iv and v, separate as regards their bases, both form
members of one large group mounted on a single wart; vi has one,
and vii (the marginal) three, black-based, hairs. The secondary hairs
above referred to are not black-based, while, on the meso- and meta-
thorax, there are two black-based hairs on each of the anterior tubercles
described above as 1. This points to the probability of the smaller
posterior wart on the other species being secondary warts, the
anterior containing both the primary hairs within its limits. One
would, of course, prefer to see all the larve in their first skins before
considering this point as definitely settled (Bacot, June 18th, 1899).
Fullgrown: Deep apple-green in colour, with a dirty look, due to the dark
hairs, and especially the dark skin-points; 10mm.-12mm. long, or more
if stretched, tapering at each end. Secondary hairs are abundant, but,
when examined, skin-hairs are found not to be so plentiful as at first
glance appeared. The tubercles have very large primary hairs, e.y.,
that on 11, on the forward abdominal segments, is 2mm. long, and the
tubercles have well-developed basal plates. The primary hairs are
always very distinct, then there are one or two large secondary hairs
well up on the plate, from 0-5mm.-0:'7mm. long, and then, more
towards the margin of the plate, three or four smaller hairs; then, beyond
the plate, are often two or three skin-hairs that are still smaller, but
look rather as if they were dependants of the tubercle or wart rather than
independent skin-hairs. Then there are the two secondary or skin-
hairs behind the spiracle (one a little above spiracle, one a little below
iv-+v) that must be differentiated from skin-hairs, so that there remain,
as genuine skin-hairs, about sixteen across the dorsum of an abdominal
segment from spiracle to spiracle. The hairs of iv, vi, and vii are still
pointed; the remainder (of the primaries) are all expanded at tips.
The secondaries are all markedly expanded apically, the smallest, down
to 0:12mm. or even O:lmm. in length, being as markedly so as any.
The hairs are nearly all pale, the tubercular base dark. On the pro-
thoracic plate are only the six usual hairs, no secondaries, and the
dark patch towards outer end; the spiracle large, conical; three long
hairs on tubercle in front, and two on that above spiracle; there are
three or four very small skin-hairs behind plate, and as many more
below spiracle. On the mesothorax, all the tubercles have secondary
hairs (as noted above) ; the accessory, behind the third pair, has one
secondary hair; there are three hairs in something of a row, behind
the first tubercles, these are large (0°5mm.), and must represent the
accessory tubercles so usual here in Alucitids. There is a much less
regular group of small secondaries, on the same point of metathorax,
that are obviously more than ordinary scattered skin-hairs. These
segments have about eighteen skin-hairs on either side, apart from

398 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

those already alluded to. The skin-points are very abundant and
quite black, even under considerable magnification. The prolegs are
much as in last skin, apparently with only five crochets (the claspers
with seven). The head, previously black, has now pale markings.
There is some difficulty as to the determination of the tubercles.
The tubercles, however, are black, and, if the rule may be taken that
black points are true tubercles, the following may be made out on the
abdominal segments: 1and lias trapezoidals,i rather nearer median line
than ii, in their usual positions; iii also in its usual position; i and iii
on the Ist, and ii on 2nd, subsegment. These tubercles are black,
with a long pale hair, and a circle of shorter pale hairs round it on
the general surface, but quite as close to the tubercle as are the groups
of hairs forming wartson the larvaof Porrittia yalactodactyla. Belowthe
spiracle is a raised boss, green in colour, with two black points (iv and
v); this is placed rather above the flange, which is marked by a yellow
line; the larger of these points is a little in front of spiracle in
position, the smaller in front of, and slightly above, the larger. In
the centre of the space between this and the prolegs is a single black
point, and, at the bases of the prolegs, three points, placed triangularly,
the largest being above, and posterior to, the others. Ventrally, there
is one minute tubercle on either side of the medioventral line, where
there are no prolegs. The abdominal prolegs carry five short brown
hooks, the anal bear six hooks (Chapman). South describes the larva
(Entom., xvi., pp. 75-76). Buckler figured (Larvae, ete., pl. clxiii.,
fig. 8) a larva of this species, after its final moult, on May 31st, 1870;
imagines from this and other larve were bred June 21st-24th, 1870.

Fooppiants.—Ononis repens (Frey), Ononis hircina (Nolcken),
Ononis spinosa (Rossler), O. arvensis (Barrett).

Parasites.—Ischnus thoracicus, Grv., bred from a pupa (Kalten-
bach).

ee The larva appears to prefer a leaf of its foodplant, to
which to attach itself for pupation, rather than any other part of the
plant. Barrett says that it ‘attaches itself by the tail to the surface
of a leaf,” to which South adds “ generally on one of the terminal
leaves.” Bankes observes that, of four pupe and one pupating larva,
found on June 22nd, 1904, in the Isle of Purbeck, two only were on
the uppersides, while the remaining three were on the undersides, of
leaves of Ononis arvensis. Hofmann says that the larve prefer the
stems of the foodplant for pupation, but Speyer notes that, near Rhoden,
he found the pup on the leaves of O. repens ; Nolcken also says that
they are usually placed on the undersides of the leaves, at the angles of
the stem, or in similar places, and attached to silken webs.

Pupa.—Varies from 8mm.-10mm. in length, the average between
Smm. and 9mm.; diameter of a large example, at 4th-5th abdominal
seoments, about 2mm., of a small one about 1-5mm.-1:75mm. The
pupa is much more cylindrical than most “plume” pups, a section
would be nearly circular, whilst it has many more primitive characters
than those of most Alucitids [Porrittia galactodactyla, Oidaematophorus
lithodactyla, or Ovendenia septodactyla (lienigianus)|. The pupa of this
species, like that of Hucnemidophorus rhododactyla, shows a laterally
constricted waist, when viewed ventrally, at about midway up the
wing-cases. It is either pale green in colour, or very pale yellow-
brown. The spiracles are prominent, but only slightly raised. The

MARASMARCHA LUNASDACTYLA. 399

‘tubercles are primitive, single-haired, with black bases, as in the larva,
but are, in some instances, raised on specialised horns, having
apparently a skin, and not tubercular, origin, although, in some
instances, they occur on the same area. A markedly specialised dorsal
ridge is found in this species. A small, central, dorsal, horn-like
process occurs on the abdominal segments 1-8, very small on the
1st and 8th, and reaching its greatest development on the 8rd or 4th
abdominal ; on the abdominal segments 2-8, this forms the centre of
three dorsal horns, the other two being situated one on either side,
and, except on the Ist and 8th abdominal segments, being very much
larger than the central one; on the middle segments the outer horns
have smaller tines at their bases. The central series above described
is situated between the dorsal tubercles i and 11, which are, on most
segments, rather close together but separated bya process developed from
the skin-area between them ; longitudinally, these processes form the
outer dorsal ridges and rise in a double horn, the anterior and larger
branch, or tine, bearing 1 on the front of its base, and the posterior and
smaller bearing 11 on the back of its base; on the 2nd, 8rd, and 4th
abdominal segments these processes are very large, on the 38rd
abdominal segment they are developed to an enormous size relatively
to the other segments; on the 2nd abdominal the base of i is situated
some distance up the front tine, ii being situated at the base of the
posterior tine; on the 3rd abdominal, the processes remind one
somewhat of a thick and heavy stag’s-horn, the posterior tine being
very much smaller than the anterior, and the bases of the tubercles
well up on the horn; on the remaining abdominal segments, as far
as the 8th, this arrangement holds good, but the size of the process is
very greatly reduced; on the 4th abdominal it is only about one-third the
size, and it gradually dwindles to the 8th abdominal. Tubercle iii is in
normal position above the spiracle, and is not raised above the general
level, and carries a single hair with black tubercles at base; iv and v
beneath spiracle, v directly beneath, and iv slightly posterior to it but
in the same horizontal plane; vi carries a single hair with black base,
and vii carries two hairs, with their bases slightly apart. The hairs
are rather short, stout, tapering, and slightly knobbed at tips, but not
thorny. On the metathorax, only a pair of dorsal tubercles are in
evidence, and these are set anteriorly on the segment; there are also
two lateral tubercles above base of wing, iiiand?iv. Onthemesothorax,
two pairs of dorsal tubercles are present, placed trapezoidally, the anterior
pair, 1, being considerably nearer in towards median line than ii, and
the two pairs quite a considerable distance apart; on this segment
also two lateral tubercles are present above bases of wings; one, I
suppose, is undoubtedly iii, but I am doubtful of the other. [Can it be
iv moved up? Theoretically, only iii should be present, as the wing
springs from the spiracular area. Quail has suggested to me that,
in Cossus, what is iv (subspiracular) on the abdominal segments becomes
the second hair of i11 on the thoracic segments; if this be so, it would
account for the fact that iv of the abdominals is missing on the
thoracic segments (2nd and 3rd) in the Sphingids and ? other groups.

(Bacot, June 29th, 1899. Compared with empty pupa-cases, December
12th, 1903). Bright green in colour, with various darker markings, some-
times a bright green pupa, with various darker markings, sometimes the
latter are so abundant that the pupa might rather be called black, some-

400 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

times quite wanting ; along with the dark markings, the green colour
sometimes becomes much darker; one specimen, apparently healthy, is
of a pale terra-cotta colour, almost reddish, with no dark markings.
Length, 9:‘Omm.-9:°5mm.; thickness, 2-Omm.-2°2mm., very slightly
thickening to 4th abdominal segment, thence tapering; there is practi-
cally no “sphinx ”’ curvature, but the face is not at all, or inappreci-
ably, flattened, so that the pupa is of circular section nearly through-
out. The dark markings are those of the antennz and appendages,
wings, dorsal flanges, and spines; dark shadings on the segments, in
front of, and between, ii and spiracle, and belowiv+v. There are
no hairs on the appendages, but the legs, antenne, and wing-
veins are nodulated, as if they ought to have a hair on each
nodule. The median vein terminates abruptly at a cross-vein, and
beyond, two veins arise and coalesce, in a way not seen in any other
(non-plume) pupa that I have seen. Of hairs, the prothorax has them
on i, 11, and i11; the mesothorax has a dorsal pair, and a wing-basal pair
(first two pairs of larval hairs ?); the metathorax has one on i (single),

and two hairs on anterior outer corner (second pair of larval hairs ?); the
1st abdominal segment, on 1, ij, 111, the 2nd abdominal on 1, ij, i11, iv, and
v. Nearly all these hairs are white, and about 0-3mm.-0-5mm. long ;
tubercles 1 and 11 well separate; iv and v separate, but rather close, well
behind the spiracle, and very nearly on a level; they are much the
same on the other abdominal segments; vi is directed backwards; vil
has two hairs at a level—equal, short, and well separate, nothing more
ventral. The chief feature of the pupa (with that of Amblyptilia
cosmodactyla), is the remarkable development of processes in connection
with the dorsal flange and the tubercles. The dorsal flange exists on
the thorax, and on the Ist, 2nd, and 8rd abdominal segments (as in
Platyptilia); on the 38rd abdominal, it is faintly marked from i to front
border of segment. The largest of these spines isa large halbert-shaped
process on the 3rd abdominal segment. This spine projects dorsally,
about O-6mm.,in line with the dorsal flange on either side; itis a little
flattened laterally and twisted ; it projects directly upwards (7.e., dorsally),
being just twisted a little forward on its base, for about half its length,
it then gives off forwards a boss which carries the hair of i; then it
slopes backwards, and, after narrowing suddenly, curves forwards, and
ends in a rather sharp point; behind it, quite separate, but from some
points of view seeming to be part of it,isa sharp conical spine of about
half the length, and carrying ii near its base, on the outer posterior
aspect. On this same segment is, behind ili, a short beehive-shaped
conical eminence, a variation apparently of the secondary hair, existing
here in the larva; it has an obsoletely-spiculated, ringed, aspect. It is
obscure on the 1st and 2nd abdominal segments, but, on the 4th and
following ones, is much as on the 8rd abdominal; a trace of a similar
process exists between iv and v; also on the 8rd, there are, dorsally—
(1) Two horns that are in line, across the back, with 11, and dividing the
space into three equal parts, curved backwards, ringed, and obsoletely-

spiculated, rather more than half as long as the horn of ii. (2) In
front of these, in the middle line, is a similar very short one, much like
the one behind iii. (3) These three are hardly represented on the 1st
and 2nd abdominal segments, but are well-marked on the 4th and
following segments; they are green with faint black shading, not dense
black like the flange processes. Tubercles i and ii carry similar horns

MARASMARCHA LUNAXDACTYLA. 401

on all the other abdominal segments, very small on the 1st abdominal,
larger on the 2nd, those on the 4th three-fourths the size of those no
the 3rd, that on 11 being almost as large; they are still quite pronounced
on the 8th, but are wanting on the 9th, abdominal. Along the meso-
thorax is a pale mediodorsal sutural line; the flanges on each side are
nodulated in front, but, posteriorly, at highest point of ridges, carry
two black flattened processes, with a small white one behind, and a
large flat white one in front. Those further forward, seen in profile,
look like a serrated alpine ridge covered with snow. ‘The surface-
sculpturing, as in most of these “plumes,”’ is, firstly, a series of fine
parallel transverse ridges, too large for sculpturing proper, too small
and numerous for subsegmentation. There are, for instance, twelve
or thirteen on the 8rd abdominal segment in front of spine. This
skin-sculpturing is most elaborate and elegant. Across the segment, in
lieu of the principal processes and tubercles; the surface is nearly
smooth and structureless. In front of this are eight or nine transverse
ridges (on 5th abdominal, taken as a sample), of which six or seven are
very pronounced ; they are narrow and straight, and without any
waving or side valleys. The whole surface in the valleys, up the
slopes of the ridges, and where the tops of the ridges are wide
enough, is covered with fine acuminate skin-points, rather pointing
backwards, and arranged alternating in rows (not with absolute
regularity). This sculpturing is all round the segments, but
is somewhat smoothed down in spiracular region. Behind the
tubercular and spinous zone is the intersegmental zone, with beautiful
tessellated pavement, each lozenge of which carries, centrally, a fine
skin-spicule, pointing backwards; this has a most unusual effect, and
one of most orderly regularity. It may be noted that, in a dark pupa,
met with in examining these structures, the spines of tuberclesi and ii
(most frequently separate), are closely conjoined on all the segments.
The cremaster is very like that of Amblyptilia cosmodactyla, Hb., with a
forward portion on the bosses of the 9th abdominal segment, each side
with about 86 hooks, and a posterior portion confined to the veniral side
of the cremastral spine, each side with about 60 or 70 hooks. The
hooks are about 0-2mm. long, and have a slightly different ending to
those of A. cosmodactyla. Itis, asif, before the hook of A. cosmodactyla
was quite finished, a further, half-turn was given to the end. The eye-
piece carries two hairs, and is attached to the dorsal headpiece, which
is itself indeterminable, except that it sometimes carries two (nearly
always one) hairs, but is otherwise a colourless membrane, indistinguish-
able from the rest of the inner membrane, connecting the eyepiece to
the prothorax. The spiracle-cover on the mesothorax is a short arch,
with a hairy or spiculate surface, much like that of A. cosmodactyla.
The hindwings end at posterior border of the 2nd abdominal segment.
The forewings show three inner veins, and the cubital, with its three
branches, very distinctly ; the colouring in dark pupe is enhanced by
rows of slight nodosities, in pale ones the veins forward of these
are not so distinguishable. The face carries four hairs (two each side),
the clypeus one each side, and the labrum two on each side. The
arrangement of appendages seems otherwise much the same as in
A. cosmodactyla (Chapman, June 27th, 1904).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—Single-brooded, usually occurring from end
of June until early August, but varying a little in different years

402 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

according to the season. In France, we note July, near Léry
(Dupont); in Belgium, June and July, at Namur, etc. (Lambillion) ;
but July and August at Rochefort (Crombrugghe); in the Channel
Islands, several captured, June, 1891, near Gouffre (Luff); in the
Baltic Provinces it occurs in July, abundant July 3rd-15th, 1896, at
Colljall, near Massa Krug (Nolcken); in Germany at the same time as
in England, viz., end of June in the Crefeld district (Stollwerck) ; late
June to August, about Wiesbaden (Réssler); end of June to mid-
August, in Waldeck, larve, pupe, and imagines, July 9th, 1€48, at
Rhoden (Speyer); June to August, at Ratisbon (Hofmann and
Herrich-Schaffer); June and July, in the lowlands of Baden, August,
at higher elevations (Meess and Spuler). British Recorps: Imagines,
August 8rd, 1862, at Sanderstead (Sang); July 7th-20th, 1870,
abundant at the Lizard (Marshall); imagines, August 5th, 1879, at
Folkestone (Sang); July 19th, 1881, in the Isle of Portland (Bankes);
early July, 1883, common at Dover (Coverdale); June 26th, 1884,
common at Cuxton; June 29th, 1884, a few imagines at Lee (Bower);
July 4th, 1884, July 16th-August 8rd, 1885, bred July 22nd-25th,
1885, from pup obtained July 16th, all in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes); July 17th, 1885, in the Warren, Folkestone (Briggs) ;
July 1st and August 7th, 1887, at Portland (Richardson); July 24th,
1887, at the South Foreland (Tutt); July 11th, 1889, July 23rd-25th,
in the Isle of Portland (Bankes); July 7th, 1889, at Leatherhead
(Briggs) ; June 25th and July 11th, 1890, at Portland (Richardson) ;
late July and early August, 1890, at St. Margaret’s Bay (Tutt);
abundant, July 20th-August 13th, 1891, at Torquay (Fox); July
20th, 1891, at St. Margaret’s Bay (Fenn); July 22nd, 1892, at Cuxton
(Tutt); July 23rd, 1892, at Riddlesdown (Sheldon); July 1st, 1893, just —
commencing to emerge at Cuxton (Tutt); emerged June 19th and 24th,
1895, from larve found at Dursley, June 3rd, 1895 (Bartlett); July 1st,
1895, an imago at Bexley (Bower); July 7th, 1895, at Cuxton (Tutt) ;
June 27th, 1896, at Middleyards Coppice (Edwards); July 2nd, 1896,
at Benfleet (Whittle); July 21st-28th, 1896, at Cuxton (Tutt) ;
September 2nd, 1898, at Sidmouth (Raynor); July 9th-16th, 1899,
very abundant at Marlow (A. H. Clarke); July 19th, 1899, common
at Sidmouth (Studd); thirteen netted at Benfleet, July 1st, 1900,
imagines bred July 2nd-17th, 1900, from larve and pupe found at
Benfleet (Whittle) ; August Ist, 1902, at Starcross (James); July
25th and 26th, 19038, at Tring (Barraud) ; July 16th, 1904, imagines
at Drayton Beauchamp (Rothschild) ; bred June 26th-80th, 1904, from
larvee collected June 4th, 1904, others-bred July 4th-11th, 1904, from
larve and pupe collected June 22nd, 1904, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes) ; June 24th, 1905, at Reigate (Turner).

Hasrrs.—The insect is a true dusk-flier, although it is disturbed
readily during theafternoon. It rarely quits the immediate neighbour-
hood of its foodplant, on the lower part of which it hangs during the
day, coming up in the afternoon to the higher shoots, and flying
nimbly over the tops thereof as soon as evening has set in. The moths
appear to pair at this time, and remain paired most of the night. Barrett
observes that this species ‘‘ hides during the day in the thick masses of
restharrow, flying lazily to a distance of a few feet if disturbed in hot
sunshine, hardly moving when it is chilly; it flies over this plant at
dusk.’ Almost everyone who knows the insect gives similar data,

MARASMARCHA LUNASDACTYLA, 403

although Bower notes having observed it on a fence at Bexley.
Bankes observes that the insect seems very irregular as to the time of
day at which it emerges from the pupa. Of 26 specimens, on which more
or less exact observations were made, 10 emerged between 10.45 p.m.
and 7a.m., while the remaining 16 did so between 7 a.m. and 6.30 p.m. ;
of the latter, 8 appeared between 7 a.m. and 11.45 a.m., and of these,
7 emerged before 10 a.m. Many observers note its restriction to the
neighbourhood of its foodplant; thus we have it recorded “‘ Every patch
of Ononis,no matter how small, seems to harbour the insect at Marlow”’
(A. H. Clarke), only among Ononis at Sidmouth (Raynor), disturbed
from among Ononis at Cuxton (Bower), common among restharrow at
Riddlesdown (Sheldon), and at Benfleet (Whittle). Of the pairing
habits, Bankes notes that a g and ? , enclosed together in a breeding-
cage on the evening of July 10th, 1904, had not paired by 10.45 p.m.
They were found, in cop., however, at 7 a.m., on July 11th, and
remained so until about 1 p.m. Speyer observes that, near Rhoden,
this plume flies abundantly round the bushy plants of Ononis repens,
imagines, larve, and pups occurring in early July at the same time ;
the imagines are restricted to the neighbourhood of their foodplant,
and are easily disturbed during the day, being usually much more
active than Wheeleria migadactyla (spilodactyla) that occurs on the
same ground. Nolcken observes that, near Célljall, in the Baltic
Provinces, the moths could be readily disturbed by day as well as in
the evening ; they rarely flew freely, kept low down, never going far
from their foodplant, or flying at all rapidly, and were usually to be
taken whilst sitting on the plant.

Hasrrats.—Open sloping chalk slopes, inland, in Kent and Surrey,
as well as the chalk cliffs along the coast between Folkestone and
Deal and near Brighton, particularly in sheltered hollows, are favourite
haunts of this species, and not very similar to the dry sun-baked slopes
at the back of Pré St. Didier (leading up to the little tunnel), where
what we have hitherto considered to be this species, but which
Chapman now says (Hnt. Rec., xviii., p. 178) is a form of WM. agrorum,
is equally abundant, localised, however, to the clumps of its
foodplant. Bankes notes that, in Dorset, although Ononis arvensis
is generally distributed and plentiful, the species is exceedingly
local, and found chiefly on the cliffs and undereliffs of the
chalk and limestone portions of the coastline, though oceur-
ring in one inland locality on the chalk; in its chosen
haunts, however, it is usually common or abundant. South says
that 1t 1s never met with off the chalk, and appears to be absent
in many places where Ononis grows luxuriantly in Devon and
Middlesex ; but Barrett observes that, though occurring on the slopes
of chalkhills, and chalky banks and commons, it is also found in sandy
spots on the coast. Many observers note its occurrence in coast
districts, e.y., on the cliffs near Le Gouffre (Lutf), abundant in a cove
by the sea in the Lizard district (Marshall), on the cliffs at Sidmouth
(Studd), although our list of “ British localities’ shows it is not at all
confined to such. South notes it as abundant on a long strip of its
foodplant, growing on an overhanging bank by a roadside, at Ventnor.
In France, Dupont says that it occurs on dry arid lands at Léry, in
the Pont de l Arche district, and Bruand that it haunts rocky and woody
slopes in the Doubs dept. Speyer says that, in the neighbourhood of
Wildungen, it occurs amongst the bushy plants of Ononis repens, which

404 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

erow abundantly on the slaty and shaly rocks of the mountains; in the
neighbourhood of Rhoden it chooses bare and sterile places, that are
found on the borders of an area rich in herbage, and covered with wild
flowers, where grow Ononis repens and Marrubium vulgare. Here
it lives with Wheeleria migadactyla (spilodactyla), each strictly confined
to its own particular foodplant. Nolcken observes that, in the Baltic
Provinces, it occurs on dry calcareous ground, formerly under cultiva-
tion, and near Colljill (not far from Massa Krug), appears by the
roadside where Ononts hircina grows in quantity. Crombrugghe, too,
observes that it is locally abundant at Rochefort, in Belgium, but
here also it appears to be confined to calcareous soils.

British LocaLities.—Very local, and apparently almost confined to

the southern and midland counties of England. Berks: Reading (Porritt),
Basildon, Streatley, Bradfield (Young), Newbury (Chorley). Bucxs: Marlow (A.
H. Clarke), Drayton Beauchamp (N. C. Rothschild). Camprincz: Cambridge
(Stainton). Cornwauu: the Lizard (Marshall). Drenpicn: the Leet (Arkle).
Dryvon: Sidmouth (Raynor), Torquay (Fox), Starcross (James), Exmouth,
Teignmouth (teste Leech). Dorset: Purbeck district (Bankes), Bloxworth (Cam-
bridge), Charmouth, Lyme Regis, Lulworth (C. W. Dale), Isle of Portland
(Richardson). Essrex: Benfleet (Whittle), Witham (Cansdale). GuoucEsTER :
Dursley (Bartlett), Painswick district (Watkins). Hants: Isle of Wight, coast
districts—Ventnor (South). Hrrrrorp: Leominster (Hutchinson), Tarrington
(J. H. Wood). Herts: Tring (Barraud), Sandridge (Griffith). Krnt: Cuxton, Lee,
Bexley (Bower), Folkestone, St. Margaret’s Bay, Dover (Tutt), near Darenth Wood
and Greenhithe (Stephens), Alkham (Stainton), Folkestone (Sang), Maidstone
(teste Leech). Norrorx: Hunstanton (Atmore). Oxrorp (Barrett), Surrzy:
Oxted, Riddlesdown (Sheldon), Reigate (Gill), Box Hill (Machin), Mickleham,
common (Stainton), Sanderstead (Sang), Leatherhead. Bookham (C. A. Briggs),
Dorking (Barrett), Croydon, Caterham Valley, Epsom (C. A. Briggs). Sussrx :
Brighton downs (Vine). Wits (Barrett). Worcester: Middleyards Coppice,
Bredon (Edwards), Tenbury (Digby). [Yorx: Huddersfield (Hobkirk) [Porritt
notes (Supp. List Yorks Lep., p. 260) that this is almost certainly an error].]

Disrripution.—Central Europe, Livonia, southeast France, Italy,

Greece, southeast Russia (Rebel). Avsrro-Huneary: Bohemia (Nickerl),
upper Austria (Mann), Styria (Treitschke), Galicia (Garbowski), Budapest district
(Aigner), Tyrol district — Bozen (Mann). Brterum: Rochefort, common,
Liége (Crombrugghe), Namur, Dinant, common (Lambillion). CHannen Isis:
Guernsey—Le Gouffre (Luff), France: Aube (Jourdheuille), Sadne-et-Loire
(Constant), Pont de l’Arche district—Léry (Dupont), Féret de Bondy (Bégrand),
Doubs—Maison Rouge (Bruand), Auvergne—Gravenoire (Sand). GuRMANY:
Hanover—Hanover (Reinhold), Rhine Provinces—Crefeld district, Traar, Trier,
Aix, Cologne (Stollwerck), Bonn (Jordan), Hesse-Nassau—Wiesbaden, Mombach
(Réssler), Frankfort-on-Main, Florsheim (Koch), Cassel (Ebert), Waldeck—
Wildungen, Korbach, Rhoden (Speyer), Thuringia—Jena (Knapp), Saxony—Ertfurt
(Keferstein and Werneburg), Weissenfels (Hofmann), Halle (Stange), Dessau
(Richter), Miihlhausen, S6mmerda (Jordan), [Silesia—Gérlitz (Méschler),| Bavaria
—Regensburg, on the Winzerbergen, near Weinting, Gebraching (Hofmann and
Herrich-Schaffer), Wiirttemberg (Steudel and Hofmann), Baden—near Freiburg,
Carlsruhe (Reutti), Kaiserstuhl, Barenthal (Feldberg), Mahlberg, Lahr, Ettlingen,
Durlach, Tauberbischofsheim, Speier (Meess and Spuler), Alsace—Colmar
(Peyerimhoff), Rhine Palatinate (Bertram). [Iraty: Piedmont valleys—Pré St.
Didier (Tutt).] NerHernanps: Limburg—near Maastricht (Snellen). Russia :
Baltic Provinces—Colljall (Nolcken), Volga district, rare (Eversmann). SwirzEr-
LAND : rare—AZiirich, Schloss-Kyburg, near Winterthur (Frey).

Subfamily: Oxyprminz.

This subfamily, included by Hubner (Verzeichniss, p. 480) among
the Amblyptiliae, was separated therefrom by Zeller, in 1841 (Isis,
p- 765), who included the typical Amblyptiliids as a section of his

OXYPTILINAE. 405

Platyntilus, and created Oxyptilus for the group we are now considering.
This grouping he maintained in 1852 (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 842), and in
this was followed by Herrich-Schiaffer, who, after giving a detailed
description of the group (Sys. Bearb., v., p. 373), diagnosed the species
known to him as follows :—
1. Alarum posteriorum lobus interior parte tertia media alba, apicali utrinque
nigro-squamata—trichodactylus, Hiib.
2. Alarum posteriorum lobus interior ferrugineus, parte quarta apicali utrinque
subsequaliter nigro-squamata—ericetorum, Zell.
3. Alarum posteriorum lobus interior ferrugineus aut fuscus, parte tertia
apicali nigro-squamata ; squamis marginis interioris longioribus.

A. Laete cinnamomeus, alis latioribus, ciliis lobi interioris anteriorum
basi acute albis—hieracii, Zell.

B. Fusco-cinnamomeus, alis angustioribus, ciliis lobi interioris
anteriorum basi dilutius albis—pilosellae, Zell.

C. Fuscus, alis latioribus, ciliis lobi interioris anteriorum versus
angulum ani longitudinaliter albo sectis—obscurus, Zell.,
marginellus, Zell., laetus, Zell.

4. Alarum posteriorum lobus interior concolor, ciliis marginis interioris nigris
usque versus medium productis.

A. Ciliis lobi interioris anteriorum fuscis, in apice et angulo anali
albo sectis—tristis, Zell. ;

B. Ciliis lobi interioris anteriorum fuscis basi albis, versus angulum
analem latius—distans, Zell.

5. Alarum posteriorum lobus interior dimidio basali albidus, ciliis marginis
interioris nigris paullo pone medium denticulum formantibus, alarum
anteriorum angulo anali obsoletissimo—kollari, Mann.

Wallengren, like Herrich-Schaffer, recognised that the Oxyptilids
did not form a single homogeneous generic group, and described the
whole subfamily under the name Oxyptilus, diagnosing the group
(Skand. Hjaderm., p. 14) as follows :—-

Antenne of both sexes with very short cilia. The forehead obtuse, wanting
the tuft or cone entirely. The palpi longer than the head, thick, laterally
compressed, ascending, the middle joint tufted at its apex, the last joint longer
than the tuft, slender, pointed. Legs long and slender, the posterior tibia
thickened with scales at the middle, and at the apex. The first pair of spines in
the posterior tibise almost equal, the second pair shorter than the shortest spine of
the first pair. The anterior wings cleft more than the third part of their length.
The segments slender, the anterior segment with no posterior angle, the posterior
segment with the angle distinct. The segments of the posterior wings slender, the
third segment linear, and with no anal angle. The anterior wings flat, when at
rest covering the posterior ; the inner margin of the anterior wings not toothed ; the
fringe of the third segment in the posterior wings with some black scales near the
apex. Veins of the anterior wings eight in number, the first and second separate,
springing from the base, the third from he posterior margin of the cell, the fourth
dividing into two branches, running from the posterior angle of the cell to the
posterior segment, the fifth coming out near the anterior angle of the cell and
running to the posterior margin of the anterior segment, the sixth, either two- or
three-branched, running from the anterior angle of the cell to the apex of the
anterior segment, the seventh from the anterior side of the cell, and the eighth from
the base. The cell distinct, closed, the transverse vein very slender, somewhat
arched. The veins of the posterior wings three, the first, two-branched, running
to the first segment, the second, also two-branched, running into the second
segment, the third simply running into the third segment. No cell.

Walleneren followed Zeller, and the earlier authors, in using his
5 y 5
genera in the modern sense of tribes, but he clearly understood that
the species grouped themselves into smaller (modern generic) sections
5 ‘
of his main division. He, however, did not name the sections, which
he described as follows :—

I. Forewings with white markings en the upperside. Hindwings with the
underside of the first plumule furnished with a white spot at the apex.

406 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

a. The tips of the cilia, on the hinder margin of the first lobe of the fore-
wings, dusky—O. pilosellae, Zell., O. hieracii, Zell., O. ericetorum,
Zell., O. obscurus, Zell.
6. The tips of the cilia on the hinder margin of the first lobe of the fore-
wings white—O. didactyla, Linn.
II. Forewings with dull yellowish markings on the upperside. Hindwings
with the underside of the first plumule unspotted at the tip—O. bohemanni, Wallgrn.

The lepidopterists (Jordan, Wocke, Meyrick) who followed
Wallengren, in dealing with the plumes, were quite unable to act on
his indications, being apparently ignorant of the early stages, and, on
the strength of a subfamily diagnosis, Meyrick (Trans. Ent. Soe.
Lond., 1886, p. 8) includes them all in the genus Ozyptilus, following
the same course in 1890 (op. cit., p. 485), his inclusive diagnosis
reading as follows :—

Face rounded, smooth, or with small tuft; ocelli obsolete ; tongue developed.
Antenne two-thirds, in ¢ filiform, simple or ciliated ({—4). Labial palpi
moderate, ascending, second joint with appressed or projecting scales beneath,
sometimes forming a short angular apical tuft, terminal joint moderate, filiform,
tolerably acute. Maxillary palpi obsolete. Tibiz thickened with scales on origin of
spurs, outer spurs nearly equal inner. Forewings bifid, cleft from about middle; vein
2 from a point with 4, 3 and 4 stalked, 5 and 6 very short, 7 from below 8, ‘long,
9 and 10 out of 8, 11 from near 8. Hindwings trifid, third segment with a well-
developed tooth of black scales in dorgal cilia; vein 2 from middle of cell, 3 from
near angle, very short, 5 and 6 very short, 7 to apex—laetus, Zell., distans, Zell.,
tristis, Zell., kollari, Stn., pilosellae, Zell., hofmannseggti, Mésch., parvidactylus,
Haw., bohemannit, Wallern., marginellus, Zell., ericetorum, Zell., maculatus, Const.,
hieracti, Zell., teucriit, Greening, didactylus, Linn. (? brunneodactylus, Mill.)

In 1895, however, Hofmann published his work thereon, and gave
a most illuminating study of the group, subdividing it into its
constituent parts on characters connected with the imago, without,
however, carrying out this division to its logical conclusion by naming
the sections as separate genera. He divides the Oxyptilines into two
main sections, diagnosing the group as a whole, and its two main
sections as follows :—

The lobes of the forewings with two pale transverse bands; feathers of hind-
wings similarly shaped. Forewings cleft to 4; lobes of forewings differently
shaped, upper one pointed, lower with obtuse anal angle, or of similar shape, and
then both pointed.

a. Vein II of forewings with five branches.* In the cilia of the costa
and inner margin of the 3rd plumule ere ere accumulations
of black scales = : Oxyptilus, Zell.

8. Vein II of forewings with four branches, as branch II, is wanting. In
the cilia of the inner margin of the 3rd plumule, not any, or only a
very insignificant, accumulation of black scales. . Trichoptilus, Walsm.

His first group, Oxyptilus, comprises our two tribes Capperiidi and
Oayptilidi, and his latter, Trichoptilus, our tribe Buckleriidi (Ent. Ree.,
Xvii., p. 87). Our separation of the first two was based largely on
details of the larval and pupal characters, both showing, in Capperia
(as exemplified in heterodactyla), an inclination to Alucitine characters.
Chapman considers now that the larval and pupal characters that
separate Capperia from Oayptilus, although apparently so great, are
possibly not structurally of tribal value, and hence he is inclined to sink
Cappertidi as falling within the limits of Oxyptilidi. Hofmann’s detailed
account of Oxyptilus (=Oxyptilidi and Cappertidi) (Die Deutsch.
Pteroph., pp. 95-102) reads as follows :—

* Exceptionally, there are only four branches of vein II present, but then II,
is always absent, not II, (Hofmann).

OXYPTILINE. 407

Imaco.— Forehead without cone. Antenne in both sexes very shortly ciliated ;
palpi longer than the head, more or less laterally compressed, porrected, or some-
what ascending; the second joint in most species with a terminal projecting pointed
seale-tuft (in Oxyptilus didactylus, O.leonuri, and O. teucrii it is absent); the third
joint longer than this tuft, slender and pointed, often somewhat drooping, and, in
that case, lying on the scale-tuft of the second joint, so that this may then be easily
overlooked. Legs long and thin, the anterior and middle tibiz at the ends, and the
posterior at the end and in the middle thickened with scales. In one portion of
the species (Division I=our Oxyptilidi) the end of the abdomen is furnished, in the
male, with a short anal tuft divided on the upper and lower sides, while in another
portion (Division IfL=our Capperiidi) it is simple, acuminate, and laterally some-
what compressed at the point. The abdomen of the female is, at the end, laterally
compressed, posteriorly, straightly or obliquely terminated. F'orewings fissured to
beyond one-third, the upper segment running to a point, the lower segment with a
broad prominent point, and more or less distinct anal angle. Segments of the hind-
wings narrow and pointed, the third linear without anal angle. Nervrarion: The
neuration shows a deviation from the genera hitherto noticed (Platyptiliinae,
Eucnemidophorinae, Amblyptiliinae, and Stenoptiliinae) in so far that, on the
forewings, II, arises from the upper corner of the median cell, very close to the
common stem of II,, II;, and IJ,, but it only reaches to a little beyond the point
where II, branches off (O. hieracti) (taf. ii., fig. 5]. In another species (0.
didactylus), I1,, on the contrary, extends beyond the branching point of II,,
while II, is either absent or concurrent with II,. In both cases II, arises from
the very weak, somewhat inwardly bent, discocellular, and runs parallel with Il,
along the inner margin of the upper segment. In other respects the neuration is
normal. Stem IV has three branches on both the fore- and hindwing. Typican
MARKINGS: The ground colour is nearly always brown, differently tinted by the
more or less richly sprinkled yellowand dark, to almost black, scales, from cinnamon-
brown, or red-brown, to a more or less dark grey-brown. The spot on the inner
margin and the discoidal spot are generally present, commonly, posteriorly, more or
less heightened with white scaling, now and then in the form of small white strige.
Behind the insignificant plical spots, which are sometimes combined in a transverse
line, the base of the fissure is nearly always bordered with white. The costa usually
marked with a narrow darker stripe is sometimes more, sometimes less, sprinkled
with white scales. Over both segments run two whitish transverse lines, the anterior
mostly broader, running obliquely inwards from the costa, «nd more or less distinctly
continued beyond the fissure on the lower segment, cutting the fringes of both
segments on the costa and inner margin; the posterior is much narrower, on the
upper segment straight or little oblique, sometimes angulated, on the lower segment
very oblique, parallel with the margin, cutting the fringes of the upper segments on
the costa and inner margin, those of the lower segment only on the costa. ‘The eostal
fringes of the upper segment are dark, from the posterior transverse line up to the
apex white. The inner marginal fringes of the upper segment, and the outer
marginal and inner marginal fringes of the lower segment, are, in their basal halves,
several times cut by snow-white scales, which mostly border on more or less deep
black spaces, so that the fringes often present a rich variegated appearance. In some
species, the concave outer margin of the lower segment is marked by a fine white
or, at any rate, pale basal line in the fringe; in others the fringes are, immediately
before the anal angle, for their whole length barred with white, or, at least, with
pale colour, in greater or less breadth. Hindwings unicolorous; in the fringes
of the 38rd segment on the costa, as well as on the inner margin, there are tufts of
thick black scales, which, in the individual species, are very different as to their
form and position—nearer or further from the apex. Between these scale-tufts and
the base of the segment there are, at the base of the fringes, single thick black and
white scales. On the underside of the upper segment both transverse lines are
visible, but only the posterior on the lower segment. The first segment of the
hindwing exhibits, usually, two white spots, rarely only one; the third segment in
front of the scale-tuft is white to a larger or smaller extent, the second segments
always without markings, The head, respectively forehead and crown, is of the
same colour as the forewings, bordered finely with white on the sides above the
eyes, antenne spotted with white and brown, white beneath at the base. Pro- and
mesothorax unicolorous dark, the latter bordered on the posterior margin with a
straight pale line; patagia usually pale coloured ; metathorax above with two dark
whitish, or yellowish, bordered lateral triangles, in the centre dark. Coxa brown,
widened at the apex by rough hairs, and edged with white. Femur brown, exteriorly

408 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

finely bordered with white, interior white. Middle and hind tibie relatively white
below and brown above, the hind tibis brown, broadly white at the base and
beyond the first pair of spurs. Spurs, inner side white, outer brown, brown at the
apex. Tarsi white, at the extremities of the joints more or less broadly dark brown
or black, on the front legs beneath mostly quite white. The 1stabdominal segment
is bordered, on both sides, broadly with shining whitish or yellowish; over the
remaining segments run two more or less distinct fine white interrupted lines along
the dorsum, those on the 1st and 2nd run parallel, on the 3rd and 4th, where they
are very distinct, and on the remaining segments, where they are less expressed,
they diverge posteriorly. The posterior margins of the segments, especially those
ot the middle ones, and the lateral ridge of the body, show white scaling ; on the
venter there are a fine central and two lateral longitudinal lines, composed of thick
white spots situated on the hind margins of the segments. Between these white
spots, on the hind margins of the segments, in several of the species, lie deep black
scales. The abdomen often exhibits quite a spotted appearance through these
markings. Gerniratia: In the male genitalia there are several types to be distin-
guished. The species of Division I (of the table that follows) are distinguished in
that the 9th dorsal plate is split into two strcng parallel processes, hook-like at the
end, bent inwardly or downwardly, while the small three-cornered 10th dorsal
plate lies between the processes of the 9th; an uncus is quite absent. The penis
is long and slender, rather thickened behind. The prensors are short, rounded at
the end, and particularly distinguished by the soft lancet-like skinny appendage
with strong sensory hairs. The 9th ventral plate is small, and consists of two
little chitinous plates, in the different species differently shaped, oval or elongated,
running to a point with the inner margins meeting (taf. iii., fig. 8). The species
of Division II agree in that the 9th and 10th dorsal plates are simple skinny forms,
sometimes broader, and truncated on the hind margin, sometimes narrower, run-
ning toa point behind; in several species (the O. teucrii group) the 10th dorsal plate
is very small, pointed, and hidden under the 9th dorsal plate. The 9th ventral
plate is, however, in these species, very strongly developed, as long as the prensors,
convex below, concave above, split terminally in two tips or points. The prensors
are very long and narrow, hollow inside, and very strongly furnished with bristles,
without the appendages of the previous Division. The penis is shaped in O.
didactylus as in the species of Division I; in the species of the O. teucrti group,
however, it is highly peculiar, namely, strongly bent downwards before and behind,
and terminating often in two strong points, a shorter and a longer (taf. ili., fig. 9).
Hasits: The moths fly in summer from the end of May to July and August; some
species have two broods (O. tristis, O. parvidactylus, O. teucrii)*. At rest, the
forewings are spread out flatly, and the plumules of the hindwings, folded over
one another, are hidden beneath them as far as the scale-tuft of the third plumule.

Larva: The larve differ much according to their mode of living; those living ex-
posed are rather swollen, becoming more slender anteriorly and posteriorly; the skin
is spiculated and beset sparsely with white bristles, dilated knob-like at the apices ;
tubercles large, darkly-coloured, mostly furnished with several hairs or bristles;
the dorsal tubercles approach very closely, so that they form double tubercles ;
ventral prolegs long, stilt-like, with a semicircle of brown hooklets on the planta.
Those larve which live in the shoots of plants are, on the contrary, whitish or
yellowish, maggot-like, hardish to the touch, and have small tubercles furnished
with a single long hair; true legs and ventral prolegs short, the latter with a few
brown hooklets on the planta. The foodplants, as far as is yet known, are solely
the Labiatae and Compositae ; those of certain species are found in early spring
(Oxyptilus parvidactylus), manifestly hibernated; most of them appear first in May
or June, or even later.

Pupa: The pupe of the exposed feeders have strongly-developed dorsal keels,
which reach as far as the 4th abdominal segment, and Lear strong thorns beset
with bristles. These thorns are continued also on the dorsum of the remaining
abdominal segments, which are also furnished with rows of bristle-bearing
tubercles. The wing-cases reach to the hind margin of the 4th abdominal
segment, the leg-cases up to the hind margin of the 5th abdominal segment, often
beyond ; the former have bristly ribs in some of the species. The cremaster bears
the usual hooked bristles at the apex and on the ventral side. In O. pilosellae,
which pupates in a cocoon, that is to say in the fluff of the leaf, the dorsal keels

* This is very doubtful. Certainly, in Britain, neither parvidactyla nor
teucrii (heterodactyla) is double-brooded.

OXYPTILINE. 409

are only poorly-developed and the dorsal thorns altogether absent; the tubercles
of the abdominal segments are small, the hooked bristles of the cremaster are only
scattered. A position intermediate between the two forms is taken by the pupa of
O. parvidactylus, which is distinguished by the remarkable form of the cremaster.

This subfamily agrees in its general characters with the other
subfamilies on the Platpytiliid side of the “plume”’ stirps. It has,
for example, the characteristic structure of the discoidal cell of the
forewings, the single spina to the ? frenulum, the black scale-tufts
on the third plumule of the hindwings, and other general characters.
It is, however, in certain characters, somewhat removed from the
Platyptiliinae, and its nearest relatives appear to be found in the Amblyp-
tultinae and Marasmarchinae. In the Oxyptilines, the lobes of the
forewings differ in shape, the upper one being pointed, and the lower
one showing, at most, an ill-developed obtuse anal angle, whilst the
plumules of the hindwings are somewhat similarly shaped. _ Hofmann
States that, normally, as in the Stenoptiliids and Platyptiliids, there
are five branches to nervure II of the forewings, although, occasionally,
there are only four, a specialisation that has become characteristic
of Marasmarcha, in which II, is the nervure always absent. In
Buckleria it is II, that is wanting. In the g genital organs there is
considerable variation, and the main points of difference appear to
characterise our two larger sections, “ Capperiidi”’ and “ Oxyptilidi,”’
although, in this particular, Geina is distinctly Oxyptilid rather than
Capperiid. .

The Oxyptiline pupx are very remarkable in their structure, and
show not only marked variation within the limits of the subfamily,
but also suggest alliance with other subfamilies on both sides of the
‘‘ plume” stirps, with the Amblyptiliines and Marasmarchines on the
Platyptiliid side, and with the Leioptilines on the Alucitid side.
Thus the pupa of Oayptilus is rather inclined to the Platyptiliine side,
whilst that of Capperia is inclined to the Leioptiline. Comparing the
pupal structure of Capperia with those with which it has real and
apparent alliance, Chapman notes that “the pupa of Capperia (hetero-
dactyla) has, on the abdominal segments, a double spine on either
side, internal toiand ii; single spines occur in the same positions
in the pupe of Alucita (pentadactyla) and Oidaematophorus (lithodactyla).
In Crombrugghia (distans), there is a spine in this position, not, however,
on each side, but a central unpaired one. Again, in its general
appearance the pupa of Capperia (heterodactyla) bears a great super-
ficial resemblance to that of Ovendenia (septodactyla), yet the structure
of the former agrees essentially with that of the pupe of the other
Oxyptilid genera. Without pressing the definition too far, the pupa
of Ovendenia (septodactyla) may be described as an Alucitine pupa,
tending to have, like the Alucitine larva, many secondary hairs that
are practically indistinguishable from the primaries. The pupa of
Capperia (heterodactyla) is of the Platyptiliine type, with no secondary
hairs, whilst the secondary hairs of the larva are always obviously
secondary. What definite distinction can be drawn between the
hairs along the wing-nervures in the pupa of Ovendenia (septodactyla)
and those of Capperia (heterodactyla) is uncertain; perhaps there is
none. ‘The lepidopterous pupa, as a rule, refuses to have hairs on any
of the appendages (antenne, legs, wings, ete.). In the pupa of
Capperia, the hairs on the wings, when carefully examined, appear

410 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

to be pupal processes rather than hairs, similar to those on the
dorsum centrally, and associated with tubercles i and ii; and,
taking into account the rarity of hairs on the wings of lepidopterous
pup, it would seem probable that the hairs on the pupal wings of
the Alucitines are similarly spines and not hairs. On the other hand,
although they have no articulated bases, they are spiculated just like
the other hairs. Leaving this part of the question for the moment, it
is certain that the fans in line of i and ii on the pupa of Capperia hetero-
dactyla presenting five, six, and seven hairs, are strictly homologous with
the dorsal spines of the Oxyptilids, that only two of the apparent hairs
are the hairs i and 11, and that the others are the branches of the
dorsal spines. Besides the two hairs, these horns or spines present two
pointsin Amblyptilia and Marasmarcha, in some others, e.g., Crombrugghia
distans there are three, and here in Capperia heterodactyla, arealso three on
the 6th and 7th abdominals, two on the 8th, and four or fiveon the 2nd, 3rd,
4th, and 5th abdominals. The only difference in them is that here these
processes of the horn are comparatively long and slender, in their propor-
tions very similar to hairs. It is curious that these horn-processes are
rough, so as to look as if spiculated, the true hairs being quite smooth.
Tubercle 111 has the true bair curved forwards, and a horn or process, very
like it in outline, curved backwards; there is a similar horn directed
outwards between iv and vy, the setze on which are directed backward
and forward ; vi has a small hair in front of it; tubercle vii carries
simply two hairs. There are also the mediodorsal horns; these
are slender, and have much the appearance of hairs. Referring
to the pupa of M. lunaedactyla, in which there are a central and
two lateral mediodorsal horns, we find the central one in Crombrugyhia
(distans), whilst in Capperia heterodactyla the central one is wanting,
and we have the two lateral ones. Across the dorsum, from one (i+ 11)
spine to the other, is a narrow ridge with wrinkled (but fairly level)
top, and sharply-marked walls on either side. It exists on the 2nd, 3rd,
4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th abdominals, and divides the segment into two
portions, a rather larger anterior ribbed portion, and a posterior (inter-
segmental subsegment), which has the sculpture of intersegmental
membrane. ‘This ridge is divided into three equal portions by the
origin of these mediodorsal spines (really subdorsal here, but medio-
dorsal because internal toi). From acombined base two spines diverge,
one forwards, one backwards, at an angle of about 100° to each other.
The forward one is about 0°'2mm. long, the posterior rather shorter.
Their structure and texture seem to be identical with those of the dorsal
spines (those of i+11). This pupa further gives an interesting light on
the cleft in the forewings. ‘‘Poulton’s lhne”’ is well marked, and has,
outside it, a very distinct band, differently sculptured, so that the area
outside contrasts with that within. Now the cleft is also well marked;
in front of it is a vein with hairs (?), and one without; behind it are
three veins more or less haired, but these run up the cleft with a strip
of the same texture as that outside ‘“ Poulton’s line,” of fairly uniform
width, bounded on each side by a continuation inwards from the
margin cf ‘‘ Poulton’s line,” which is met at top, where it crosses from
one side to the other, by a short vein (5 and 6 ?) which starts just
above from the transverse vein. The cleft is therefore an extension
inwards of the hind margin, as, on thinking a moment, one sees it
must be, and not, as one hastily supposes, a shit in the wing tissue

OXYPTILIDI. 411

healed round somehow. ‘The sculpture consists of twelve, or so, trans-
verse ridges or waves, very smooth in outline, with finer sculpture of
small round pits. These seem to vary into spicule on the ventral
surface, especially at anterior margin of segments.

The Oxyptiline larve also vary considerably. Those that are
largely internal feeders are hardly, perhaps, Platyptiliine, but rather,
perhaps, Stenoptiliine, in their general appearance and the character
of their tubercular structure, whilst the largely external-feeding larve
are extremely specialised, and the tubercles have become specialised
into highly-developed warts. The variation in the larval wart structure,
accompanied as it is by differences in pupal and imaginal structures,
suggests that our subdivision into the two tribes, Oxyptilidi and
Capperiidi, is well-founded, the former containing the more generalised,
the latter the more specialised, species. Without here going into the
detailed characters, our subdivisions work out as follows :—

OxyPTILIDI—

Oxyptilus—pilosellae, Zell., hieracii, Zell., ericetorum, Zell., parvi-
dactyla, Haw.
Crombrugghia —kollari, Stn., tristis, Zell., distans, Zell.
CaPPERIIDI—
Geina—didactyla, Linn.
Capperia—leonuri, Stange, heterodactyla, Mill.

Dyar remarks (Journ. New York Ent. Soc., iil., p. 21) that ‘the
Oxyptilid larval characters are very uniform, the tubercles being
converted into moderate-sized warts, with six to twelve long hairs; the
body also rather sparsely covered with short secondary hairs with
enlarged tips; i and 11 entirely consolidated into a single wart, a single
long seta behind iv+v; vill a single seta, other warts normal.
Prolegs slender, the crotchets forming two-thirds of a circle on inner
side.” One suspects from this that Dyar’s knowledge of the subject
was limited. It is apparent that periscelidactylus, the species he
here describes, is a member of the Capperiid section of the Oxyptilines.

One can accept, as an expression of ignorance, Meyrick’s remark
(Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1890, p. 485) that Owyptilus (sens. lat.) ‘is
especially characteristic of Hurope, but stragglers have spread thence
into the surrounding regions.” The fact is, we know next to nothing
about the ‘‘ plumes” outside Europe; they have never been worked, and
their distribution isa closed book. In the broad sense of the term, including
the Buckleriids (T'richoptilus, Buckleria, etc.), we note that Staudinger
and Rebel (Cat., 3rd ed., pp. 70-72) note 15 species recorded from the
Palearctic region, whilst Dyar (List Nth. Amer. Lep., pp. 441) records
seven species from the Nearctic region. One suspects that the Oxypti-
lines are much more widely distributed in America than is at present
supposed, and possibly there are as many Nearctic as Palearctic
species.

Tribe: Oxyprmipt.

The species of this tribe have already been differentiated by
Hofmann on imaginal characters, and by Chapman on pupal and larval
characters, from those of Capperiidi. Hofmann notes (Die Deutsch.
Pteroph., pp. 100-102) that the Oxyptilids (excluding Buckleria) can be
divided by the characters of the ¢ genital organs, with which is
correlated a difference in the palpi, into two rather large natural groups.
These groups coincide with our sections Owyptilidi? and Capperiidi.
His grouping of the species in the first tribe works out as follows :—

412 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

I. Palpi thick, rather straightly projecting, 2nd joint furnished with very long scales,
which form, at its apex, a comparatively large pointed tuft of scales, 3rd joint
slender, with appressed scales, as long as the 2nd.

A. The scale-tuft of the inner margin of the 8rd feather is distant from
the apex.

1. The anal angle of the lower lobe very obtuse, the outer
margin between this and the apex scarcely noticeably
sinuate . ae kollari, Stn.

2. The anal angle of the lower lobe distinctly prominent, the outer
margin, between this and the apex, concave.

a. Dark grey-brown, with a white dash in the fringes of
the anal angle of lower lobe tristis, Zell.

b. Red-brown or yellow-brown, the fringes of the lower
lobe with a narrow white dash at the anal angle,
and a fine white basal line, mostly running up to
the apex .. We distans, Zell.

B. The scale-tuft of the inner margin of the 3rd feather close to the
apex, or surrounding it.

1. The black scales of the 3rd feather shorter on the costa than
on the inner margin.

a. The black scales of 3rd feather run, neither on the
costa nor on the inner margin, quite to the apex,
which is white-scaled on both sides, and only
bears, exceptionally, a few isolated downwards-
directed black scales as pilosellae, Zell.

b. The black scales of the 3rd feather run, on the costa,
almost or quite up to the apex, which bears, besides,
also a small downwards-directed scale-tuft. On the
inner margin, the black scales do not quite reach
up to the apex, are longest towards the base, and
become shorter towards the apex, so that the
scaling, as a whole, assumes a_ tooth-like
form .. ys hieracii, Zell.

2. The black scales of the 3rd feather are, on the inner margin —
and costa, of equal length, and run, on both sides, to the very
tip, which is sometimes, at this point, also furnished with
some white scales.

a. The fringes of the outer margin of the lower lobe with:
a white or pale basal line .. ericetorum, Zell.

b. The fringes of the outer margin of the lower lobe with
a white dash at the anal angle parvidactylus, Hw.

The pupal characters of this tribe exhibit an intermediate stage
between the more normal Platyptiliid pup, and the more extreme
form represented by Capperia. The pupa is, in the Oxyptilids (sens.
rest.), free from warts, but has long, well-developed, primary hairs,
without any trace of secondaries in connection with the tubercles, or
on theskin-surface; the dorsal flanges are well-developed; but, although
the pupa has a single median, unpaired, spine on the abdominal segments
1-8, it does not show the highly-specialised structure, of Capperia
(heterodactyla), in which the pupa has, on the abdominal segments, a
double spine on either side, internal toiand ui. [Single spines or
hairs occur in certain pupe on the Alucitid side of the stirps, e.g.,
Alucita ( pentadactyla), and Oidaematophorus (lithodactyla).|

It is, however, in the larval characters, that the Oxyptilidi differ
most from the Cappertidi. The former are practically Platyptiliid in
structure and habit ; the larve being largely (if not entirely) internal
feeders, whilst the latter are external feeders, this difference in habit
being associated with a marked difference in structure, for, whilst the
Oxyptilidi are essentially simple in their structure, with no indications
of wart-structure, or at least none exceeding, or even reaching, that of

ea OF pana oR

OXYPTILUS. 413

the Stenoptiliids, the primary tubercles i and 11, as well as iv and v,
being separate, and the accessory postspiraculars absent, whilst the
Capperiidi have well-developed warts, i+ii united into a single
many-haired wart on thorax and abdomen, iii forming a well-developed
wart, whilst the accessory postspiraculars are also well-developed.

Genus: Oxypritus, Zeller.

Synonymy.—Genus: Oxyptilus, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,” pp. 765, 789 (1841); ‘‘ Linn.
Eint.,” vi., p. 345 (1852) ; Wallgrn., ‘‘ Oefvers. K. V. A. Frr.,’’ p. 220 (1852) ;
H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 370 (1855); Wallgrn., ‘‘Skand. Fjaderm.,” p. 14
(1862); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 121 (1869) ; Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,”’
2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Nolck., ‘‘ Lep. Fn. Hstl.,’’ p. 803 (1871); Frey, ‘‘ Lep.
Schweiz,” p. 429 (1880); Staud., ‘‘ Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross.,’’ xv., pp. 425-7 (1880) ;
Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 122 (1881); Barr., ‘‘ Hint. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii.,
p. 177 (1882); South, ‘‘Ent.,’’ xv., p. 35 (1882); xvi., p. 73 (1883); Sorhgn.,
‘« Kleinschmett. Brandbg.,’’ p. 3 (1886); Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,’’? pp. 56, 57 (1886) ;
Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,” x., p. 164 (1889); South, ‘‘Ent.,” xvii., pp. 32, 34, 102
(1889); Briggs, ‘‘ Ent.,” xxii., p. 139 (1889); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xxv.,
p. 431 (1889); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,” p. 485 (1890); Tutt, ‘‘ Brit.
Naty i, pp. 182, 249 (1891); ““Pter. Brit.,” pp. 60, 66 (1895); Meyr.,
‘¢Handbook,’’ etc., p. 431 (1895); Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ pp. 95,
107 (1895); ‘Illus. Zeits. fiir Ent.,”’ iii., pp. 152, 307 (1898); Staud. and
ine Daaeat., 2 ard ed. p. (2 (L90L); Barr, “luep. Brit. Isles)? \ix., p. 362;
pl. 414-415 (1904); Tutt, ‘‘Ent. Rec.,” xvii., p. 37 (1905). Alucita, Haw.,
‘‘Lep. Brit.,”? p. 479 (1811); Zett., ‘‘Ins. Lapp.,’’ p. 1013 (1840). Ptero-
phorus, Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent.,’’ 1st ed., p. 237 (1839); Zell., ‘Isis,’ p. 789
(1841) ; pp. 38, 902 (1847) ; Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Méth.,”’ p. 383 (1845); Tgstrm., ‘‘ Finl.
Fjar.,”’ p. 155 (1847); Frey, ‘‘ Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’ p. 408 (1856); Sta., ‘‘ Syst.
Cat.,”’ p. 13 (1849); ‘‘Man.,’’ ii., p. 441 (1859) ; Gregs., ‘‘ Ent.,’’ p. 298 (1867) ;
Barr. and Buckl., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” viii., p. 155 (1871); Mason, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’
xxv., p. 162 (1888). Amblyptilia, Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,’’ iv., p. 377, in part
(1834); app. p. 424, in part (1835). Oxyptilia, Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett.
Deutsch.,’’ iii., pt. 2, p. 790 (1877).

Until quite recently all the species of the Owyptilinae, with the
exception of those belonging to the genus Buckleria, have been placed
in the genus Owyptilus. This genus, created by Zeller (/sts, 1841, pp.
765-766) in order to separate the Oxyptilines from the Amblyptilines,
which Hubner had united in his genus Amplyptilia (recte Amblyptilia),
was from the first restricted to the Oxyptiline species. The original
description reads as follows:

The lobes extend to more than one-third of the wing-expanse, are narrow, and
the upper wants the anal angle; the third plumule linear, before, or at the apex,
with black scales in the fringes. Only the similarity of the markings and general
appearance places this group here; a thorough consideration of the formation of the
wings, would, without fail, place them in the third group. The lobes and the
plumules are much narrower and longer than those of the first group; the upper
lobe is very pointed, and its anal angle has disappeared ; the lower lobe has a very
elongated apex. In the hindwings, the first fissure runs to within the basal third
of the wing, the second nearly up to the base. The linear plumules become
gradually narrower from their commencement up to the apices; the third has no
distinct anal angle, but bas, not far from the apex, or at the apex itself, either in
the fringes of both margins, or in those of the inner margin only, a crowded row of
black scales. The wings are held, in rest, as in the preceding group, namely, the
forewings are stretched out flat, and the hindwings, folded as in the first group, are
all, except the scale-tuft, hidden beneath. The markings are, from the very near
relationship of the species, much in agreement. Before the fissure lies a generally
smaller, paler, dash, and before this, in the disc, another larger. Right across the
lobes, more sharply defined on the upper, run obliquely two whitish, usually some-
what shining, transverse lines, between which the ground colour, as a rule, appears
especially dark. These are also present on the underside ; only the portion of the
first transverse line is wanting on the lower lobe. The first plumule of the hind-
wings has, on the underside, two pale, yellow, transverse dashes, which lie in

414 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

close neighbourhood to the transverse lines of the forewings. On the forewings,
the fringes of the costa are white from the outer transverse line to the apex. The
black scale-tuft at the mouth of the fissure, and on the inner margin, as in the first
eroup. The legs have strong, dark, scale-tufts, long spurs, and pale and dark
alternate rings like the antenne. The interrupted, pale, longitudinal lines on the
abdomen, give a strikingly variegated appearance. The larva lives in a shoot of
the foodplant, spun together with silken threads, which it hollows out. The
pupa is bristly, and has, on the upperside, rows of elevations, which, according to
the species, develop more or less into branched prickles or spines. All the five
species form a single natural group.

The five species included are tristis, Zell., pilosellae, Zell., obscurus, Zell.,
hieracti, Zell., and trichodactylus, Hb. Weareinclined to maintain atleast
the middle three of these species in our limitation of the genus, although
it is possible that ohscurus = (parvidactyla) may have later to be separated
from pilosellae as wellas hieractt. In 1852 (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 8342) Zeller
maintained the genus, but included a dozen species, and the genus was
maintained by Herrich-Schaffer in 1852, Wallengren in 1862, and practi-
cally all succeeding authors. The differences exhibited in the imaginal
structure (antea p. 412) led Hofmann to subdivide the genus into two
main groups (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 100-102), with several other
minor subdivisions, which the detailed structure of the larve and pupe
will probably prove to belong to quite distinct genera, and our hint
above, that even Oxwyptilus, as we use it, consists of two genera, is
based on the belief that a greater knowledge of the early stages will
place pilosellae and hieracti together in Oxyptilus, and separate them
from ericetorum and parvidactyla. At present, however, our informa-
tion is too little to enable us to make the separation. We therefore
use Oxyptilus for the whole of Hofmann’s Sect. I, subsect. B, and
have already named (Ent. Rec., xvii., p. 85) pilosellae the type of the
genus. The characters of the larval and pupal stages are largely
characterised by their suitability to the life of a borer and internal-
feeder.

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA, Haworth.

Synonymy.—Species: Parvidactyla, Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 480 (1811) ;
Tutt, “Brit. Nat.,? 1., p. 249 (1891); ‘‘Pter.. Brit.,” p. 75 (e985) eee
ReCiu vile pag ot (1905): Microdactylus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,”’
p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,”’ fo. 161 (1827); Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Hiaust.,%
iv., p. 3¢7 (1834); Wood, ‘‘Ind. Ent., Ist ed., p. 238, pl; leiemmiGa
(1839). Obscurus, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,” p. 793 (1841); p. 38 (1847); ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,”
vi., p. 354 (1852); Dup., ‘‘ Hist. Nat.,”’ supp. iv., pp. 503, 613, pl. 88, fig. 11
(1842); ‘Cat. Meth.,”” p. 383 (1844); Tgstrm., “dinl. Byars pes
(1847); H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,” v., p. 372 (1855), supp. fig. 17 (1853); Frey,
‘Tin. Pter. Schweiz,’’ p. 410 (1856); Wallgrn., ‘‘Skand. Fjad.,’’ p. 15 (1859) ;
Jord., ‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 122 (1869); Nolck., ‘‘ Lep. Fn. Estl.,”’ p. 804
(1871) ; Frey, ‘‘ Lep. Schweiz,”’ p. 429 (1880). Hemidactyla, Sélys. ‘‘Mem. Soe.
Roy. Sci. Liége,’’ p. 29 (1845-6); [Zell., ‘Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 355 (1852).] Parvyi-
dactylus, Sta., ‘‘Man.,” ii., p. 441 (1859); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘Cat.,’’ 2nd ed., p.
348 (1871); Hein.and Wocke, ‘‘Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 792 (1877); Staud.,
‘¢ Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross.,’’ xv., pp. 425-7 (1880); Barr., ‘‘Hnt. Mo. Mag.,” xviii.,
p- 177 (1882); Sorh., ‘‘ Kleinschmett. Brandbg.,’’ p. 4 (1886); Leech, ‘‘ Brit.
Pyr.,” p. 58, pl., xvil., fig. 3 (1886); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,” x., p. 162 (ise)
South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xxii., p. 34 (1889); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xxv., p. 431 (1889) ;
Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 485 (1890); ‘‘ Handbook,”’ etc., p. 432 (1895);
Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ p. 112 (1895); ‘‘Illus. Zeits. Ent.,’’ iii., p. 307
(1898) ; Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,” 3rd ed., p. 71 (1901); Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,”’
ix., p. 363, pl. 414, fig. 6 (1904). ;

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION.—Alucita (the small Plume) nana, alis
patentibus fuscis, striga punctisque albis; anticis bifidis, posticis
tripartitis. Habitat in Cantio, at rarissime. Expansio alarum

—_—

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 415

6-64 lin. Oss.—This is the smallest of the Plume Moths, and it is
also one of the rarest. Its characters are almost exactly the same as
in the two preceding articles (didactyla, heterodactyla); yet its diminutive
size, aS a species, renders it very distinct (Haworth, Lep. Britannica,
p- 480).

Imaco.—138mm.-l6mm. Forewings chocolate-brown, with a golden
tinge; a white dot before the fissure, another further back; a white
oblique, transverse line near the base of fissure crosses both lobes,
broader on the lower lobe; nearer outer margin a second, narrower,
white, transverse line, extending along costa of upper lobe to apex;
cilia red-brown, interrupted with white; in the hollowed portion of
the dorsal margin are short white fringes, with two small, black,
oblique dashes. Hindwings pale golden-brown; the fringes dark
smoky-brown ; the scale-tuft of the 3rd plumule large, black, and
triangular, edged with white.

SEXUAL DrmoRPHISM.—The males appear to me to average rather
larger than the females, though I have examples of the former as small
as any of the latter sex, and some of the females in my long series are
as large as fair-sized males (Bankes).

Variation.—Although, in the bulk, a long series of this species
appears to offer little variation, yet, examined in detail, there is con-
siderable diversity in size, tint, and intensity of the markings, the
differences, however, rarely leading to any striking aberration,
although a note in the nt. Rec., ix., p. 41, mentions an ‘ ochreous”’
specimen of this species that was in the “ Briegs”’ collection at the
time of its dispersal. The British examples are largely of two distinct
colour forms: (1) A bright red- or golden-brown, the hindwings almost
as brilliantly tinted as the forewings. (2) A much duller fuscous-
brown, without the marked glossy sheen of the former, the hindwings
of a deep fuscous-grey, with scarcely a tinge of red-brown. The former
occasionally leads up, even in England, to a specimen that distantly
approaches the bright, but paler, red-brown, or red-ochreous, forms of
the south and east. Some, again, are much more speckled with white than
others, presenting a white discal streak, sometimes conspicuous, which is
even developed, in the best marked examples, into an oblique transverse
shade, extending across the wing from costa to inner margin. Such ex-
amples have a well-developed white discal spot, well-marked white trans-
verse lobal lines, white costal edge to the upper lobe, whilst the two white
streaks in the outer fringes of the lower lobe, and the white scales on the
inner margin of the forewing are exceedingly well-developed. In others,
too, there is much difference in the development of the black scales, not
only in the upper lobe, but more markedly in the fringe areas of the
lower lobe, both on the outer and inner margins of the wing; in some,
there are two quite distinct black spots near the anal angle of the lower
lobe, and two others, smaller, further along the inner margin, towards
the base of the wing, with which the white patches contrast strikingly; in
others the fringes appear much more uniformly dark grey, neither the
black nor white patches being distinctly and clearly developed. One
observes in some of the brightest reddish specimens that the apex of the
third plumule, before the scale-tuft, is white, and there are many white
scales on the plumule, between the tuft and the base of the wing; in
the fringes of the hindwing also, besides the recognised scale-tuft, there
are a few short black scales placed in the long dark grey fringes, much

416 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

nearer to the base of the wing, but only discernible in very fine
specimens. One can, therefore, divide our British examples into the
following groups :

1. Fuscous-brown with abundant white markings=ab. variegata, n. ab.

la. Fuscous-brown with the white lobal lines and the fissural spot only=

parvidactyla, Haw.
1b. Fuscous-brown with the fissural spot and lobal lines more or less obsolete

=ab. obsoleta, n. ab.
2. Golden-brown (or chocolate-brown with a golden tinge) with abundant white

markings =ab. clara-variegata, nu. ab.
2a. Golden-brown (or chocolate-brown with a golden tinge) with the white

lobal lines and the fissural spot only =ab. clara, n. ab.
2b. Golden-brown (or chocolate-brown with a golden tinge) with the fissural
spot and lobal lines more or less obsolete =ab. clara-obsoleta, n. ab.

In size, we should call examples above 16mm. ab. major, n. ab., below
18mm. ab. minor, n. ab. One observes, in looking through the Fre

collection, that there is considerable difference in size. The tint of the
wings varies from brown, inclining to golden, to a deep fuscous-brown.
Some slight variation in the obliquity of the two transverse lines
across the upper lobe is noticeable; the inner one, often nearly
vertical, is occasionally somewhat oblique, whilst now and again the
outer one inclines to be of zigzag form; occasionally both these lines
are inconspicuous, and inclined to approach the ground-colour in tint.
The apical costal edge, sometimes white, is, at other times, ochreous ;
the white fissural dot is sometimes extended towards the costa, and
the basal area is sometimes thinly scaled with white; the white dots on
the marginal fringe vary considerably in intensity. An example from
Viennalooks very like pilosellae. Snellen notes it as the smallest Oxyptilid
species, also the darkest coloured, adding that some of the larger pilosellae
approach nearly to obscwrus in their dark colour, but have always a redder
tint, whilst the scale-tuft on the 8rd plumule will always distinguish
them. Zeller, in describing this species under the name of obscurus, says
(Linn. Ent., vi., p. 854) that, in size, it is like a small P. tristis,
belonging, therefore, to the group of smallest species, although in the
formation of the black scale-tuft of the 3rd plumule it agrees with P.
trichodactylus and P. ericetorum ; instead, however, of the whitish line,
which, in these species, stretches into the fringe at the base of the
second lobe, this presents an area of pure white. It is also browner,
with less reddish-yellow in its tint. Its nearest relative is P.
marginellus, from which it differs more markedly in the cleft of the
forewings, which only extends over the outer third, and not right up
to the centre, and in the white fringes of the front edge of the upper
lobe being narrower, whilst those round the apex of the 3rd plumule
of the hindwings are whiter, and have the white fringe-area more
extended. In 1847, Zeller had already noted (Jsis, xi1., p. 793) a 9

from Macri, a trifle worn and faded, so that its colour agreed with the
lightest local (Glogau) specimens, from which it appeared only to
differ in that—(1) The first transverse line of the upper lobe is broad,
and continued on the lower lobe almost as distinctly as on the upper;
itis not such a pure white, nor so sharply defined, as usual, and appears
to be less slanting. (2) The second transverse line is also broader
than in our obscurus, on the lower lobe with a larger dash in the
fringes. (8) On the hindwings the centre of the 8rd plumule is whitish;
on the front edge are several minute white scales, more numerous on

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLAs 417

the hinder edge; at both places, latticed with a couple of black scale-
patches. As these small scale-areas are larger, he says, and of a purer
white, than in our specimens, and must be even more conspicuous in fresh
specimens, one suspects that the Asiatic specimens may possibly form
a distinct species. Later, in 1852, Zeller (Linn. Hnt., vi., p. 355)
referred this specimen to maryinellus, as noted by Staudinger (posted).
Zeller also notes (op. cit., p. 855) that a g of P. dentellus, Mann,
from Fiume, in which the black scale-tuft on the 3rd plumule of the
hindwing is triangular, is not specifically distinct from obscurus ; he
says that examples of this kind occur among the gs at Glogau. This
specimen, he says, belongs to var. g, diagnosed as “ digiti tertii medio
albido.”” Of this form Snellen says: ‘The 8rd plumule is always
paler before the black scale-tuft, but sometimes white, when it forms
the var. g of Zeller.”’ [Réssler says that the specimens from Lorch
and the Dennelbachthal, near Wiesbaden, appear to belong to a
different species; in size they sometimes approach that of hieracii,
although usually smaller, and the grey colour is more like that of
tristis ; otherwise they agree with obscurus, except that they are
distinguished by the black margins to all the white marks on their
inner edge; the apex of the 3rd plumule, in comparison with
that of obscurus, is beset to a greater extent, on both sides, with
black scales; and they are certainly larger.| Zeller records it from
Sicily, ia May and July, Asia Minor, near Macri, and Brussa ;
the @ in GZeller’s possession, from Brussa, was caught in July.
Staudinger states (Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross., xv., pp. 426-7) that, ‘on the
strength of eleven specimens captured by him in 1875, from the
beginning of May until after the middle of June, and found in great
variety almost everywhere, in Amasia, and forwarded to Wocke, the
latter determined nine to be parvidactyla, and the other two to be new
species, one a specimen of a species allied to obscurus, the other to
hieractt. In 1876, he (Wocke) determined seven more of the specimens
as marginellus, Zell., but stated at the time that he considered the latter
to be only a southern form of parvidactyla,” and, in this, Staudinger con-
sidered him to be quite right. ‘‘ Zeller, too,’’ he says, “referred the
specimen caught by Loew, near Macri [which he at first quoted with
his Asia Minor examples as obscurus (parvidactyla)|, later on, in his
Monograph, to marginellus, and thus his two Asia Minor Oxyptilid
species share the same fate as his two Asia Minor Anchinia (Pleurota)
insects, in not being the species as quoted by him at first. [
merely mention all this confusion to show the great uncertainty
prevailing about these Oxyptilid species. Moeschler’s hoffinannsegyi is
nothing else but marginellus, hardly a variety thereof. Brunneodactylus,
Mill., like didactylus, and even pilosellae, hieracti, and ericetorwm,
appears to me to be far from having been proved a distinct species;
maculatus, Const., too, also appears to be doubtful, as well as teucrii
sent to me by Jordan; and ¢ristis and /ollari require very careful in-
vestigation, e.g., there are, in Lederer’s collection, examples of mar-
ginellus from Amasia amongst the kollari, as well as others from North
Persia, also placed under /ollavi. Mann records parvidactylus as being
taken at theendof April near Amasia, and in May not searce near Brussa.”’
Staudinger further notes that he ‘‘ also received a somewhat small,
typical specimen from Kriiper, taken ut Smyrna, which is referable to
the small species described by Mann, or Zeller, as dentellus, but this

418 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

cannot even be maintained as a variety, and the fact that Mann suc-
cessively quotes obscurus (parvidactylus) and dentellus as two separate
species, taken near Amasia, the latter at the commencement of June,
shows that Mann was not over-critical in the enumeration of some
species. All the distinctions that Zeller points out between margin-
ellus and parvidactylus are vague and overlap. The tint of the spots,
fringes, etc., is very variable, and in 88 specimens from Amasia, before
me, great differences are apparent, ¢.g.,in one example, determined by
Wocke as a new species, the hindmost feather of the hindwing is
almost white, with only small back scale-tufts, that also occur in
transitional stages up to typical parvidactylus. In others, also deter-
mined by Wocke as a separate species, the white spot on the outer edge
of the lower lobe of the forewing breaks through the cleft, and forms
almost a white transverse band. The fringes on the costa of the
upper lobe are sometimes narrower, sometimes broader, at times
apparently interrupted with white. The deeper cleft of the forewing,
which is particularly supposed to separate marginellus from parvi-
dactylus, is entirely unreliable, e.y., I have Tyrolese alpine parvidactylus
from Trafoi which have the cleft much deeper than any of my southern
marginellus. Iam unable to separate these insects, although I have
100 examples of the two forms before me—from Denmark, Germany,
the Alps, Italy, France, Spain, Dalmatia, Greece, Macedonia, Smyrna,
Amasia, North Persia and Saisan (in southwest Siberia). Of course, I
readily admit that extreme examples from North Germany have a
very different appearance from the lighter, more marked, southern
specimens, especially those from Spain and North Persia. Some of
my Amasian examples, and particularly those from Siberia, are very
light brown. In other Amasian and Persian examples the second
plumule of the hindwing has, in the hind-marginal fringes, before the
tip, a pure white spot.’’ Zeller remarks concerning dentellus, Mann
(supra), from Fiume, that he has a ¢ that scarcely differs from parvi-
dactylus ; the black scale-tuft on the third feather, however, forms
almost a triangle, but adds that such specimens occur particularly
among the gs. He further remarks that his example belongs to
var. b. Having summarised the published facts relating to the sup-
posed southern and eastern forms of this species, we give the descrip-

tions of the doubtful forms, which are most probably referable to
parvidactyla. These are :—

a. ab. dentellus (, Mann), Zell., ‘Linn. Ent.,”’ vi., p., 355 (1852).—P. dentellus,
Mann, from Fiume, one ¢, does not differ sufficiently from P. obscurus to consider
it distinct. The black scale-tuft of the 3rd plumule is somewhat triangular-shaped,
but such examples appear also with us, especially among the gs. My specimen

belongs to var. b (Zeller).

This appears to be a MS. name of Mann’s, at any rate we fail to
trace any description by that lepidopterist. Var. 6, to which Zeller
refers it, is diagnosed as ‘“ digiti tertii medio albido.”’ An example in
the Frey collection is labelled ‘“P. dentellus, Mann=obscurus, Zell.
Croatica (Groning).’’ It is rather small, brownish in tint, with two
distinct transverse lobal lines; the outer one crossing both lobes; the
costal edge from the second (inner) lobal line to apex, white; the
inner marginal fringe well-marked, with light and dark latticings.
The hindwings brownish-fuscous, the fringes a shade darker; the scale-
tuft on the 3rd plumule rather long.

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 419

B. var. (an spec. dist.) marginellus, Zell., ‘‘Isis,’? 1847, p. 903 (1847);
‘‘Tinn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 355 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 372 (1855); Staud..,
‘‘ Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross.,’’ xv., p. 425 (1880); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p.
72 (1901). Obscurus, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,’’ p. 38 (1847).—Nearest related to P. obscurus,
being of the same size, or only a trifle larger. The differences appear to be as
follows: (1) The forewings split almost to the middle. (2) The upper lobe of the
front wings narrower; consequently, the first white transverse line is somewhat
shorter. (3) The costa, between the two white transverse lines, is edged with black.
(4) Behind the second transverse line the fringes of the costa are more narrowly
white, and internally edged by a fine black line, widening somewhat towards the
apex (this character is also noticeable on the underside, where the apex is paler
yellow-brown). (5) The white in the fringes of the lower lobe forms a larger,
more complete, white spot towards the front. (6) Before, and at the tip of the 3rd
plumule of the hindwing, area number of equally long white scales, placed amongst
the black ones ; in the ? , these are more abundant, marginally, between the black
seale-tuft and the base of the plumule. I caught three ?s near Syracuse towards
evening, on the grassy-slopes of the ancient Neapolis, on May 4th and 23rd; also a
é in good condition near Catania, on July 4th, in a cultivated field between lanes
of lava. Loew’s specimen from Macri, in Asia Minor, which, until now, I had
considered, like the Sicilian examples, as oldscurus, I now refer to marginellus, as
the more marked distinguishing characters were either not well-marked, owing to
the condition of the specimen, or misunderstood, on account of the larger upper
lobe. This species seems to replace P. obscurus in the Mediterranean
district (Zeller).

We have already noted Zeller’s further remarks on the insect,
and Staudinger’s important and extended notes thereon have already
been quoted in full (antea pp. 416-417). Herrich-Schiffer observes
(Sys. Bearb., v., pp. 872-3) that the distinctions which Zeller quotes
do not appear to warrant the setting up of marginellus as a distinet
species, the characters appearing more or less in all the large and quite
fresh examples of obscurus, particularly (1) the forewings being split
almost to their middle, (2) the black edging to the costa between
the two white transverse streaks, (3) the black edging to the white costal
fringe of the apex (Herrich-Schiffer did not find that this white
costal edge is narrower, nor the upper lobe smaller), (4) the expansion
of the white longitudinal patch of fringe at the base of the lower lobe,
(5) the white scales before, and at the apex of, the 8rd plumule of the
hindwings, nor does the latter appear to have a blacker scale-tuft with
more white scales. Herrich-Schiffer selected some of the larger of the
Regensburg obscurus, and Zeller referred these to marginellus. Rebel
writes (Cat. 3rd ed., p. 72): “Possibly a var. of parvidactyla; major,
obscurior, etc. Sicily, Spain, Bithynia.’’

y. var. (an syn. supra) hoffmannseggi, Moesch., ‘‘ Berl. Ent. Zeits.,’’ x., p. 145
(1866).—18mm. Alis anticis pallidefuscis, laciniis albidostrigatis, ciliis dorsalibus in
medio et ante apicem lacinix posterioris linea albida. Alis posticis fuscis, digito tertio
albido pulverulento, ante apicem utrinque atro-squamat®. Subtus digito primo ante
apicem albido. Antenne black and white ringed. Palpi brown, at the apex and
on the sides sparsely, beneath evenly, scaled with white. Head brown, at the
base of the antenne a single white spot. Thorax brown, sparingly scaled with
white. Abdomen brown, each segment with two white dashes approaching each
other anteriorly, the anal tuft brown, mixed with white; beneath each segment
bordered with white, posteriorly divided in the centre by a longitudinal white stripe,
sides with white scaling. Front and middle legs brown, with the tibiw finely dusted
with white, tarsi spotted with white. Hindlégs with almost white tibiw, the tarsi
brown, with four broad white rings. Forewings dark, dirty grey-brown, sparingly
dusted with white. The upper lobe with two white transverse lines, the apex dark-
brown in the middle, costa and inner margin white. The fringes of the inner
margin from base of fissure to beyond first transverse line white, beyond this
brown and only below the outer transverse line narrowly white. Base of fissure
margined with white. The fringes of the costa of the lower lobe white at the base,

420 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

both white transverse lines distinct, the first entering the fringes of the inner
margin, the outer one hardly perceptibly separated from an elongated white spot
in the fringes, the inner marginal fringes from the base of the fissure to the first
transverse line whitish, some white scaling also at the apex, The three plumules
of the hindwings dark red-brown, the third dusted with white, scaled with black
and brown before the apex. Fringes grey-brown, white at the apex of third
plumule. All the wings brown beneath, the spots pure white, the first plumule
of hindwing broadly white before the apex, the fringes on both sides to the same
extent whitish. The third plumule quite white before the apex with a broad
spot of black-brown scales. This species is distinguished from all its relatives by
its abnormal ground-colour ; according to Dr. Wocke, it occurs also in the south
of France, but is not yet described, and I name it after Graf von Hoffmannsegg.

Keeiayinc.—The eggs are laid singly, on the hairs on the upper
surface of the leaves of Hieraciwim pilosella, about halfway up the hair, ora
little higher. On June 24th, 1905, I took a ¢ of this species, and two
or three gs. They were swept from the short turf in places where
H. pilosella was growing. The moths were sleeved over a plant of H.
ptlosella and a piece of thyme, and, on June 29th, at 4.15 p.m., I noticed
that the moths, of which there were then only two left, were paired. The
g was hanging from the ? inthe usualAlucitid manner, but wasalsocling-
ing to the muslin of the sleeve. When I saw them again at 7.40 p.m.
they had separated, and I fancy they must have been disturbed. On
July 2nd, ova were found on the sleeved plant of Hieracium, but none
on the thyme. The eggs were all attached to the long hairs (near the
summit) which grow on the upper surface of the Hieracium leaves.
These eggs subsequently proved infertile, but they showed the position
and situation in which this species lays its eggs. Acting on the know-
ledge thus gained, I visited the moth’s haunts, fortunately meeting
with Dr. Chapman on the way. After some searching we found, in all,
about a dozen ova on the Hieracium leaves in the position above
described. This was on July 5th, and ten days later I took a few more
ova in a different locality, but these were also laid in the same position.
The egg, as already noted, is laid singly at the end of one of the hairs,
on the upper surface of the leaf of H. pilosella. Asarule, only one egg is
laidonone plant. It reminds the observer superficially of the ege of the
Lacewing fly, which is laid at the summit of a long egg-stalk, but in
this case the ege is not laid actually on the apex, but along the ter-
minal portion of the hair, so that it stands well off the surface of the
leaf, about 2mm. That portion of the hair to which the egg adheres
seems to be of the same colour as the egg itself (? the effect of the
gum), the rest of the hair is transparent. The egg rests with its
longer axis parallel to the hair (Sich). On July 5th, 1905, a search
was made with Mr. Sich, who had ascertained that the eggs were laid on
the hairs of the leaves of H. pilosella; we both found several, and all
were laid about midway up one of the long hairs on the upperside of
the leaf; the hairs beneath may also have them, but they are not
easily searched. Several eggs were pale, nearly white, the majority
were orange; one was darker and already showed the black larval
head, this egg hatched on July 6th. A @ taken on Reigate Hill only
laid three eggs, one being ready to hatch on July 12th (Chapman).
The following particulars of three ova observed closely may be
interesting :

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 421

(1) July 11th. Still orange, no head show-
July 9th. Colour unchanged. ing yet.
etGh, = se ,, 12th. Orange, dark head showing.
,, 12th. Showing traces of deeper », 13th. Hatched.
colour.
,, 13th. Hatched. (3)
July 9th. Orange, dark head showing.
(2) ,, lOth. Hatched.
July 9th. Orange,head not yet showing.

Other dates of hatching noted are:—July 7th (earliest), 9th (2),
22nd, 23rd (2) (latest). I presume the duration of the egg state lasts
about ten days, but have no actual facts to go on (Sich).

Ovum.—A rather large egg, especially for so small a moth; the
length is 0°48mm., the width 0:30mm., and the height 0:'27mm., with
a question as to whether the end view is not circular and the last two
measures rather those of slightly different eggs. They are very pale
orange-yellow when laid, and become brighter orangeasthey mature. The
sculpture is in very irregular polygons, usually hexagons, but very far
from regular ones; each cell about 0:025mm. in diameter, they appear
quite flat, and the dividing ribs are of rectangular section, about 4 of
the diameter of a cell in width, and perhaps a third, or a quarter, of
their width in height (Chapman, July 9th, 1905). Longer axis
0:-53mm.; shorter axis 0°3lmm. Shape ovoid, elongated as compared
with some other Alucitid eggs, the poles rounded, scarcely any differ-
ence between them. It may be described as a short cylinder with
rounded ends. The whole surface is covered with a network of more
or less pentagonal cells, but the cells are not much raised above the
general surface. The cells vary in size, but are usually about 0:02mm.
or 0:03mm.in diameter. The micropylar area, measuring about 0:06mm.
in diameter, lies on the upper pole of the ovum. The neat rosette
appears to consist of a roundish cell with a prominence in its centre,
and a circle of six similar cells around it. The colour of the newly-
laid egg is pale ochreous, and the surface is very glossy. In some
lights the egg appears of a greenish-grey tint. Later, it becomes
deeper in colour, and before hatching assumes quite a deep orange
(chrome-orange) colour. At this period the head of the larva is
visible within the egg as a large dark spot (Sich).

Hasirs oF LARva.—When hatching, the larva bites a hole in the
wall of the egg, usually just below the upper pole. It does not devour
the egg-shell, which is left, fairly entire, upon the hair on which it was
laid. On July 7th, 1905, just before midnight, I was fortunate enough
to see a larva, newly-hatched, in the act of crawling down the hair on
which the egg had been laid. It wandered to the edge of the leaf and
back again to the centre, subsequently up to the apex, and finally down
to the base of this outer leaf. It then climbed over a leaf nearer the
centre of the plant, and at last disappeared between this leaf and the
innermost, and youngest, leaf of the plant. This occupied one hour
and thirty-five minutes. At 10 a.m. on the 8th, I could see no signs
of the larva, but, on the day following, I noticed the fluff of the inner-
most leaf of the plant had been removed from a small space, and the
substance of the leaf seemed to have been attacked. On July 10th, I took
the larva out of its burrow; it had grown quite fat,and its body was as
wide as its head, but it was still in the first instar, though 24 days old.
July 13th, resting in the central shoot with head uppermost, but, after

422, BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

being slightly disturbed by my efforts to view it, the larva turned
round and went head downwards into the shoot. Next day the larva
had left its first burrow, and was now feeding at the base of the 3rd
leaf from the centre of the plant,and had spun a slight web of silk,
mixed with the hairs of the Hieracium and débris. I put it under the
microscope ; it was still in the first instar—64 days old. By this time
several of the other eggs had hatched. In nearly all cases the larva
finally made its way into the heart of the plant, and burrowed down,
a little over its own length, at the base of the innermost leaf. In one or
two cases, where the heart was a poor one, the larva lived on the upper
surface of the youngest leaf, hiding in the still-rolled edge of the leaf.
At first the larve scrape off the fluff, usually from the underside of a leaf at
its base, and eat the green substance, but,afterwards, burrow downwards
as already mentioned. Apparently it is only quite late during the
1st stadium that the larva spins any covering over its burrow, perhaps
only when about to undergo ecdysis. The hairs of the plant and the
fluff, however, hang about the dwelling. The only other outward sign
of its presence is the brown excrement that clings to the part of the
plant attacked. However, it must not be forgotten that, at this stage,
the dwelling required by the larva is so small that it is practically
invisible without a lens, as usually it is only the top of it that meets.
the observer’s eye. On July 17th, the above-mentioned larva, at this
time nine days old, had just passed through its first ecdysisand was there-
fore in its second stadium. Though the head is lighter in colour, the
general appearance of the larva is not altered. I must have destroyed the
silken covering of this larva’s burrow in getting the larva out, as my next
note concerning it states that, two days later, it had spun a new cover.
A second larva, which hatched on July 10th, had assumed the second
instar on the 21st of that month. A third example, which I had kept
in a glass tube instead of sleeving it in a pot on the growing plants
like the rest, changed its first skin on July 28rd. On July 27th, the
plant in which the first-mentioned larva had been living, showing signs
of failing, I took out the larva and placed it on a fresh plant. The
vacated burrow showed that the larva had entered the stem of the
plant at the base of the leaf, not that it had actually bored into the
stem, but had eaten out a deep irregular groove running perpendicu-
larly down the stem to the distance of about 8mm. My observations
were now somewhat interrupted. On August 1st, 1 made a search for
two of the larve which had been on plants in the same pot. I could
not find either of them, and concluded that they had ceased feeding,
and would hybernate in the second instar. The slow growth
of the larve convinced me, even when they were in the first
stadium, that none of them would yield August imagines. I searched
again in another pot on August 6th, and then found No. 10 larva
(hatched July 22nd). This was in a burrow similar to that just
described in the second instar, and very stout. This was the last
larva I saw in 1905. From time to time I searched the pots, but
could not see either larve or any traces of them. The pots were
plunged in earth in the garden, November 6th. The following notes
may be of interest :

July 10th.—No. 3 larva still feeding at base of innermost leaf.

July 12th.—No. 3 not visible.

July 13th.—No. 3. After dissecting plant, found it at the base of one of the,
rather outer leaves. Transferred it to another plant.

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 423

July 14th.—No. 3 in heart of new plant, burrowing, head downwards, under a
covering of silk, Hieracium hairs, and débris, i.e., bits bitten off the plant.

July 13th.—No. 5 larva. The eggshell is empty. Larva invisible. Later,
found it on the underside of a lower leaf, but lost it while endeavouring to transfer
it to the heart of the plant.

July 14th.—No. 5 feeding in heart of plant, to which it has found its way
since yesterday.

July 27th.—The plant in which larva No. 4 was living is dying, and I found
the larva wandering over a leaf, evidently seeking a new plant.

Like most larve, these, when crawling, always spun a thread along
which they could walk in safety. As they walk, the head is moved
from side to side, and thus a sort of silk ladder is formed. ‘The line
thus traced by the spinneret generally contains a number of irregular
figures of 8 and letters U (Sich). A larva left the egg on July 6th, 1905,
at 9.30 a.m., and commenced to wander over the top of the leaf, shortly
turning basewards, and then, reaching an edge of the leaf, went beneath
it; then it travelled towards the tip, the leaf being a quite mature one; at
11 a.m., the larva was found after some search, apparently resting
satisfied amongst the hairs close to the base, on the upper surface of a
rather younger leaf, really quite in the centre of the plant; it was in
the same position at 12 (noon), but at 1.20 p.m. could not be found ;
it was certainly not on either surface of a leaf, nor in any easily seen
axillary position (Chapman, July 6th, 1905). Another larva, hatched
July 12th, was isolated in a glass-tube on a leaf of its fuodplant.
When it hatched, it crawled about the leaf, and then was observed at the
cut base of the leaf, where it was seen several times at a few hours’
interval; it then wandered off on the glass of the tube. The leaf was
a fresh one, put in at the time of placing the egg in the tube. The
larva was then preserved, July 15th, 1905, on a slide in Farren’s
medium. Jt was then seen that the impression that it had eaten nothing
was correct, although it was left two days in the tube (Chapman).
On April 27th, 1906, I observed a patch of Hieracium amongst some
fir-trees, near Guene Vieille (two miles from Ste. Maxime); the plant was
very like my idea of FH. piloseila, only the leaves (and the whole plant)
are very decidedly larger than those of that species ordinarily are in
Kneland. ‘The hairs on the leaves rather larger and stronger, white.
The flower-bud just discoverable, 2mm. or 38mm. across in the centres
of the most forward plants. On one of these I found a ‘‘plume”’ larva,
but a long search, and destruction of a good many plants, afforded no
more. Something suspicious about the centre of the plant attracted
attention to it, and, pulling the youngest central leaf (about $in. long),
it came away too readily. A closer look now showed a larva in the
centre of the plant, under a sort of cocoon or tent. The larva was
thick, short, stubby, and white, and much resembled a larva of some
weevil. It was, however, lepidopterous; it had eaten the little central
button, or heart, of the plant, and was continuing its attack on the
central pith below. The ‘cocoon”’ was merely a slight felting of the
white hairs of the central parts eaten, to a great extent leaving them
where they would have been, had they been still attached to the young
leaves and leaf-buds from the central eye of the plant. ‘These, however,
had disappeared, and the cavity so left was occupied by the larva. No
other trace of larval attack was discovered on this or neighbouring
plants. The larva itself is a white lethargic maggot, more like a
coleopterous than lepidopterous larva in general aspect. Its method of

424 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

feeding is clearly very similar to that of Fredericina calodactyla
(zetterstedtii), but it has a more “internal feeding” facies than that
larva, except that it has fairly well-developed hairs. I thought at first
that the lethargy might be due to approaching pupation, but I observed,
on the 29th, that the shortness and thickness were clearly due to
sulkiness, as it was seen later to crawl, distinctly more stretched, on
its foodplant, and is now ensconced in the old nest, which it has
enclosed with hairs of the plant and frass, in a sort of cocoon, and is
quite invisible (Chapman, April 27th-29th, 1906). OnJune 4th, 1906,
I spent a couple of hours on the slopes of the chalk downs at Reigate,
working for the larve of O. parvidactyla. Many hundred plants of
Hi. pilosella were scrutinised; one of the first showed the central
upstanding leaf to be somewhat limp, and it came away readily when
pulled. On looking closely, the centre of the plant was seen to be
occupied with some loose hairs of the plant, and some traces
of dark frass entangled in them or some silk. On taking the
plant up, and pushing aside this central débris, a larval tail was
observed, white, with a dark anal plate. Some time after, a plant
was found with the leaves. a little stunted, and with yellowish
and reddish tinting, and, in the centre, a slight dome of brown
frass, apparently spun together, which included in its level a flower-bud
(or the top of one). This covering of frass was about 6mm. xX 5mm.,
the bud nearly 8mm. across. When opened, this was not the top
of a cocoon, but had further frass packed under it, over a burrow,
passing down into the root, and containing a larva, which, however,
afterwards died. The search revealed nothing further, though furnish-
ing frequent disappointment in plants showing the results of various
accidents and injuries, which always proved to be caused by something
that was not parvidactyla. The larva burrows into the centre or
pith (?) of the plant, making a burrow apparently little more than
twice its own length, and placing the frass on top, with the displaced
hairs of the plant (they are very thickset on parts of the plant not yet
expanded), and more silk, the whole being very inconspicuous or
invisible, probably quite so until the larva is about fullfed. These
larve were identical with that found at Ste. Maxime. They have, to
an extreme, the aspect of internal feeders, something like Hepialus, as
if a set of whitish fat-masses lay beneath a delicate colourless skin. The
hairsare long and dark (Chapman, June 4th, 1906). Hofmann discovered
the larva on June 2nd, 1897; it was then nearly fullfed, and had bored
deeply into the heart of a plant of Hieraciwm pilosella, eating out this
right down to the root, so that the small leaflets of the shoot had become
withered, the only sign of the presence of the larva. [Frey says that
he found larve in the main stem of Stachys alpina, well on in the second
half of April, although Zeller bred it from Hieracium pilosella with
Oxyptilus pilosellae. Leech says that the larva feeds, in April, in the
young leaves of Stachys alpina, and in the autumn in the heads of
Marrubium. This is, no doubt, merely copied from other authors
without acknowledgment. We think the larva found by Frey certainly
belonged to another species. |

Larva.—First instar (newly-hatched): Orange-yellow in colour,
with some very decided orange material in the fore part of the
alimentary canal. It is about 1mm. long, and has long hairs. The
head is black, the prothoracic plate is of the same colour as the rest of
larva, and is broad in the middle and narrow at the ends. The

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 425

trapezoidals are well separated, ii having the longest hair; iii has a
very long hair, nearly 0-25mm. long; iv and y, the anterior (v) much
the higher, and with the shorter hair; long hairs also at posterior ex-
tremity. Later, itis stillabout 1mm. in length, with dark head, but other-
wise only slightly, if at all, tinted with yellowish. It has long colourless
hairs, that on tubercle ii on the last segment being about 0-3mm. long.
The hair on iis comparatively short, about 0:05mm. long, straight,
porrected, a little swollen, and perhaps inclined to be bifid at the tip ;
that on 11 is directed upwards and backwards in a flowing curve, at
least on the abdominal segments; that on iii is a long hair, directed
outwards and slightly forwards, about 0-27mm. long ; those on iv and
v are shorter, the front one much higher than the posterior, and on a
separate base, rather shorter than the posterior one, which is about
0:17mm. long, and is directed outwards (hardly backwards); the lower
setee are a short hair, and a very short one, apparently vu, at base of
prolegs. The prothoracic and 8th abdominal spiracles are very large
and prominent (Chapman, July 15th, 1905). The newly-hatched
larva measures 1-2mm. in length. The body is fairly cylindrical, but
tapers towards the anal extremity. Segmental divisions well-marked.
The spiracles are large and elevated. The tubercles are also large,
especially iii. The very long hairs are conspicuous, especially at the
anal extremity. The head is large (width about 0:2mm.) and rather
flat ; shining brown with a strong ochreous tinge; the borders of the
clypeus very dark brown. Body of the larva bright yellow-ochreous.
The thoracic shield dark ochreous. A plate on the dorsum of the 9th
abdominal segment, and the anal shield, very dark, almost black. The

tubercles are dark, and the hairs grey (semitransparent). There are

some dark ochreous markings in the dorsal and lateral areas. The legs
are lone, but the claspers are rather short, and have no crotchets except
the anal pair, which has three, or sometimes only two, black ones on
each clasper. First instar (74 days old): Length about 1-6mm. Head
dark brown, body stout, paler than when newly-hatched, and more maggot-
like. The hairsmuch covered with dirt (? the dried juice of the Hieracium).
The head carries two long hairs, one on each of the lobes near the
clypeus, and a few shorter ones. The skin of the body is covered with
spicules. The prothoracic shield has a front row of hairs, the two outer-
most being the longest, and there are two very long hairs on its
posterior border. All the tubercles are simple and separate, but 1 and
ii are close together, and so are iv and v. On the meso- and meta-
thorax 1, 11, and iii are more or less in a line. On the abdominal
segments, i and ii are always very close together. All the hairs are
smooth, carries a short hair(0-06mm.), flattened atthe tip and distinetly
notched. ‘This hair is directed forwards, even on the 8th abdominal
segment, and therefore soon gets spoilt, or even broken, when the larva
takes to burrowing. Most of the other hairs run to a fine point, ii
carries a long hair, about 0°'2mm., directed forwards on the thorax and
backwards on the abdomen ; iii carries also a long hair, about 0-2mm.,
and, on the meso- and metathorax, iii has a very small tubercle carrying
a very short hairclose behind it; iv andvare both subspiracular, the front
one (v) having a short hair directed forwards, and the other (iv) a longer
hair directed backwards. I believe vi to be absent, but vii is represented
by one small tubercle with a very short hair, and, just behind it, a
larger tubercle with a much longer hair. There areno properly so-called

426 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

secondary hairs, but there are one or two hairs to each segment in the
ventral area. The most striking point in the hairs of this instar is the
extraordinary length of those of tubercle ii on the 8th and 9th abdominal
segments; these hairs extend to a length of 0-4mm., nearly half the
length of the newly-hatched larva. The hairs of the first instar are
actually very little shorter than those of the second instar, and therefore
very much longer in proportion to the size of the larva. Second instar :
Width of head 0°3mm. Length of larva rather over 2mm. Rather
stout and maggot-like. Head brown, suture, clypeal borders and ocelli
dark brown. Body pale whitish-ochreous, much attenuated posteriorly,
segmental divisions well-marked. Thoracic shield deep ochreous, with
a faint pale line running down the centre. Anal shield also deep
ochreous. Head smooth, shining, with a long hair on each side, not
far from the clypeus, and several shorter hairs. Thoracic shield with
a front row of six hairs, the two outermost much the longest, a pair
of short hairs in the centre, and two very long hairs on its posterior
border. The prothoracic spiracle is large and tall, dark-bordered; the
abdominal spiracles are also large and elevated. Theskin of the larva
is very strongly, and rather coarsely, spiculated. No proper secondary
hairs. The tubercles are single-haired, all quite separate, small, and
little elevated, iii being the largest. On the meso- and metathorax, i,
ll, and ii1 are nearly in line; iii has, just behind it, a very small tubercle
with a very short hair. On the abdominal segments, i and 1 are close
together and fairly in the centre of the segment ; 1 carries a short hair,
about 0-07mm., flattened towards the apex, whichis shallowly notched ; 11
has a long hair, about 0-2mm., running to a fine point. On the 9th
and 10th abdominal segments, ii carries a very long hair, about 0-46mm.
in length; 111 bears a hair similar to that of i1; iv and v are quite
separate, the front one, v, carries a short hair (0‘O6mm.) with blunt tip,
and the other, iv, bears a longer hair with a pointed tip, about 0:-15mm.
in length. On the thoracic segments, this group consists of three
tubercles; here v, instead of being above and in front of iv, appears to -
have dropped down to just below iv, while the third member of the
group is close behind iv, and bears a very short bluntly-tipped hair
about half as long as that of v. On the thoracic segments, some
way below iv and v, is a pair of tubercles, the front one with a
short hair, and the posterior with a hair double that of the front
one. On the abdomen, vi is a small tubercle with a short hair;
vii is a group of three tubercles, a moderate one with a hair
about O-O7mm. and two small tubercles with very short hairs.
The legs are rather long, but the ventral claspers are very short, and
without any crochets, except the anal pair, which bears three very
large crochets on each clasper; they are placed at about equal distances
apart, and the hooked ends are directed forwards (Sich). 7? Third instar
(after hybernation): 83mm. long; the head brown, darker on the
posterior margin, prothoracic shield brown, shining, undivided ;
on the dorsum of the 9th abdominal segment is a brown, strongly
chitinous, bristly, transverse plate ; the horse-shoe-shaped depressions
between the dorsal warts are absent; anal shield and warts as in the
fullgrown larva (Hofmann. May 25th, 1898). Penultimate instar : 5mm.
long ; a brown thoracic shield, divided by a fine bright line ; on the other
hand, the brown transverse plate of the 9th abdominal segment has
disappeared, and is replaced by the ordinary warts; all else as in the full-

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 427

grown larva (Hofmann. Same larva, June 28th, 1898). Length 5mm.,
thickness 2mm., diminishing to each end; the hairs on tubercle ii are
nearly 1mm. long; that on i is short, and arises close to 11; that on ili
is about O‘6mm. long. The spiracles are faintly rufous, iv and v are
in usual positions, apparently on separate bases and a little way apart,
v, about 0-7mm., directed outwards, iv shorter and directed forwards,
vi is solitary, towards middle of segment, directed backwards. There
are no secondary tubercular hairs, but, on the dorsum, are a good
many secondary skin-hairs. The head is pale brownish, with
darker markings at back and marginally. There are indications
of dark longitudinal lines above vi, and along spiracles, forming
a broadish mark at spiracles, wanting behind and narrow-
ing forwards; a faint line through iii, and a similar one half-
way between it and ii. Between i and ii, dorsally, is a small dark
mark, somewhat horse-shoe-shaped, with convexity forwards; legs
colourless; a few brownish marks on prothoracic plate. Other details
want a better lens (Chapman. April 27th, 1906). Final instar:
6mm. long; sluggish, stouter than the larva of O. pilosellae, dirty
yellow in tint (whilst that of O. pilosellae appears whitish-yellow); the
skin is smooth, without the white knobbed bristles of O. pilosellae
larva. Head bright brown, shining; prothoracic shield yellow, with
two black spots on each side of the hind margin; both are strongly
bristly. The very characteristic anal shield is large, semicircular,
yellow, thickened with brown on the hind margin, and thickly covered
with numerous, bristly, little tubercles; also numerous bristles are
scattered over the surface of the claspers. The tubercles are brown on
the back (i and 11), standing closely together, each with a strong brown
hair; on the sides, on the other hand, the hairs of the tubercles are
whitish, as in the larva of O. pilosellae. Between the dorsal tubercles
on each segment, is a small horse-shoe-shaped depression, open
posteriorly. Spiracles finely ringed with black. Thoracic legs small,
light brown; abdominal prolegs very small, yellow, with few, or not
any, hooklets on the sole. Anal claspers still more ill-developed
(June 2nd, 1897. Hofmann). The sete are long; those on
tubercle ii, on the middle abdominal segments, being 1:75mm.
long; slender, dark basally, but for the greater part of the length
colourless. The prothoracic plate has the usual six hairs on each side,
the end ones of the back row being the smallest, the longest about
OSmm. The plate is rather square-ended, has a median pale
suture, with some spots of clouding along it, especially at posterior
margin, and a patch of dark in usual site of dark mark in
Platyptiliids. Spiracle large, thimble-shaped, a group of three hairs in
front of it, two front ones above each other, length about 0-4mm. No
hairs at base of leg, about 0-°26mm. This segment has four secondary
hairs below spiracle, and four between legs and the two basal hairs. Meso-
thorax has the usual four pairs of hairs (the third pair with accessory),
each pair on a plate of its own, no skin-points being between them,
but the plate is weak and colourless—the 1st hair, with wide divided
point, about O-5mm., the 2nd about 1-4mm., 8rd with bifid point,
O-4mm., 4th 1:2mm., 5th O-8mm., 6th 0-7mm., the accessory, with a
bifid point, 0-'83mm., on 7th and 8th 0‘'3mm. and 0-6mm. This seg-
ment (mesothorax) has about 29 secondary hairs on either side, not
symmetrically arranged, but none on front half of segment, except

498 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

close to tubercles. The metathorax appears to be identical, and has
about 85 secondary hairs on each side. On the abdominal segments, i
and v (the front one of subspiraculars) have widely divided ends, the rest
end in more than usually long, flowing, slender filaments; 1 and ii are on
a single plate, about 0-4mm. between these and those of opposite sides;
on, say, the 4th abdominal segment, the seta on 1 is, in length, about
0-5mm., 11 about 1:6mm., 111 about 1:°3mm., iv, 0°8mm., v, 0°35mm.,
vi, 0°35mm., of vil, the longest (the posterior) is about 0°5mm., the two
front ones 0°35mm. and 0:15mm. respectively. The secondary hairs are,
to some extent, grouped; some 20 or 25 form an oval on the dorsum,
including i and 1i of both sides, with centre clear, but one or two hairs
inside the tubercular plate; 6 or 7 are grouped near il, and 8 or
10 about iv-+v, which are close together, apparently on one plate,
immediately below spiracle; there are others about vi and vil, and
4 or 5 scattered separately along posterior portion of segment. On the
abdominal segments 7 and 8 (with prolegs), vil is represented by
two hairs only; three are present on the 1st and 2nd abdominals, and
there is a ventral hair (about 0-14mm.) on all segments, on the 2nd-
6th abdominal segments just inside proleg. There are here also a few
secondary hairs. The hairs have the same arrangement on the 9th, except
that vii appears to beabsent. On the 10th abdominal segment there are
no hairs, except ten on the bases of the claspers, and on the anal plate
(which is large, 0‘8mm. across, transverse in front, semicircular behind).
The latter has six hairs on the outer border on each side, and two inside
these in front. A number of (black) dark spots are scattered over the
disc, larger centrally ; there are six or eight similar spots centrally on the
9th, and one outside i, three or four smaller on the 8th, and one or two on
the 7th abdominal; these are similar to the dark spots on the prothoracic
scutum. The secondary hairs are very short, and vary little in length,
though a few of the shortest may be as short as 0:04mm., and the
longest 0‘O8mm. They are broad, and widen equally towards bases
and tips, the tips being usually darker, and terminating in two to four
sharp points. The colourless skin-points are very inconspicuous; on
the posterior portion of segments they are round nodules, but along
the front they carry acute points directed backwards; these are
especially strong, and slightly tinted on prothorax. The distinctions
between front and back of segment hold throughout; even the front of
the anal plate has sharp, and the posterior margin has rounded, points,
but, on this segment, the sides, down to claspers, also have the
points spiculated. The hooks on prolegs vary; in one specimen each
has two, including claspers, in another they are 8,5; 4,4; 3,8; 4,5;
claspers 3,4, and in another vary from 2 to 4. The true legs are
brown, with a few fine bristles and a sharp claw. The spiracles are
raised on short cones. The jaws have four teeth, or five if inner
rounded one is counted. A central eye-spot, and five others in a semi-
circle round it, the middle one decidedly the largest. Labrum with two
hairs on disc, and four round margin, on either side (Chapman. May
10th, 1906). [The head black, the body dusky pale green, with a black,
divided, prothoracic plate. ‘True legs black, abdominal prolegs of the
colour of the body, with black hooks. On the dorsum of each segment
are four similar black tubercles, which bear a stellate tuft of strong
bristles ; also a similar row of tubercles on the sides. The spiracles
stand out conspicuously (Frey. From larva found towards end of

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 429

April in main stem of Stachys alpina). Apparently this has nothing
to do with this species, although it is the description quoted in all our
text-books. |

CoMPARISON OF LARVH OF OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA AND O. PILOSELLZE.
—The larva of O. parvidactyla is easily separated from that of O.
pilosellae, as follows: (1) By the absence of the white, knobbed, bristles
on the skin. (2) By the strong brown hairs of the dorsal tubercles.
(3) By the strong characteristic anal shield (Hofmann).

Purarium.—On examining the specimen (already described as larva)
on May 15th, 1906, I found it had pupated. It is in the same cavity
in which the larva fed, but this is extended upwards into a rather
wider cavity, covered in chiefly with the leaf-hairs, etc., of the
Hieracium, forming altogether a cavity twice as long, and twice as wide
(rather more above), as the pupa. This is able, by some activity, to
travel up and down in the cavity; in doing so it uses the ample supply
of hooks it has at both extremities and dorsally, and makes lateral as
well as dorso-ventral curves, but, dorso-ventrally, it shows no indication
of the somersault movement of the pupe of so many “plumes.” Thismove-
ment of travelling up and down in the puparium is similar to that possessed
by ‘‘micros,”’ but, there being a special set of implements for carrying it
out, is obviously not a retained, but a reacquired, accomplishment, as
in the case of Macrothylacia rubi, Dimorpha versicolora, and certain
Sphinges (Chapman. May 15th, 1906.). The pupa of the species is
also very remarkable, usually attached to the underside of a leaf of the
foodplant, in the manner common to the Alucitids, among the loose
torn-off down of the leaf (Hofmann). [The deep black* pupz are to
be found on the underside of the leaves of the foodplant (Frey). This
observation apparently does not apply to the pupa of this species. |

Foopriants.—Hieracium pilosella (Zeller), H. laeviyatwm (Crom-
brugghede Picquendaele). | Marrubium vulgare (Frey, confirmed by Ghtz,
Steudel, and Hofmann), main stem of Stachys alpina (Frey), and Thymus
serpyllum (Shuttleworth), still want confirmation]. Whether Marrubium
vulgare 1s, or 1s not, a foodplant for this species appears to us to be open
to question. It is, however, noticed by many German authors; among
others, Glitz mentions larve as not rare at Herrenhausen in May, the
imagines being bred in June; and the statement is accepted by Crom-
brugghe de Picquendaele, who, quoting Disqué, says (Rev. Ent. Soc.
Namur), “ Hieracium laevigatum and also Marrubium vulgare,” but, in
answer to a query by us, states (tn litt.) that he himself has ‘never
seen it on, or among, the latter plant.’’ We cannot believe the larva
and pupa described by Frey from Stachys alpina have anything to do
with this species.

Pura.—6'5mm. long; 1:3mm. broad at widest part. Seen
laterally it is about the same width from mesothorax to the 5th
abdominal segment. Thence it diminishes to abont O-7mm. or
0-6mm. at end of the 8th abdominal; the 9th abdominal is extended
by ventral hooks; the 10th abdominal ends in a hook curled round
and directed dorsally; on lateral view, this seems to range with
hooks formed by i+ 11 on the preceding segments; it is, however,
single and median. Out of its cocoon, the last pupal segments are curved
forward, so that this hook points backward, é.e., posteriorly ; the wings

* The pupa is described as pale by Hofmann, Chapman, ete.

430 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

reach to the end of the 4th abdominal segment, and their prolonged
apices, legs, etc., to the end of the 5th abdominal. The pupa is terra-
cotta-coloured, with a dark shade down each side of dorsum, darkest on
thorax, and some dark shading down antenna, and between veins of
wings. Seen dorsally, the pupa is widest at mesothorax, tapers
slightly to 5th abdominal, thence more rapidly. ‘The head is rather
bent forward, so that the wing-spines are level with the lower margin
of eyes, and the front of pupa is rather blunt and truncate, the
thickest part of the pupa being only 0-5mm. from extreme front. The
first legs reach to end of wings, the maxilla disappearing under them at
about two-thirds of their length; antenna rather shorter than first
legs ; wing-veins (some of them very obvious) la, 1b, 1, 2, 3, and two
more costal, a line also of medio-cellular veins. There are certain
hooks on the head that are especially to be remarked. Between the
jaws and the maxillary bases is a diamond of labium ; above these the
labrum, and above this a square piece, the clypeus; immediately above
this, on either side, are two minute sharp points, brown and chitinous,
on a thicker pale base; they point directly ventrally; above and behind
these, and external to them, are two very large hooks, curved, and with
their dark, sharp, spines similarly pointed ventrally ; just below, and in
front of, the points, along hair arises (pointing also ventrally), making the
process, in some aspects, like a part of the process of the 8rd abdominal
in Marasmarcha. Then, further out and further back, in line with outer
margin of eye,is a third sharp point directed ventrally. These three pairs
of hooks are so placed as to enable the pupa to secure a hold of anything
suitable (like the silken lining of its cocoon), and to pull itself
forwards, or at least hold, during further movements. There are also
two pairs of minute hairs on (or near) the clypeus, and another large
hair behind the largest hook. The two hairs on this hook seem to be
the antennz, basal pair, and the outer hook is on the antennal scape ;
there are minute sharp points to each of the first three joints of the
flagellum. The thorax carries the usual two dorsal flanges, with
tiree hairs, and there is a sharp point on it, at its highest position on
mesothorax, directed backwards. There are several other hairs on the
pro- and mesothorax, and one at front corner of metathorax. These
are all 0‘-3mm. to 0-4mm. long. The hairs on the following abdominal
segments are all short, 0-lmm., or shorter. The hindwing ends just
below the spiracle of the 2nd abdominal. On the 8rd abdominal
segment the hairs become longer again, and here 1 and 11 have,
between them, a sharp, dark, chitinous spine; i and ii rather close
together, with a wide space between them and those of opposite
side; ili is represented on the ist and following abdominal
segments ; iv (0°2mm.) and v (0’°3mm.) are first free from the wing
on the 8rd abdominal; on the 4th and 5th abdominals, the dorsal
spines are larger, and curved a little outwards, and more so on the
6th, 7th, and 8th abdominals; on the 9th abdominal, absent, or
represented by a dark brown point beside the rather long hair
(0:'5mm.). The terminal (cremastral) hairs are long (0-4mm.), brown,
about six in number, curved at the tips, but obviously too pliant and too
little hooked to have any cremastral function. Tubercle vis on a slight
elevation, greater on the posterior segments; the wing-spine is marked
by a very minute, sharp, brown point; tubercle vi is well-marked as a
strong hair on the 4th abdominal, and inwards by a hair directed

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 431

backwards, rather thick and strong, about 0°35mm. long ; on the 4th,
5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th abdominal segments, vii has a very long,
strong, posterior hair, and a shorter forward one, the long one
0:5mm., the shorter 0°25mm., on the 8th abdominal only one shorter
hair; the 9th abdominal possesses a similar hair, probably of same
series. In place of the usual bosses, the 9th abdominal possesses two
strong hooks, large basally, curved a little forwards, with sharp brown
points; on each of these are four, long, cremastral hairs (functionless
eremastrally), like those of apex. The dorsal hooks of the 6th, 7th,
and 8th abdominals have the concavity forwards; the 9th and 10th
abdominals carry several other long hairs. The anal scar is distinct,
the ventral aspect of the cremastral spine (terminal) is finely grooved
longitudinally. The end of the appendage-spine consists of maxille, the
tarsal ends of the 2nd and 8rd legs, and tips of wing-process. The
surface-sculpturing is fine pitting, not more than a faint indication of
the frequent transverse ribbing is detected. [Imago emerged June
9th, 1906 (Chapman).] Slender; pale yellowish in colour; differs from
pupee of the closely-allied species, O. hieracii and O. ericetorum, by the
absence of the spines on the thorax and on the first three abdominal
segments, and especially by the cremaster. This terminates in a fine
point, directed upwards, and has, on the venter, just before the hind-
margin of the 9th abdominal segment, instead of the heap of hooked
bristles usually present here in the Alucitids, two long processes,
which, as well as the front of the cremaster, are furnished with long,
stiff bristles, partly straight, and partly bent, hook-like at the end.
Zeller has already accurately described and figured the remarkable
formation of the pupa (Jsis, 1841, p. 794, pl. iv., fig. 26) (Hofmann).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—The species is absolutely single-brooded in
Britain*. In very early seasons the moth is well out by the middle of
June, but, in late seasons, does not appear much before the commencement
of July, and then, occasionally, lasts until early August; the last fortnight
of June, and the first two weeks of July, form, however, its average
time of appearance. The same extended period appears to occur in
Belgium (Crombrugghe de Picquendaele), in Switzerland (beginning of
June to end of July, at Zirich, and the end of July at Samaden, at
6000it. elevation) (Frey), and in Germany, where Speyer gives mid-June
to the end of August for Waldeck; end of May to commencement of
August in Brandenburg (Sorhagen) ; July in Mecklenburg (Gillmer) ;
in Hamburg (Sauber), etc.; end of June in the Mombacher Wald
(Rossler); commencement of July in the Délauer Haide (Stange) ; end
of July and August in Silesia (Méschler); end of June and commence-
ment of July in the Kingdom of Saxony (Schutze); from end of May to
beginning of July in Bavaria (Schmid); and June and July in
Wiurttemberg (Steudel and Hofmann). In Austro-Hungary, one
notes May to commencement of August in Moravia (Gartner) ; May
and June in the Vienna district, and in Carniola (Mann) ; whilst May
27th to June 4th are given for Flitsch, in Carinthia (Zeller). The
end of June and July are noted for the Baltic Provinces (Noleken) ;
June for Bulgaria (Rebel) ; but as early as May near Brussa (Mann) ;
and, in Roumania, it oceurs in July near Varatic; in May and June

* We are quite unable to accept Sand’s statement that it appears in June
and again in September, in the Auvergne district, without confirmation.

;

432 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

near Tultscha (Caradja); whilst July 13th is recorded for Gothland
(Dahlbom). Snellen gives May and July in the Netherlands, and
erroneously notes it as double-brooded; Constant also makes it double-
brooded, occurring in June and September in Saone-et-Loire. Actual
dates of captures are as follows :—ConTINENTAL RECORDS: June 23rd,
1867, at Zwtrichberg (Dietrich); June 19th to July 11th, 1869, at
Meseritz (Zeller); July 5th, 30th, 1870, at Magnusholm ; end of June
at Dreyden (Nolcken) ; singly in June, near Shvno; July 28rd, 1908,
at Lakab (Rebel); July 9th, 1904, at Velthem (Crombrugghe de
Picquendaele). BritisH REcorps: June 19th, 1845, in Charlton sand-
pit (Douglas); July 17th, 1862, at Castle Eden (Sang); June, 1868,
at Witherslack (Hodgkinson) ; July, 1868, near Lewes (Jenner) ; July
18th-15th, 1869, at Witherslack; July 3rd, 1872, in very fine condition,
at Witherslack (Hodgkinson); July 15th, 1878, at Witherslack (Sang);
June 80th, 1883, at Witherslack (Shuttleworth); July 18th-26th,
? 1888, in the Isle of Purbeck (Digby); July 7th-9th, 18838, common
at Dover (Coverdale) ; June 23rd, 1884, at Folkestone (T. H. Briggs) ;
June 28rd, 1884, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); imagines common,
June 26th, 1884, at Cuxton (Bower); June 3rd-July 10th, 1885, in the
Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ; second week of July, 1885, at Witherslack
(Hodgkinson) ; June 26th-July 13th, 1886, July 12th, 1887, in the
Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); July 14th, 1888, on Box Hill (T. H. Briggs);
July 21st, 1888, at Cuxton; August 6th, 1888, at Kingsdown; August
21st, 1888, at Folkestone; July 7th, 1889, at Kingsdown, (Tutt) ;
June 22nd-July 13th, 1889; May 29th, 1890, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes) ; June 14th, 1890, at Oxted (Sheldon) ; late July and early
August, 1890, at St. Margaret’s Bay, and at Deal (Tutt); July 7th,
1890, at Horsley (Bishop); July 20th, 1891, at St. Margaret’s Bay
(Fenn); June 17th, 1891; June 10th-July Ist, 1892, in the Isle of
Purbeck (Bankes); June 7th, 1898, near Carrickfergus (Watts); July 4th,
1898, at Shoreham, Kent (Bower) ; July 22nd, 1898, at Cuxton (Tutt) ;
June 28th, 1894, at Shoreham, Kent; July 8th, 1895, at Shoreham
(Bower); June 19th-July 7th, 1895, at Cuxton, June 14th-28rd, 1896,
at Cuxton (Tutt); June 12th-16th, 1896, at Witherslack (Hodgkinson);
July 12th, 16th, 21st, 1497, at Shoreham (Bower); June 8rd, 1898, at
Chippenham Fen(N.C. Rothschild); July 12th-21st, 1898, at Shoreham,
Kent (Bower); end of July, 1900, at Marlow (Clarke); July 8th, 1902,
at Shoreham, Kent (Bower); July 16th, 1903, at Hesleden (Harrison);
July 30th, 1904, at Cuxton and Halling (Ovenden); June 24th,
1905, at Reigate (Sich); June 25th, 1905, near Hartlepool (Bower) ;
June 27th, 1905, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); July 5th-12th,
1905, on Reigate Hill (Chapman); July 15th, 1905, at Clandon (Sich);
June 24th, 1906, at Reigate (Turner); June 16th, 1906, near Box
Hill; July 14th, 1906, at Horsley (Sich).

Hasits.—This active little species, abundant on the chalk-downs
running from Strood to Maidstone, from Kingsdown to Dover, from
Folkestone to Dover, through Surrey, on the Reigate and Boxhill
Downs, and similar places, is difficult to see, but, once recognised,
can be followed up without trouble. It flits nimbly over the
herbage, taking short flights, and then skipping rapidly off again,
during the hot afternoon sun, when most of our captures have been
made; it becomes, however, more abundant as the afternoon draws to
a close, and one can, by keeping one’s eyes well down on the ground,

OXYPTILUS PARVIDACTYLA. 433

and covering the quarry with the net (so that they can fly up into it),
obtain them in numbers. They hang warily on grass-culm, Hieracium
stem, etc., but also settle down to feed on the thyme-blossom, with
which, in Eneland, they seem to be usually associated, skip up the
net, when made captive, with remarkable agility, and are not to be
driven down again, by blowing at them, without much expenditure
of energy. Towards dusk the species is more readily observed,
and can then sometimes be taken in considerable numbers; we have
seen it quite abundant on the turf at the top of the cliffs near
the South Foreland lighthouse, between 7 p.m. and 8 p.m., on
a still evening in early July. Bankes says that, in the Isle of
Purbeck, the insect flits over the short turf of the downs in the
evening, is difficult to see, but, in his experience, can then be
obtained most easily by sweeping the flowers of Thymus serpyllum,
on which it delights to feed. Sich observes that, at Reigate, during
the daytime, it is easily disturbed from the short herbage, but, owing
to its small size and dark colour the moths are hard to follow. Studd
records its capture when flying in the sun at Oxton, Devon, whilst
Crombrugghe de Picquendaele records it as flying freely in the daytime
among Hieracium pilosella at Velthem, between Brussels and Louvain.
Barrett says that it may easily be disturbed by day, by the foot, from its
hiding-place among the short herbage, but at sunset flies freely of its
own accord. Zeller says he often captured specimens in cop. at
Glogau, although he gives no information as to their habits at this
time, but Sich observes that the g hangs free from the @ in the usual
Alucitid manner, although the one he had under observation (in
confinement) was also clinging to the muslin of the sleeve.
Hasirat.—From Scandinavia to the Mediterranean district (Sicily,
etc.), and from the sea-level to some 6000ft. elevation in the Alps of
Central Europe, give a very considerable range for variety in the
habitats of this little species. In the south of England it prefers the
chalky and limestone downs that are so characteristic of the southern
counties. At Halling, where it is exceptionally abundant, the chalk
slopes are covered with an abundance of Lotus corniculatus, whilst
thyme and the mouse-ear hawkweed appear to be much less abundant.
In Ireland, it frequents the sandhills of Sligo and the railway-banks near
Athlone. In Durham it occurs commonly on a dry railway-bank, close to
Hesleden Dene, where there is no thyme, but where there is plenty of
Hieracium ; whilst it also occurs at Black Halls, where both thyme
and Hieracium grow. In Gloucestershire it is not scarce on the slopes of
Durdham Down (Bartlett), and occurs freely on the downs at Ventnor:
(South); it is found very locally, and rather sparingly, on the limestone
downs of the Isle of Purbeck coast, but, except for a solitary specimen
at Bloxworth, has not been found elsewhere in Dorset (Bankes),
Barrett says that the species frequents the slopes of chalkhills and
open downs, also any rough ground in chalk and limestone districts,
and more especially haunts wild thyme and marjoram. In Switzerland,
Frey has taken it at Samaden, ata height of 6000ft., and Jordan ata still
higher elevation, v7z.,in the hilly field half-way up the Riffel Alp, but, as a
rule, it does not reach remarkably high elevations, being noted particu-
larly by Weiler as not going much above 8000ft. in the Tyrolean Alps
about Innsbruck, although Heller gives it as extending from the
valleys to 6600ft. elevation in these same mountains. Dietrich

434 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

records it as occurring among Tussilayo at ZGurichberg, but this must
be merely due to this plant growing among its foodplant in its locality
here. At Brussa 1t inhabits the mountain slopes and meadows (Mann).
In Belgium it ts little known, but Crombrugghe de Picquendaele finds
it commonly among Hieracium by the roadside, at the cross-roads at
Velthem, between Brussels and Louvain. Zeller observes that, at
Meseritz, in Posen, it lives in dry sandy places where Hieraciwm pilosella
grows abundantly; whilst near Glogau it is abundant, occurring, not
infrequently, in company with O. pilosellae, at the end of June and in
July, on somewhat dry but fertile spots, where its foodplant, Hieraciwin
pilosella, grows commonly. Near Jena it occurs frequently in the
mountains (Schlager); in Meckienburg the species is found at the same
time and in the same places as O. pilosellae (Stange) ; and in the Rhine
Provinces with QO. pilosellae, in dry sandy places (Stollwerck). In
Roumania it occurs, rarely, on hillsides and high pastures (Caradja).
In the Netherlands it usually frequents heaths, e.g., at Soest (Snellen).

British LocaLities.—Apparently widely distributed in England
and Ireland, but greatly overlooked; not yet recorded from Scotland.
Antrim: on Knockagh, near Carrickfergus, abundant (Watts). Bucks: Marlow
(Clarke). Campripce: Chippenham Fen (N. C. Rothschild). Devon (Stephens).
Dorset: Isle of Purbeck (Bankes), Bloxworth (Cambridge). Duruam: Castle Eden
(Sang), Black Halls, Hesleden Dene (J. Gardner), near Hartlepool (Bower). Ganway:
Clonbrock (Dillon). GuoucestEeR: not scarce, Durdham Down, near Wood-
chester, Almondsbury (Hudd), Bristol, common (Porritt), Painswick district
(Watkins). Hants: Isle of Wight, abundant on coast (W. H. B. Fletcher)—
Ventnor (South). Kenr: Charlton sandpit (Douglas), Shoreham (Bower), Deal
district (Vaughan), Cuxton, St. Margaret’s Bay, Kingsdown, Folkestone (Tutt),
Dover, common (Coverdale), Darenth (Stephens). Lancs: near Grange (Hodgkinson).
Norrork : very local, Croxton (H.Williams). Roscommon: Athlone district (King).
Stico: Knocknarea (Russ). Somerset: Leigh Down, Portishead (Hudd). Surroik
(Barrett). Surrey: Oxted (Sheldon), Clandon, Box Hill (Sich), Horsley (Bishop),
Reigate Hill (Chapman), Dorking (T. H. Briggs). Sussex: widely distributed—
Arundel Park, Ditchling Common, Shoreham Downs (W. H. B. Fletcher), Clapham
Downs (T. B. Fletcher), near Lewes (Jenner). WexstmeatH: Athlone district
(King). Westmorntanp: Whitbarrow (Hodgkinson), Witherslack (Shuttleworth).
Yorks: near Scarborough (Stainton).

Distripution.—Hurope (except polar region), northwest Persia,
Asia Minor, ‘Tarbagatai mountains (Staudinger and _ Rebel).
Asta: Asia Minor—Amasia (with marginellus) (Staudinger), Brussa (Mann), the
Tarbagatai (teste Rebel). Austro-Huncary: Bohemia (Nickerl), Moravia—near
Brinn, near Karthaus (Gartner), Lower Austria—Hernstein district, also on the
foothills (Rogenhofer), Vienna district (Mann), Tyrol, north, central, and southern
alps to 6600 ft. (Heller), Bozen, Trient (Mann), near Innsbruck, Tratzberg, up the
mountains to 3000ft., Taufers Valley, near Taufers, Schlafhaus, Weissenbach
(Weiler), Glockner district, near Schluderbach (Mann), Trafoi (Kppelsheim),
Carniola—Nanos—Abhang, near Gradischa (Mann), Carinthia—Raibl and Preth
district, Flitsch (Zeller), near Fiume (Mann), Croatia and Dalmatia (Mann),
Galicia (Nowicki), Slavonia (Koca teste Rebel), Banat, Transsylvania (teste Rebel).
Beuetum: Liége (de Fré) ; Ixelles, Velthem, between Brussels and Louvain (Crom-
brugghe), [Francorchamps, near Spa (Sélys).] Bosnta anp Hercecovina: Lakab,
Mostar (Rebel). Buncarta: Eastern Roumelia—near Slivno (Rebel). CHANNEL
Istanps : Guernsey—Petit Bot Valley (Luff). Denmark (Bang-Haas). FInuanp (teste
Zeller). France: Aube (Jourdheuille), Cher—St. Florent, Indre—Nohant (Sand),
Saone-et-Loire (Constant); Var—Ste Maxime (Chapman). Germany: east and west
Prussia (Tiedemann), near Dantzig (Speiser), Posen—near Meseritz (Zeller),
Pomerania—near Stettin, Schrey, Wollin Island (Biittner), Mecklenburg—near
Friedland (Stange), near Neustrelitz (Messing), near Parchim (Gillmer), Hamburg
—near Bahrenfeld, in the Haake (Sauber), Hanover—near Hanover (Reinhold),
Herrenhausen (Glitz), Rhine Provinces—near Aix, Uerdingen, near Cologne (Stoll-
werck), Neuenahr, Altenahr (Maassen), near Bonn (Jordan), Hesse—the Mombacher

3 ar ae

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLE. 435

Wald, near Dotzheim, Wiesbaden, Nassau (Rossler), Frankfort-on-Main, near Cassel
(Koch), Waldeck—near Rhoden, Arolsen(Speyer), Thuringia—near Jena(Knapp),near
Soémmerda (Jordan), Province of Saxony—Dolauer-Haide, near Nietleben, Halle-
a.-S. (Stange), Brandenburg—near Berlin, Potsdam (Pftitzner), Silesia, distributed
(Wocke), Upper Lusatia, near Schonberg, Siegersdorf (Sommer), near Sommerau,
Lower Friedersdorf, near Neusalza (700 ft.-800 ft.), Schafberg, near Baruth, Nisky
(574 ft.) (Méschler), Kingdom of Saxony—Saxon Upper Lusatia, distributed
(Schiitze), Bavaria—near Regensburg, on the Keilstein, near Worth (Hofmann
and Herrich-Schiaffer), Schwablweiserberge, Kleinpriifening, near Kelheim (Schmid),
Wiirttemberg—near Urach (Steudel and Hofmann), Baden, only in high mountains
—near Ueberlingen, Lahr, Gengenbach, Herrenwies, Tauberbischofsheim, Fried-
richsfeld (Meess and Spuler), Alsace, the Palatinate (Bertram). Irany: Sicily
(Mann). NetHEerianps: North Holland (Kinker), Utrecht—on the heath at Soest
(Snellen), Gelderland—near Arnhem (vy. Medenbach de Rooy), Limburg—near
Maastricht, North Brabant—near Breda and Rijen (Snellen). Roumanza: Varatic
(Caradja). Russta: Baltic Provinces — Magnusholm, Pichtendahl (Nolcken),
Livonia (Zeller), Kokenhusen (Lienig), Grésen (Rosenberger), Treyden (Bienert).
Scanprnavia: Blekinge (Wallengren), Gothland (Dahlbom). SwirzrriaNnp: up to
6000 ft. elevation—Ziirich, Baden, Engadine — Samaden, at 6000 ft. (Frey),
Bergun (Zeller), Riffel (Jordan), Ziirichberg (Dietrich).

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLH, Zeller.
SynonyMy.—Species: Piloselle, Zell., ‘‘Isis,’’ p. 789, pl. iv., fig. 27 (1841) ;
v. Tied., ‘‘ Preuss. Provinzialblatt.,’’ p. 539 (1845) ; Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Méth.,”’ p. 383
(1845); Lienig, ‘‘ Isis,” p. 300 (1846); Tgstrm., ‘‘ Finl. Fjar.,” p. 155 (1847) ;
Koch, ‘‘Isis,’’ p. 954 (1848); Sta., ‘‘Sys. Cat.,’’ p. 13 (1849); Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,”’

Vi., p. 349 (1852); Wallern., ‘‘ Oefvers K. V. A. For.,”’ p. 220 (1852); H.-Sch.,

** Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 372 (1855); supp. fig. 16 (1853); Frey, ‘‘Tin. Pter. Schw.,”
p. 408 (1856) ; Plotz, ‘‘ Freyer’s Neu. Beit.,’’ vii., p. 131 (1858); Sta., ‘‘Man.,”’ ii., p.
442 (1859); Wallgrn., ‘‘ Skand. Fjaderm.,’’ p. 14 (1862); Gartn., ‘‘ Faun. Briinn,”’ p.
250 (1866); Jord., ‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 122 (1869); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘Cat.,”’
2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Nolck., ‘‘Lep. Fn. EHstl.,”? p. 803 (1871); Hein. and
Wocke, ‘‘Schmett. Deutsch.,’’iii., pt. 2, p. 790 (1877); Frey, ‘‘ Lep. Schweiz,” p. 429
(1880) ; Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xviii., p. 122 (1881); Snellen, ‘‘ De Vlind.,”
ii., pt. 2, p. 1029 (1882); Sorhen., ‘‘ Kleinschm. Brandbg.,”’ p. 3 (1886); Leech,
‘Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 57, pl. xvii., fig. 1 (1886); Tutt, “Young Nat.,’’x., p. 164 (1889) ;
Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xxv., p. 431 (1889) ; South, ‘‘ Ent.,” xxii., p. 33 (1889) ;
Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 485 (1890); Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,’?i., p. 182
(1891) ; ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 66 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,” ete., p. 432 (1895) ;
Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ p. 107 (1895) ; Staud.and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’”’ 3rd ed.,
p. 71 (1901); Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., pp. 369-370, pl. 415, fig. 2 (1904).
Didactylus, Stphs., ‘‘ Illus. Haust.,’’ iv., p. 377, in part (1834); Wood, “Ind.
Ent.,”’ Ist ed., p. 237, in part, pl. li., fig. 1650 (1839). Trichodactyla, Stphs.,
‘«Tilus., Haust.,’’ iv., p. 424, in part (1835). Didactyla, Zett., ‘‘ Ins. Lapp.,”’
p. 1013 (1840). Hieracii, Sta., ‘‘Cat.,” p. 32 (1849); ‘Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,’’ i.,
p. 185, im part (1891); ‘* Pter. Brit.,’ p. 69, i part (1895); Meyr., ‘ Handbook,”’
oe, 432 (1895); Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., 367-368, in part, pl. 415, fig. 1

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION.—Alis anterioribus rufescenti-cinnamomeis,
laciniis albido-bistrigatis, digito tertio cinnamomeo, paulo ante apicem
utrinque atrosquamato. Forewings reddish cinnamon-brown with
two whitish transverse lines across the lobes; the third plumule
cinnamon-brown, shortly before the apex on both sides with deep black
scaling (many gs and ? s). This plume differs from Pterophorus
tristis in its brighter colour and in the position of the scales in the
fringes of the third plumule; from 2. vbscurus in the lighter ground-
colour, in the absence of the black scales on the dise of the third
plumule and in the differently marked fringes on the hind-margin of the
lower lobe; from P. hieracii in its smaller size, in the pale, less chestnut-
coloured, ground-colour, and in the less distinct white hind-marginal
line of the lower lobe ; finally, from P. trichodactylus in the wnicolorous
dise of the third plumule, and in the differently coloured hind-margin

436 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

of the lobes. Size less than P. tetradactylus. Head orange-brown,
with a white line above the eye, which runs into the red-brown basal
joint of the white and black ringed antenne. Palpi longer than the
head, somewhat curved upwards, then porrected; the thin pointed
terminal joint hes generally on the elongated hair-scales of the second
_ joint; they are yellow-brown with white longitudinal lines, as in P.
tristis. Dorsal shield and abdomen yellow-brown. Across the shield
runs a transverse whitish-yellow line to the inner margins of the fore-
wings. On the hind margin of the thorax are four longitudinal
similarly-coloured lines, which are continued on the commencement of
the abdomen; each segment of the abdomen has four, more or less
distinct, white, longitudinal lines, which become thickened and divergent
on the hind-margin. In the most distinct examples, usually females, the
venter has three snow-white longitudinal lines thickened before the
incisions, and between these a white spot in each ring. Legs with
white lines on the femora and tibiz on the side turned to the body, on
the outer side with two reddish-brown longitudinal lines ; the area at
the base of the spurs and the apices of these reddish-brown; the tarsal
joints snow-white with broad yellow-brown apices (the thickened
portions at the spurs are stronger and the brown colour much brighter
than in P. tristis). Forewings bright, reddish, cinnamon-brown,
dotted with white on the dark costa, on the inner margin near the
base, and also on the disc before the fissure, with yellowish and whitish
scaling. The upper lobe is the darker, but lighter at the apex. Two
whitish transverse lines, more oblique and more sharply margined than
in P. tristis, ran over both lobes. The fringes, from the second trans-
verse line to the apex, on the costa of the upper lobe, are yellowish-
white ; on the lower lobe the whitish base of the fringes, between the
apex and the second transverse line, forms a yellowish-white curved
line as the boundary of the ground-colour. The fringes of the hind-
margins brown-grey, especially dark in the space between the two
transverse lines on the lower lobe, lighter brownish towards the base.
Here and there are scattered black scales in the fringes of the inner
margin. Hindwings grey-brown with grey fringes. The third plumule
light reddish-brown, with a set of white scales on the hind-margin; the
hind-margin has them longer, and more numerous, than the costa; this
set does not, however, reach the whitish apex, where two black scales lie.*
Underside darker cinnamon-brown ; the white of the transverse lines
and fringes more distinct than on the upperside. The forewings on
the costa with scattered white scaling; the first transverse line is
absent on the lower lobe. The first and third plumules paler than the
second, and with a large whitish spot before the apex; on the third
plumule one sees the black scales distinctly only on the hind margin.
This species lives in many countries and is abundant; but I here only
mention the following with certainty: Sweden (Zetterstedt); Mecklen-
burg-Strelitz (from examples from Messing); in the Mark of Branden-
burg (round Berlin and Frankfort-on-Oder) ; Silesia, in the plain and
in the mountains (round Glogau it is very common, rarer round
Reinerz); Province of Posen (according to von Low); Bohemia,

* This paragraph is queried in Zeller’s copy of the Isis in Nat. Hist. Mus.
library in his own handwriting. The description, however, is quite accurate,
except that the whitish apex appears also often to carry the white scales. The
black scales at the apex are very distinct in fine specimens.

Se sS

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLE. 437

round Nirdorf and Reichstadt (according to Fischer v. Réslerstamm’s
information) (Zeller).

Imaco. —17mm.-19mm. Forewings orange-brown or pale
cinnamon in colour; an oblique white transverse band (or shade),
sometimes very obscure before the middle; the base of the fissure
edged by a whitish cloud; beyond this is a broad, sharply-defined,
white stripe, crossing both lobes, and not strongly angulated ; beyond
this a slender similar stripe; the fringes of the upper lobe brown,
blackish at anal angle, of the lower lobe, brown, with a pale ochreous
patch in outer marginal hollow, and strikingly blackish between bases
of lobal transverse lines. Hindwings with the plumules dark golden-
brown, thickly sprinkled with minute dark scales, the fringes very dark
smoky-brown, the third lobe with some white cilia towards the tip, but
interrupted by a broad triangular brown-black tuft, the margin of this
plumule with a series of isolated conspicuous black scales.

SEXUAL DIMOoRPHISM.—The @, easily recognised by its wider and
more pointed abdomen, is usually distinctly smaller than the ¢,
tending to show more conspicuously the white abdominal dorsal
streaks and chestnut-brown lateral markings (as noted by Zeller). The
eround colour of ? is usually bright, the pale markings well-developed,
both on the forewings and the 8rd plumule of the hindwings.

Varration.—One may look over a very fair number of British
examples of this species and get the idea that this is not a variable
species, and this appears to be accurate so far as there are no striking
aberrations that attract notice. There is, however, some little minor
variation observable in size, tint, and intensity of markings. In size,
specimens in our own series vary from a little over 19mm., to not
much over 16mm., the smallest, however, in almost all cases being @ s.
In tint, the specimens are of a cinnamon-brown or pale chestnut colour,
not far removed from the shade found in the darkest and brightest
examples of Marasmarcha lunaedactyla, but with a redder tone, 7.e.,
distinctly more intense than in Crombrugyhia distans, and without the
tendency to chocolate so characteristic of Capperia heterodactyla. This
brighter form appears to be Zeller’s type, but occasional specimens are
distinctly duller and greyer in hue (=ab. suffusa, n. ab.), and without
the brightness of the form just noted; these duller-tinted individuals
also usually have fewer and less strongly developed white dots and
markings, those at the fissure, middle of the wing, and on the lower
lobe, showing the greatest tendency to fail. The best marked of the
brighter brown specimens are considerably variegated and show conspicu-
ously a short longitudinal shade of white scales above the base of the
median nervure; three short longitudinal white streaks, or shades, on the
disc and inner margin, one below the other (the remnant of a transverse
band), a patch of w hite scales at the end of the fissure, internally edged
with the darker discal lunular-mark; the first lobal transverse line broad,
crossing both lobes, widening and occupying considerable space on the
lower lobe ; the second lobal transverse line narrow, and continued
over both lobes, but not extending into the fringes; the costa from the
second lobal line to apex white, with sundry white scales scattered
over the lobes and the costa between the discal shade and first lobal
transverse line. This is Zeller’s typical form. Other examples of the
brighter orange-brown or cinnamon form are less distinctly marked, the
white basal and discal streaks failing, also, in part, the transverse lines

438 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA, -

on the lower lobe, whilst the white costal scales to a great extent also fail
=ab. paupera, n.ab. There is also some variation in the amount of
white and black scaling on the lower margin of the 8rd plumule, and
the distinctness of the white at the apex of this plumule. The speci-
mens in our collection of ab. suffusa are particularly noticeable as being
without the usual quantity of white on the 8rd plumule. We do
not observe a tendency in the white markings in our least-marked
British examples to become ochreous and blend with the ground
colour, but they remain white, however reduced in size the scale
patches become. Barrett’s description (Lep. Prit. Isles, ix., p. 369)
appears to be faulty, in that it makes the outer lobal transverse
line branch in each lobe to the apex, the cilia of the second lobe
white, etc. (naked eye appearances, not borne out under a good lens).
In the Frey collection there are the same two distinct shades in the
eround-colour of the specimens exhibited, one of a bright brown (the
type), the other of quite a dull tint of brown. There is great difference
in the clearness of the markings, some examples having the lobal trans-
verse lines snowy-white, but the others dull ochreous and inclined to
blend with the ground-colour. Both the lobal lines usually cross both
the upper and lower lobes. The white fissural spot is sometimes con-
spicuous, at others almost obsolete, whilst the faint transverse shade
between cleft and base issometimes increased into a well-developed trans-
verse line. Two examples from Frankfort and one from Munich are of a
very pale brownish-ochreous ground-colour, with feeble, pale (ochreous,
rather than white) markings. One of Zeller’s examples in the “ Frey
coll.,”’ from Glogau, has the ground-colour very bright, the space
between the two transverse lines on the upper lobe very dark, almost
banded. Our British examples frequently show this dark band, and
have the colovr on the outside pale, but, as the ground colour of the
discal and basal parts of the wing are of almost the same dark orange-
brown tint as that between the two lobal lines, the banded appearance
does not become conspicuous.

CoMPARISON OF OXYPTILUS PILOSELLZ WITH ITS ALLIES.—Generally
smaller than P. hieracii, to which it is most closely allied, it differs in
the less dark ground-colour, less sharply white transverse lines, and, in
particular, by the faint appearance of the whitish line, which edges the
hind-margin of the lower lobe of the forewings. Both species have a
less deep cleft than P. caffer. P. pilosellae differs from P. obscurus
(1) by its larger size, (2) by its brighter (lighter) colour, (8) by the
less sharply marked white line which edges the costal fringe at the
apex of the upper lobe, (4) by the triangular scale-tuft which does not
reach the apex of the third plumule. This last character P. marginellus,
P. ericetorum, and P. trichodactylus also possess (Zeller). Webb compares
_ the Dover examples with Capperia heterodactyla, and notes (in litt.) of the
former: ‘‘Some of the reddish-brown examples are quite indistinguish-
able from the old Mickleham specimens. When freshly-emerged they
are nearer the colour of heterodactyla (teucrii), but the colour, tuft, and
silveriness of the markings all vary in individuals, the most constant
characters being :—(1) The pale ochreous fringes of the second lobe.
(2) The absence of any white scale-patches (best seen in heterodactyla)
on the inner margin of the first lobe. (8) The absence of the two
minute black tufts on the inner margin opposite the fissure. (4) The
tuft on the third plumule of the hindwing not extending on both

ee ag

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLA. 439

sides of the shaft. (5) The wings markedly narrower than those of
heterodactyla. (6) The first fascia crossing the lobes of the forewings
always composed of a line, not a blotch, as is frequently the case in
heterodactyla. (7) The contrast in colour between the fore- and hind-
wings, heterodactyla having them almost identical in hue. (8) The
underside of the first plumule of the hindwings not so mottled as in
heterodactyla, but with a much more elongate and distinct white spot near
the apex.’’ Comparing the Dover examples with Crombrugghia distans,
Webb notes (in litt.): ‘ Pilosellae is not so pale in colour, nor so coarsely
scaled as distans, but comes nearer to it in the width of the wing;
some specimens come, indeed, very near distans, but there are no hoary
scales along the inner margin, and the tuft, of course, is different ; in
the nearest examples they can be separated by a glance at the underside.
The fascize crossing the lobes of the forewings are parallel in pilosellae,
and the outer one makes a continuous line; in distans this outer one is
not a continuous line, but the parts in the first and second lobes

enclose an obtuse angle ; in distans, too, the pale fringes surround the

first lobe, and another pale line runs from the centre of the fascia to
the tip; in pilosellae the fringes are only pale on the costa.’ Barrett
gives (int. Mo. Mag., xxv., p. 481) a comparative summary of the

British Oxyptilines and hieracti. This reads as follows :—

Pilosellae.—The costal margin much arched beyond the middle, so that the
apex is long, pointed, and drooping. The two pale fasciz (which, in all these
species, cross the lobes of the forewings) yellowish-white, oblique, not very narrow,
nor well-defined. The third feather of the hindwing with a large brown tuft of
scales near the tip.

Hieracii.—Of the same size, but with the costal margin less arched, and the
apex more blunt and squared; the fasciz# more perpendicular, narrower, and more
sharply defined. The tuft on the third feather of the hindwing is brown, and is
situated just beyond the middle.

Parvidactyla.—Considerably smaller, of the colour of pilosellae, and with
oblique fascie, but these are narrow, bright, and sharply detined ; the costal margin
much less arched, and the tips less produced, though hardly so blunt as in hieraciti.
ne dark tuft on the third feather of the hindwing is large, and placed nearly at
the tip.

Distans.—Of a paler duller colour than the three foregoing, and its pale fascie
so placed as to resemble crescents, especially when the insect is alive and at rest.
Its shape and size are similar to those of hieracii, and the tuft on the third feather
of the hindwing is similarly placed, though small and inconspicuous, but the
species is at once distinguished by its broad, ill-defined, pale fascie.

Heterodactyla.—Perhaps the largest of the group; its wings decidedly broader,
and, from its dark colour and bright white markings, it is by far the most handsome.
The costal margin much rounded, the tips long and drooping, the fasciew fairly
broad and brightly defined, and the inner (dorsal) margin of the forewings edged
with bright white cilia, in which are three black dashes. The third feather of the
hindwing has a large blackish tuft, and the anterior portion of the feather is white,
with numerous black dots.

Bankes, commenting (Mnt. Rec., xviii., p. 46) on the above, suggests
that Barrett cannot have had the true hieracti, Zell., before him, for
he says that the dorsal scale-tooth (‘tuft’) of the third feather of the
hindwing is situated ‘just beyond the middle,’ whereas Zeller
himself says that it lies “a little before the apex.’’ It would appear
that Barrett could not have based this remark on the specimens in
his collection received from Zeller, and which are now in Chapman's
possession and under observation as we write, since they show
the scale-tuft near the apex, as in pilosellae, and as Zeller describes
it (Tutt). Speaking of Azeraci?, Zeller writes (Linn. Ent., vi.,
pp. 850-851): “This species is generally larger than 1’. pilosellae,

440 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

darker yellow-brown in colour, with somewhat brighter and, as a rule,
narrower, transverse lines across the lobes of the forewings, and with
a distinct, bent, white line at the base of the fringe before the apex of
the second lobe. The black scale-tooth also, on the 8rd plumule of the
hindwing, is larger in hieracti. The nearest relative to the latter is
ericetorum, which has the same dark, almost chestnut-brown, ground
colour, and the same marking of the hind lobe. These two species,
however, differ from each other in that the scale-tuft on the 3rd
plumule of the hindwing, which, in hieracii, does not reach the apex
of the plumule, and in which the costal (upper marginal) scales in the
neighbourhood of this tuft form only a narrow line, which contributes
little to the size of the tuft, in ericetorwm reaches the apex of the
plumule, and forms with the broad costal row of scales a large
roundish spot, which covers the entire apex.’’ Hofmann writes (Die
Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 107): ‘ Pilosellae is very close to O. hteracit,
smaller, more cinnamon-red; the outer marginal fringes of the lower
lobe have a dull white, or more yellowish, basal line. The best dis-
tinguishineg character is formed by the black scales of the 8rd plumule.
These are similar to those of 0. hieraciit, but weaker and shorter,
especially on the inner margin; on the costa they do not run quite up
to the apex, which bears whitish scales on both sides, and only has a
few black scales at the extreme end of the inner margin; on the costa,
however, they run towards the base somewhat further than on the
inner margin. In O. hieracii, on the contrary, the black scales of the
costa run up to the apex of the plumule, so that only a very few white
scales remain among the rest, while the black scales do not run further
towards the base than on the inner margin. With worn specimens
these characters are, of course, easily lost. Palpi as in O. hieracit.”
Writing of O. hieracti (op. cit., p. 108), he further says that this species
is ‘‘ usually somewhat larger (expanse 11mm.) than O. pilosellae, dark
red-brown, almost chestnut- brown, with pure white, somewhat shining,
markings. The basal line of the outer marginal fringes of the lower
lobe is usually sharp and pure white, occasicnally, however, somewhat —
tinged with yellow, and, in many examples, becoming obsolete on
reaching the centre of the outer margin. The black scales of the
third plumule of the hindwing are shorter on the costa and placed
very obliquely, on the inner margin almost vertical, very long towards
the base, becoming gradually shorter towards the apex, so that they
form a tooth-like projection; they extend along the costa up to the
apex, but towards the base not further than the scales on the inner
margin. At the apex of the plumule there are only a few little scales,
and one pair of thick deep black scales directed downwards, which are
usually closely in touch with the scales of the costa, but separated
from those of the inner margin by a short interval in which the
‘fringes are whitish-coloured at the base. Palpi brown, edged with
white below, with a distinct tuft of hairs on the second joint.”’
[ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION OF OXYPTILUS HIERACH, ZELLER.—Pterophorus
hieracii. Alis anterioribus brunneis, laciniis niveo-bistrigatis, ciliis
cost ante apicem exalbidis, arcu lacinie posterioris marginali
albido ; digiti tertii dorso ante apicem atro-squamato.* Forewings

* Forewings red-brown; lobes with two snowy strige; cilia of the costa before
the apex yellowish-white ; a whitish bow on the margin of the lower lobe; the
fringe of the 3rd plumule black-scaled before the apex.

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLZE. 441

dark brown-red; on the black costa, from the base to the cleft,
dotted with snow-white; on the disc near the incision lie, behind
a dark mark, crowded white scales, as well as some on the division.
Over both the lobes, in the usual positions, are two snow-white, some-
what shining, transverse lines, those on the second lobe not reaching
the inner edge; the first one thick, oblique from behind forwards,
going into the fringe; the second one very thin, often on the first lobe
broken to an angle, not reaching the fringe. From this second line to
apex the costal fringes yellowish, and ending in this colour at a long
black streak; the posterior border of the second lobe has, behind a
black marginal line, a whitish-yellow, concave, darker, emarginate line
on the fringe. The fringes blackish, in the incision paler; on the
inner margin of the wing yellowish, with a few black scales, which are
easily lost, but are firmest behind the middle of the incision. Hind-
wings clear red-brown, with black fringes; the 8rd plumule has, before
the yellowish-fringed apex, on both sides deep, black, crowded scales,
of which those on the hind border are rather the longer and form a
sort of tooth, becoming gradually shorter towards the tip (Zeller, Isis,
1841, p. 827).]

Rectayine. —Nothing appears to be known of the ege- ‘laying or egg
of O. pilosellae. Nolcken observes that he captured a pair, in cop.,
the Riga district, August 7th, 1870, that eggs were laid, and that, ee
these, young larve emerged on August 22nd.

Ovum.—Undescribed.

Larva nasits.—As the foodplant, Hieracium pilosella, grows in
patches, there are always several larve near together, though only one
lives in each plant. The plant tenanted by a larva has no flower-
stalk, and is easily recognisable by the loose white fluff over the
central shoot, by which a kind of roof is formed for the larva. This
fluff is scraped off the underside of the leaves, and mixed with a few
hairs from the upperside. Under this poorly-protecting roof the
maggot-like larva, deeply boring, eats out the heart, and often
gnaws the tender leaves of the shoot from the margin up to the mid-
rib. -As a rule, it is not satisfied with a single plant; I have found
deserted dwellings, and, in neighbouring plants, well-grown larve,
which were just commencing to form their roofs, and, therefore, could
not have dwelt there from their youth upwards. The larve are full-
grown at very uneven periods, and still very young larvee occur, when
others have already pupated. The excrement is pale yellowish, not
in great quantity, and dry. The larve can let themselves down by a
thread. In its chosen habitats, the larva is to be found, often in
abundance, in June (Zeller). In Baden, the larve are found in stems
of Hieracium pilosella (Reutti). The larva lives among the lower
leaves of H. pilosella, where it makes a flattish roof, beneath which
it burrows into the innermost part of the plant, and sometimes devours
even the leaves themselves, after which it will go to another plant ;
the plants thus attacked do not produce flowers (Wallengren). The
larvee are to be found in Briinn, at the end of May, on H. pilosella, the
central shoots of which are, at this time, clothed with a cottony- or woolly-
like bunch, beneath w hich the larvee spin flimsy webs, in which they ean
be found of all ages; but, although imagines are to be taken by June
20th, half-grown larvee may also be found at the same time in nature
(Gartner). Freyer observes that Plétz first found larve on the under-

449, BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.g

side of the lower leaves of Hieracium, but later obtained them
more abundantly on the upper central parts of the plants, where they
concealed themselves by drawing the nearest portions of the plant around
them. Hofmann says that the larva lives in May and June on
Hf. pilosella, under a loose web of white fluff, spun over the central
shoot. This fluff is scraped off from the underside of the leaves, and
mixed with a few hairs from the upperside. The maggot-like larva.
under this web bores deep down into the heart of the plant. Pupation
takes place either in the larval dwelling, or on the underside of a leaf,
where the fluff is scraped off and formed into a longish cocoon that
hangs loosely together.

Larva.—lLarva brevipes setulis minutis capitatis tecta, exalbida :
capite melleo ; seriebus duabus dorsalibus pilorum ternatorum; foyeolis
lateralibus supra seriem pilorum solitariorum. (Larva with short legs,
with very short, knobbed, sete, yellowish-white; with pale yellow head ;
two rows of triple hairs along the back; a row of depressions above a
lateral row of single hairs.) Length somewhat under half-an-inech-
The small head shortly oval, pale honey-yellow, with dark jaws
and blackish ocelli, little shining, like the thoracic shield, and drawn
halfway into the prothorax. The ground colour of the body, which is
somewhat stout and attenuated at each extremity, 1s, both in the old
and young larve, pale yellowish-white, yellower towards the venter; the
last two segments greyish-blue, from the excrement showing through.
The surface is everywhere clothed with quite short, knobbed, bristles.
A mediodorsal line is wanting, as well as every other marking; each
segment exhibits, in the centre of the dorsum, a very shallow depres-
sion, forming a posteriorly-open horse-snoe. The middle segments
have, near this, three hairs, one behind the other, near together,
diverging above, the central the longest, the last directed obliquely
backwards. Further down on the side, below a distinct indentation,
stands a long hair, below which, on the lateral flange, is a separated,
horizontal, diverging, double hair. The spiracles, which must lie
above the lateral flange, I was not able to recognise. Segments clearly
divided ; the skin falls in transverse folds when the larva contracts
itself. The very short ventral claspers cylindrical, with a slightly in-
complete brown circle of hooklets. The thoracic legs, also, are of note-
worthy shortness. The larva is rather hard to the touch, bat not so
much so as that of P. scarodactylus (Zeller). The larva is spindle-shaped,
without markings, and of a dull greenish-yellow colour, with fine
whitish hairs (Plétz teste Freyer). The fullgrown larva is yellowish-white,
transversely wrinkled, with distinct lateral flange, feels hard to the
touch, but notso hardas that of Letoptilus scarodactylus, without markings,
beset all over with quite short, white, knobbed, bristles, rising singly.
Tuberclessmall, bearing singlelong white bristles. On the back, there is, on
each seement, between the dorsal tubercles, a small shallow depression, in
which four dark, roundish, spots, forming a square, may be seen with
a strong lens. Laterally, each segment bears another small, roundish,
depression, with a single-haired tubercle below, then the small spiracle
margined with pale brown, and below this, on the lateral flange, a tubercle
bearing two divergent bristles. Head small, retractile, pale honey-
yellow, with dark brown mouthparts, and two brownish spots on the
posterior margin, and, like the yellow thoracic shield, hardly shining.
Anal flap yellowish, with brownish spots. Thoracic legs short, pale

.

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLZA. 443-

brown ; abdominal claspers short, with few brown hooks (five to six)
on the sole, some of which exhibit, at the base, a second hooklet, scarcely
half so long (Hofmann). The larva is yellowish- white in colour, with
long white. hairs; the small, heart-shaped head flattened, with two.
dark eye-points, and pale reddish- brown mouth, deeply drawn in; no
thoracic or anal shield. Body thickened in the centre. The points of
the legs, and the soles of the ventral claspers, reddish-brown, otherwise,
like the venter, white. Movements slow (Gartner).

Comparison or Larva or Q. PILOSELLH WITH THAT oF O. HIERACI.—
O. pilosellae :—The larva of O. pilosellae is yellowish-white, without
markings, and the ventral prolegs are short, with few brown hooklets
on the planta. It bores into the heart of Hieracium pilosella, and
pupates either in the larval dwelling, or on the underside of a leaf of the
foodplant under a web. O. hieracii:—The larva of O. hieracit is of
some shade of green, the dorsal tubercles are brownish, or brownish-
red, bordered on each side with red or brown elongated spots. The
dorsal vessel is blackish, or dark green, or even blood-red, sometimes
also bordered with pale yellowish lines. The ventral prolegs long,
stilt-like. It lives in the shoots of Hieracium umbellatum, eating the
inner leaves, and pupates on the stem or on the upperside of a leaf

near the midrib (cf. Hofmann, Die Deutsch. Pter Oe pp. 107-109).

Foopriants.— Hieracium piloselta (Zeller), fH. umbellatum (Frey),
[Inula (Schmid).] [It is to be noted that Hieracium umbellatum is the
food of Oxyptilus hieracii. We have no further indication concerning
Schmid’s unexpected record of Inula as a foodplant, and particulars of
every kind—species, etc.—appear to be wanting. |

Puparium.—Pupation takes place either in the larval dwelling, or
on the underside of a leaf, where the fluff is scraped off and formed
into a cocoon, elongate, and loosely hanging together. On the third
day, the larva becomes a very slender whitish-yellow pupa. The female
pupa is somewhat shorter and stouter. If disturbed it lashes strongly
around and over itself, and is hard to the touch. The pale-reddish,
backward-directed, dark-hooked prickles on the venter do not appear
to be used for anchoring the pupa; only those on the anal point
seem to be used as a holdfast (Zeller). The pupa is fixed in the
larval nest, or on the back of a leaf, on which a thin oblong web is
prepared, and into which the onawed-off fluff, etc., is spun (W allen-
eren). or pupation, the larva chooses the underside of a leaf of its
foodplant, and settles down among the woolly covering; the pupal
stage lasting 14 days (Gartner). The fullfed larva, in mid-June,
betakes itself to the underside of a leaf, bites off the hairs from a small
area, and spins there for itself a slight transparent web, wherein it
fastens itself by its cremaster to the leaf, before changing to an ivory-
coloured pupa; the pupal stage lasting from 14-17 days (Pl6tz teste
Freyer).

Pura.—Chrysalis albida, fronte bicorni, carina duplici abbreviata
setigera in abdominis dorso; fovearum lateralium serie simplici;
seomenti penultimi ventre elochidibus instructo. (Pupa whitish,
with two frontal horns and two bristly keels on the dorsum of the first
three abdominal segments ; a series of indentations on the side of the
abdomen ; the penultimate segment with supporting hooks on the bare
ventral area.) The anterior dorsum, towards the head, which has at
the base of each antenna a pointed hump terminating in a spike, is

444 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

obliquely swollen, and has, on its uppermost part, two whitish, outwardly
curved, longitudinal keels. From the union of these on the middle of
the back run two narrow little-raised keels over the first three segments
of the abdomen; they disappear on the middle segments and rise
again on the hindmost, and bear, on each segment, on a little elevation
anteriorly, a very short, and behind, a long, backwardly-curved, bristle.
Further down, in the centre of each segment, is a little elevation with a
bristle, and below it a depression, in front of which lies the scarcely
recognisable spiracle. Below the depression, on a raised longitudinal
line, two very short bristles are placed, more towards the venter, and, in
the centre of the segment, a longer bristle, and quite below two more, one
behind the other. The bristles are clear, directed posteriorly, those of the
thorax, however, directed forwards. The whole of the upper surface is
very finely and closely wrinkled, most deeply on the centre of the back.
On the wing-cases the nervures are raised and white in colour. On
the venter, at the commencement of the penultimate segment, is a
number of pale-reddish prickles, directed backwards with dark-hooked
terminations ; they are shorter than the anal bristles, and I have never
found the pupa anchored with them. On the anal point there are
many such prickles, which, however, but little strike the eye from above;
these alone I saw hooked into the silk and used as a holdfast. In
about fourteen days the moth appears (Zeller, sis, 1841, pp. 789-798).
The pupa is whitish, with two projecting nosehorns, and two dorsal
ridges, with bristles, on the first three abdominal segments; on each side
of the abdomen is a row of hollows, and the penultimate and anal
segments have dorsal hooks, by which it is attached (Wallengren).
The pupa is whitish with two frontal elevations and two ledges (dorsal
keels) on the back of the first four abdominal segments; on the sides
of the abdomen there is a small shallow dimple on each segment. On
the wing-cases the nervures are raised and white. It differs essentially
from the pupa of O. hieracii in that the bristly dorsal keels disappear
on the middle segments, and only rise again on the hindmost segments
(Hofmann). The lively pupa is slender, bone-yellow, with two points
on the head; thorax humped; anal end pointed; wing- and leg-cases
leave two segments free, and are reddish-brown at their terminations ;
the segments bear single hairs directed backwards (Gartner).
CoMPARISON OF THE PUPA OF QO. PILOSELLE WITH THAT oF O. HIBRACII.
—O. pilosellae:—The pupa of O. pilosellae is whitish, with two
elevations with radiating bristles, and two bristly dorsal keels on the
dorsum of the first four abdominal segments; on the lateral area of
each segment of the abdomen is a small shallow depression. On the
Wine-cases the nervures are white and raised. From the pupa of
O. hieracit it essentially differs, in that the bristly dorsal keels disappear
on the middle segments of the abdomen, and only rise again on the
terminal segments. O. hieracii :—The pupa of O. hieracti has, on the
dorsum of each segment of the abdomen, laterally compressed elevations,
these are largest on the 4th abdominal segment, and decrease in size
towards both extremities. The colour of the pupa is bright green
with reddish and brown markings, and a dark, whitish-bordered, medio-
dorsal line (cf. Hofmann, Die Deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 107-109). |
[Lirenistory or Oxyprinus nieraci.—As QO. hieracit has, for many
years, been erroneously quoted as a British species, and, as there is noth-
ing in the foodplant, habitat, or distribution of the species which should

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLZ. 445

forbid its occurrence in Britain, we add Hofmann’s lifehistory of the
species (as known in Germany). This reads as follows :~-Larva:
9mm. long ; yellowish-green, pale green, or yellowish; dorsal tubercles
pale brownish to brown-red, on both sides bordered with rose-red, or
blood-red, or even brown-red, elongate spots. The dorsal vessel
beneath the skin appears blackish, or dark green, though sometimes
even blood-red, sometimes edged on each side by a pale yellowish
longitudinal line. The small heart-shaped head is brown previously
to the last ecdysis; afterwards clear honey-colour with dark mouth-
parts, sometimes also green. The prothoracic shield, shining brownish
before the last ecdysis, sometimes made up of three spots, disappears
afterwards ; spiracles ringed with brown; anal shield bright brownish-
yellow, dark brown on the sides; all the legs of the general colour of
the body ; ventral claspers long, stilt-like, Hazrrs or tarva: It lives
at the end of May and in June in the terminal shoots of Hieraciwn
umbellatum, which are spun up in longish bunches, in which the larva
eats the innermost leaves and deposits its excrement; [the larva also
occurs on Picris hieracoides* and Teucrium scorodonia* (according to
Sorhagen, p. 4), unless, with regard to the latter plant, a mistake has
been made with another species, perhaps O. teucrit.| Dr. Steudel, of
Stuttgart, once bred an example, probably of this species (on account
of the crippling of the hindwings not exactly identified), on July 25th
from the flowers of Hieracium boreale. Pupatton: The pupation takes
place on a stalk, or on the upperside of the leaf, beside the midrib, etc.
Pura: 9mm. long, anteriorly bluntly rounded, with very short, blunt,
frontal prominence, and slight dorsal keels ; these are furnished, on the
metathorax, each with three small teeth directed forwards; on the
dorsum of the abdomen there are laterally compressed elevations
terminating in one point on the first and last segment but one, and in
two points on the remaining segments; they carry, at their bases, a
white bristle directed forwards and another directed backwards; the
elevations are largest on the 4th abdominal segment, where the dorsal
keels terminate, and from here, anteriorly, as posteriorly, they decrease
in size. The sides of the abdomen are furnished with four rows of
white tubercles lying one above another (one tubercle in each row to a
segment), each bearing a white bristle directed backwards, but the
second row carries two divergent bristles. The leg- and wing-cases
reach to the posterior margin of the 5th abdominal segment. Nervures
of the wing-cases without bristles. The pupa is a lively green in
colour, brown between the reddish dorsal keels and elevations, with
the dark dorsal vessel showing beneath the skin. ‘The dark dorsal
vessel is bordered outwardly with whitish. Time or APPEARANCE AND
pistRiBUTION : Imago emerges from the end of June till August. 0.
hieracit is distributed throughout Germany and Austria, and occurs
also in many places in Switzerland—dZirich, Baden, St. Gallen, ete.|
Time or appearance.—-In Britain, O. pilosedlae occurs in July and
August (Stainton). [We have a note to the effect that Farn captured it
in the Painswick district, between July 1lst-16th, 1894.] The state-
ment of Blackmore, that he captured the species the last week of July,
1864, in the Isle of Portland, and that of Wormald, that he took it on
July 27th, 1867, in a swamp at West Wickham, require confirmation.

Teucrium scorodonia the foodplant of Capperia heterodactyla, the latter species
referred to by Sorhagen as hieracii, Greening.

A46 .BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Zeller says that, in Posen, it commences to fly after mid-June, and is

at its maximum in early July, disappearing at the end of the month ;

belated examples, however, occur later, even into September, and, on
October 2nd, a single worn example was captured, probably from an
ego of the year. In Germany, it was just appearing June 19th, 1869,
abundant on July 11th, 1869, at Meseritz (Zeller); 1t is noted in
July in Anhalt, near Dessau (Gillmer), near Potsdam, Berlin, ete.
(Pfatzner), and Frankfurt-on-Oder (Kretschmer) ; it is recorded in
June and July, in Vorpomerania (Paul and Plotz), the Rhine
Provinces (Stollwerck), in Hanover (Glitz), in Upper Lusatia
(Moschler), in the kingdom of Saxony (Schtitze), and near Regens-
burg (Hofmann and Herrich-Schiffer) ; in Wurttemberg it is noted
as occurring from June to August (Steudel and Hofmann), and near
Friedland (Stange), also near Munich (Hartmann), and in Baden
(Meess and Spuler) ; whilst at Wiesbaden only the end of June is
recorded (Réssler). In Austria, it is recorded for the last half of

June and early July, in Moravia (Gartner) ; in May and June in the

Vienna district (Mann); and from June to August in the Salzburg
(Fritsch) ; we captured it between August 5th-12th, 1895, at Cortina.
It is recorded for July 4th-29th in Scania, etc. (Zetterstedt); in June
and July, and even as late as September, in southern and central
Sweden (Wallengren); in June and July near Helsingfors and
Hollola, and at Walamo on July 23rd (Tengstrém); July 18th-
August 17th, 1870, in the Riga district (Nolcken). In Switzerland
it occurs in July and August (Frey). In France, we captured the
insect between July 31st and August 5th, 1898, at Bourg St. Mauriee ;
August 5th-12th, 1896, at La Grave; June 23rd-30th, 1897, in the
forest of Fontainebleau; August 6th-12th, 1902, at Megéve; Angust
16th, 1902, at Chamonix; August 8th, 1906, at Beauvézer, in the Basses-
Alpes, the dates suggesting that the altitude influences its time of
appearanceconsiderably. In Italy, also, we foundit between July 31stand
Aueust 8rd, 1894, at Courmayeur, August 9th-18th, 1901, at Bobbie,
and August 20th, 1901, at Au Pra. In Belgium it is recorded as being
common, and occurring in June, July, and August (Crombrugghe).

Hasits.—This species loves a dry sunny spot, and, flitting from one
Hieracium stem to another, hangs like a dried scrap from the stalk, to
which it clings with its front legs; or it bustles busily among the
herbage at the end of the afternoon, when it is not so easily seen
as Zeller would suggest. At La Grave the species was disturbed
during the daytime, but was more active, naturally, at the end of the
afternoon and in the early evening. At Bobbie, the imagines could
be disturbed during the afternoon, but they flew naturally later,
and were easily put up as one walked among the herbage; at
Megéve, too, they were most abundant in the late afternoon, flying
quite freely between 5.30 p.m. and 6.30 p.m., on still, sunny after-
noons. At Courmayeur, Bourg St. Maurice, Chamonix, Cortina, and
Au Pra, odd specimens were occasionally disturbed as one walked
through the herbage, amongst which they were no doubt hiding.
At Fontainebleau they could, apparently, only be induced to fly at all
freely quite late in the afternoon, but Zeller notes that, at Meseritz, in
Posen, they were easily seen and captured in the twilight. He says
that the species commences to fly after the middle of June, and is usually
over by theend of July. Wallengren observes that it is more frequently
on the move in the daytime than most members of the family

OXYPTILUS PILOSELLA. 447

Hasrrar.—In Britain, it is very local, and confined practically to
the chalk. Formerly, it used to be exceedingly abundant on the
chalkhills at Mickleham and Box Hull, in Surrey, and on the chalk-
hills in the neighbourhood of the Devil’s Dyke, Newmarket. Of
late years, however, these localities have produced few, if any,
specimens, but this by no means proves the absence of the species
there. More recently, however, the neighbourhood of Folkestone and
Dover has been more prolific in specimens, and one suspects that it is
a much-overlooked species. Leech says that the insect is excessively
local, occurring in a few places on the chalkhills and adjacent green-
sand. [Blackmore reports that he captured the species in July, 1864,
in the Isle of Portland, but both this, and Wormald’s record that he
captured it on July 27th, 1867, in a swamp at West Wickham, want
confirmation (see infra).| Zeller says that its habitats are open,
dry, sunny places, in which the foodplant, Hieracium pilosella, grows
freely; it is, therefore, most frequently found in pine woods, especially
on sheltered, gently-sloping, hillocks, and, in such situations, in places
where few cattle are reared, the species is abundant enough; he says that
it is pretty abundant throughout Germany on well-drained soils where its
foodplant grows. In Posen, Zeller observes it as abundant at Meseritz,
on dry sandy tracts, where Gnaphalium arenarium, Artemisia campestris,
etc., grows abundantly, the imagines being easily seen and captured
in the twilight. Zetterstedt observes that, in southern Scandinavia, it
is found almost everywhere in fields, pastures, and pine forests. We
found the species fairly commonly in a very restricted area in Fontaine-
bleau Forest, not far from one of the main drives passing through it, and
amongst rather sparse herbage, under, so far as we can remember, pine-
trees; at Bourg St. Maurice, it occurred rarely on the lovely flower-
covered banks above the bridge, as well as those much higher up the
torrent; at Courmayeur, in Piedmont, on the other side of the Little
St. Bernard Pass, the species also haunted the flowery slopes, lying directly
behind the village at the foot of Mont Courmet, that lead up to the
pine-forests that cover its steep sides; here the insect was taken at an
elevation of more than 5000ft. At Chamonix, odd specimens only
were taken, one, on the flowery banks below Lavancher, which are
again capped by pine-woods, the other in one of the openings among
the bushes and boulders that cover the lower slopes of the Brévent.
At Cortina, in the Tyrol, again, a single specimen was captured on the
flower-covered banks at the foot of the Croda di Lago, where grassy
openings lead up into the woods of the lower slopes. On other occasions
we have found the species at considerable elevations, once at Megéye,
on a slope in a meadow, by the side of the Calvaire, when it flew
freely at the end of the afternoon in the sunshine, and again at Bobbie,
in the Pellice valley, where it also was found in the late afternoon on a
rough rock-covered slope, covered with thyme and other attractive
plants, and at the foot of which was a jungle of Hupatoriwm, giant
salvias, thistles, willow, etc. In both these places it was in fair
abundance. In the late afternoon of August 6th, 1902, at Megéve,
more than a dozen specimens were seen in a short time, but, by the
next afternoon, the herbage had been cut, and only single specimens
were noted in the locality afterwards. The species appeared to
occur sparingly far up the Pellice Valley above Bobbie, and a
single example was nettsd at Au Pra, on pasturages above

448 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

6000 ft. elevation. At La Grave, in the heart of the Dauphiny
Alps, it occurred on the shaly banks where flowers were fairly
abundant, near the village, as well as right up to the mountain-
pastures by the Meije glacier. A single example was also found on the
flower-covered bankside of a field, sheltered above by a pine-wood in
carly August, 1906, at Beauvézer, in the Basses-Alpes. Frey observes
that, in Switzerland, it flies in dry forest-meadows, and in open spaces
or clearings in the forests, sometimes in company with O. ericetorum.
Caradja also reports it as frequenting meadows in Roumania, and
Wallengren observes that, in the southern and central part of Sweden,
it is the most common species of the family, being found almost every-
where; Hieracium pilosella grows scarcer, however, in Lapland, but
the moth has been found as far north as Hollola, whence Zetterstedt
obtained it; it prefers dry sunny places protected from winds, and
pine-forests particularly are its favourite haunts. Snellen observes
that it occurs throughout the whole of the Netherlands, in sandy
localities, and is often common. In Germany, it flies everywhere in
the neighbourhood of Stettin, where Hieracium pilosella grows; Sor-
hagen says that, in Friedland, Stettin, and Hamburg, it flies among
Hieracium pilosella in dry woodland-meadows, and in open spaces in
woods ; Stollwerck observes that, in June and July, 1855 and 1856,
the species was very common along the whole eastern slope of the
Kleiner Hees, near Uerdingen, whilst the dry years 1857 and 1858
only yielded the species very sparingly.

BritisH LocaLities.—Hxceedingly local, and possibly much over-

looked. [Anrrim: Belfast (Birchall).] Cauprrce: Cambridge (teste Stainton),
Devil’s Ditch, Newmarket (teste Barrett). (Dorszr: Portland (Blackmore), almost
certainly Capperia heterodactyla (Bankes).] [GuoucrstER : Wootton-under-Hdge
(Perkins), Painswick district (Farn).] Kenr: Folkestone (Purdey), Dover district
(Webb), [Maidstone (teste Barrett),] [West Wickham (Wormald).] Surrey: Mickle-
ham, common (Stainton), Box Hill (Barrett).

Distrisution.—Central and northern Europe, southeast France,
northern and central Italy, Armenia, Transcaspia (Tura) (Rebel).
Asta: Asia Minor—Armenia (Rebel). Auvustro-Huneary: Bohemia—Nirdorf,
Reichstadt (teste F. von Réslerstamm), Moravia—near Briinn (Gartner),
Lower Austria—near MHernstein (Rogenhofer), Vienna district (Mann),
Tyrol—near Innsbruck, lower alpine region up to 7000 ft., Taufers Valley (Weiler),
Cortina (Tutt), Salzburg (Fritsch), Croatia, Banat, Transsylvania (teste Rebel).
Beteium: Namur, Dinant, St. Servais, Vallée de la Molignée, common
(Lambillion), Brabant, Rochefort (Crombrugghe). Bosnia anp HERCEGOVINA:
Sarajevo (Apfelbeck). Buncarta: near Rilo Monastery, up to 4000 ft. (Rebel).
Denmark (Bang-Haas). France: Dept. Nord—Malo-les-Bains (Paux), Seine-et-
Marne—Fontainebleau (Tutt), Cher—St. Florent, Indre—Nohant (Sand), Sadne-et-
Loire—Couches-les-Mines (Constant), Doubs—Maison-Rouge (Bruand), Savoy
alps— Chamonix, Megéve, Bourg St. Maurice, Dauphiny alps—La Grave, Basses-
Alpes—Beauveézer (Tutt). Fintanp: Helsingfors, Hollola, Walamo (Tengstrém).
Germany: Posen—near Meseritz (Zeiler), east and west Prussia, not rare—near
Domnau and Sorquitten (Speiser), Pomerania—in Vorpommern, not rare (Paul
_and Plétz), Stettin, wherever the foodplant grows (Biittner), Mecklenburg—near
Friedland, common (Stange), near Parchim (Gillmer), Neustrelitz (Messing), Ham-
burg—Bahrenfeld, Steinbeck, Haake (Sauber), Hanover—Hanover (Reinhold),
Misburger, Kirchhof (Glitz), Géttingen (Jordan), Rhine Provinces—Uerdingen,
ete. (Stollwerck), Hesse—Wiesbaden (Réssler), Frankfort-on-Main (Koch), Cassel
(Knatz), Waldeck (Speyer), Thuringia, everywhere (Knapp), near Sémmerda
(Jordan), Anhalt—Cothen, not rare (Gillmer), Brandenburg—Berlin, Grunewald,
ete. (Zeller), Potsdam (Hinneberg), Frankfort-on-Oder (Sorhagen), Silesia—dis-
tributed, Glogau (Zeller), the Seefeld, near Reinerz (Standfuss), Upper Lusatia
(Méschler), Kingdom of Saxony—Saxon Upper Lusatia, distributed, rather common

CROMBRUGGHIA. 449

(Schtitze), Bavaria—near Regensburg, Keilstein, Winzerberge, common (Hofmann
and Herrich-Schaffer), near Munich, Isar-Auen (Hartmann), Wiirttemberg, general
(Steudel and Hofmann), Baden, general—Freiburg, etc. (Reutti), Alsace (Meess and
Spuler), the Palatinate (Bertram). Irany: Piedmont—Bobbie, Au Pra, Cour-
mayeur (Tutt), Tuscany* (Mann), Alzate, Giardini (Turati). NrrHernanps: dis-
tributed throughout, often common (Snellen). Roumanta: Grumazesti (Caradja).
Russia: Baltic Provinces, distributed—Riga district (Berg), Stint- and Jagelsee,
Magnusholm, Cisel (Nolcken), Livonia—Kokenhusen (Lienig), Grésen (Rosen-
berger). Scanprnavra: throughout Sweden, as far north as Lapland—Ostrogoth-
land, Gottland, Giland, Scania (Zetterstedt)—Trolle-Ljungby (Wallengren). Swrr-
ZERLAND: widely distributed, near Ztrich, Pfaffikon, ete. (Suter).

N.B.—The record of Pterophorus hieracit ?, Galway—Merlin Park, mid-June,
1880 (Ent. Mo. Mag., xvii., p. 81) is certainly pilosellae (J. J. Walker, in litt.,
October 10th, 1906).

Genus: Cromprucentia, Tutt.

SynonymMy.— Genus: Crombrugghia, n. gen. Alucita, Haw., ‘‘ Lep.
Brit.,”’ p. 479 (1811). Pterophorus, Sam., ‘‘Hnt. Usef. Comp.,’”’ p. 409
clen)ee Zell, “Isis,” p. 902 (1847)5 Frey, ‘‘Die Tin. Pter. Schw.,” p-
408 (1856); Knaggs, ‘‘Ent. Ann.,’”’ p. 127 (1869). Amblyptilia, Stphs.,
‘“‘Tilus. Brit. Ent. Haust.,”’ p. 377 (1834); app. p. 424 (1835). Oxyptilus,.
Zell., ‘Linn. Ent.,” vi., p. 345 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘ Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., pp. 370, 372.
(1855) ; Jord., ‘‘Hnt. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 122 (1869) ; Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,”’
2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Staud., ‘‘ Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross.,’”’ xv., p. 424 (1880); Frey,
‘*Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 429 (1880); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xvili., p. 122 (1881) ;
South, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xv., p. 35 (1882) ; Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 178 (1882) ;
Snell., ‘‘De Vlind.,” ii., p. 1028 (1882); Sorhgn., ‘‘ Kleinschmett. Brandbg.,’’
Dae ('s886)> Leech, ‘* Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 56 (1886); South, ‘‘Ent.,”’ xxii., pp. 32, 103
(1889); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xxv., p. 431 (1889) ; Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x.,
p. 164 (1889); ‘Brit. Nat.,” i., pp. 141, 181 (1891); ‘Pter. Brit.,” pp. 60, 62
(1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 485 (1890); ‘‘ Handbook,”’ etc.,
p. 431 (1895); Hofmn., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,’’ pp. 95, 105 (1895); Staud. and Reb.,
eatemorded., p. ( (1901); Barr., “lhep. Brit. Isles,*’ ix., p. 365 (1904).
Oxyptilia, Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 790 (1877).

The genus Crombrugghia, as already noted (anted, p. 411), forms
one of the constituent sections of the tribe Oxyptilidi. It is
Zeller’s sect. a of Oxyptilus (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 342), Herrich-
Schiffer’s sect. 4 of the genus Owyptilus (see antea, p. 405), and
Hofmann’s group 1, sect. A (see antea, p. 412 where his diagnosis of
the imagines is given). The three most striking points of the imaginal
structure are: (1) The depth of the cleft of the forewing. (2) The
tendency to linear form of the lower lobe of the forewing. (8) The
length of the 3rd plumule of the hindwing and the position of the
scale-tuftthereon. So far asour British Oxyptilid species are concerned,
there can be no difficulty in at once recognising distans by the scale-tuft
being towards the centre rather than towards the apex of the 8rd plumule
of the hindwing. The Crombrugghias, as exemplified by the larva and
pupa, however, present marked characters separating them from
Oxyptilus, as here restricted. The larval structure of Crombrugyhia (as
exemplified by distans) is particularly noticeable for the stellate-haired
tubercles that replace the simple sete in Owyptilus (that of laetus is
much modified). It is unfortunate that the larva of this our only
British Crombrugghia (distans), has never been found in this country.
Comparing, however, the pupal structure of Crombrugyhia (distans)
with Oxyptilus (parvidactyla), Chapman gives the following details :-—

Cromprueenta (distans): Shows the normal structure for an ordinary plume
pupa, z.e., it is fixed in the usual way by a ventral and terminal cremaster, and has
no arrangement for movement, nor any other for fixation. It has what (following

* Zeller observes that Mann’s pilosellae, from Tuscany, appears to present no
difference from hieracii.

450 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Amblyptilia) we may consider the normal arrangement of dorsal spines, viz., a
double spine (one being the base of tubercle i, the other of tubercle ii). It hasa
small mediodorsal spine on the 4th or 5th abdominal segment. It has no extra
hairs on appendages or elsewhere.

Oxyprinus (parvidactyla): Specially modified for existence in a cocoon, and
with means for travelling to and fro therein. It has no mediodorsal spines, and
the dorsal spines exist only on the 4th to 8th abdominal segments, are single, and
modified into a hook suitable for assisting retrograde, and preventing forward,
movement. The genital bosses on the 9th abdominal segment are developed into
great hooks, arranged with concavity forwards. There is no forward cremaster,
and, though there are many long hairs of the posterior cremaster, their ends are
insufficiently hooked to be functional. They would form an excellent buffer on
rapid retrograde movement. The other hairs are fairly developed, but there are no
extra ones on appendages or elsewhere.

The two species, distans and laetus, are possibly the most difficult in
the European ‘“ plume’’ fauna to separate in the imaginal.stage by
means of wing structure and markings, yet, in their early stages, they
are most widely divergent, and this divergence is supported by an
exceedingly well marked structural difference in the g¢ genitalia of the
two insects. Before entering into a detailed account of the differences
existing between the genitalia of these two species, so similar in
appearance, we may quote Chapman’s general remarks on the genitalia
of the group. He writes (in litt.): “The g appendages in the
Oxyptilids bear some resemblance to those of the Agdistids, but differ
very much from those of all other plumes. In the Platyptilids we
have, roughly speaking, a form of appendages not widely different from
those of, say, the Noctuids or butterflies, ¢.e., a chitinous ring with a
dorsal process more or less produced in the median line, and one pair
of hinged processes, ‘the clasps,’ with other smaller interior processes,
and, centrally, the oedeagus. In the Oxyptilids, however, no chitinous
ring is very obvious, nor is there a marked central dorsal process (it is
small, pale, and hidden between the other parts, and is difficult to
see), but besides the oedeagus, there seem to be not one, but three
pairs of lateral-hinged appendages, and which of these is the homologue
of the clasp in the Platyptiliids is not quite easy to pronounce. The
dorsal pair presents a very clasp-like form, but the articulation is
dorso-lateral, whilst that of -the second pair is ventro-lateral, which
suggests that these are the clasps as seen in most of the other groups
of plumes; their somewhat less simple structure points in the same
direction. The third pair is hardly visible in any other plumes, but
is, | think,‘seen (along with the clasps) in some other families ; they are
comparatively small and quite ventral. The structure of the J appen-
dages shows that the Buckleriids (paludum and siceliota) belong to the
Oxyptilid group. The different Oxyptilid species differ especially in
the relative proportions, forms, and directions of these lateral apophyses
To compare distans and laetus in illustration :

(1) The dorsal pair of apophyses are wider and heavier in distans, the dorsal
margin nearly straight, but bent dorsad near the extremity, beyond the bend the
texture of the appendage is a little different. There is a wide basal attachment,
but the lower margin rapidly approaches the dorsal, and then, bending forwards,
makes the basal half somewhat triangular, the terminal half somewhat baton-like.
In laetus the general structure is the same, but the terminal half is much more
slender, and, instead of bending dorsad and terminating in a rounded end as in
distans, it curves ventrad, becomes rather thinner, and ends in a slight terminal
enlargement with a ventral projection or point. There is little difference in length
(about 0°34mm. from dorsal angle of base to end), but the more slender and curved
process in laetus makes it look longer.

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS. 451

(2) The second pair of apophyses have a hard-looking basal portion, and a
softer inflated-looking terminal portion which arises not from the actual extremity
of the basal portion, but just below its end. In distans the basal and terminal
portions are in a nearly straight line, and, approximately, of an uniform width
(0°7mm. in overall length, and 0:09mm. wide). In laetus the basal portion of the
process diminishes to half its previous diameter towards the end (basally it is
much the same width as in distans), and bends ventrad, and ends in a slight
enlargement much like that of the upper process. The further portion of the
clasp is very much smaller (less than half the length) than in distans, is directed
rather ventrally, and looks as if it were quite distinct from the basal portion,
much more than is the case in distans. (The length of the basal portion is about
0-38mm., of the terminal appendages 0:09mm., in distans the two portions are
approximately equal.)

(3) The small lower appendages are not very different in the two species, but
are largest in laetus, they are about 0°26mm. long, and of very similar structure to
the terminal portion of the middle (true clasps?) appendages. In these two
species there appears to be a central. dorsal triangular plate, not above the upper
paired appendages, but buried between them, and only of about half their length ;
this is probably the dorsal plate; it has no terminal process, and is so buried
between the lateral processes, and so pale and lightly chitinised, that it is far from
conspicuous, and is, therefore, probably present in those Oxyptilid species in which
I do not happen to have observed it.”’

It is, perhaps, not really so very surprising that two insects, so mach
alike in their general facies, yet with absolutely distinct larvee and
pup, should have so markedly different g¢ genital organs. The
differences are so great that there can be no possible doubt about their
absolute distinctness.

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS, Zeller.

Synonymy.—Species: Distans, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,” p. 902 (1847); ‘‘Linn. Ent.,”?
vi., p. 345 (1852); H.-Sch., ‘‘Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 372 (1855); Frey, ‘‘ Die Tin. Pter.
Schw.,” p. 408 (1856); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,”’ 2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); Hein. and
Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 790 (1877) ; Staud., ‘‘ Hor. Soc. Ent.
Ross.,”’ xv., p. 424 (1880); Frey, ‘‘ Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 429 (1880); Jord., ‘‘ Ent.
Mo. Mag.,’’ xviii., p. 122 (1881); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xviii., p. 178 (1882) ;
Snell., ‘‘ De Vlind.,”’ ii., pt. 2, p. 1028 (1882) ; Sorhgn., ‘‘ Kleinschm. Brandbg.,”’
p. 3 (1886); leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,”’ p. 56, pl. xvi., fig. 11 (1886); South, ‘‘ Ent.,”
XXli., pp. 32, 103 (1889); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ xxv., p. 431 (1889); Tutt,
‘* Young Nat.,’’ x., p. 164 (1889); ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,’’ i., p. 94 (1890); Meyr., ‘‘Trans.
Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ 1890, p. 485 (1890); Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,” i., p. 141 (1891);
‘Brit. Pter.,’’ p. 62 (1895) ; Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,” ete., p. 431 (1895) ; Hofmn.,
‘¢ Deutsch. Pteroph.,” p. 105 (1895); Bankes, ‘‘Ent. Rece.,’’ xii., Pp. 165 (1900) ;
Mitt ent. Ree.,’’ xii., p. 217 (1900) ; Staud. and Reb., “Cat,” 3rd ed. pe at
(1901) ; Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 365, pl. 414, figs. 7- Ta (1904). Didactyla,
Haw., ‘‘ Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 479 (1811). Didactylus, 8 Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comp.,’’ p.
409 (1819); Stphs., ‘‘Illus. Haust.,’’ p. 377, in part '(1834). a ebed sys
Stphs., ‘Illus. Haust.,’’ app. p. 424, in part (1835). Tristis var. b, Zell., ‘‘Isis,”’
p. 38 (1847). Laetus, Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” vi., p. 122 (1869) ; eet de Ent.
Ann.,’’ p. 127 (1869); South, ‘‘Knt.,’’ xv., p. 35 (1882); Barr., ‘‘Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’
Xvili.,’’ p. 178 (1882); South, ‘‘ Ent.,”’ xxii., pp. 32, 103 (1889). [Laetidactylus,
Brd., ‘‘ Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr.,’’ p. 34, pl. ii., fig. 7 (1861).]
ORIGINAL DESC is anterioribus luteo-fuscescentibus,
laciniis obsolete albido-bistrigatis; digiti tertii dorso pone medium atro-
squamato (g 9).* After along and very careful examination, I con-
sider it preferable to declare the examples taken in Asia Minor and Italy
a separate species, as I did P. tristis, in the list of the moths from Asia

Minor (Jsis, 1847, p. 88). They belong to two sections of Pterophorus in

* This was Seinndedl in 1852 (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 345), to: ‘* Major, alis
anterioribus luteo-fuscescentibus, laciniis obsolete albido-bistrigatis, arcu lacinie
posterioris marginali albido; digiti tertii dorso longe ante apicem atro-squamato
(sé 2).”

452, BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

which itis very difficult to discover reliable characters, when one cannot
compare the larve and pups, in which it is to be expected that, for these
southern Pterophorids, considered on the first impression to be different
species, a confirmation will be found in thefuture. It may, of course, prove
later that P. distans and P.laetus are only the different generations of the
southern P. tristis, to which species | was very much inclined to refer
these examples after a somewhat careful examination. What gives
this supposition a greater degree of probability is the circumstance that
a female taken by Low, near Macri, at the end of May, agrees in all
characters most exactly with my Silesian P. tristis, and, as such, not to
be disputed, and that, of a pair taken near Kellemisch in the middle of
May (the male, however, in the plain, and the female on the moun-
tains), the male must be placed with P. laetus, the female with P.
distans. P. distans is considerably larger than P. tristis. The colora-
tion has a somewhat more yellow admixture, from which it appears to
be of a more pleasant yellowish-grey brown. The markings are exactly
the same. The white border of the costal fringes on the upper lobe of
the forewings is not so broad as in P. tristis; on the underside the
space from the apex to the hindmost transverse line, into which the
white costal line runs, is notably paler and narrower. The chief
difference, however, is presented by the black scale-tuft on the 8rd
plumule of the hindwing; it is smaller, more diffusely formed, and
decidedly somewhat nearer the base, and, as it 1s narrower, it is notably
more distant trom the apex than in P. tristis. At the apex of this
plumule the female only has a black scale on the right wing; in the
male it is entirely wanting. The male I took near Syracuse, on May
7th, in a grassy dell on the slope of the former Neapolis. The female
came, as already mentioned, from the coast of Asia Minor (Zeller, Isis,
1847, pp. 902-3).

Inwaco.—l14‘7mm.-20°3mm. Anterior wings rusty-brown or pale
ochreous in colour, the costa rather darker, except towards apex, which
is nearly white ; the lower lobe very linear on the outer margin, and
scarcely excised; three more or less abbreviated fasciz cross the wings
transversely, viz., a small whitish blotch extended into a crescentic
shade at the end of the cleft; two transverse whitish lobal lines, the inner
wider and somewhat lunular (the points turned outwards) ; the outer
narrow, more parallel with hindmargin, and inconspicuous on lower
lobe; the wing-apex sometimes edged with whitish cilia beyond the
outer lobal line; a few scattered white scales on costa towards base ;
a faint white scaling forming an inconspicuous longitudinal discal
streak ; the fringes in the cleft very dark grey, paler where the lobal
lines cross, cilia with white bases towards outer edge on upperside of
cleft, a few scattered black scales throughout, but especially on upper
edge; fringes of outer and inner margins of wings dark grey, rather
paler where the lobal lines end, and somewhat darker between these.
Posterior wings bright, shiny, coppery-brown, fringes dark grey (glossy
like the plumules in some lights); the scale-tuft on 38rd plumule ill-
developed, formed of a few short parallel black scales set close together,
rather beyond the middle of the plumule; a few scattered black scales
between the patch and base, also one or two isolated ones towards
apex.

SEXUAL DiMoRPHISM.—There is none of the marked sexual difference
in size or wing-markings seen in Oayptilus pilosellae, both sexes being

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS. 453

almost identical in these respects. The different form of the abdomina,
however, distinguishes the sexes at a glance.

Varration.—The British specimens in our possession vary consider-
ably in size, colour, and extent and intensity of markings. In size the
limits of variation fall between 14:7mm.and 20:3mm. Incolourthereare
two very distinct forms readily noticeable,onea bright rusty-brown(almost
of the tint of the brightest g Marasmarcha lunaedactyla), the other of
a much greyer tint (inclining to a greyish-fawn, with a tinge of fuscous
in it). These represent the two forms known in this country,
respectively, as distans and laetus (though not apparently so described
by Zeller), and are generally supposed to represent seasonal di-
morphism, the early brood being composed of the brighter, and
the later brood the greyer, specimens. In our experience this
appears to be only partly true, but it has proved impossible to get

specimens with full data of the two broods from the same locality in

the same year, and, at Deal, where we know the species best, the greyer
form has appeared on the wing, in different seasons, from the end of
June to mid-August, all possibly belonging to the second brood of
different years. Our brightest examples come from the Dover district,
but the month of capture is not given. Whether the variation is not
more largely a matter of habitat than season (first or second brood) must
still be considered, therefore, an open question, but we suspect that it is.
Besides these, however, there is a very pale ochreous form, a modifica-
tion of the brightest brown forms. The markings vary from clear
white to a dingy ochreous, and sometimes approach almost complete
obsolescence. This tendency to failure is particularly noticeable in the
markings connected with the apex of the wing, and in the outer lobal
line, these markings being very conspicuous in some examples, whilst,
in other specimens, at the other extreme, they are practically obsolete,
and, to a less extent, the failure also frequently shows in the lower
half of the inner lobal line. There is, too, considerable difference in
the number of white points on the costa, and on the disc of the fore-
wing, whilst the colour of the hindwings, usually bright coppery-brown,
is, in the greyest examples, often of a black-grey tint, tending to
darken the general appearance. In the fringes, the scaling of the
cleft of the forewings is worthy of examination, the number of short
black scales, and the amount of development of the pale sections, where
the lobal lines cross, varying considerably; there are also some little
differences exhibited in the fringes of the inner margin. The scale-
tuft 1s entirely different in position from that of the other British
Oxyptilids, is very small and inconspicuous, and the scales forming it
are rather readily lost; the number of black scales on either side of
the scale-tuft, along the margin of the plumule, varies considerably.
Zeller’s colour description of distans is “ luteo-fuscescentes,’’ and
the dark dirty-brown tint usually connected in our entomological
literature with the term ‘‘fuscous,” precludes the usual assumption
that our brightest brown form of this species is really distans.
Accepting this as a basis of grouping, our own inclination is to group
the specimens we get in Britain as follows:

1. Bright rusty-brown with white markings=ab. brunnescens, n. ab.

la. Bright rusty-brown with ochreous markings=ab. ochrea-brunnescens, n. ab.

1b. Bright rusty-brown with obsolete markings = ab. obsoleta-brunnescens, n. ab.

2a. Pale ochreous, or greyish-ochreous, ,with white markings=ab. intermedia,
n.ab.

454 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

2b. Pale ochreous, or greyish-ochreous, with ochreous markings=ab. ochrea-
intermedia, n. ab. q

2c. Pale ochreous, or greyish-ochreous, with obsolete markings=ab. obsoleta-
intermedia, n. ab.

3a. Yellowish-fuscous, or dirty greyish-brown, with white markings =
distans, Zell.

3b. Yellowish-fuscous, or dirty greyish-brown, with ochreous markings=ab.
ochrea-distans, n. ab.

3c. Yellowish-fuscous, or dirty greyish-brown, with obsolete markings=ab.
obsoleta-distans, n. ab.
So much for the variation as exhibited in our own series of com-
paratively recently caught British examples. For further comparison
we have in our possession some 30 other specimens from various British
and continental sources, viz., (1) Two British examples, bred by
Norgate, in July, 1892, from pupz obtained in Suffolk, particularly
strongly marked with fuscous, and these tally almost exactly with (2) four
specimens sent by Zeller to Barrett as distans, and labelled “ Rhetia,”’
so that one may safely assume that they are from Bergtin, where the
examples, although ‘generally larger than those from North Germany ”
(see Stett. Ent. Ztg., 1878, p. 163), yet one supposes to be not very dis-
_ similar to those from Glogau, where Zeller found the species not at all
common, and of a form which he says (Linn. E'nt., vi., p. 846) is like the
Syracuse (Neapolis) (g )and Maeri ( 2 ) specimens [described (Jsts, 1847,
p. 902) as the typical examples of distans|, and a single specimen from
Dalmatia. These are the darkest, largest, and coarsest-scaled ex-
amples of distans known to us. The nearest approach to these are
(3) seven examples from St. Michel-de-Maurienne, taken August
1st-5th, 1897; they are less fuscous, but still belong rather to the
distans form noted above than to any other dealt with. [It is to be
noticed that, of these, the Suffolk examples were bred at the end of
July, the St. Michel specimens were taken in early August, the Glogau
examples also in July, the Syracuse example in May, and the Macri
specimen in September, so that Barrett’s idea that distans consisted of
specimens of the first brood is hardly supported by the facts.] Allied
to this form, but not quite so closely, since they are not quite shaded
to the same extent with fuscous, are (4) two examples taken—one at
Hyéres, April 28th, 1905, and the other at Draguignan, May 4th,
1905, of a pale greyish-yellow, very slightly shaded with fuscous, and
with faint markings, except the second inner line which is very well
developed ; these are particularly characterised by their pallid appear-
ance. We have also under observation (5) a large specimen taken by
Chapman in Macugnaga, of the colour of Norgate’s bred, and Zellevr’s
Rheetian, examples. (6) A long series of British-caught specimens,
without data, from the ‘‘ Mason collection,’’ mostly of a _ pale
ochreous tint, and with scarcely any fuscous in any of the cx-
amples (? faded), the range of tint extending from pale ochreous to a
distinct reddish or rusty-brown. Besides these we have for com-
parison (1) a single specimen sent by Zeller to Barrett as laetus, and
labelled “Messina,” which is probably one of the three original
examples noted by Zeller in his original description of Jaetus (sis,
1847, p. 903), and taken in July (see posted). [Superficially this bears
considerable resemblance to our two Riviera specimens, noted above,
the latter being, however, slightly more tinged with fuscous.]
(2) Agreeing almost exactly with Zeller’s ‘‘ Messina” specimen is a
long series of specimens taken by Chapman in June and July, 19038

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS. 455

and 1904, in central Spain, at Bejar, La Granja, Soria, Moncayo, etc.
‘These are of a bright ochreous tint, but there can be no hesitation in
referring these to Zeller’s laetus, whilst the most extreme of these
Spanish forms are so warmly tinged with reddish, that the deepest
coloured examples are rather bright rusty-brown than ochreous, and
these are, one suspects, Zeller’s laetus var. 8, which he noted as
“brunnescens.”’ (8) A specimen bred (? with others) by Walsingham,
from a larva found on Andryala, at Granada, and which is evidently
identical with Zeller’s ‘‘ Messina,’ Jaetus and Chapman’s Spanish laetus.
The closest comparison of these laetus, or more ochreous specimens,
with the more fuscous distans, by Chapman and ourselves, failed
entirely to discover any structural difference in the wing-structure or
markings, and, presumably, we had to accept distans, Zell., and laetus,
Zell., as one species, for Durrant had written (in litt., December 8rd,
1904) that Lord Walsingham and himself had carefully studied all the
original material in the ‘‘ Zeller”’ collection, with the result that they
were unable to separate distans, Zell., from laetus, Gell., ‘in fact,’’ he
added, ‘‘ we agreed with your conclusion, written (Pter. Brit., pp.
62-64) some years ago.”’ But this was not altogether satisfactory, we
had the pupal skins of Norgate’s two distans, we had, also, Hofmann’s
description of the larva and pupa of the German distans, which
evidently belonged to the same insect. We had, also, the larva and
pupa of Walsingham’s Granada laetus from Andryala, and Milliére’s
description and figures of the same Andryala insect, and these
larve and pup of Jlaetus were as different, structurally, from
those of distans as could well be imagined, the former inclininz to
the Buckleria structure, the latter to the Capperia form. Separating,
therefore, the specimens on their superficial appearance into the two
groups noted above, Chapman kindly undertook the detailed examina-
tion of the genital organs, with the result that they were found to be
entirely different, and proved absolutely the difference of the species,
and supported the wide differences existing between the larve and
pupz of the two insects. That some of our British specimens of distans
are indistinguishable from laetus, on wing structure and appearance,
appears to be true, but laetus, so far as we know, is a purely southern
species, confined to southern France (Lyons appears to be its most
northerly point), Spain, Italy, etc., and overlapping, in south France
(Riviera), Italy (Geller), etc., distans, which has a much wider distribu-
tion. Snellen observes that ‘‘the 8rd plumule of the hindwing of distans
is longer than that of the other Dutch Oxyptilid species, being above
two-thirds and almost three-fourths the length of the 2nd plumule,
its inner marginal fringe at the base white; the black scale-tuft is
placed at two-thirds; three or four black scales are visible nearer
the base, and one or two on the lower side of the apex.’’ Hofmann
Observes (Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 105): ‘The examples from the Alps are
distinguished by their great size, 11-5mm., and darker brown coloration,
from those of the north German plains which only measure Imm.
Ihe black scale-tuft of the 3rd plumule of the hindwing is, in these
alpine examples, very variable.’’ Probably, this accounts for Zeller’s
statement (Linn. Hnt., vi., p. 845) that distans is the largest species in
the section, for it is certain that the average size of British examples
is a shade below that of British pilosellae, ete., yet the types of distans
from Zeller, in the Barrett collection, are of about the same expanse

456 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

as our larger British examples (see infra), but one caught by Chapman
at Macugnaga is much larger. (Our smallest and largest British
distans and pilosellae are 14-7mm. and 20°3mm., and 15:‘6mm. and
19mm. respectively.) Réssler notes, of the Hesse specimens,
that they are ‘‘rather large in size, nearly that of Marasmarcha
lunaedactyla, of a pale yellowish-red colour, mixed with more or less
grey.” Of our continental examples of distans we have the following
measurements: from Draguignan 19:Omm., St. Michel-de-Maurienne
19‘Omm., Rhaetia (from Zeller) 19-4mm., Macugnaga 22°Omm., whilst
Norgate’s bred Suffolk examples are 19°5mm., so that whilst these are
above the size, 9mm. x 2=18mm., given by Hofmann for examples from
the north German plains, Chapman’s large example from Macugnaga is
1mm. lessthan Hofmann notes the Alpine specimens, viz., 11:5mm x 2=
23mm. Speaking of the British specimens, Barrett notes (Lep. Brit. Isles,
1x., p. 366) the species as ‘‘a little variable in tone of colour and the
degree of darker dusting on the forewings. Specimens of the second
generation, taken in August, are commonly paler and more smoothly
light fawn-colour; those of the June emergence darker and dusted ;
these last seem to agree accurately with Zeller’s distans, the paler
forms with his laetus. Those found on the south coast of Kent are
especially soft in colour,” etc. In his earlier differentiation, he notes
(Ent. Mo. May., xvi., p. 178) that ‘“distans is larger, darker in colour,
and coarser-looking than laetus, but without any reliable difference in
markings between typical distans and laetus received from Geller.
Those British examples to which the name of lactus was applied, were
second-brood examples, lighter and brighter-coloured than those of the
first brood, the majority of which were larger, decidedly darker in
colour, and agreed accurately with specimens of distans received from
Zeller; others, however, of these early examples, incline towards the
brighter-coloured forms, of which the second brood is mostly com-
posed; specimens taken at Folkestone by Purdey (which agree abso-
lutely with continental Jaetus from Geller), are rather paler than any
Brandon specimens I have seen.’ In Barrett’s collection are four
specimens of distans, labelled ‘“‘ Rhaetia,’’ and one of laetus, labelled
‘‘ Messina,” all received from Zeller; these are now in Chapman’s
possession, and have already been referred to (antea p. 454) at length.
South considers that the Devon examples belong to the laetus form.
Of course, all our British examples, so far as is known, belong to
one species only, viz., distans.

HisroricaL NOTES ON CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS AND C. La=TUS.—
In Staudinger and Rebel’s Catalog, 8rd ed., p. 71, laetus is sunk as
the summer brood of distans. We have here a curious instance of
continental authorities following our British lead when we are wrong,
notwithstanding an often-observed constitutional objection to doing so
when we are right. In the previous edition (1871) they were kept
distinct. In Great Britain laetus does not occur, only distans, yet for
many years pale forms of the species (distans), pale either geographically,
seasonally, or from fading, were recorded and accepted as Jaetus,
although there was a good deal of controversy as to whether they were
really distinct. Barrett possessed a type specimen of laetus given him by
Zeller (now in my possession), and, since we now know that 1t is difficult,
if not impossible, to say positively about any specimen (or, at least,
about a good many specimens), with no other guidance than its colour
and wing-markings, to which species it belongs, it was very natural

Priate LV.

CT] ou. on og ‘ : cs) 04

ANCILLARY APPENDAGES OF CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS (ENGLISH) AND C. Larus (SPANISH).
(From camera sketches by 'T. A. Cuapman.)

Natural History of the British Lepidoptera, 1906.
[For explanation see back. |

PLATE IV.

[To be bound facing p. 457.]

D1AGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF ANCILLARY APPENDAGES OF CROMBRUGGHIA
DISTANS (BRITISH) AND C. L=eTUS (SPANISH).

Fig. 1. —-Dorsal piece, C. distans. Figs. 11-12.—Dorsal piece, C. laetus.
Figs. 3-4 Upper appendages __,, _ Figs. 13-14.—Upper appendages ,,
Figs. 5-6.—Intermediate append- Figs. 15-16.—Intermediate ap-

ages 3 pendages 3
Figs. 7-8.—Lower appendages __,, Fig. 17.—Lower appendages i
Jeinegs Aidceagus 5 Fig. 19.— Aidceagus Es

Fig. 10—Mdceagus of C. distans, eversible membrane exserted.

N.B.—C. distans is our only British form. C. laetus is clearly a distinct
species as given by Zeller. C. lantoscanus is a distinct species, not a form of
either of these. In the latter the intermediate appendages are straight, as in C.
distans, the end piece short, as in C. laetus, with other differences—T. A.
CHAPMAN.

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS, 457

on the part of Barrett to identify some British specimens of distans
as laetus, and in this he followed, and was followed by, a good
many of our leading lepidopterists. Facts, however, though difficult
to seize and define, were too strong to admit of this conclusion stand-
ing, and, by 1882, we find Barrett concluding that distans and lactus
were one species, a spring and a summer form. In this conclusion,
South, Tutt, and others finally acquiesced. In his Lepidoptera of the
British Islands (circa 1908), Barrett says, as a final conclusion, ‘these
last seem to agree accurately with Professor Zeller’s O. distans, the
paler form with his O. laetus. Those found on the south coast of Kent
are especially soft in colour. I think that Professor Zeller ultimately
felt doubtful of the distinction of his O. distans and O. laetus. ‘They
seem to be no more than faint variations of this one species.” This
probably sums up the view of the two species that had obtained for
about twenty years. There is no fault to find with the position, as
regards British examples, since, so far as we yet know, no true laetus
has been found in these islands, nor is likely to be (though the
sporadic occurrence of an imported specimen, as of somany quite southern
Species, is just possible). The error is in applying this true, but
insular, conclusion to the whole continental area, as evidenced by
Staudinger and Rebel’s Cataloy, published in 1901 ; for how lone before
this date laetus was understood to be sunk we do not know. Barrett’s
belief as to Zeller’s change of opinion may be quite correct. When
Zeller dealt with these two species (1847), he possessed an acumen that
is rarely reached and never exceeded. He saw distinctly that there
were two species, though, how he did it on the obvious imaginal
characters, 1t is hard for us to understand; he was, however, one of the
giants, and we are but pigmies. When asked for his opinion many
years later, he probably was ready to acquiesce in what he took to be
the modern conclusion on a subject he had not looked at for so long,
but such acquiescence goes for little. When I looked over specimens
from the Walsingham collection, I found a moth (from Granada) that
I could not separate from distans, yet it had a larva and pupa quite
different from the described larva and pupa of distans, with which a
distans pupa (from Mr. Norgate) quite agreed. I found also that a
numberof Spanish specimens before me, had genitalia (3 ) quite different
from any other Huropean Ovyptilus I had examined. These specimens
I found to be indistinguishable from Lord Walsingham’s specimen,
and, individually, indistinguishable from O. distans, yet the facies of
the whole series was very clearly different from that of a series of
distans. They were smaller, slighter, and paler. When Mr. Tutt
came to the consideration of VU. distans for his “ British Lepidoptera,”’
he found himself prejudiced in favour of the British view, and, as luck
would have it, I forgot for the moment the result of my examination
of the genitalia made some twelve months before. In discussing the
matter, therefore, he thought there might be some error about the
Walsingham specimen. Milliére’s account of laetus would be very
valuable corroborative evidence, but was not clear enough to form a
sound foundation. I then remembered what had m: ade me go
positive that the Spanish were quite distinct from the British
examples, and, on repeating the examination on further specimens of
both species, there Was no escape from the conclusion that they were
absolutely distinct. Lord Walsingham’s larve and pupe beea

thoroughly trustworthy, and even Millicre’s plate and descrip

458 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

were found to contain very strong confirmatory evidence (Chapman).
Zeller observes (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 845) that ‘‘distans is the
largest species in this section, approaching in colour FP. pilosellae,
but, as a rule, with a greater admixture of grey. This is particu-
larly the case with the few examples caught near Glogau, and
solitary specimens from Dalmatia and Syracuse. In the Asiatic
examples the quantity of grey is very insignificant, except in a
? from Maeri, and consequently the colouring is a trifle lighter and
less vivid than in P. pilosellae. The white bent line in the fringe of
the hindmargin at the anal angle is very distinct, and presents a good
mark of distinction from P. tristis. The intensity of the black scale-
tuft, on the hind edge of the 8rd plumule of the hindwing, varies, and
hence also does its distance from the apex of the plumule.” Staudinger
writes (Hor. Soc. Ent. Ross., xv., pp. 425-7) that he refers “a gf caught
May 14th in the Kerasdere, and a @ captured May 19th in the
Tschirtschur Valley, to distans, although Wocke looked on the latter as
lactus, which may be right, as luetus is a smaller, paler (more yellow,
lighter), southern form of distans.* Mann, too, notes that distans is to
be found in June, near Amasia, and in May, near Brussa. It appears
to me that laetus is, in the south, the later brood of distans*, as examples
caught by myself near Granada,{ in April and May, can hardly be
separated from the German distans, whilst, in August and September,
I caught, at the same place, typical small laetus, which possibly was
even a third brood, as I found, in the second half of June, typical
laetus, also near Granada. . Zeller, too, caught his examples from the
middle of June right into August, in Italy, and Loew, in Asia Minor,
captured some in September and November (/sis, 1847, p. 903), near
Attalia, Addionas, and Kellemisch. These laetus, Zeller mentions, in
his note on Loew’s captures (/sis, 1847, p. 38), as tristis var., but, in his
list of Sicilian insects (op. cit., p. 908), he refers them to laetus, whilst
as he does not notice in his monograph (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 345) that
tristts occurs in Asia Minor, but does observe that distans was caught
by Loew near Macri and Kellemisch, it is only logical to suppose that
he finally concluded that the specimens from Asia Minor, at first
supposed to be tristis, were distans and laetus. Johann sent me later
several very typical laetus, from Amasia, unfortunately without dates,
but I suspect they were autumnal captures. Mann, of course,
mentions that laetus and distans were caught together in May, near
Brussa. I also received, from Kriiper, nearly typical laetus; captured
as early as April 24th, near Smyrna, and that is why I mention here
that laetus may be specifically distinct from distans, although I possess
all intermediates imaginable between the two forms{. Lederer notes
laetus caught on the mountain slopes near Kis Aolé, but without dates.”
Herrich-Schaffer observes that ‘“‘distans is somewhat larger than tristis,
and has the colour of obscurus, differing, however, from the latter in
the scale-tuft, which is placed further back from the apex on the 8rd
plumule. The fringes of the cleft of the forewings are, at the apical
half, sharply white basally, with the black longitudinal streaks as in

* This we have now shown to be entirely incorrect, the species being absolutely
distinct in every stage.

+ It is quite clear from the specimens in the Walsingham collection that
laetus occurs at Granada, on Andryala ; one is inclined, therefore, to suspect that
Staudinger’s distans taken here are to be referred to laetus.

{ This sentence shows that Staudinger’s instinct was right in spite of the
apparent opposition presented by the facts. a

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS. 459

trichodactyla, those of the lower lobe likewise broadly white at the base,
with a black tuft at the apex, and at the anal angle, and therefore very
different from obscurus.”’ One is quite at a loss to understand how
Herrich-Schaffer can assert that the ground colour of distans is like
that of obscurus (parvidactyla) ; they are, of course, so far as we know
them, utterly dissimilar. The synonymy of Jlaetus, and Zeller’s
original description read as follows:

Waemns, Zell. “isis,” xu., p. 903 (1847); “linn. Ent.,” vi. p. 346 (1852);
ifsc isys, Bearb. v., p. do (1853); Mill, “Icon,” 1., p. 333, pl.
Xxxix., figs. 7-11 (1864); Staud., “Cat.,” 2nd ed., p. 342 (1871); “Sta., “ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,” vi., p. 36 (1879); Jord., “ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” vi., p. 122 (1879); Staud., “ Hor.
Soc. Ent. Ross.,” xv., pp. 425-7 (1880); Barr., “ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xvui., p. 178
feeb eecouth, “int.” xv., p. 39 (1882); xxu., p. 33 (1889); Tutt, “ Brit. Pter.,”
peeon (1895); Staud. and Reb., “Cat.,” 3rd ed., p. 71 (1901). [Laetidac-
ijims) rd, Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr.,” p. 34, pl. u., fig. 7 (1861).-—P. laetus—
Corpore alisque anterioribus ochraceis, his postice grisescentibus; lacinis
obsolete albo-bistrigatis; digiti tertil dorso longe ante apicem squamis paucis
atris instructo. Var. @.. Alis anterioribus, brunnescentibus, basi dilutiore (As.
Min., Rom.).—Size, like that of P. tristis, variable (expanse of forewings
3'''-43'""). Ground colour of body and forewings light ochre-yellow. ‘The
upper lobe, before the first and up to the second white transverse line, somewhat
brownish ; on the costa itself brown; the fringes beyond the second transverse line
narrowly white, as in P. tristis, and, on the underside, less pure white, and, therefore,
contrasting but little with the ight ground colour. At the hind angle of the lower
lobe, the white in the fringe usually more restricted than in P. tristis. The plumules
of the hindwing more yellowish-brown and lighter, the scale-tuft on the 3rd plumule
is always smaller, and consequently at a greater distance from the apex; at the
apex are from 3 to 0 small black scales. The entire underside is much yellower
than in P. tristis, and the abdomen particularly light without any brown. The other
details agree with the latter species. The Asiatic example (from Kellemisch) is
the largest, and is particularly dark (deep) in colour; the first white transverse line
and the spot at the cleft are slightly shiny. A ¢ from the Campagna, near Rome, is
exactly like it, but is smaller. I caught specimens on June 26th, near Catania, in
company with P. acanthodactylus ; and, on July 10th-l1th, three examples in dry
spots on the mountains near Messina; in the Campagna, south of Rome, specimens
were flying, not rarely, on dry grass patches on August 24th and 28th, in exactly
the same manner as our P. pilosellae. The species is probably on the wing
for a long period. Dr. Loew caught it in Asia Minor as late as September-
November (Zeller). Distrisurron: Europe (south and central), Asia Minor,
Armenia, Tura, Mauretania, Canaries (Staudinger and Rebel). [One supposes that
“Central”? Europe will now have to be deleted. |

Some five years after Zeller had written the original description
of daetus, he monographed the “plumes,’’ and gave the following
diagnoses of the two forms he recognised (Linn. Mnt., vi., p. 346) :

a. Alis anterioribus pallide ochraceis, laciniis obsolete albido-bistrigatis ; digitt
tertii dorso longe ante apicem squamis paucis atris instructo (¢ ¢).

6. Alis anterioribus brunnescentibus, basi dilutiore.

He then notes: ‘The very light ochreous colour, and the smaller scale-
tuit on the 8rd plumule, readily separate this species from LP. tristis,
whilst the smaller size of its body distinguishes it from P. distans ;
var. 8, although darker than the type, is still considerably lighter than
distans.”’ He adds * Castle Abbadessa in Dalmatia, in June, singly on
pasture-land (Mann),”’ to his previous localities. Staudinger and Rebel
give ldaectus under distans as “gen. aest.”’ (Cat., 8rd ed., p. 71) and
simply diagnose it as ‘‘ minor, pallidior,” which is not illuminating.
Chapman’s recent work has shown conclusively that Milliére’s laetus
(Iconoyraphie, i., pp. 831 et seq.) belongs here; and, for reference, we
here give Milliére’s account of the insect, which reads as follows:

Oxyplelus laetus.—Cet insecte a de grands rapports avec le laetus de Zeller.
Il posséde des caractéres constants qui, 4 la rigueur pourraient en faire une espdce

460 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

distincte ; mais je l’avoue, ces caractéres ne sont point assez importants pour créer
une espece nouvelle. L’ Oxy. laetus n’était pas connu dans ses premiers états; je
remplis une lacune dans son histoire en racontant ce qui restait 4 en dire. CHENILLE:
Fusiforme, faiblement convexe, trés-atténuée aux extrémités. D’un jaune de Naples
clair, lavé de carné inférieurement et sur le dos. On ne distingue pas les lignes
ordinaires, et la villosité abondante propre au plus grand nombre des chenilles de
Ptérophorites, est ici rare et courte. Les anneaux sont bien distincts, et il regne un
sillon assez profond sur la région dorsale. Le ventre est concolore et sans lignes.
La téte, petite, globuleuse, testacée, est noirdtre sur les cotés. Les pattes sont
concolores, sauf le dernier article des écailleuses qui est rougedtre. Les trapézoidaux
qu’on ne voit qu’a l’aide d’une trés-forte loupe, sont indiqués en rougeatre.
Le premier segment est surmonté de deux traits noirs paralléles, accompagnés de
chaque cété d’un gros point noir. Fooppiant: Cette chenille vit aux dépens des
fleurs de lAndryala sinuata, L., plante assez rare dans nos environs, ou plutdt
cantonnée dans certaines localités chaudes et pierreuses. L’insecte sort de lceuf
lorsque les fleurs de l’Andryale sont épanouies, c’est-a-dire en juillet; sa croissance
est rapide. Bien que fort petite, cette chenille cause un grand dommage aux fleurs
dont elle fait sa nourriture, car elle en lie le sommet alors qu’elles ne sont point
entierement développées, ronge la base des étamines, les atrophie et en empéche le
développement. Pupation: Vingt jours suffisent 4 l’insecte pour atteindre sa
grosseur; il se place alors au centre d’un groupe de fleurs pour opérer sa meta-
morphose. Pupa: La nymphe est bientét formée; celle-ci, allongée, grele, brune,
non villeuse, passe au noir deux ou trois jours avant l’éclosion du petit Lépidoptere,
La chrysalidation dure quinze jours au plus. Insecte Parrarr: Envergure
0016 a 0°017 mill. Les ailes supérieures, profondément échancrées, d’un brun clair,
présentent deux taches blanchatres, vagues, oblongues, placées sur la branche
supérieure des ailes qui sont elles-mémes largement teintées de brun foncé a la céte.
Les inférieures ont les deux premiers rameaux bruns; le troisiéme également
brun porte trois ou quatre écailles noires au bord inférieur de la cdte.
Téte et thorax roux; abdomen brun avec deux traits jaune paille au sommet de
chaque segment. Ces traits sont séparés par une tache cunéiforme noire. Les
franges sont longues et concolores. Les pattes, blanches, sont maculées de brun
aux articulations. Les tarses sont blancs. Parasites: Cette espece est attaquée
dans de grandes proportions par un parasite de la nombreuse famille des
Ichneumons. J’ai vu éclore plus de la moitié de ces parasites 4 la place des
insectes que j’attendais. Cet Hyménoptere a été figuré (pl 39, no. 9). Locairizs:
Oxyptilus laetus vient augmenter la liste de notre faune lépidoptérique lyonnaise.
J’ai recueilli la chenille et l’insecte parfait de ce Microlépidoptére au pied de la
montagne d’Yseron, dans la propriété méme de notre collegue M. Maurice Ferrouillat.
Ce Ptérophore appartient encore aux environs de Perpignan (Pyrén.-Orientales), de
Thiers (Puy-de-D6éme), et de la Voulte (Ardéche). Je l’ai pris moi-méme dans
chacune de ces localités. Osservation: Le nom de laetuws me semble mal appliqué
a cet Insecte, et peut induire en erreur. Si l’antériorité n’était respectée, ce nom
pourrait étre plus judicieusement remplacé par celui de Andryaladactilus ou mieux
Andryalae qui rappellerait la plante dont la chenille se nourrit (Milliere).

CoMPARISON OF CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS WITH ITS ALLIES —The
close relationship of C. distans and laetus in the imaginal stage
has already been fully dealt with. Concerning its other allies
Hofmann observes that distans is “very near to QO. tristis, but
to be separated from that by the red-brownish or yellow-brownish
coloration, which approaches that of O. pilosellae. At the anal
angle of the lower lobe there is usually a narrow white dash
in the fringes, to the upper part of which is adjoined a narrow, white,
basal line of the outer marginal fringes, which mostly reaches to the
apex of the lower lobe, though it sometimes vanishes even before the
apex, about the middle of the outer margin ;. such examples are only
to be separated by their coloration from O. tristis, in which also a short
commencement to a basal line in the fringes above the white dash at
the anal angle sometimes occurs. The white transverse lines of
the lobes are sometimes more, sometimes less, pronounced. The black

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS. 461

scale-tuft on the ard plumule is variable in respect to size, as a
comparison of 28 examples has taught me, sometimes smaller than in
O. tristis, but also sometimes larger, that is more streak-lke, stretched
lengthwise. Beyond the scale-tuft the fringes have a fine, white,
basal line up to the apex, at which a few isolated black scales often
he.”

Ovum.—Undescribed.

Hairs oF Larva.—Hering (Stett. Mnt. Zeity., 1891, p. 224) first
noted that Herms had found the dusty grey-green larve of the second
brood at the end of June and beginning of July, in the park of
Hohenkrueg, feeding on the flowers of Crepis tectorum, in the same way
as the larvee of Geina didactyla do on those of Geum rivale. Hofmann
repeats this, but adds Crepis virens as a foodplant, and notes that the
larve of the first brood, occurring in early spring, must have, in any
case, a different habit; he opines that they possibly live spun-up within
the central shoot of the young plant. Durrant swept two larve in
early August, circ. 1898, from, it is believed, Picris hieracoides, but
one small larva was injured, and, although the other pupated, the
pupa produced an ichneumon.

Larva.—l2mm. long, green, with large, dark brown, stellate-haired
tubercles in the usual positions. The red-brown markings consist of a
broad, dorsal stripe, an indistinct, washed-out, narrow subdorsal, and
similar supraspiracular, a rather broad spiracular, and a basal consisting
of separated spots. Spiracles maregined with dark brown. Head
shining black. Prothorax green, the centre with a large black-brown
spot, divided by a fine central line. Anal flap brownish-yellow,
beset with bristles. Thoracic legs with Ist and 2nd joints black,
the third whitish. Anal claspers with a brown chitinous plate
on the exterior (Hofmann). Described from preserved larva received
from Dr. Hinneberg, of Potsdam). [Head dark brown, almost
black. Thorax with pronotum dull grey-green, with slight,
dark brownish, longitudinal streaks at the sides and on the
middle. A broad dorsal streak, much mottled with dull reddish,
commences behind the pronotum, and extends to the anal segment ;
the sides of all the segments dull olivaceous-green, becoming some-
what paler beneath; covered with tufts of long and short whitish
hairs, some short ones scattered between the tufts. True legs greyish,
with their basal two-thirds brownish externally; anal claspers and
abdominal prolegs concolorous with the venter (Durrant. Described
from two larve, swept near Merton, in August, from Picris hieracoides,
one small one was bruised and died, the other pupated but produced an
ichneumon). |

Fooprrants.—F lowers of Orepis tectorwm (Herms teste Hering),
Crepis virens (Schtitze, confirmed by Norgate), [Hieraciwm (Sorhagen), |
Picris hieracoides (Durrant).

Pupation.—Il’or pupation, the dusky grey-green larva of the summer
brood simply fastens itself to a leaf, flower, or stalk of the foodplant,
like that of Geina didactyla, the pupal stage lasting at most ten days
(Hering) ; pup found attached to the flower-heads of Crepis virens
(Norgate).

Pura.—Variable in colour, light brown to nearly black, with white
bristles on the small tubercles of the abdominal segments. The dorsal
keels are moderately developed, but furnished with strong thorn-like

462 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

processes terminating in two points directed upwards ; at the bases of
these stand two white bristles, one directed forwards, the other
backwards. The thorn-like process of the 4th abdominal segment
has the longest points, and also a third small point directed backwards;
the abdominal segments 5-9 bear similar thorn-like processes, which,
however, gradually become smaller towards the anal end. The thorn-
like process of the 5th abdominal segment sometimes also exhibits a
third very small point directed backwards. The nervures of the wing-
cases do not carry bristles (Hofmann. Described from pup. received
from Hinneberg, of Potsdam). Length 9mm. Abdomen cylindrical ;
thorax somewhat compressed dorsally. Pupa looks very hairy, the
result of the length of the hairs, for it possesses only the primary
tubercular hairs (and apparently all of these), but no secondaries,
either on the tubercles or skin-surface. The colour is pale, so that, in life,
it had no markings, and was pale green (appendages darker) or ochreous.
The dorsal flanges (head to 3rd abdominal segment) are well developed,
and, on the abdominal segments (1-8), are tall processes, carrying 1 and
ii. They are tallest on 1-8, where they arise from the flange. They are
compressed laterally, rise with a simple pedestal, and then divide into
two sharp spines, one curved forwards, the other backwards. On the
1st and 2nd abdominal segments the hairs arise from the base of the
pedestal, behind this 1 arises from the base of the front spine, and ii
from a little lower—i directly in front, 11 a little on the outside of the
column. The columns on the 8rd, 4th, and 5th abdominal segments
have a subsidiary small spine on the back of the posterior one, the 8th
thas only one (the anterior) spine. The lengths of these spines, the
thickness of the pupa at the 4th abdominal segment being about
1-4mm., are, on the 1st abdominal, 0°-42mm.; on 2nd, 0°48mm.;
on 8rd, 0-'70mm.; on 4th, 0°57mm.; on Sth, 0:-54mm.; on 6th,
0-51mm.; on 7th, 0:'54mm.; on 8th, 0-42mm. The hairs are longest
in front (i) on the forward spines, behind (i1) on the posterior, the
longest are all but a millimetre in length, the shortest (in front of the
‘7th and 8th abdominals: 0:26mm., and 0:30mm. The termination of
the dorsal flange on the 3rd abdominal is well illustrated by the spine
on that segment being undercut behind, all the others spreading in
both directions, but this one cannot do so, its large size being assisted
in front by the flange, but not behind. On the thorax the ridge
carries a hair (1:15mm.) at the anterior margin of the metathorax ; on
top of the mesothorax are two spines, 0°'l5mm. high and 0:14mm.
apart, one in front of the other; in front of these a hair (curved
forward) about 1mm. long, and a little further forward another.
There are sundry other lateral hairs on the front of the pupa.
Tubercle i111 carries a long hair (about 1:Omm.), flowing outwards and
‘backwards on all theabdominal segments (1-8). Those on tuberclesivand
v are remarkable; they are on a slightly raised base, that on iv is directed
backwards, and that on v forwards, withacurvethat makes the ends point
about exactly backwards and forwards, and the ends, unlike those of the
other hairs, which are sharp, are thick and rounded, the two together
looking just like the double belaying-pin for fastening ropes and cords;
they are short, about O'3mm. Tubercle vi has again a long hair, flowing
‘backwards, and vii three rather shorter hairs; viilis not detected, nor are
any very definite scar of prolegs seen. The face carries two nose-
-spines, one on either side. These are lower down (more ventral) than

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS. 463

the nose-spine of Platyptilia, and are, no doubt, different structures,
being close down to the labrum, but with room between for one hair
(about O-3mm.); each spine carries, at its extremity, a hair (0-5mm.
long). The spine itself is short (O-lmm.), apparently white, and the
hair points backward nearly parallel to the ventral surface. Above it,
at the base of the antenne, are two hairs on either side (the antenna-
basal hairs). The prothoracic piece, beautifully sculptured in wrinkles
and pits, bears three hairs, and (in dehiscence) carries at the end a com-
paratively large sheet of membrane and the eyepiece, the membrane
having more than twice the area of prothorax and eyepiece together;
an evanescent line, 0-O7mm. long, on the dorsal margin of this, is
probably the dorsal headpiece. ‘The base of the antenna has high,
branched, transverse ribs (white ?), dwindling lower down. The wing-
base is marked by a raised longitudinal ridge with a series of nodules,
and a second less-marked, similarly nodulated, ridge, is just ventral to
the first. The hindwing ends just below the ‘spiracle of the 2nd
abdominal segment. All the segments are transversely ridged, with
12-20 ribs; these are smooth and wave-like, with no side valleys.
The fine sculpture consists of closely-set minute round pits, and, on
the interseemental membrane, the appearance is of pits rather than of
tessellated pavement. ‘There is not detected any variation from this
pitting (into spicules, smoothness, etc.). The mandibles meet in the
middle line, with the triangular labrum above, and a minute diamond
of labium below. The maxille disappear below the legs (as usual), at
about 2°5mm. from the base, but show again between the 2nd legs in
the free spine. This includes the wing-tips and the 3rd tarsi (behind),
the wings being a fraction short of the other (6) items that are all but
level. The free spine is about 1:‘5mm. beyond the attachment to the 8rd
abdominal segment. Beyond the nodules on the wing-spine, there is
no trace of hair-process or spine on any of the appendages. The
cremastral spine is flat vertically, with angular edges, narrowing thence
dorsally to two dorsal ridges, which are high and narrow. Its form
is, therefore, in section, quadrangular, with the ventral side as long
as any two others. The cremastral hooks, both of forward and terminal
set, are slender, long, and abundant. There are still to be noted the
mediodorsal spines. Some spines, dorsal to tubercle i, seem character-
istic of most Oxyptilid pupa. (I have one of didactylus {?) without
them.) In this respect, Marasmarcha lunaedactyla is Oxyptilid. These
are absolutely median, and in a direct line between the middle of the
dorsal spines carrying iandii. On the 2nd abdominal the mediodorsal
is Just indicated ; on the 8rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th abdominal:segments
it is well developed —a finger- like process, not quite erect, but a little
sloped or curved forwards, tapering, about four times as long as it is
wide at its base, with a rough surface, and with no colour but its
contents. Its length is about 02mm. (Chapman. Described from
pupa skins, obtained by Norgate, spun up on Crepis virens, near
Brandon, from which the imagines were bred.) [In the Walsingham
collection are a larva, pupa, and imago, apparently of the s same
species, all dated July, Granada, and labelled distans, with a “?.’’ The
moth is certainly very close to distans, I find it difticull to say
precisely wherein they differ. The pupa, however, is free from all
processes and horns, and has well-developed hairs. It is, therefore,
exactly of the type of Buckleria paludum. Another very similar

464 BRITISH, LEPIDOPTERA.

moth from Tangier has a nearly identical pupa, which is, however,
deep black, and very solid-looking. This does not prevent them being
the same species. The Granada insect is certainly laetus (Chapman). |

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—The species appears to be double-brooded
throughout most of its range, although, probably, in the higher moun-
tainsit is only single-brooded. In England, itis generally said to oceurin
late May and early June, and again in July and August, but we have taken
it, in different years, apparently continuously from June to August, at
Deal, and Warren says that, at Tuddenham, it is on the wing in June
and August, but whether as a succession of emergences, or two distinct
broods, he would not like to say. The fact that it is double-brooded,
however, appears certain, for Hering says that it appears in the
beginning of June, that the larve of the next generation are to be taken
at the end of June and beginning of July in the Park of Hohenkrug, that
these pupate in due course, and the imagines of the second brood emerge
in about ten days. In Switzerland, Zeller found the insect at Bergin,
from June 28th throughout July 1871, 18738, 1875. In Pomerania it
occurs in May-June, and againin August (Paul and Pl6tz); end of May to
mid-June, and again in early August, in the Salzthal district (Rossler);
the same periods, May-June and then August, are given for Branden-
burg (Pfitzner), for Saxon Upper Lusatia (Schutze), etc.; whilst June
is given for the lowlands of Silesia (but a single specimen in early July,
at Oswitz) (Wocke), and June alone is noted for Baden (Meess and
Spuler). Mann took it in June on the pastures near Spalato, in
Dalmatia. Rebel records it from Radobolje, in Bosnia, on July
19th, 1898, from Lastva, on August 20th, 1908; he also
captured an example on the Calvarienberge near Bozen, on July 28th,
1892, and Frey notes it in early August on the Alp Murailg, near
Samaden, at a height of 6772ft. The earliest dates we have are
April 28th, 1905, at Hyeres, May 4th, 1905, at Draguignan (Tutt)
(the former the same date, April 28th, but in 1870, that Blackmore
records Jlaetus as having occurred in northwest Morocco),
and May 29th, 1869, at Msseritz (Zeller). In the Baltic
Provinces it has been taken in July, at Dubbeln (Teich). In
Roumania it occurs in June (Caradja). In France, in May, and again
in August in dept. Sadne-et-Loire (Constant) ; whilst we found it
flying fairly freely on the morning of August Ist, 1897, near St.
Michel-de-Maurienne, in the Dauphiny Alps, and saw other specimens
daily between then and the 5th (Tutt); Sand notes it as occurring
in July on Mont Dore. In Belgium, the early brood does not appear
to have been noted, but the second brood occurred on July 24th, 1901,
and was very abundant at the end of July, 1902, at Coq-sur-Mer
(Crombrugghe). On the other hand, only the spring brood has been
noted around Brussa, specimens having been taken in May (Mann).
BritisH REcorDs.— First brood: June 4th, 1870, June 138th-30th,
1871, at Brandon (Barrett); June 18th, 1885, at Brandon, abundant
June 19th-22nd, 1885, and in profusion June, 1886, at Tuddenham
(Warren); June 8th, 1889, between Dover and St. Margaret’s Bay
(Purdey); June 16th, 1898, near Tuddenham (N.C. Rothschild); June 2nd,
1897, at Tuddenham (Burrows). Doubtful first or second brood: Hight
examples on July 4th, 1885; July 9th, 1887; June 29th, 1888;
July 6th, 1889; July 7th, 1891, on the Deal sandhills (Tutt). Second
brood: Late July, 1868, near Thetford (Walsingham); early August,
1871, at Brandon (Barrett); July 26th, 1878, near Brandon (Bower);

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS. 465

last week in July, 1881, in north Devon (South) ; very abundant and
in fine condition in early August, 1884, at Tuddenham (Meek); in
profusion in August, 1886, at Tuddenham (Warren); July 18th,
1889, at the Sandwich end of the Deal sandhills (Purdey); rather
abundant from mid-July onwards, 1889, at Dover (Webb) ; July 18th,
1891, a single specimen at Tuddenham (Tutt); August 13th, 1891, at
Tuddenham (Porritt); July (end) to mid-August, at Thetford (Hare).

Hasirs.— Walking over the short-herbaged waste lands at Tudden-
ham, one may, in the daytime, occasionally put up a specimen of this
species on a fine still afternoon, but we have never noticed having
done so on the sandhills of Deal and Sandwich, although just at dusk
it flies naturally, with a gentle movement, at some little height above
the herbage, often for some distance before taking rest again, the
flight continuing, apparently, until it is quite dark. Barrett says that,
at sunset, it flies very quietly in its favoured haunts, but is quite easily
disturbed, and induced to flit a short distance, in the afternoon
especially in hot weather ; he observed it once flying in the late after-
noon at Brandon. Meek notes it as flying just before dusk at
Tuddenham, so abundantly on one evening in early August, 1884,
that he captured some 40 specimens; whilst Bower observed it flying
in the afternoon near Brandon. At Stanford, near Merton, the imagines
frequent Picris hieracioides (Durrant). At Tuddenham, Warren
observed that it seemed to affect bushes of broom, which, however, it
possibly only haunted for shelter. Abroad, however, the little experi-
ence we have had with the insect makes us look on it as one rather
easily disturbed by day. At Hyéres, whilst collecting small things, we
disturbed a specimen on April 28th, 1905, from among the long herbage
on the slopes at the back of the castle, in the early morning sunshine,
between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m.; it flew a short distance and settled on a
erass-culm, flying again a little farther, on two or three occasions, as
we approached it, until, at last, we netted it; a few days afterwards a
specimen was observed at Draguignan, under almost exactly the same
conditions. A long search in both*places failed to disclose more. At
St. Michel-de-Maurienne, the species was found under almost identical
conditions, during the first few days of August, 1897; the imagines were
disturbed in the full sunshine, in the morning, soon after 9 a.m., and
were captured as they flitted from stem to stem of the short herbage
on a rather sparsely grass-covered piece of waste ground by the road-
side; some seven or eight examples were thus captured in about a
quarter-of-an-hour. In Brandenbure, Hesse, and Baden, near Ueber-
lingen, it is reported as occurring among Ononis spinosa, possibly,
however, only seeking this plant for shelter.

Hasirat.—A series of shght hollows, sheltered by a range of low sand-
hills, about 100 yards from the sea, roughly overgrown with marram grass,
but thickly carpeted beneath with Ononis, Thymus, Hieracium, Crepis,and
other plants, formed the favoured haunt of this species on the sandhills
lying between Sandwich and the sea. It was also the home of Acidalia
ochrata, and many other local lepidoptera, which, abundant in this
restricted area, were to be found more sparingly over a considerable
area around. Sorhagen also notes that, in Brandenburg, it occurs in
sandy spots, among Ononis spinosa, and Rossler in a deserted sandpit
near Biebrich, about O. spinosa, so that it would appear to love an
arenaceous soil, and to thrive thereon. Crombrugghe writes that, on
the Belgian coast, opposite our own famous “Breck’’ district, at

466 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Coq-sur-Mer, the insect formerly abounded on the sand-dunes by the
sea, but its abundance has been much decreased by ‘improvements ”’
during the last few years. Of its occurrence in East Anglia, Barrett
says: ‘It has been found all over the sandy ‘Breck’ region from
Thetford to Brandon, and extends from it to some of the more chalky
portions of Norfolk and Suffolk. . . . The insect frequents open places
among low herbage and abundant wild-flowers, on the lower slopes of
chalk and limestone hills, but is more abundant on the ‘Breck’ sands,
where it hides in the daytime among lucerne, yarrow, Hypochaeris
maculata, and all manner of low-growing plants.” Webb says that, at
Dover, in 1889, it was particularly attached to one hill-slope, where
Hieracium pilosella grows; and South observes that, in North Devon-
shire, 1t was found in a lane, leading down to the shores of Woody Bay,
near Lynmouth, whilst Warren records that, at Tuddenham, its chief
haunt was on rough ground sheltered by broom bushes, among which
the imagines were more common than elsewhere, mainly, one supposes,
because they obtained from them better shelter when on the wing; at
Brandon, he notes that he has seen the insect on the allotment grounds,
and Rothschild found it on rough ground by the roadside at Tuddenham.
But it is not confined to the sea-coast on the continent, and Zeller
observes that he obtained it freely in a “ fallow” field near a spot
carpeted with Hieracium pilosella in the neighbourhood of Meseritz, and
Hering says that it also occurs in the park of Hohenkrug, the larve on
flowers of Crepis tectorwn. In Brandenburg, as already noted, the species
flies on the sandhills among Ononis spinosa, Hieracium, etc. (Sorhagen).
Zeller says (Stett. Ent. Ztg., 1878, p. 168) that the species occurs from
June 28th, throughout July, at Rugnux, and is not rareamongst small
fir-plantations, the specimens generally larger than in north Germany.
Our knowledge of the localities of this species outside Britain is limited.
We met with a single example on the steep flowery slopes behind the
castle at Hyéres, in late April, 1905, where one suspects it would be
much commoner a little later, and a second example on May 4th at
Draguignan, in a little butterfly-corner on the Grasse Road, on a little
patch of grass and wild flowers, just inside a garden that swarmed
with butterflies—Leptidia duponcheli, L. sinapis, Melitaea aurinia,
M. cinvia, M. phoebe, and some 20 to 80 other species. At St.
Michel-de-Maurienne, directly behind the village, on the road to
Valloire, on a dry sandy bank, sparsely covered with grass and wild
flowers, chiefly Compositae, the species was not at all uncommon in
August, 1897. It seems to be from the records, although our experi-
ence does not run in this direction, distinctly a mountain species in central
Europe, having been taken at high elevations on the Stelvio (Kppels-
heim), the Albula (Zeller), and up to nearly 7000ft. on the Alp Muraigl,
near Samaden (Frey), as well as at Macugnaga (Chapman). [Rebel
says that, in Bosnia and Hercegovina, it is only recorded in the second,
smaller, paler generation, laetus, near Radobolje, July 19th, 1898
(Rebel), and Lastva, August 20th, 1903) (Paganetti-Hummler). One
wonders whether this is the true laetus, or only a form of distans.| Mann
notes it as occurring on the mountain-slopes near Brussa, and the
pastures near Spalato, in Dalmatia; whilst Caradja records it as being
found, in June, on hillsides and in young copses near Tultscha, in
Roumania.

BrITIsH LOCALITIES.—Hxceedingly local. Dzyon: north Devon—Lyn-

CROMBRUGGHIA DISTANS. 467

mouth district (South). Dorser*: Isle of Purbeck—Studland, one specimen
(Digby). Kenr: Sandwich and Deal sandhills (Tutt), Dover (Webb), Dover to
St. Margaret’s Bay (Purdey), Folkestone (Adkin). Norroux: Thetford, Stanford,
near Merton (Walsingham), near King’s Lynn (Atmore). Surrourx: Brandon
(Bower), Tuddenham (Warren), Barnham (Norgate), Elveden (Williams). '
Distrisution.—Hurope, central and south, Asia Minor, Canaries

(Staudinger and Rebel). Asta: Asia Minor—Macri, Kellemisch, (Loew
teste Zeller), Kerasdere, Tschirtschirthal (Staudinger), Amasia, Brussa (Mann).
Austro-HuncGary: Bohemia (Nickerl), Tyrol—in the subalpine region to 7500ft.
—Stanser-Joch, Franzenshohe (Heller), Taufer alps (Weiler), Calvarienberg, near
Bozen (Rebel), Stelvio (Wocke), Carniola—Nanos, Dalmatia—near Spalato, Fiume
(Mann), Carinthia (Zeller), Slavonia (Rebel). Brtcrum: coast dunes—Coq-sur-Mer
(Crombrugghe). Bosnta anp Hercecovina: Radobolje (Rebel), Lastva (Paganetti-
Hummler). Bunearta: Varna (Haberhauer). Corsica (Marshall). France: Aube
(Jourdheuille), Saone-et-Loire (Constant), Dauphiny Alps—St. Michel-de-Maurienne,
Var—Hyeres, Draguignan (Tutt), Auvergne—Mont Dore (Sand). Germany: fairly
distributed in north Germany, in southern Germany rarely noticed (Hofmann), Pome-
-Yania, not rare—near Voigtsdorf(Paul and Plétz), Hohenkrug (Hering), Eckerberg,
Stettin-Schrey (Bittner), Garz(Hofmann), Hesse—near Biebrich, Hessler, at theend
ofthe Salzthal, Nassau— Wiesbaden (Rossler), Brandenburg—near Spandau, Potsdam
(Hinneberg) ,Saatwinkel,nearSpandau(Stange), Posen—near Meseritz( Zeller), Silesia,
rare—near Schwoitsch,Glogau (Zeller), Breslau, Oswitz (Wocke), Kingdom of Saxony
—Saxon UpperLusatia(Schiitze) ,Baden—nearUeberlingen,Alsace(Meessand Spuler).
GREECE (teste Rebel). Iraty: Piedmont—Macugnaga (Chapman), Sicily—Vallecorta,
Syracuse (Zeller), the Madonie mountains (Mina-Palumbo), Lombardy—Alzate
(Turati). NetHernanps: coast dunes (Crombrugghe), Zeeland—Domburg (Lycklama
teste Snellen), south Holland, north Holland, Gelderland—Arnhem (Snellen).
Roumanta: Dobrudscha, near Tultscha (Caradja). Russia: Baltic Provinces—
Dubbeln (Teich). Swrrzertanp: local—Upper Engadine—Alp Muraigl, 6772¢t.,
near Samaden (Frey), the Albula, Bergiin (Zeller), on the Maienwand (Kolb).

Tribe: CappERIIDtI.

The imaginal characters of this tribe have already been worked
out by Hofmann, and the larval and pupal characters by Chapman.
Besides the characteristic difference in the genital organs, as pointed
out by Hofmann (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 99), he gives the following
grouping of the three species at present referred hereto (op. cit., p. 102):

Palpi slender, second joint ascending, third rather drooping (therefore, as a
whole, waved); second joint with appressed scales, at the apex with few, or usually
no, projecting scales; third joint very slender, shorter than the second.

The fringes of the outer margins of the lower lobe with a white
basal line .. is) ar ae se .. didactylus, L.
B. The fringes of the outer margin of the lower lobe with a white dash
at the anal angle.
1. The black scaling of the third feather extended, interrupted
just before the apex, on both sides, by white scales.

ce ee eae ee ee ee ee eee

* ««In the ‘ Lepidoptera of the Isle of Purbeck’ (Proc. Dors. N. H. and A. F.
Club, vi., 176) the Rev. C. R. Digby, who assisted me with it, entered the following
record: ‘ Pterophorus laetus, Z., Studland; one specimen taken in a wet meadow
was pronounced by Mr. H. T’. Stainton to be a pale individual of this species. The
specimen is now in the cabinet of Mr. J. B. Hodgkinson, of Preston.’ The indi-
vidual in question was taken, about 1882, by the Rev. C. R. Digby, who shortly
afterwards gave itto Mr. J.B. Hodgkinson. At the time of the sale of the ‘ Hodg-
kinson collection,’ I failed to find, either in the cabinet or among the duplicates,
any specimen that seemed likely to be the Purbeck one, nor was any labelled as
such (labels were conspicuous by their absence!). Mr. Digby failed to find it
among the series of duplicate laetus that I secured and submitted to him. No
other example of distans, or var. laetus, has been taken in Dorset, but in view of the
improbability of Stainton mistaking any other species for var. laetus, and of the
fact that distans has been recorded (Meyrick’s Handbook, ete.) as occurring from
‘Kent to Devon . . . . ,’ there seems no reason to question Stainton’s
identification. The ‘ wet meadow’ is but a short distance from a stretch of coast
sandhills such as distans might inhabit, though hitherto it has been sought there
in vain ’’ (Bankes).

468 | BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

a. With a broad white dash at the anal angle of the lower
lobe 4 .. teucrii, Greening.
b. With a very narrow white dash at the anal angle of the
lower lobe . .. var. celeusi, Frey.
2. The black scaling of the third feather compressed, without any

white interruption before the apex .. Jleonuri, Stange.
The main differences, however, are exhibited in the larval and pupal
stages. In the larva there are more or less well-developed tubercular
warts of almost Arctiid type, whilst the pupa also is exceedingly well
supplied with hairs. The general characters of the Capperiids has
already been dealt with at length (antea, pp. 409-411). The following
details, however, may here be noted. Comparing the larve of the
Oxyptilids (as exemplified by parvidactyla) with those of the Capperiids

(as represented by heterodactyla), Chapman notes as follows:

1. Oxypriuus (parvidactyla): Quite internal feeder, living in heart of food-
plant, eating central bud, and boring down to root. Larva looks bare and fleshy ;
has no secondary hairs*; the prothoracic plate has only the normal six primary
hairs; posterior thoracic dorsal tubercles absent on mesothorax; each tubercle
carries a single seta; iand ii are near, but quite separate; skin-points sharply
pointed ; hooks of prolegs small, two or three present (rarely one or four) ; pale
spot (and others) on prothoracic plate.

2. Capprrta (heterodactyla): External feeder. Larva hairy; abundant
secondary hairs, broad at tips; prothoracic plate with abundant secondary hairs
obscuring the six usual primaries. which are, however, present; posterior thoracic
dorsal tubercles present on mesothorax ; each tubercle a many-haired wart; i and
ii fused into one large wart; skin-points blunt; hooks of prolegs well-developed,
four or five hooks ; no spot on prothoracic plate.

He also notes (tn litt.) the connection of the pupa of didactylus, one of
the species referred to this group, with those of various allied groups.
He observes that most of the few Oxyptilid pupe he has examined agree
with those of the Marasmarchids and Amblyptiliids in possessing the
spinous development of the more or less conjoined tubercles i and ii.
A pupa of didactylus presents nothing very decided to mark it off
strongly from Amblyptilia. The most definite point, that distinguishes
an Oxyptilid pupa from Amblyptilid and Marasmarchid pupe, is that
the halbert-shaped spine of the 8rd abdominal segment, has, in the two
last-named, its front spine developed, wrinkled, twisted, and curved, so as
to have well-deserved the description of haibert-shaped, whilst, in those of
the Oxyptilines, this front spine, though usually larger than any of the
others, is fairly simple, smooth, and straight. In the Marasmarchid pupa,
and in those of some Oxyptilids, are other processes that occur in noother
‘‘plume’’ pups in which we have looked for them (although certain
secondary hairs occupy a similar situation in Alucita pentadactyla, etc.).
These are spines, or prominences, on a transverse ridge connecting the
dorsal spines, and are, therefore, internal (or dorsad) to these spines ;
of these there is a dorsal or central one, and an outer or paired one,
i.e., one, on each side, halfway between the dorsal ne and the i+11
spines. The Amblyptiliid pupa shows no traces of these spines, but, in
the Marasmarchid pupa, both the median and outer set are developed.
There is another difference between the Oxyptilid pupe and those of
the other two groups, viz., that, in them, the hair, marking tubercle i,
arises well up on the spine, leaving one in no doubt that the spine is a
development of the base of the tubercle, but, in the Oxyptilid pupe, the
hair arises from the base of the spines, so that one might assert that

* British larve show no secondary hairs; a larva from south France (Ste.
Maxime), that produced an imago quite inseparable from O. parvidactyla, had a.
good many secondary skin-hairs, but none on the tubercles (Chapman).

469

‘aouad..ourd [Urred 19978 Wood0d ojuL vdnd SarMeip TIM IOF syooy oyvur 0} padojoaap ore Osa T, y

a a a nnn OE

TOysvUr

-910 [BULION LOJSVULIAD [CVULION

LIYSCVULITO ['BULIO NT

poxooy Aypavy 104 |
“SUULIIO [VUIUNIO} JO salvy | Su0I14s UOT |
4: JUOULSAS [VUTULOpgR YG | [VUrUMIoy { 104 suorjiod
JO Sassoq [wnxas Aq pouLIoF | -SvU1d19 0} UOT] [BVUTULIAy pu [eayuaAs

I9JSVULI10 [CULO NY SYOOT, O[Q VI TVULOL OAT, -10d [BIJUDA ON ‘1O4SBULAIO [VULIO Ny

autds viyxo svy
Tm ‘yuesoid uvipout
‘syu0lISes oUOS UO
a[qnop urtpetqns

seurds
[VSIOPOTpout ON

SPAVAM IVY
ouo puv spIRAIOF
auo ‘Tapue[s puv suoy
yours ove ‘ssaooad
pytq v@ opis yora uo
‘aurds uvipeurqng

quosqv aurds [ws.1op
-OIpoeut ynq ‘ospr4
OSADASUVAY JO DOV,

s[rulmopqe
_ ssado01d UL-pig uo ssavoaid
sso001d [vsIoporpout ON |[VS1Opotpout ON) [VSLOporpaul 4A0yg

-
|
|

CAPPERIIDI.

sasepuoddy
uo sourds ‘Suoy Sarre PT

SITVY
suoy apdurg

SPIVAL
‘gyquaasat 10 ‘ATVI
a1v sautds [vsi1oq

sourds
[esiop ON

sasupuoddv uo
‘saurds sosvpuadde uo sarey
TOYYLA LO ‘SITVET SUOT SILVA O}VAIOPOU SITVFT D}VIIPOULSIIVT | OU “Huo sAvyPT
S[VUTUL
-Opqv Up pur pag SPAVAMIOF yuTOd ayy
uo ourds paryy v | GTM yooy vse pedoyeaop ysofuoy or} [eurar
JO soonty forqnop | ‘speurutopqe qIS-qIF ULOIT soutds -opqe pig ‘afqnop
ejdiyjnur sauids pusi0g sourds [Vsiocy [uO pur ‘ajSuts sourdg [vstop ON sourds [vsaoq

“WAGOATV “VLOITHOIG

“VIAL VY COUd.LA FL

“VIRLOVAIC “WIXDOVAIAY “SO.LY'T “SNYVLSIG

A a SE S-SSRS SSS SS YSSS S.T R C R

470 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

the spines are extra growths interpolated between tubercles i and il.
It must, however, be noted that, in some Oxyptilid pupe, of which
that of Oxyptilus parvidactyla is a good example, the pupa has the
spines obsolescent; in 0. parvidactyla they exist on some posterior
segments; in O. laetus, however, they are quite wanting. On the pre-
ceding page we add a table showing the more marked Oxyptilid pupal
characters in those species whose pupe are available.

Genus: Capprria, Tutt.

Synonymy.—Genus: Capperia, Tutt, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,” xvii., p. 37 (1905).
Alucita, Miill., ‘‘ Faun. Ins. Frid.,’’ p. 59 (1764); De Vill., ‘‘ Linn. Ent. Faun.
Suec.,’’ ii., p. 535 (1789); Haw., ‘‘Lep. Brit.,’’ p. 479 (1811). Pterophorus,
Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef. Comip.,”’ p. 409 (1819); Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,”’ fo. 161 \(1827);
Wood, ‘‘ Ind. Ent.,’’ 1st ed., p. 238, pl. li., fig. 1651 (worn) (1839); [Dup., ‘‘ Cat.
Méth.,”’ p. 382 (1844);] Sta., ‘‘ Sys. Cat.,”’ p. 13 (1849); ‘‘Man.,”’ ii., p. 441
(1859); Dbldy., ‘‘ Zool. Syn. List,’’ 2nd ed., p. 36 (1859); Greeng., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,’’ iv., pp. 16, 39-40 (1867); Gregs., ‘‘Ent.,’’ iii.,”’ p. 298 (1867); Jord.,
‘*Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p. 14 (1869); Gregs., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 115 (1869);
Mason, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’”’ xxv., p. 162 (1888); Porrt., ‘‘ Buckler’s Larve,”’ ix.,
p. 354, pl. 163, fig. 7 (1901). Amblyptilia, Stphs., ‘Ill. Brit. Ent. Haust.,”’ iv.,
p. 377 (1834). Oxyptilus, Jord., ‘‘Knt. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 122 (1869); Gregs.,
‘* Eint.,’’ iv., p. 305 (1869); Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,’’ p. 143 (1870); Barr., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,”’ viii., p. 155 (1871); South, ‘‘ Enf.,’’ xvi., p. 73, pl. i, figs. Iol@i(aissa)e
Leech, ‘‘ Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 57, pl. xvii., fig. 2 (1886); South, ‘*Ent.,”’ xxii., pp. 34,
102 (1889); Briggs, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xxii., pp. 75, 139 (1889); Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,” x.,
p. 164 (1889); Barrt., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ xxv., p. 431 (1889); Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,”
i., p. 205 (1891); ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,”? p. 71 (1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,”’ ete., p. 432
(1895); Hofm., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ p. 116 (1895); Crombr., ‘‘ Rév. Soc. Ent.
Nam.,’’ iv., p. 447 (1900) ; Staud. and Reb., ‘‘ Cat.,’”’ 3rd ed., p. 71 (1901) ; Barr.,
‘‘Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 370, pl. 415, figs. 3-3b (1904).

The genus Capperia was first named in the Ent. Rec., xvil., p. 37,
when heterodactyla was cited as the type. It is one of the most highly
specialised of the genera in the Oxyptilid group, if not in the whole
of the “‘plume”’ fauna. The chief characters have been already noted,
and are to be summarised as—

Imaco: Palpi slender, second joint ascending with appressed scales, the third
joint very slender and shorter than the second, the fringes of the outer margin of the
second lobe with a white dash at the anal angle. The genitalia have the 9th and
10th dorsal plates slender, the latter being small, pointed, and hidden on the 9th
dorsal plate; the 9th ventral plate very strongly developed, as long as the prensors,
convex below, concave above, split terminally in two tips or points; the prensors
very long, narrow, hollow inside, very strongly furnished with bristles without
appendages; the penis is strongly bent downwards before and behind, terminating
in two strong points, a shorter and longer.

Larva: Prothoracic plate with many secondary hairs, but there is no difficulty in
distinguishing the usual six sete on each side. Body deeply segmented ; tubercles,
many-haired warts with primary and secondary hairs; abdomen, i+ ii forming a
large round wart, with two primary hairs; iii also a large wart with one primary
hair; iv+v also one wart, with two primaries, that representing v higher than the
other; vi has one primary hair; vii three primary hairs; behind the spiracle,
towards back of segment, two accessory warts; skin thickly shagreened with blunt
skin-points ; many minute scattered secondary hairs, broad at tips; hooks of prolegs
well developed,

Pupa: Hairy pupa—dorsal spines multiple; hairs on appendages; submedian
spines on each side, each forming a bifid process of which each branch is long and
slender, one directed forwards, the other backwards; good cremaster.

Of the two species placed by Hofmann (Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 116)
in this group, he notes that ‘‘heterodactyla is to be distinguished
from leonurt by the darker coloration of the latter, and by the scale-
tuft of the third plumule, in which tbe isolated group of scales at the

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 471

apex of this plumule is absent, but more certainly by the genital
appendages, i.e., the differently-shaped penis. From all the remaining
Oxyptiline species it is to be separated easily by the formation of the
palpi.’”’” The species in this genus are particularly characterised by
the remarkably hairy larve and pups; in the abundant larval armature,
the hairy warts remind one almost of the specialisation to be seen in
Arctiids, and other highly-developed larval wart-structures. Chapman
observes that preserved larvee and pupe of Capperia leonuri
received from Staudinger cannot be distinguished from those of
CU. heterodactyla.
CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA, Muller.

Synonymy.—Species: Heterodactyla, Miill., ‘‘ Faun. Ins. Frid.,”’ p. 59 (1764);
de Vill. ‘Linn. Ent. Faun. Suec.,’’ ii., p. 535 (1789); Haw., ‘‘ Lep, Brit.,’’ p.
moll) s Cutt, “Kt. Rec.,” i: p. 94 (1890); “Brit. Nat.,” 1., p-
205 (1891); ‘‘ Pier. Brit.,”’ p. 71 (1895). Heterodactylus, Sam., ‘‘ Ent. Usef.
Comp.,” p. 409 (1819); Stphs., ‘‘ Sys. Cat. Brit. Ins.,’’ 2nd ed., p. 231 (1856) ;
‘‘Tilus. Brit. Ent. Haust.,’’ iv., p. 377 (1834) ; Wood, ‘‘ Ind. Ent.,”’ Ist ed., p. 283—:
pl. li., fig. 1651 (worn) (1839); Mason, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,” xxv., p. 162 (1888) ;
South, ‘‘ Entom.,”’ xxii., p. 1U2 (1889); Barrt., ‘‘Hnt Mo. Mag.,”’ xxv., p. 431
(1889); Crombr., ‘‘ Rev. Soc. Ent. Nam.,”’ iv., p. 47 (1900); ‘‘Ann. Ent. Soc. Belg.,”’
xlv., p. 103 (1901). [Didactylus, Curt., ‘‘ Brit. Ent.,’’ fo. 161 (1827); Stphs.,
‘*‘Tilus. Haust.,’’ iv., p. 377, in part (1834).! Hieracii, Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Méth.,’’ p.
382 (1845); Sta., ‘Sys. Cat.,’’ p. 13 (1849); ‘‘ Man.,’’ ii., p. 441 (1859) ; Dbldy.,
“Zool. Syn. list,’’ 2nd ed.,-p. 36 (1859); Gregs., ‘‘ Ent.,”’ iii., pp. 298-9 (1867);
Greening, ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ iv., pp. 16, 39-40 (1867); Tutt, ‘* Pter. Brit.,’’ p.
69, in part (1895); Porr., ‘‘ Buckl. Larv.,” ix., p. 354, pl. 163, fig. 7 (1901); Barr.,
‘‘Lep. Brit. Isles,”’ p. 365, in part (1904). Teucrii, Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi.,
pp. 14, 122 (1869); ‘‘ Ent. Ann.,”’ p. 143 (1870); Buckl. and Barrt., ‘‘ Ent. Mo.
Mag.,”’ vili., p. 155 (1871); Réss., ‘‘ Schppfi.,’”’ p. 222 (1881); South, ‘‘ Ent.,”’ xvi.,
Pao. pl. i, fies. 1-1c (1883) ; Leech, *‘ Brit. Pyr.,’’ p. 57, pl. xvii., fig. 2 (1886) ;
South, ‘‘Ent.,”’ xxii., p. 34 (1889); Briggs, ‘‘ Ent.,’’ xxii., p. 139 (1889); Tutt,
‘Young Nat.,’”’ x., p. 164 (1889); Hofm., ‘‘ Die Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ p. 116, pl. i.
(1895); Meyr., ‘‘ Handbook,”’ etc., p. 432 (1895); Staud. and Reb., ‘‘Cat.,’’ 3rd
ed., p. 71 (1901); Barr., ‘‘Lep. Brit. Isles,’’ ix., p. 370, pl. 415, figs. 3-3b (1904).
Britanniodactyla, Gregs., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,”’ vi., p, 115 (1869); ‘‘Ent.,’’ iv., p.
305 (1869). Hetrodactylus, South, ‘‘ Ent.,”’ xxii., p. 34 (1889). [Bankes writes
that the two examples of ‘‘ britanniodactylus, bred, Gregson,’’ in the Mason coll.,
were heterodactyla, Mill., and that the specimen of ‘‘ heterodactyla,’’ Haw.,
bearing Haworth’s MS. label, was correctly identified by Mason and Barrett with
teucriit, Greening (Ent. Mo. Mag., xxv., p. 162 (1888). ]

ORIGINAL DESCcRIPTION.— Phalaena Alucita heterodactyla, alis
patentibus fissis, nigris, maculis albis, anticis bifidis; posticis
tripartitis. In horto (Muller, Fauna Insectorum Friedrichsdailina,
p- 59).

Imaco.— Forewings of a deep chocolate-brown, a white longitudinal
discal streak, a white blotch at end of cleft surrounding discal lunule ;
two white transverse lobal lines, the inner wide on upper, but more
or less obsolete on lower, lobe; the outer finer, apparently angulated on
upper lobe, where it extends into fringe, and usually distinct on lower
lobe; the costa, from outer lobal line to apex, narrowly white; fringes
of the ground colour, with two white dashes on outer margin towards
apex, and two more white dashes in cleft, representing extensions of
transverse lines in upper lobes, a small white dash at apex of lower
lobe, and a larger white patch in enclosed portion; the fringes of inner
margin of wing pale grey, with two black dashes, one just before, and
one beyond, the middle. Hindwings almost of ground colour of fore-
wings, but rather greyer; fringes slightly paler, a shiny apical patch in
those of 1st and 2nd plumules ; the 8rd plumule with black scale-patch

472 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

towards apex, well-developed on both sides of shaft; lower margin and
apex of plumule distinctly snowy-white; two or three black scales at apex,
and a few tiny isolated ones between patch and base.

SEXUAL DIMORPHISM.—The few 9s we have in our collection appear
to be slightly smaller than the gs, and Bankes notices the same
slight difference in average size among the many bred specimens of
both sexes in his lengthy series.

Variation.—Barrett, like Haworth, notes the particularly dark
coloration of this species. The former calls it black-brown, abundantly
dusted with golden-brown. To the naked eye it certainly looks the
darkest of our British Oxyptilids, but, under a lens, the normal colora-
tion in Britain is almost identical with that of OU. parvidactyla, a deep
rich brown, to which the term “ chocolate-brown ”’ is better applied
than to any other British species; nor does the similarity of the
imagines of these two species end here, for the markings are almost
identical; the slight curvature of the upper lobal lines, seen in
parvidactyla, however, is apparently absent, and the outer lobal line
is much more distinctly marked on the lower lobe in heterodactyla,
whilst, in the latter, also, the scale-tuft of the 8rd plumule of the
hindwing is more marked on the upperside of the shaft than in
parvidactyla ; yet the remarkable fact remains that the two British
Oxyptilids that are most unlike in their larval and pupal stages, are
most like superficially in the imaginal, except, of course, in size, and
here again they are at the two extremes, as the largest and smallest
of the Oxyptili, excluding the Buckleriids. There is no doubt that
the two ‘“ Coverdale’”’ ieracit (see Brit. Pter., p. 69) belong here.
They are somewhat narrower in the forewings than usual, due probably
to lessened fringe-scaling, and, perhaps, a trifle worn, and the ground
colour is a trifle paler. In a series of some 26 examples, from
Clevedon, King’s Lynn, Canterbury, and Purbeck, little variation is
exhibited. There is a slight difference in the intensity and brightness
of the ground colour (some are particularly shiny in appearance), and
the Canterbury, and some of the Purbeck, examples are, perhaps, a
shade paler (? greyer) than the others; a few examples (two from
Clevedon, two from Purbeck, one from Canterbury) without white
scaling in the discal area (the pale space, however, is marked), the
tendency to obsolescence of the inner lobal line in the Clevedon and
King’s Lynn examples (one of the Clevedon, and three of the Purbeck
examples have this specially strongly marked), and the occasional
obsolescence of the lower lobal half of the outer line (very noticeable in
one Clevedon and one Purbeck example), about cover the range of
variation. The most variegated specimen, with all the white markings
specially strongly developed, comes from Clevedon. The most
obsoletely-marked and uniformly-tinted specimens, with only the upper
halves of the lobal lines, of all the white markings, at all distinctly
outlined, is from Purbeck. Two forms have been described as distinct
species from German examples, but Hofmann says that their genitalia
are identical with those of heterodactyla. . These are :—

a. var. loranus, Fuchs, ‘ Stett. Ent. Zeitg.,’ p. 48 (1895); Hofm., “ Pter.
Deutsch.,” p. 117 (1895); Fuchs, ‘“‘Stett. Ent. Zeitg.,” p. 338 (1897); Staud. and
Reb., ‘“‘ Cat.,” 3rd ed., p. 71 (1901). Obscurus, Rossl.,.“‘ Cat.,” p. 163, no. 867 am
part (1881). Parvidactylus, Rossl., “ Cat.,” p. 222, no. 1123 in part (1881)—
Under obscurus, Zell., Réssler writes (Cat., p. 163): “The specimens from Lorch
and the Dennelbach Valley, near Wiesbaden, belong possibly to a distinct species.

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 473

In size they sometimes approach hieracii, but are usually smaller, and of the grey
hue of tristis, although, in other respects, they agree with obscurus, yet are distin-
guished therefrom by the black edging of all the white markings towards the body.
The scale-tuft of the 5rd plumule ‘is larger than that of obscurus, and extends on
either side.” Under the head of parvidactylus, Haw. (obscurus, Zell.), Rossler also
writes (op. cit., p. 222): ‘Two of my specimens are larger, have longer 3rd plumuies,
and have the apex of the 3rd plumule of the hindwings isolated from the large
scale-tult by white; the white transverse lines, also, of these specimens, on the
inner side are edged with black, as in Herrich- Schiiffer’s figure of marqinellus ; as
they were caught not far from Teuerium scorodonia, they may probably belong to a
new species not yet described, the larva of which was found by Schmid near
Regensburg, on Teucrium, or to the English species tewerii, which is unknown to
me in the imago state, etc.” Hence it is seen that a species of the parvidactylus
group has been known to Rossler and myself for a considerable period of time.
The best distinction from parvidactylus, to which this species is nearest related, is
given in Réssler’s Catalogue, viz., its grey colour, in which it agrees with VU. tristis.
Untortunately, this fact has been ignored, and the species has been referred to
teucrit, a species that not only occurs in England, but has been found by Reutti, and
other collectors of micro-lepidoptera, in Carlsrule and other parts of the duchy of
Baden. Comparing our insect with two Baden specimens of teucriz sent by Hering,
it is clear that they are not the same, as tewerii is not only darker than loranus, as
Bang-Haas pointed out when I sent him two for expert opinion, but shows decidedly
the red-brown tint of parvidactyla, which loranus does not show; besides, teweri is
larger. Therefore, the characters quoted as most important in Rossler’s Catalogue,
must be insisted on, viz., that loranus, with all its undeniable relationship to parvi-
dactylus, has always the normal grey colouring of tristis without the admixture of
red-brown. The transverse lobal lines are never pure white, but yellowish, so that
they do not contrast with the light ground colour of the wing, as in parvidactylus.
‘The black edging towards the hase, of which Réssler speaks, I do not see in my
specimens, so that this point is not decisive. The size, too, does not suffice for
distinction, as it varies. Un the other hand, there seems to be a biological dis-
tinction of which Réssler was not aw are, viz., that in 1893* loranus was double-
brooded, occurring first in the middle of May, and again abundantly in the middle
of August, whereas, of O. parvidactylus, 1 only found on August 18th, 1893, one ¢ ,
which had developed rapidly owing to the summer heat; the irregularity of its
development giving it a marked appearance of being dw arfed ; the August speci-
mens of loranus, on the other hand, ure in no wise inferior in size to those caught
in May. Of the range of loranus, even in the Wiesbaden district, nothing detinite

can be stated, as Réssler, in his statements already quoted, speaks only of two
examples in his collection. That Rédssler caught this species near Lorch-on-the-

thine, which is not far from me, I learned from him personally ; later he must
have had his doubts about their belonging to the same species as the specimens he
took in the Dennelbach Valley. At present it can only be said that U. loranus is
found in the Rhone Valley from Lorch downwards (Fuchs).

Hofmann (Deutsch, Pter., p. 117) says that he cannot separate
loranus from heterodactyla ; the slender palpi without rough scaling at
the apex of the 2nd joint, the broad white dash in the outer marginal
fringes of the lower lobe, and the black scale-tufts on the third
plumule, of which the dark apices are cut off like a little ‘knob from
the larger dark parts by white,’’ as mentioned by Roessler (Schuppenyt.,
p. 222), and the quite similar formation of the male genitalia,
decidedly point to its place here; the darker, more grey coloration,
and the smaller size, cannot be made the foundation of a specific
distinction. . parcidactylus, with which Fucks compares it, belongs,
on account of the formation of the palpi and male genitalia, to quite
another group. Fuchs took objection (Stett. Hut. Zty., 1897, p. 888)
to this, and complained that Hofmann was wrong in uniting doranes

* In the marvellous summer of 1893, both in Britain and Central Europe,
very many usually single-brooded species were double-brooded:

A474 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

with teucrit. He says that, in the Roeslingberg, loranus only occurs
without any transitional forms to teucrii; at the beginning of June,
1897, the insect was already on the wing, whilst many fresh specimens
were observed between the beginning of July and the 20th of the
month, amongst them a couple paired, both sexes true loranus form, in
1895.”" He adds: ‘I found at the same place afresh ? as late as
August 19th. In the Lenning, there flies, without definite transitional
forms to loranus, round Teucriwm scorodonia, the species named after this
foodplant, tewcriz; 1t occurs in the second week of June, and, compared
with loranus, is abundant, and continues till the beginning of July, never
later. In the Heimbach Valley, where I discovered loranus, and
where I have since repeatedly met it, although never so abundantly as
on the Roesling mountain, | only once, on May 31st, 1897, captured
O. teucrti, a fine g, flying round Teucriwn scorodonia. The two
insects with us have different habitats, which can only be attributed
to different foodplants, but, although I have not yet found the larva of
loranus, Lam satisfied that it does not liveon Teucrium. On the Roesling
mountain the moths are always found flying about a pretty but tiny
plant, blooming in July, that I have been unable to determine, but
which certainly is not Teucrium.” It must be confessed that Fuchs’
argument is here particularly weak, so much so that Staudinger and
Rebel have no hesitation in referring loranus to teucrii (Cat., 3rd ed.,
p- 71) with the diagnosis ‘‘ var. minor, obscurior, magis grisea. South-
west Germany.”

8. var. celeusi, Frey, ‘“Stett. Ent. Ztg.,” p. 18* (1886); Schmid, “Corr:
Regensb.,” xl., p. 200 (1887) ; Hofm., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,” p. 116, pl. i., fig. 2 (1895) ;
Meess and Spul., ‘‘ Lep. Baden,” p. 152 (1898) ; Staud. and Reb., “ Cat.,” 3rd ed.,
p- 71 (1901).—This stands, according to Hoffmann, next to obsewrus, Z., on account
of the white longitudinal dash in the outer marginal fringes of the lower lobe, and
of the nearly equal length of the black scaling on each side of the apex of the third
plumule of the hindwing; it is, however, usually larger, and of a darker, more coffee-
or yellow-brown, ground colour, while obscurus, Z., has a red-brown coloration,
which, in viewing a number of specimens, very easily catches the eye. The white
markings on both lobes of the forewings are broader and more shining than in
obscurus, Z., also the dise of the wing carries several white dots, which are wanting
in the latter, so that var. celewsi appears much more variegated. ‘The palpi in var.
celeusi are, in 18 specimens bred here and quite perfect, more slender and rounder,
mostly somewhat curved upwards with shghtly drooping terminal joints ; the 2nd
joint is outwardly brown with two, more or less large, white spots, and has no
porrected tuft of hairs at the extremity ; the 3rd joint is white, with a pair of fine
brown spots, or brown with white spots ; in several specimens the palpi, outwardly,
are almost entirely white. On the inner side the palpi are marked just as on the

==

* The pilosellae-hieracit group is one of the most difficult amongst the plumes,
and one suspects that too many species have been described therein. This doubt
was impressed on me when [ read, in Stainton’s Hnt. Annual for 1870, the description
of a new species, teuecrit (Greening), Jordan. This doubt was increased when I
received from Zeller two specimens of this new English species (probably from
Jordan). The lJarve of this, I learned from Regensburg, had been reared on
Teucrium scorodonia. A few years ago, Schmid found a larva on Teueriwm
chamaedrys, near Kelheim, that produced an Ozxyptilus, which the discoverer,
thinking he had a new species, called O. celeusi. As a result of many years’
collecting | possess a very large number of specimens belonging to the pilosellae-
hieracit group from different countries, and I have become very doubtlul as at the
specific difference of hieracit and pilosellae. O. teuerii, Jord., and O. celewsi, I
unhesitatingly conclude to be dark forms of hieracii ; two specimens, received years ©
ago from Glitz, of Hanover, completely agree with the specimens from England
and Kelheim, etc. (Frey).

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 475

outside. Obscurus, Z., has, on the other hand, broader, laterally compressed, palpi,
usually directed forwards; the 2nd joint terminates in a pointed tuft of hairs, which
only appears absent when the 3rd joint is somewhat drooping, and is thereby
pressed up against the tuft of hair. The palpi are white at the base, the 2nd
joint outwardly brown with a white border above and below, the 3rd joint, which
is very short, is quite brown; on the inner side, the palpi are marked as on the
outer side, only some examples have the 2nd joint inwardly white with brown
borders. Hieracii, Z., to which species Frey (Stett. Ent. Zeitg., 1886, p. 18) seems
inclined to refer var. celewsi as a dark form, may be very easily distinguished
from var. celeust by the want of the white longitudinal dash in the outer marginal
fringes of the lower lobe, and by the short black scales on the costa of the third
plumule of the hindwing. This plume, ill-recognised in former years [in the
Lepidopteren-F'auna der Iegensburger Umgegend, by O. Hofmann and Dr. Herrich-
Schaffer, Fortsetzung, 1855, p. 148, marginellus, Z., is brought forward and
described as hardly specifically different from obseurus, Z.], flies everywhere, in
June, in our Donaubergen, also in Kelheim, where I first found the larva on the
Brannt, in May, 1879, of various sizes, on J’eweriwm chamaedrys ; it lives exposed
on the leaves of this plant, which usually serve as its food, though it also gnaws the
tender stalks of the young shoots, which thereby acquire a withered appearance.
When in want of food they do not spare each other. The fullgrown larva,
according to Hofmann’s drawings, reaches 8mm.-Imm. in length, and is dusky pale
green; the head looks black, when viewed casually, but, more closely observed, one
notices that it is of the same colour as the body, but bears broad, shining, black
spots on its borders. The prothoracic shield and anal shield are not especially
marked, but concolorous with the body, as well as all the legs and anal claspers.
The whole body (in the young larva transparently reddish) is beset with rows of
blackish-brown, narrowly white-ringed, warts, which bear stellately-arranged
white hairs. The slender elongate pupa, fixed to the leaves or to the stalks of the
plant, is bright green in colour, with a double row of small humps on the dorsum,
each of which bears a number of strong bristles, directed forwards. The name of
this species is derived from Celeusum of the Romans (Kelheim) (A. Schmid).

Although we have given Schmid’s excellent note above as the
original description of this insect, it is to be observed that Frey first
published the name, which had hitherto been merely a MS. name,
originating with Schmid. Frey’s notice we have added as a footnote
(p. 474). One point Frey makes clear, viz., that, at the time he wrote
the note, he was certain that the examples of tewcrii from England,
celeust from Kelheim, and hieracii from Hanover, were all one species
—a conclusion since confirmed by other lepidopterists. Hofmann
says (Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 117) “celeusi is like loranus, Fuchs,
somewhat smaller, and, as a rule, darker brown without reddish
admixture, although distinctly red-brown examples occur; the white
dash in the outer marginal fringes of the lower lobe is mostly much
narrower than in the typical O. teucrii, and the inner marginal fringes
of the upper lobe are, beyond the outer transverse line, only seldom so
distinctly twice cut through with white as is the case with the typical
form ; but, nevertheless, both these distinctive characters are inconstant,
and, therefore, I do not venture to found a separate species upon them.”’
Staudinger and Rebel accept this as a form of tewcerii (Cat., 3rd ed., p.
71), and diagnose it as ‘“‘ minor, obscurior, minus rufescens. Bavaria.”
Celeust is recorded by Meess and Spuler as occurring in the Geisinger
Bergen, singly, in June, the larva, according to Hofmann, feeding on
Teucrium chamaedrys.

CoMPARISON OF CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA WITH ITS ALLIES.—Although
this species, for a long time overlooked, and referred to the names
rightly belonging to other species, was clearly separated from hieracii,
in 1869, by Jordan, yet the German lepidopterists continued to send
it out as that species (see Knt. Rec., iii., p. 58) until the publication

i

476 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

of Hofmann’s Deutsch. Pterophorinen, in 1895. Even now it is little
known abroad, and is repeatedly mixed with other allies, although it
is probably one of the best characterised of all the Oxyptilid species.
So far as our British species are concerned, it is absolutely different
from all the others, on the most superficial glance. The ground colour
is entirely different from that of pilusellae and distans, and, in this
respect, 1t most closely resembles parvidactyla, from which, however,
its size at once distinguishes it, apart from any details of structure.
It is, therefore, somewhat remarkable to find Hofmann still comparing
heterodactyla with hieracti rather than with parvidactyla in colour (op. cit.,
p. 116), although his slender material was evidently the cause, for the
one marked “character of our finest British specimens is certainly the
chocolate-brown tint which it shares with parvidactyla, and not the
mahogany-brown, or red-brown, tint of hieracitt. He writes: ‘‘ Of the
size and coloration of O. hieracii, forewings (Qmm.-10mm.) dark red-
brown, marked with pure white; the fringes of the lower lobe, from
the anal angle to halfway up the margin, or even beyond, are white
for their whole length, purest at the base, towards the apex somewhat
running into yellowish or greyish; above this white portion the fringes
are brownish, and, at the apex of the lower lobe, furnished, at the base,
with a black spot, bordered on both sides with white. On the inner
margin of the upper lobe, beyond the outer lobal line, the fringes are,
at the base, twice cut by fine white lines, between which lie deep black
scales. The black scale-tuft of the 8rd plumule is much extended,
mostly somewhat further along the costa than on the inner margin,
the scales themselves, on both sides, are of equal length; they extend on
the costa not quite up to the apex, which exhibits a few white scales at
the base of the fringe; on the inner margin, the black scaling is
interrupted by white scales shortly before the apex, so that, at the apex
of the plumule, just on the inner margin, there is a small isolated
black scale-tuft, surrounded by a ring of little white scales; only in
an English example do the black scales on the inner margin of the
Srd plumule run, without interruption, up to the apex. The palpi are
very slender, the second joint brown, bordered with white, or spotted
with brown and white, the third joint brown with a white apex.
This description, drawn up from numerous examples from the Reutti
collection, exactly suits also the four original English examples, which,
through the kindness of Messrs. Overamtsrichter Eppelsheim and
Oberlehrer Stange, I received for inspection. . teucrii is easily to be
separated from O. didactylus by the outer marginal fringes of the lower
lobe being furnished with a broad, white, dash for wash] .”*
Kea.ayinc.— The eggs are yellowish in colour, laid on the under-
side of the leaves of Yeucrium scorodonia, and are exceptionally
conspicuous, in some lights, although agreeing well with the tint of
the underside of the Teucriwn leaves. Most of the eggs are laid flat,
and near a midrib, although others are placed in the large depressions
of the underside of the leaf; one is laid on end, with the rather wider
micropylar end forming the apex, but this appears to be a chance
position, due to its being lodged against the large midrib. Bacot
observes that, in captivity, eggs were laid either singly, or in pairs, in

* Hofmann describes this portion of the fringe in didactylus as having a sharp,
white, basal line (p. 114).

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 477

the hollows between the veins on the undersides of the leaves. On
another occasion, eves were laid on both the upper- and undersides of
the leaves, but, as the plant was a weakly one, and the leaves were on
a somewhat curved stem, this may not be the normal habit.

Ovum.—Length 0:-4mm.; width nearly 0°3mm.; oval in outline,
plump, yellow in colour; the micropylar end rather wider and flatter, the
nadir much more rounded ; the surface shiny, covered with a delicate,
but large-celled, polygonal reticulation (Tutt, July 6th, 1899). Of the
cylindrical type; size about ‘4mm. long, and 25mm. wide and thick ;
rather a broad oval, not flattened on sides, and would give an almost
(or quite) circular cross-section; of a pale, but bright, green colour, with
varnished-looking surface, showing faint traces of surface facets of the
type exhibited by the egg of I. lunaedactyla* (Bacot, July 2nd, 1899).
Yellowish ; oval in all aspects, except that one end is very decidedly
flattened; length 0°-40mm., width 0°28mm., height 0°2lmm. The
sculpture is bold, in a network of strong, flat, broad ribs, fairly high,
and forming irregular polygons, each of about 0:°027mm. in diameter
(Chapman, July 2nd, 1904).

Hasits oF LarvA.—The young larve attack the youngest leaves,
springing from the axillary buds, or from the growing shoot, but few of
the unopened buds are in a condition for the larve to enter; those, that
are so, are attacked much in the same way as the loose terminal buds of
the speedwell are by the larvee of Stenvptilia pterodactyla after hyber-
nation ; on the expanded leaves the larvee remain upon the underside,
and eat small irregular holes, apparently leaving the nervures untouched.
When several larvee attack one small leaf, it is nearly skeletonised. The
young larve grow with such rapidity that, by July 20th, 1904, when about.
three weeks old, some were 3°5mm. in length, and, judging from memory,
already of the adult form, the segments distinct, and the body tapering
at both head and anus (Bacot). Gregson also notes (Hnt., iv., p. 806)
that “the young larve leave the eggs in autumn, and the tiny larve
eat little round holes in the upper leaves of Teucrtum scorodonia grow-
ing in sheltered places; they appear in winter as small oval tufts of
whitish hair, attached to the underside of the leaves; early in
spring they move, and eat into the young shoots of tue foodplant,
and, in a few days, if the season be fine, they may be seen on the
upperside of the young leaves, casting their skins, and then they appear
like little oblong pinkish bundles of hair. They now begin to eat
freely, previous to the next change, and may be easily found, often
two or three, sometimes more, upon each spike of their foodplant, always
on the upperside of the terminal leaves. Ina few days they move
down the stem, and eat a small round hole in it, about two joints
down, which soon causes the tips of the plant to droop, and, near
this cover, they remain for some weeks, eating the young growing
leaves around them, until they appear as whitish-green hairy
larve, with a retractile head, attenuate to the anus, four to five
lines long, and change in May and June to a pinkish and green,
and eventually brown, pupa.” The larve seem to grow very little

* A later description reads: ‘‘In shape, a long regular oval of a pale and
transparent yellowish-green colour, with the usual highly-varnished surface.
Some faint surface-markings are present, but they are not definite enough to
describe as sculpturing. Length about 450mm. ; width about -2mm. to -225mm. :
these eggs also appear to be more or less circular in cross-section, at any rate, I ean
only manage to get them into positions that give me the one measurement”’ (Bacot).

478 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

until after hybernation, which seems to end towards the end of March
or the commencement of April, the larve usually moulting soon after-
wards. ‘The first larvee discovered in this country were in this stage,
the young larve being found at Delamere Forest, on May 1st-2nd,
1867, sitting on the tops of the leaves, having just (it was assumed)
concluded their first moult. A week later they were more difficult
to find, having gone down the stem to within about 14 inches from
the bottom, where they had eaten the stem just halfway through,
causing the parts of the plant above the bitten place to bear down, and
soon to become half dead and very soft. On this part the larva now feeds,
and, as it ceases to grow, the neighbouring plants soon overtop it, and
cover it up, so that one cannot see it until one looks well for it under
the other plants; this dying part appears to afford sufficient food for a
single larva, and to accommodate it till it is fullfed. The larva, when
feeding, still attaches itself to the upperside of the leaf, but, since the
upper part of the plant is inverted (owing to the stem having been
bitten through), it is effectually protected from wet (Greening). In
the spring, the larva feeds on Tewcriwmn scorodonia, gnawing nearly
through the stem, and eating portions of the withering leaves near the
tip of the shoot, and often the actual heart of the shoot. It moves
from shoot to shoot, treating each in the same manner (Bankes).
Barrett says (nt. Mo. Mag., viu., p. 155) that “ the mode of life of
this larva is curious; it gnaws adeep round hole in the side of the
stem of a young shoot of Teucrium scorodonia, stopping the flow of sap,
and, causing it to droop, then crawls slowly to the heart, and eats
portions of the younger leaves, biting them clean through like ordinary
larvee, and never, apparently, gnawing the surface of the leaf like some
of its congeners, nor entering the shoot like others; it does not confine
itself to one shoot, but, after eating bits of several leaves, goes to
another, which it causes to droop in the same way; in wet weather
the shoots will recover and raise themselves, but, if the sun is hot, and
the weather dry, they wither, and serve as signal flags to show where
a larva is to be found. Inconfinement, the larva makes no attempt to
wither the shoot, but eats the young and fullgrown leaves indifferently.
Its principal object is, evidently, shelter from the sun, and it is so
sluggish that it can hardly ever be seen to move when light is upon it.
It is liable to a disease which causes it to become distended, and to die,
when it looks like a little hairy bladder.’’ On April 25th, 1904, Bankes
found the larvee scarce in the Isle of Purbeck, but those he found were,
on April 26th, 1904, sent to us, feeding on T. scorodonia. Each of the
shoots of Teucrium attacked had the central bud cleared completely out,
and the remaining outer leaves bent in towards each other, making a
sort of tent, in some of which the larve still remained. Scattered
through this chamber was a considerable amount of loose frass. The
larvee hang readily by a thread if disturbed, or wriggle actively to the
eround, where they remain for a time comparatively still. We have
elsewhere mentioned that the larva stretches its anal legs out behind
posteriorly, and uses them as pincers to take hold of, and throw to some
distance, the pellets of frass (April 27th, 1904). In confinement, how-
ever, the larvee eat out pieces of leaf somewhat irregularly, and appar-
ently from any part of the leaf. The resemblance of the smaller larve
to bent pieces of the leaf-stalk is sometimes very striking (Tutt). By
the end of May and early June the larve are fullfed, although, in some

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 479

years, they go on feeding longer, e.g., Adkin records (Proc. Sth. Lond. Ent.
Soc., 1891, p. 128) the larvee common at Hynesford on June 20th, 1891
(see also infra). Usually, however, they are much earlier—young larve
found at the end of April, in north Wales, were nearly fullfed by May
19th, 1867; whilst on March 25th, 1867, and following days, in the
Llanferras district, young hybernating larve were just beginning to
feed (Gregson) ; larve were searched for on June 5th, 1904, but were
then nearly over, and only three obtained, although many stems showed
where they had been attacked; the larve had mostly fed up and
apparently left the plant (Atmore). Bankes gives the following dates
for the taking of larve—June 6th, 1887, and June 19th, 1888, in the
Isle of Portland; imagines from the last lot bred July 17th-20th, 1888;
larve in the Isle of Purbeck from May 27th-June 11th, 1885, pro-
duced imagines June 21st-July 7th; also from the Isle of Purbeck—
larve June 7th, 1886 (imagines June 28th-July 10th), larve June 8th,
1887 (imagines June 19th-July 3rd), larvee May 81st, 1888 (imagines
June 25th-July Gth), larve April 25th, 1904. He also has notes
of the larve being found in the Isle of Purbeck, by Digby, on
May 5th, and May 16th-81st, circa 1883. Bower notes larve com-
mon on Box Hill, June 24th, 1887, young larvee May 26tb, 1902,
at Shoreham, Kent, the larve biting partly through the stems of their
foodplant, causing the tops to wither and fall over. Buckler figures
(Larvae, ete., pl. clxi., fig. 7) a larva of this species after its final
moult, feeding openly and exposed on Tencrium scorodonia, on May
16th, 1867. On June 24th, 1887, also, Richardson reported taking
larvee in the Isle of Portland, whilst in the following year they were
obtained in the same locality from May 26th-June 11th.
Larva.—Iirst instar (about to moult): Pale reddish-brown in
colour, with a double series of white dorsal patches; the skin much
wrinkled, lateral flange already present. Head polished black;
thoracic segments large; true legs strong, prolegs weak, but tall, as in
adult larva; prothoracic plate of a medium brown tint. On the meso-
and metathorax, as well as abdominal segments, i+11 are on the same
plate. On the meso- and metathorax, ii is large and iv small (the
former well in front of the latter); v, placed below them, carries a
strong hair. On the abdominal segments, tubercle ii is situated in
its usual position, iv and v, each carrying a hair, forming a twin pair
directly below the spiracle, v the smaller. The skin appears quite
smooth and shiny under a +-inch objective, showing no trace of spicules.
The hairs are comparatively short, smooth, and tapering, with slightly
knobbed ends, but not thorned (Bacot, July 10th, 1904). Second
instar: 38°5mm. The segments very distinct ; the body tapering both
at head and anus. Head black. The body with a coat of coarse
spicules ; secondary hairs restricted to the tubercular areas, with two
exceptions, and these are where secondary hairs occupy the positions
later taken possession of by the accessory warts. Secondary hairs are,
however, numerous on the prothoracic shield, and show their knobbed
character very plainly. All the primary hairs appear to be slightly
knobbed, but not thorned, and they show some amount of tapering;
the tubercles, from which they rise, are wart-like in character, Spiracles
raised. Colour of larva dull red, with whitish areas surrounding the
bases of warts, and a dark mediodorsal line. Third instar (hybernating
skin) (April 27th, 1904): The larva is the smallest of several sent by

480 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

Mr. Bankes from the Isle of Purbeck, rather differently tinted
from the others, being much redder; it is rather under 4mm.
in length. The head is black, the ocelli still blacker, the mouth-
parts brown, the chin white; studded with comparatively long
white hairs. The prothorax is remarkably long (front to back),
eradually increasing in width to the mesothorax, projecting some-
what in a point medially over the head, divided distinctly into
two halves, the front half not haired, glossy white in tint, retractile
with the head into the hinder half, on which the dorsal warts
form a broad, transverse, bristly, prothoracic hood, the hairs of
which, when the larva is in repose, form a protecting cover to
the head. The body sezments—mesothorax to anus—are of a delicate
reddish tint, with deeply-cut, bright, orange-yellow, intersegmental
incisions; on each segment the tubercles are arranged in a transverse
ring of warts—on the thoracic segments as i+i1, 111+1V, Vv, vll, and on
the abdominals as 1-4-1, 111, iv-+-v, vi, vii—of which i--H, 11, 1v-+-v are
large and raised on an elevated base, vi of moderate size (low, with one
long, black-based, central hair), and vii of small size (low, with two
long, black-based, central hairs); the bases of the raised warts are
silvery-white, inclining to be transparent and glassy, the flat apex dark
grey, from which a number of long, serrate, blunt-ended hairs spring
from black, shining, chitinous bases, rising in two alternate rows, one
below the otier, with one large central hair; the long hairs appear to
be rather darker, but, in general appearance, they are almost hke spun
glass ; vi appears to be lost on the prothoracic segments, and, as already
noted, i+i1 make, on the prothorax, a long transverse wart. The
posterior edges of the segments are also white. There appear to be
two subsegments to each segment, the hinder exceedingly narrow.
The reddish body-colour breaks up, under a lens, into somewhat
moderately-developed mediodorsal, subdorsal, and supraspiracular
longitudinal rows. The anal segment is covered with black chitin,
from which arise numerous white hairs, similar to those on the warts,
but shorter. The shagreening of the skin on the dorsal surface 1s very
striking, the raised points looking (under certain lights) like drops of
shiny liquid. The projecting black spiracles form also a very
striking feature. The dorsal surface carries a number of irregular,
scattered, secondary hairs, similar to, but smaller than, those on the
tubercular areas; one surmises that those on the posterior portion of
the mesothorax and metathorax have a definite morphological value.
(They appear to suggest a duplication of the dorsal warts). The
venter is whitish in tint, with very clear yellow-orange intersegmental
incisions, and few scattered hairs. The prolegs are long, slender,
glassy-looking, almost transparent, although tinged with black; the
proleg hooks are also black; the anal lees are also very long, and well
developed, glassy in appearance, and tinged with black. ‘The true legs
are glassy, almost transparent, grey-black, each with a single, sharply
back-curved, hook (Tutt. Larve, April 27th, from the Isle of Purbeck,
sent by Mr. Bankes). Plump, slug-shaped, grey in colour; tapering to
either end; 4th and 5th abdominal segments are the largest, as regards
girth, while the 8th is probably shghtly the longest; the segmentation
very marked in the Arctiid or Anthrocerid fashion, the incisions being
very deeply cleft. The larva rests with its body curved. Head glassy in
appearance, very dark brown, almost black on crown. Body: The
skin is pale flesh-coloured, whiter on dorsal area, and, where it

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 481

immediately surrounds the tubercles, nearly pure white. Both the
true legs and prolegs are pale, the latter being very tall and slender.
Skin covered with numerous raised chitinous buttons, evidently a
development of the spicular coat, and, although they are actually minute,
they are, relatively to the size of the larva, large and coarse. The
spiracles are dark brown or black, and are raised into short tubes that
taper upwards from the base like a lighthouse, they are about one and
a half times as high as the diameter of the longer transverse
axis. ‘The skin bears a small number of hairs (secondary skin-hairs)
in addition to those arising from the tubercular area, and these,
together with the smaller tubercular hairs, appear to be enlarged at
the tips, when seen under a l-inch objective; with a +4-inch
objective, they are found to be merely blunt-ended, but, as they are
very nearly transparent for the greater part of their length and filled
with an opaque white substance at the tip, the apparent enlargement,
when viewed under a lower power, is most probably optical. The
longest (probably the primary) tubercular hairs arise from dark
brown or black bases; they are tapering, and of pale colour, with
one or more dark bands round them at about half their height, and
then pale to their tips. T'ubercles: The dorsal tubercles have converged
and developed into large raised warts. There is no secondary wart
behind spiracles, only a group of three or four small hairs.
Tubercles i+11 are combined into a single wart on all segments from
the mesothorax to the 8th abdominal; 11 is a large wart in about
normal position above spiracle; iv and v conjoined form another
below it; there is also a marginal series. There is a tolerably
conspicuous reddish patch just above base of true legs (Bacot,
May Ist, 1904). 2? Fourth instar (after moulting hybernating skin):
Between 6mm. and 7mm. long when crawling, almost 6mm. at rest.
The body pale greenish, with broken, reddish, mediodorsal line ; sub-
dorsal and supraspiracular lines still sufficiently well-developed to give a
marked red tinge to the ground colour (but much less so than in
preceding instar), in spite of the magnificent assemblage of white
silvery hairs arising from the tubercles. The body also is a little
stouter, but still quite cylindrical, and with no perceptible inclination
to flattening ventrally, thinning off, also, both anteriorly and
posteriorly. The head is now of a semitransparent greenish-yellow,
with two dark brown patches on the upper part of the clypeus. The
tubercles appear to be arranged as in the preceding instar. The
prothorax is covered dorsally with a panoply of hairs, arising from a
large combined wart, i+-1i1, which projects over, and protects, the some-
what retractile head ; on the other seements the tubercular warts are
—i-+i1 united, ili rather smaller than these, iv-+-v about the size of iii,
vi somewhat smaller, vii very ventral, rather larger than vi, also
each produces a magnificent series of divergent white hairs, with
blunt-ended tips of a silvery-white colour, of three sizes, shining, under
a good light, like filigree-work; the longest of these appears to be
readily recognised as the primary set, the smallest are very similar
to the secondary, scattered, blunt-ended hairs that arise irregularly
from the body surface; vi and vii are almost flat. The spiracles are
very striking, dark, almost black in colour, with a median metallic-
looking spot. Same instar preparing for another moult: 6mm.-7mm.

482 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

long, in position for moulting. Head drawn in ventrally, invisible
from upperside; prothorax and metathorax also drawn down ventrally.
Skin of a dull greyish-yellow; segments distended, intersegmental
incisions stretched, but very clearly marked. Tubercles as before, the
hairs, however, much broken, the longer black and white sete less
disturbed. The spiracles drawn in, and appearing as small, black,
shiny plates. The 9th and 10th abdominal segments much contracted,
their whole area being, as it were, covered with complex, tubercular,
warts, similar to those on the preceding segments. Final instar: A
larva that has just completed a moult is of a peculiar dove-grey, owing
to the pale hairs and pinkish skin, but it is much too hairy to allow of
any description in detail before it has filled out somewhat. A large
larva in same skin, at rest, is 8mm. to 9mm. in length. It rests with
its head turned downwards and its thorax compressed, so that its
greatest girth appears to be towards the anterior end, and it appears to
have a longer and more gradual taper posteriorly than anteriorly.
Otherwise than this, it is of the same shape as the smaller larve,
except, perhaps, that the segmentation in the smaller larve was rather
accentuated, owing to the approach of a moult. In colour there is a
complete change, the skin being now of a bright yellow, with some
red mottling on the lateral area of the thoracic segments. The
spiracles are not so tall as previously, and are of a paler hue, which
renders them less conspicuous. ‘The tubercles are pale brown, and the
head is also paler, the dark brown or black markings of the previous
skin being replaced by pale brown. ‘To the naked eye the spicules
appear to be smaller in comparison, and more closely set, and much
less conspicuous in consequence. ‘The hairs are similar to those
of the earlier stage, but are more conspicuous, partly, I think,
owing to their greater length, and partly to a considerable increase
in their numbers. The postspiracular group of (secondary or body)
hairs forms a much more conspicuous feature, but there is no raised skin-
area, nor any sign ofa wart. Noclear subdivision of the segments can
be made out. Long hairs are minutely thorned (Bacot, May 1st, 1904).
Final instar (well-grown): Much stouter, and plumper in build, than
in the preceding stadium, less attenuated at the ends, and altogether
more stumpy, but still not. flattened ventrally; Smm. at rest, 9mm.-
10mm. when crawling. The larva examined has lost the whole of its
red coloration, and is now of a delicate yellowish-green, much whiter
towards the anterior edge of each segment and at the bases of the
tubercles, much yellower at the hinder parts of the segments, and
there is certainly no clear trace of a second subsegment when the larva
is at rest. A somewhat darker greenish line is traceable, as a medio-
dorsal, from the prothorax to the anal flap. The tubercles are
splendidly developed, the bases pale, the hairs very numerous and
variable in length, but the body-surface covered to nothing like
the extent it is in the preceding instar, owing to the great growth
of the larva in width as well as length, 7.e., the tubercles occupy
much less space in proportion to the size of the larva. The
skin is still heavily shagreened. There is no trace of a sub-
spiracular flange, but, below the spiracular area, the body is more
distinctly yellow-green. The head is of a semi-transparent, pale,
greenish-grey, the mouth-parts almost colourless; a brown patch
above them; the summit of the clypeus is also tinged with brown ;

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 483

the ocelli brownish-black. The true legs are of the same semi-
transparent greenish-grey tint as the head, the terminal hooks being
black, but, laterally to the legs on either side, and below the marginal
tubercle, is a red-brown patch (? slightly chitinous) on each of the
thoracic segments, a somewhat similar, but smaller, patch being placed
higher up, directly above the marginal tubercles. With the exception
of a trace of the lower one on either side of the venter of the Ist
abdominal seement, these brown patches are confined to the latero-
ventral area of the thoracic segments. The remainder of the venter
is more or less of the greenish ground colour, but, under a good lens,
the ventral area of the thoracic segments, the bases of the true legs,
the fronts of the abdominal segments, the bases of the prolegs, as well as
the venter of the 9th and 10th abdominal segments, are semi-transparent,
and very glassy-looking. The prolegs are long and slender (and there is
some sign ofa slight “loop” when the larva is walking hurriedly). The
hooks on the prolees are few in number, and exceedingly small; the
anal prolegs are of the same pale, semi-transparent, greenish colour as
the others, the hooks are also very minute. I was interested to see
a larva use the anal prolegs as pincers, by means of which it was seen
to throw a frass pellet to a considerable distance from the body. On those
seoments, which do not carry prolegs, a tiny tubercular point carries one
or two hairs in the proleg position. All the short, irreeularly-scattered,
secondary hairs appear to be bluntly bifid, and like the short hairs on
the tubercular warts; the 1st and gad abdominal segments have a ver

large number of secondary hairs on the venter (Tutt. April, 29th, 1904).

Final instar (fullgrown): Yellowish-green in colour, looking glaucous
or hoary, from the abundant hairs, and paler, round, large ee from
which they arise; short and idnselk 8mm. lone, 1‘8mm. wide; small
ochreous head with brown markings, overhung by a thick curtain of
hairs from marein of prothorax ; it tapers in either direction from the
Ist abdominal seement, but the change is slight in the first six abdo-
minal segments; there is a green dorsal line (dorsal vessel?), but
otherwise the colouring is very uniform, and there are no markings
except on thoracic segments, where there are small brown patches below
tubercles v-+-vi, and, on TREAT NOTERS in front of 1+: also. The
hairs are white; the tubercles pale, except a darker shade at base of
principal hairs; the tubercles carry numerous secondary hairs, but
these are much longer than the secondary hairs scattered over the skin-
surface. The tubercles i and ii, on the abdomen, form one large round
wart, with two primary hairs, distineuishable from the others by being
tinted with sepia basally, and with a dark ring of origin; they are smooth
and pointed, that representing i being in front of, and inside, t that repre-

senting il, about 1-Omm. long, 11 being about 2°Omm. long; these, and
other primary hairs, are marked with rings like those of a porcupine,

there being only one, two, or three, toa hair; several secondary hairs are
lone, smooth, and pointed, and even ringed like the primary, but, bi asally,

they are abundantly distinct; then there are very definite secondary
hairs, to the number of tw atve to fifteen, of various lengths down to
0: 1mm. ; the smaller they are, the more they are thickened at the end;
this thickening is gradual, and generally ends in two or three divisions
or points; tubercle 111 may be described in similar terms to i-+ii,
except that it has only one primary hair; iv-+-y, again, carries two
primaries, the upper one (that representing v) in front; it is otherwise

Mi

484 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

like i+1i. Behind the spiracle, near the posterior border, is a very
definite little tubercle, with eight or ten hairs, none of which have the
characters belonging to the primaries on the other tubercles ; another
very similar tubercle lies immediately below this, and as far below iv
+vyvas this one is above it; vi has a primary hair about 1-Omm.
long; the tubercle itself is much flatter than those above, and has seven
or eight typical secondary hairs, but none of the pseudo-primary as in
i+il. The general surface is closely set with skin-points; these are
almost colourless, so that, in some lights, it is difficult to believe they
are not little pits; there are, also, very numerous minute, white,
secondary hairs, finely swollen, and bifid at tips; their length is about
O-lmm., but some are nearly 0:17mm.; they are disposed at a consider-
able distance from the tubercle, leaving a free surface round each, so
that they may be said to lie along the borders of the segments, and,
from these, form transverse rows between the tubercles. The
prothoracic plate is crowded with secondary hairs of all lengths,
but the usual six long hairs on each side can be distinguished;
one specimen has a well-developed tubercle, almost a wart, with
long hair, behind the Ist tubercle on mesothorax, whilst another is
without it; this is wanting on the metathorax. On the mesothorax,
1 has two primary hairs; on the metathorax it has apparently
only one, 11 and ii each have two. The head ochreous, with
darker markings. The legs pale. The prolegs on long props, ending
in a bulbous extremity with five hooks, omitting outer quadrant
(Chapman. June 8th, 1904). Quiescent stage preceding pupation: The
segments very deeply cut at incisions, no subsegments apparent; larva
has an Arctiid appearance, owing to tall many-haired warts. Spiracles
tall, rims raised into tubes, as usual, pale brown. In addition to the
hairs on raised warts, many secondary hairs are present on general
skin-area (Note. This is a feature not developed at all in Porrittia
galactodactyla, Alucita pentadactyla, Ovendenia septodactyla (entyianus),
and Oidaematophorus lithodactyla), and also a coat of spicules, of the
same colour as the general skin-surface; the warts on the abdominal
segments, are placed as a single transverse row, or ring, round each
segment ; 1 and ii carry dark-based hairs placed with other hairs on a
single wart; ili, a single dark-based hair on a wart with other hairs ;
iv-+yv, with two dark hairs, in a large many-haired wart, and vi and
vli aS in Marasmarcha lunaedactyla. The posterior lateral warts
(secondary) are well-developed on meso- and metathoracic segments ;.
the dark-based hairs (?1 and i1) combined within the limits of a single
large wart; the primary hairs are long and thorny, secondaries and
smaller wart-hairs are shorter and glandular, enlarging at tip, as in
M. lunaedactyla, all hairs white. Prolegs of the usual long and
slender description. (Bacot. June 18th, 1899).

Pupation.—The larva, when fullfed, descends to just below where
it has bitten the stem halfway through, and, attaching itself by the
anal segment, changes to a pupa with the head downwards; the stem
to which it is attached is very short and stiff, and the pupa is
usually well protected by the taller plants that have covered it ©
(Greening). The larve of Capperia heterodactyla occasionally pupate
on the plant on which they have fed up, outside the feeding area,
but not generally, I think, although the habit seems a common one ©
in confinement (Atmore). The pupal state seems to be assumed,
under any convenient object, close to the ground, as the hairy pupa is

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 485

not often to be found on the plants on which the larve have matured
(Buckler). The larva pupates on the underside of a withered leaf,
clod, or stone, attached by the anal segment (South).

Foopriants.—Teucrium scorodonia (Greening), T’. chamaedrys (QO,
Hofmann) [Marrubiwm vulgare (EK. Hofmann). |

Parasites. — Limneria barrettii, Bridge. (Barrett), L. tencrii, Bridg.
(W. H. B. Fletcher), Anyilia virginalis, Grav., Mesochorus vitticollis,
Holm. The species is very subject to the attacks of ichneumons. I
bred more parasites than moths from the larve reared in 1900
(Crombrugghe de Picquendaele).

Pupa.—Leneth 8mm., greenish, more olive-reddish towards
the anal end, greyer in front, with practically no markings. Very
similar in build to the pupa of Porrittia yalactodactyla, Wheeleria miga-
dactyla, and especially Ovendenia septodactyla (lientgianus). It differs
from the latter in the remarkable arrangement of the hairs on
tubercles i and ii, which suggests in O. septodactyla the design carried
out in C. heterodactyla (teucrii), viz., the hairs of the series are all
arranged in the same antero-posterior flanges, forming, on each segment,
a pair, and the whole are extensions of the dorsal flanges. It differs
especially in having, internally conjoined, i+11, on either side in the
middle of the dorsum, a pair of secondary hairs, one pointing forward
and one backward, certainly small, but still such that, without the
homology with Ovendenia septodactyla, etc., it would be impossible to say
that it might not be the realiandii. The fan-like tubercle 11i (contain-
ing the wing-line of hairs) is less developed, each tubercle possessing two
hairs only; tubercles 1 and ii, combined, possess five hairs, fan-wise,
not quite antero-posteriorly arranged, but with the front shghtly
twisted outwards, but so httle that the effect is to present the series as
all lying in one plane ; ii1 has a true hair pointing forwards, smooth
and pointed, and a very similar secondary hair curved backwards; the
secondary hair has, however, no well-marked ring-base, is thick,
blunt, glassy-looking, and coarsely spiculated. This difference between
primary and secondary hairs shows the mediodorsal double pairs to be
secondary, that i and ii lie nearly flat, forwards and backwards (like Steno-
ptilia pterodactyla, etc.), and that the upstanding hairs are secondary.
Equally, iv+v are a triplet, the upstanding central hair being
secondary; vi carries a lone hair sloping backwards, with a short
projecting secondary. ‘The head is well armed with hairs which form
a border, chiefly those of the front of the antenne. The mesothorax
has a pair of long hairs (i ?) within the dorsal flanges, which are
ringed with black, fading out to their tips. The dorsal flanges (as in
Platyptilia) are not very strong, but are accentuated by a continuous
row of hairs, most of which are secondary; on the metathorax the
largest hair of the flange is primary, and there are a couple of
primaries at its outer front angle. In front, the band projects a little
ventrally, the 1st lee has a strong keel, like the pupa of Mucnemido-
phorus rhododactyla, but much more marked, and there is no femur
visible. The antenne have a fine hair to each joint, but legs,
maxille, etc., are without them. There are two hairs (primaries) at
the eye-centre, one on the clypeus (each side), and on the labrum.
The antennz end 2mm. short of the end of the appendages, and the
Ist legs go only about O°3mm. further; the 8rd legs are barely
visible, the 2nd being but slightly separated at the tip. The beads

486 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

are various minute nodules and ridges, the most marked of which,
perhaps, follows closely the line of the glazed eye inside it; seen
laterally, the two clypeal hairs have a very walrus-tusk aspect, in spite
of their relative delicacy, and the antenne form fine nodulated ridges.
The wings begin basally with three rows of hairs; the middle one is
very short, ‘The second dorsal one ends at the posterior margin of the
2nd abdominal segment, but here are, again, a few hairs of a middle
row, and, in front of these, the beginning of a fourth row of hairs (or
dth, if the few hairs just mentioned are not part of the first middle
set). An outer row again appears, and these rows proceed till stopped
by hind margin. The very finely pointed wing-tip is about 0-3mm.
short of the end of the 2nd legs. The above description was made
from a living pupa, and under the impression that the apparent
hairiness of the pupa allied it with the hairy Alucitids, and before a fuller
study of the Oxyptilid pupe showed the necessity of distinguishing
between: (1) true hairs, (2) secondary hairs, (8) skin processes (spines
or horns), and (4) enlarged skin-points. [The following note, made
more recently from mounted pupa-shells, will afford to correct the
preceding description which is in error in calling skin-processes hairs:
The pupa of C. heterodactyla is Oxyptilid, in having essentially
the same development of the bases of the dorsal tubercles into spines
and processes that is characteristic of C. distans, and that is carried

to such high development in the Amblyptiliid and Marasmarchid

pupe. In Capperia heterodactyla, the spines are much more slender than
in Crombrugghia distans, are, in fact, so thin, that one describes them as
hairs, untilacloser examination of themis made. In this way, oneconfuses

the structure with the very different one of, say, IWheeleria migadactyla

(spilodactyla), where tubercle i (with ii juss behind it) carries a number
of true hairs. In Capperia heterodactyla there is a single, definite hair to
represent i, and another for ii; the other hair-like structures are pupai-
processes, like the halbert spines of the pupa of Amblyptilia cosmodactgla
(acanthodactyla), i.e., extension of the pupal integument into this form.
In Crombrugghia distans, these horns or processes have a rough surface
due to their having the same structure on the general pupal surface, viz., a
minute, closely-set, pitting. In Capperiaheterodactyla, these horns, having
become slender and hair-like, retain a similar roughness, and have all
the appearance of spiculated hairs. One is so used to spiculated hairs,
especially on larve of “plumes,” that a first impression is that these
must be similar spiculated hairs; this, however, is at once corrected
by noticing that their surface is continuous with that of the body of
the pupa, without any separation by line or suture, whilst the two

hairs proper of i and 1i are very obvious, with their elaborate basal

articulation. They are perfectly plain and smooth, without any trace
of spiculation, and so contrast with the horns. The pupa is not, there-
fore, really a hairy pupa as it appears to be, except, of course, in the

very natural sense that any filamentous cutaneous structure may be called
.a hair. We need not here burden ourselves with other questions that may

arise in regard to other pupe, but, having referred to that of Wheeleria —

“migadactyla (spilodactyla), we may note that the long hairs on that pupa

are true hairs arising from ‘‘ warts,’’ 7.e., many-haired tubercles, whilst

‘the short ones are neither true hairs, nor pupal processes, as in Capperia

heterodactyla, but, apparently, enlarged skin-points like the secondary
“hairs” on the larve of Platyptilic. The wing-hairs of the pupa of

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 487

Wheeleria migadactyla (spilodactyla) are small and numerous, and appear
to be, similarly, skin-points, whilst the pupa of C. heterodactyla has fewer
and larger ones that are spiculated and apparently ‘“‘horns’’ like the
dorsal ones. One would expect the wing-hairs to be the same structure in
both cases, until one reflects that this is no more necessarily the case
than for the dorsal ‘‘hairs’’ of 1 and il.} (Chapman). Pupa-case: The
extremely sharp angle, at which the upper portion of the pupa-case 1s
bent backwards after emergence, is only paralleled in Adactylus bennetit,
among the species that 1 have examined, and it renders accurate
measurement very difficult. The length appears to be from 8°5mm.
to 10mm., the diameter just under 2mm. at the end of the wing-cases.
The colour of the empty pupa-skin is pale yellowish-white, with a
trifle darker shade on the anterior dorsal region. In shape it is nearly,
or quite, cylindrical. The spiracles are low, only slightly raised, with
a sht-like opening. There are structural dorsal ridges, of the nature
of thin walls, on the anterior abdominal segments in the line of the dorsal
tubercles, the processes, on which these latter are placed, rising directly
from, or through, the flange. The antenna-cases, and chief nervures
on the wing-cases, are fringed with hairs, but this is not so prominent
a feature as in Porrittia galactodactyla, Ovendenia septodactyla, or
Oidaematophorus lithodactyla. In reality, the tubercles bear single hairs,
but, owing to the exceedingly hair-like development of the dorsal pro-
cesses or horns, really a development of the raised skin-area which bears
the dorsal tubercles, the pupa, at a casual glance, appears to bear many-
haired tubercles. This arrangement suggests a fairly close relationship
with Marasmarcha lunaedactyla. All the dorsal tubercular processes are
fairly well developed from the 1st abdominal to the 8th abdominal, and,
although the 3rd abdominal bears the largest processes, there is not
the same marked disparity that there is in the case of M. lunaedactyla.
Each process consists of the raised skin-area bearing i and ii; between
these tubercles rise two tall, slender, tapering horns. The tubercles
themselves are situated just below the juncture of these horns, rather
to the outer side of the process, their hairs pointing anteriorly and
posteriorly at a low angle; slightly on the inner side of the process,
and lower down than the tubercles, arise two smaller horns, one
anterior and the other posterior. On the 2nd and 8rd abdominal
segments, the posterior horn is nearly as large as the central ones, while
on the later segments, (?) 4th and 5th, but certainly on the 6th, 7th,
and 8th, this hair is altogether wanting. On the 2nd to 8th abdominals
there is a pair of small, forked, horn-like processes, one on either side
of the dorsal line, on a low transverse ridge, which connects the large
dorsal processes, one fork of each pair bending forwards, and one back-
wards; tubercle ii is situated posteriorly to, and above, the spiracle ; it
appears to bear two large hairs, but a closer examination shows that
the anterior alone has a tubercular base, the posterior being a slender,
horn-like, process, arising at the base of the tubercle; iv and vy are in
line below iii, the bases of the two hairs being separated by another
tall slender horn, that could quite as easily be mistaken for a hair as
that at base of iii; tubercle vi carries a single large hair, with a very
small process at its base, and vil two hairs, with their bases a short
distance apart. The hairs are white, and smooth; they taper
very gradually and evenly; the horn-like processes, although confusing
at first, are easily enough distinguished after a short examination, owing

488 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

to their heavier and less even appearance, their surface being roughened
and spiculate. The meso- and metathoracic segments also bear a
dorsal ridge of hair-like horns, but the real tubercular-based hairs are
as in IM. lunaedactyla, four dorsal on the meso- and two on the
metathorax, each segment having two lateral hairs at the base of the
wings, also as in the above-named species. The abdominal segments,
especially the 4th, 5th, and 6th, on their dorsal area, show the transverse
wrinklings of the integument very sharply; they are fine and even, and
appear as flattened folds. The intersegmental area is very finely, but
sharply, pitted. It is interesting to note that this genus retains the
wing, and antennal, hair-fringes that are lost in M.lunaedactyla. The
development of hair-like processes in proximity to the tubercular hairs,
in this species, suggests that perhaps the additional hairs of species like
Ovendenia septodactyla, etc., may be of the same character, but a further
examination of the last-named species shows that there is not the
same clear differentiation, and, as regards the dorsal groups, the two
large central structures are most certainly hairs (Pacot).

VARIATION OF PUPA.—The pupe, like the larve, vary somewhat in
colour, being sometimes pale pinkish, at other times pale green, and
occasionally brown, with intermediate varieties, but the pale forms all
become darker before emergence.

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—T'he species is on the wing, in most years,
from mid-June till towards the end of July, although, in such early
years as 1898, imagines were already on the wing before the end of
May, and in late years specimens are to be found in August. In
Baden, it occurs in the Hardtwald, near Carlsruhe, from the beginning
of June on into July, sometimes very abundantly among Teucrium
scorodonia (Hofmann), also as late as August, near the Todtmoss,
Tauberbischofsheim (Meess and Spuler). In Belgium, usually abundant
in late June and July, in the Forest of Soignes (Crombrugghe) ;
abundant June 29th, 1901, in the Forest of Libin (Derenne). Chap-
man took a specimen at Moncayo, in Spain, between July 12th-24th,
1908, probably in the beech-wood zone, at about 8500ft.-4000ft. The
earliest example, in 1867, was bred on June 14th, from larve received
from Delamere Forest (Knaggs); July 16th-17th, 1869, flying amongst
wild sage at Witherslack (Gregson); July 31st, 1869, common
between Norwich and Ranworth; July 14th, 1870, near Norwich
(Barrett); July 14th, 1878, near Brandon (Bower) ; July 19th, 1881,
in the Isle of Portland (Bankes); end of July, 1882, in Tilgate Forest
(South); early July, 1888, at King’s Lynn (Atmore); July 19th, 1883,
in the Isle of Portland; bred June 21st-July 7th, 1885; bred June

28th-July 10th, 1886 ; captured July 5th, 1886, in the Isle of Purbeck

(Bankes) ; June 24th, 1887, at Box Hill (Bower); June 29th-July Ist,
1887, at Portland ‘Richardson); bred June 19th-July 8rd, 1887, also June
25th-July 6th, 1888, from larve taken in the Isle of Purbeck, and bred
July 17th-20th, 1888, from larve found in the Isle of Portland (Bankes);
July 8th, 1888, at Crohamhurst (Sheldon) ; bred July 21st, 1888, from
larve taken near Weymouth; July 2nd, 1889, and August Ist, 1690, in
the Isle of Portland (Richardson); July 19th, 1888, June 23rd, 1889,
June 24th, 1891, at Clevedon (Mason) ; May 81st, June 2nd, June 10th,
1893; and June 16th-25th, 1894, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); June,
1897, at Bentley (Burrows); July 15th, 1897, at Hartlebury Common
(J. E. Fletcher); July 18th, 1901, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ;

CAPPERIA HETERODACTYLA. 489

June, 1905, in the extreme north of Sutherland (Cruttwell, “nt. Mo.
Miag., xli., p. 260).

Hasirs.—The species is rarely to be disturbed during the morning,
but, as the afternoon advances, it may be readily started from its
hiding-places, among the herbage, where Teucrium scorodonia grows.
Tt flies more freely, however, in the late afternoon, although the early
eyening is undoubtedly its natural time of flight, and Barrett notes
that, on one occasion, on a rough piece of ground beside the roadway,
between Norwich and Ranworth, a thunderstorm impending, one
afternoon, made the ‘“‘ plumes”’ so lively, that they danced over the
Teucrium like Tipulae; the same observer, however, notes that,
normally, the moth hides itself during the day in patches of woodsage,
and can hardly be induced to fly, except in the afternoon, and then very
sluggishly, but at dusk it dances about in a lively manner, sometimes
in plenty, over the same patches. Bower found that it was readily
disturbed in the afternoon of June 24th, 1887, at Box Hill, occasionally
flying on its own account later in the afternoon, whilst on July 14th,
1878, he was able to disturb specimens by walking through their
haunts, at Brandon. South, however, records that the imagines were
seen darting about in the sunshine among a large patch of Teucrium
in Tileate Forest, in 1882, an observation doubtless that led to Leech’s
general statement that ‘the species is local but plentiful where it occurs,
flying over woodsage in the sunshine in July.’’ Bankes says that, in
Dorset, the imago can be disturbed from among its foodplant in the
daytime, but is then very sluggish. Its true flight-time appears to be
in the evening. At Clevedon, it is generally on the wing for a
fortnight or so each year; it is usually to be obtained by beating
wood-sage and low-growing bramble-bushes in the daytime, flying for
a yard or two, and then generally settling on the flowers of the wood-
sage. It is rather a difficult insect to follow during flight, being so
similar in tint to the herbage (Mason).

Hasrrat.—This species appears to be most particular in its choice
of habitat, and we know many spots where Teucriwm scorodonia grows
abundantly, yet where we could never find the insect. Gregson says
that it was first taken freely, in Britain, in Pettypool Wood, in the
Delamere Forest district. Atmore notes that the species is exceedingly
local on the heaths in the King’s Lynn district, where the foodplant
grows in patches, every one of which, however, does not produce the
Species; he notes that it seems to be less particular in the New
Forest, where the species appears to be very abundant. Barrett says
that the species prefers the patches of wood-sage that grow on open
heaths, in extensive gravel-pits, or in open woods, and appears rarely to
be found on a hedgebank or under bushes, although the plant may
be there in abundance; it prefers sand-heaths and gravyel-pits to
woods. South, however, says that the insect occurs on stunted plants
of Teucrium growing on a dry embankment, in a fir plantation in
Tilgate Forest, and Cambridge notes that it occurs in woods among
Teucrium scorodonia, at Bloxworth, and Freer that it is found
sparingly on Cannock Chase. Mason observes that he could only find
it in one restricted locality in Clevedon, viz., in an open glade in a wood
growing on a limestone hill. At Folkestone it is found freely on the
undercliff in the Warren, not far from the railway-station there, whilst
its first record as British was, as noted above, from Delamere Forest.
In Belgium, Derenne also records it as very abundant in the Forest of

——

490 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Libin, whilst Crombrugehe says that it is abundant in the Forest of
Soignes, in somewhat shady places. Bankes says that it is an
extremely local species in Dorset, where, although its foodplant is
abundant both away from, as well as on, the coast, the insect appears
to have been only found at one inland station, v7z., Bloxworth. He adds:
‘*« Personally I have never met with it except on the coast-line, but have
there found it in, and on, various warm hollows and slopes on
sheltered strips of undercliff. Some of these spots le fully exposed to
the east, but they are all protected from the prevalent west and south-
west winds. C. heterodactyla, in my experience, 1s not confined to any
particular kind of soil.” W.H. B. Fletcher finds it on a sandy common
on Hayling Island.

Locatities.—The species is exceedingly local in England, has been
once reported from Scotland, and only from Ireland, without details, by
Gregson (/nt., iv., p. 806). Brrxs: Reading (Bazett), Boar’s Hill (Sedg-
wick). CHEsHIRE: Bidston (Brockholes), Pettypool Wood (Gregson), Delamere
Forest (Greening), Birkenhead (Stainton). [? Cornwatnu: Botus Fleming
(Marshall), recorded as hieracit.| DrenpicH: Llanferras, Pen-y-Garrowin,
Pant Moen (Gregson). Drvon (teste Barrett). Dorser: Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes), Isle of Portland (Richardson), Bloxworth (Cambridge), Weymouth
(Richardson). Duruam: Darlington (Stainton). GuovucEsTeER: common—
near Durdham Down, Almondsbury (Hudd), Bristol (Stainton). Hants :
Hayling Island (W. H. B. Fletcher), New Forest (Atmore). Iste or Man
(Gregson, Ent., iv., p. 306). Kent: Folkestone Warren (Tutt), Shoreham
(Bower), Canterbury (Parry). LancasHrre: [Warrington (teste Leech). Possibly
intended for Petiypool Wood (Tutt)], Humphrey Head (Gregson). lLincotn:
Ashby, near Brigg (Cassal). Norrotk: Yarmouth, Norwich, Ranworth (Barrett),
King’s Lynn (Atmore). NorTHUMBERLAND: Newcastle (Stainton). SomERsEer:
Leigh Woods, Brockley Coombe (Hudd), Clevedon (Mason). Strarrorp: Cannock
Chase (Freer). Scurrozrk: Brandon (Bower), Bentley (Burrows). SuRReEy:
Crohamhurst, near Croydon (Sheldon), Box Hill(Bower). Sussex: Tilgate Forest
(South). Surnertanp: Extreme north of the county (Cruttwell teste Holland).

WestmortanD: Witherslack (Gregson). WorcestER: Witley, Hartlebury
Common (Edwards). ; ;
Distripution.—The continental distribution of the species is prac-

tically unknown, and, even as late as 1892, examples were being sent
out by Staudinger as /ieracii (see Ent. Rec., 1li., p. 58). Réssler and
others, however, had previously almost reached a solution of the diffi-
culty, but it was not until 1895 that it really was distinctly recognised
as a species apart from hieracii (see Hofmann, Die Deutsch. Pteroph.,
p. 116), and, as recently as 1900, Crombrugghe de Picquendaele felt it
necessary to point out the different life-histories of the two insects*
[fer. Ent. Soc. Namur, iv., p. 47 (1900)]. bererum: Forest of Libin, very
abundant (Derenne), Forest of Soignes, abundant (Crombrugghe). Grnmany:
Baden—Hardtwald, near Karlsruhe (Hofmann), Heidelberg (Meess and Spuler),
Schwarzwald— St. Blasien (Bischoff), Todtmoos, Geisinger Bergen (Meess
and Spuler), Rhine Provinces—Lorch-on-Rhine, Dennelbach Valley (Réssler), the
Senning, Roeslingberg, Bornich, near St. Goarshausen (Fuchs), Bavaria—the
Donauberg, Kelheim (Schmid), Hanover (Glitz), Marktsteft, near Wirzburg,
Wiirttemberg—Urach (Hofmann). Spain: Moncayo (Chapman).

* Having reared both species, Crombrugghe de Picquendaele writes: ‘‘ The
larva of O. hieracii feeds on Hieracia, chiefly H. laevigatum, that of C. heterodactyla
will eat only Teucrium scorodonia, refusing entirely Hieracia. Their mode of life,
too, differs completely—the larva of hieracii, far from exposing itself, lives hidden
in the heart of the stem, and folds the young leaves, and only quits this hiding-
place when fullfed, wandering off then to find a suitable pupation-place. That of
heterodactyla feeds openly on the stem, or on the leaves. The pupz of the two
species, too, differ markedly—that of hieracit has a row of carmine-red spines
separated by black points; these are wanting in heterodactyla”’ (Rev. Ent. Soc-
Namur, iv., pp. 47-48). -.

BUCKLERIA. 491

Tribe : BuckiERupt.

Genus: Bucxueria, Tutt.

Synonymy.—Genus: Buckleria, Tutt, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,’’ xvii., p. 37 (1905). Acip-
tilus, Zell., ‘‘Isis,” p. 866 (1841); H.-Sch., ‘‘Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 382, supp. fig. 19
(1855). Pterophorus, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,’’ p. 866 (1841); Dup., ‘‘ Cat. Méth.,’’ p. 383
(1844) ; Sta., ‘“‘Supp. Cat.,’’ p. 13 (1851); Thomps., ‘‘ Ent. Wk. Int.,” i., p. 106
(1857); Dblday., ‘‘ Syn. List,’’ 2nd ed., p. 37 (1859); Sta., «‘ Man.,’’ii., p. 445 (1859).
Aciptilia, Zell., ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,” vi., p. 400 (1852); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,”’
2nd ed., p. 345 (1871); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 810
(1877); Frey, ‘‘Lep. Schweiz,’’ p. 432 (1880); Biittner, ‘‘Stett. Ent. Zeit.,’”
xli., p. 473 (1880); Teich, ‘‘Stett. Ent. Ztg.,’? xlv., p. 214 (1884); Sorhen.,
** Kleinschmett. Brandg.,’? p. 9 (1886); Cambr., ‘‘Ent.,”’ xx.,. p. 326 (1887) ;
ut. Young Nat.,”’ x., p. 166 (1889); South, ‘‘Ent.,”’ xxii., p. 36 (1889).
Alucita, Cunt y Mart., -‘ Cat. Lep.,’’ p. 204 (1874). Trichoptilus, Meyr., ‘‘ Trans.
Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 484 (1890) ; ‘‘ Handbook,”’ etc., p. 430 (1895) ; Tutt, ‘* Brit.
Nites ie, D- 203 (1891); ‘° Pter. Brit.,’’ p: 77 (1895); Hofmn., “‘Deutsch. Pter.,”
peat (1895)5 Staud. and Reb., “‘Cat.,’ 38rd ed., p. 70 (1901); Barr., ‘* Lep.
Brit. Isles,’’ ix., pl. 417, fig. 7 (1904); Chpm., ‘‘ Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.,’’ p. 133
(1906). Trichoptylus, Barr., ‘‘ Lep. Brit. Isles,” ix., p. 396 (1904).

When Zeller first described (/sis, 1841, p. 866) paludwm, he grouped
it in his Aciptilus, placing it in a separate sect. g, next to sect. f, which
contained pentadactyla, L. In 1852, he adopted (Linn. Ent., vi., p. 400)
the Hubnerian title, Aciptilia, and placed it with stceliota, Z., and
baptodactyla, Z., in his group d. Herrich-Schaffer, who largely
followed Zeller, in 1855 placed it in his sect. 1 of Aciptilus, with
siceliota ; whilst Doubleday, in 1859, placed (Syn. Cat., 2nd ed., p. 37)
it in his heterogeneric genus Pterophorus, between microdactyla, Hb., and
brachydactyla, Tr. Staudinger and Wocke (Cat., 2nd ed., p. 345)
retained it in Actptilia, placing it directly after pentadactyla, L.
Meyrick, in 1890 (Trans. Mnt. Soc. Lond., 1890, p. 484), placed it in
Lrichoptilus*, a genus created and described by Walsingham (Pteroph. of
California and Oregon, pp. 62-68) for an American species, pyyniaeus, and
it is especially noted that the third lobe of the hindwings is adorned
with a projecting tooth of scales, very slightly beyond the middle of
its hinder margin, and that the tuft is situated nearer to the base than
in any other genus known to the writer. Meyrick had already used
the generic name (T7rans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1885, p. 7), extending the

* TRICHOPTI!US, gen. nov. Aciptilo aflinis. Antenne pubescentes, articulo
basali incrassato ; floceus frontalis nullus. Palpi capite longiores, tenues, articulo
secondo vix fortiore quam apicalis. Pedes sat robusti. Tibi postice: nodis
duobus penicillo supra ornatis, calearibus primis pene paribus, secundis
brevioribus. Alze anticz ultra medium fisse, lacinize peranguste, diverse, angulus
analis obsoletus. Alarum posticarum digiti tres filiformes, tertio paulo post
medium squamis projectis ornato. Antenne pubescent, palpi projecting beyond
the head, slender, acuminate, the second joint scarcely thicker than the apical
joint, and about the same length. The legs fairly stout. ‘The posterior tibixe
thickened at the base of the spurs, and ornamented above them with erect brush-
like tufts of scales ; the first pair of spurs of nearly equal length, the second pair
equal and shorter. Forewings cleft to slightly beyond their middle, the lobes very
slender, diverging; the anal angle not defined. Posterior wings with the upper
cleft reaching to within one-fourth of their base, the lower cleft nearly reaching the
base ; all the lobes very slender, almost filiform, the third being adorned with a
projecting tooth of scales very slightly beyond the middle of its hinder margin.
The cleft of the forewings is deeper, and the tuft of scales on the third lobe of the
hindwings is situated nearer to the base than in any genus with which | am
acquainted. It approaches the genus Aciptilus in its narrow lobes and in the
absence of a defined anal angle—Type: J'richoptilus pygmaeus (Walsingham,
Pteroph. Cal. Oregon, pp. 62-63).

492, BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

characters for various species from localities as far distant as the Cape
de Verde Islands, Queensland and New Guinea, although he rightly
acknowledges that he does not know whether the generic name
rightly belongs to the species he describes. One suspects not, at any
rate, in the cases of scythrodes and ceramodes, and possibly of many
more. In his Handbook, p. 481, he gives “a slight black scale-tooth
in dorsal cilia of 8rd segment of hindwing”’ as one of the characters of
the genus in which he places paludum, which is, however, without the
scale-tooth. That paluduwm belongs to the American genus we are not
inclined at all to grant, and, for our European species without the
scale-tuft on the 8rd plumule of the hindwing, we created, in 1905,
the genus Buckleria. Although we do not think Meyrick was right in
the use of the name Trichoptilus, we are fully in agreement with him
in following Hofmann in bringing it into close proximity with his
genus Oxyptilus, for even he had, in 1886, followed (Trans. Ent. Soe.
Lond., p. 6) his predecessors in keeping the insect close to Aciptilia.
That Meyrick’s diagnosis of Trichoptilus applies to the whole of the
Buckleriid group, or tribe, is clear from his description (Trans. Ent.
Soc. Lond., 1890, p. 484), which reads as follows :

Face without tuft, rounded; ocelli obsolete; tongue developed. Antennze
two-thirds; in ¢ ciliated (one-third to two-thirds). Labial palpi moderate,
ascending, second joint with short projecting scales leneath, tending to
form a short angular apical tuft, terminal joint short or long, filiform, tolerably
pointed. Maxillary palpi obsolete. Tibie thickened with scales on origin of
spurs, outer spurs nearly equal inner. Forewings bifid, cleft from before middle ;
vein 2 out of 4 or absent, 3 absent, 5 and 6 extremely short, 7 absent, 9 absent,
10 from near 8 or absent, 11 from near 8, long. Hindwings trifid, 3rd segment
with more or less developed tooth of black scales in dorsal cilia, often slight;
vein 2 from middle of cell, 3 absent, 5 and 6 very short, 7 to apex.

Meyrick then says (loc. cit., p. 485) that this is ‘‘a genus of limited
extent, but cosmopolitan; more species are known from Australia
than any other region.” His later diagnosis (Handbook, etc., pp.
430-4381), specially written for paludum, still maintains that ‘‘ the 3rd
segment of the hindwing has a slight black scale-tooth in the dorsal
cilia.” Hofmann, as usual well ahead of all his contemporaries, first
brought the Oxyptilids (Ozyptilus) and Buckleriids (T’richuptilus) into
close connection (see anted, p. 91), and his is the latest independent
work, Staudinger and Rebel’s Catalog, 38rd ed., pp. 70 et seq., being a
mere copy of Meyrick’s system, and including all his errors. An
examination of the $ genital appendages indicates that Hofmann’s
erouping is correct, and Chapman notes thereof: “The structure of
the § appendages shows that the Buckleriids (paludum and _siceliota)
belong to the Oxyptilid group. The middle (true clasp ?) appendage
consists of two portions, a basal one of tolerably solid chitin, clothed
with scales and some bristles, and a terminal one, that is much more
delicate (and easily deformed in preparation and mounting). It has
an inflated appearance, and is covered with fine bristles, regularly
disposed, at some little distance apart. In Buckleria (paludum)
this curious appendix arises near the middle, not the end, of the
shaft which is very long and slender. In Stangeia (siceliota) it
is hardly developed, and the structure is less close to Oxyptilus,
than is that of Buckleria.” Some ten years after the position of
the Buckleriids with the Oxyptilids had been satisfactorily worked
out by Hofmann and Meyrick, Barrett wrote (Lep. Brit. Isles,

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 493

ix., p. 897) that “paludum has recently been included in the genus
Leioptilus, but has been separated by Lord Walsingham, under the
present name (Trichoptilus), with a number of closely allied North
American and other exotic species.” So far as we know, the species
has never been placed by any author in Letoptilus, whilst, further,
Walsingham created Trichoptilus for certain American species, without,
however, referring paludum thereto; it was Meyrick who referred our
paludum and other exotic species, differing apparently in structure, to
the American genus. Hofmann’s Tvichoptilus is largely based on
paludum, and is, therefore, nearly synonymous with our Buckleria.
His diagnosis (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 169-170) reads as follows:

Forehead and crown smooth-scaled ; antenneze loosely scaled all round, especially
in the apical third, where some of the scales of the joints are erect. _ Palpi rather
long and slender, smooth-scaled, second joint somewhat ascending, sometimes with
a few slightly-projecting scales at its apex, terminal joint shorter than the second,
directed downwards. ‘Tibize with scale-thickenings at the origin of the spurs.
Forewings fissured to the middle, both lobes narrow, and running to a point, the
upper broader than the lower. Plumules of the hindwings similar to one another ;
in the only German species, without scale-tufts on the inner margin of the 3rd
plumule; in a second south European species, with a very small and weak scale-tuft
in the middle of the inner margin of the 3rd plumule. The neuration differs from
that of the genus Oxyptilus m that Il, (Branch 11, H.-S) is absent, and that only
one stem arises from the upper angle of the central cell, namely, the common stem
of II,, Il,, and I],. Il, (Branch 7, H.-S.) arises at some distance from this common
stem out of the very weakly indicated, vertically running, discocellular, and runs
parallel with stem II along the inner margin of the upper lobe. III, and IIT, are
scarcely to be recognised, III, (Branch 4, H.-S.) is adjoined to IV, and arises with the
very short and weak branch IV, (Branch 3, H.-S.) out of the stem IV shortly before
the apex of the lower lobe. IV, (Branch 2, H.-S.) arises, at the base of the lower
lobe just at the fissure, out of stem IV, is very weak, closely adpressed to the main
stem, and vanishes at about the middle of the lower lobe in the wing membrane.
Stem V is, in the basal half of the forewings, very weak, afterwards stronger, and
vanishes at the base of the lower lobe where IV, arises. Stem a is only weakly
indicated at the base of the wing. On the hindwings, stem IV only throws off a
short branch, which, running very close to the main stem, gradually loses itself in
the middle plumule. The male genitalia are distinguished by the very remarkably
formed genital clasps; these are extended lengthwise, narrow, hollow within, and
furnished with a broad, axe-shaped (beilformig), bristly, membranous process
(Taf. iii., fig. 10). The 10th dorsal plate obtusely triangled, arched, and directed
downwards at the apex. The 9th dorsal and ventral plates exhibit nothing
especially noticeable. The much more perfect neuration, the thickening of the
tibiee with scales, and the differing typical markings, similar to those of the genus
Oxyptilus, completely justify the separation from Aciptilia. From Oxyptilus,
the genus may equally well be differentiated by the perfectly-pointed, narrow. lower
lobe, without a trace of an anal angle, and by the neuration. Only one German
species—paludum.

BuckLeria paLupuM, Zeller.

Synonymy.—Species: Paludum, Zell., ‘‘Isis,’’ p. 277 (1839); p. 866 (1841); Dup.,
“Cat. Méth.,’’ p. 383 (1844) ; Zell., ‘Linn. Ent.,” vi., p. 400 (1852) ; Sta., ** Cat.,”
supp. p. 13 (1851); H.-Sch., ‘‘Sys. Bearb.,’’ v., p. 382, supp. fig. 19 (1855);
Thomps., ‘‘ Ent. Wk. Int.,”’ ii., p. 108 (1857) ; Sta., ‘‘Man.,” ii., p. 445 (1859) ;
Jord., ‘‘ Ent. Mo. Mag.,’’ vi., p. 150 (1869); Staud. and Wocke, ‘‘ Cat.,’’ 2nd ed.,
p. 345 (1871); Cuni y Mart., ‘‘Cat. Lep.,” p. 204 (1874); Hein. and Wocke,
‘‘Schmett. Deutsch.,”’ iii., pt. 2, p. 810 (1877); Biitt., “‘ Stett. Ent. Ztg.,” xli.,
p. 473 (1880); Frey, ‘‘Lep. der Schweiz,’’ p. 432 (1880); Snell., ‘*De Vlind.,”’
li., pt. 2, p. 1057 (1882); Teich, ‘‘Stett. Ent. Ztg.,’’ xlv., p. 214 (1884) ; Sorhgn.,
“‘ Kleinschmett. Brandbg.,’’ p. 9 (1886); Cambr., ‘‘Ent.,’? xx., p. 326 (1887);
Tutt, ‘‘ Young Nat.,’’ x., p. 166 (1889); South, ‘ Ent.,’’ xxii., p. 36 (1889);
Tutt, ‘‘ Brit. Nat.,’’ i., p. 253 (1891); ‘‘ Pter. Brit.,’’ p. 78 (1895); Meyr., ‘* Trans.
Ent. Soc. London,”’ p. 485 (1890); ‘‘ Handbook,’ ete., p. 431 (1895); Hofmn.,
“Deutsch. Pter.,’? p. 122 (1895) ; Staud. and Reb., ‘* Cat.,’’ 3rd ed., p. 70 (1901)

>

=

ats

AQ4 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Barr., ‘‘Lep. Brit. Isles,” ix., p. 396, pl. 417, fig. 4 (1904); Chapmn., ‘“ Trans.
Ent. Soc. London,”’ p. 133 (1906).

ufo-griseis, laciniis niveo-
bistrigatis, digito tertio setaceo non atro-squamato. (Forewings reddish-
erey, with two snow-white transverse lines across the lobes, the 8rd
plumule bristle-like, without black scales) (one male and three females)
Isis, 1839, p. 277.* The smallest plume, even less than P. microdactylus.
In colour and markings it appears similar to the species related to
P. hieracii (section b of the genus), but differs essentially in that the fore-
wings are fissured more than to the middle, that the lower lobe, like the —
upper lobe, is quite bristle-like, and that the 8rd plumule is quite without

the black scale-tufts in the fringes. It belongs, therefore, to the same
section as P. pentadactylus, from which it is distinguished by its short, but
very long-spurred, legs. Body brownish-grey. Upper margin of the
eyes white. Antenne brownish, with a white longitudinal line, and
with short bristle-like, somewhat erect, threads on the joints in both
sexes. Palpi much longer than the head, curved upwards, slender,
whitish, with a brown longitudinal line on the side; the apical joint
slender, rather long, projecting horizontally, brown beneath. Legs
shorter than usual. Cox brownish dust-colour; the four hinder ones
whitish. Femora on one side silvery-whitish, on the other brownish,
with white lines;+ tibiz white, with a brownish longitudinal line,
thickened at the ends with brownish scales; those on the hind tibize
are conspicuous ‘by their white terminations. ‘Tarsal joints silvery-
white, brownish at their ends. Abdomen, upper- and undersides, with
interrupted, and partially extinguished, silvery lines.t The narrow
forewings fissured to more than the middle, brownish-grey, on the inner
margin just before, and at, the fissure, with crowded whitish scaling.
The two lobes have, at the commencement of the second and third
thirds, a broad, somewhat faint, silvery-white transverse line, which
runs on the costa into the fringes. Fringes blackish, here and there
with whitish spots, with which that before the apex of the inner
margin of the 8rd plumule contrasts well. Hindwings pale brown,
with rather long grey fringes; the fringes at the apex of the 3rd
plumule whitish. All the plumules very narrow, the two first as long
as two-thirds of the total length of the hindwings. I took eight
examples of this species (and could have taken more if [ had not merely
considered them remarkable on account of the situation and small size)
near Frankfort-on-the-Oder, at the end of July, on a peat-moor, where
I also collected Tipula fasciata, Chrysops sepulchralis, and Tabanus

* Yet another species has a resemblance to didactylus, which, however,
immediately falls away, when one observes the long, narrow, 3rd plumule of the
hindwings entirely destitute of the biack scale-tufts, wherefore, also, I did not at
all take it into consideration above. It is like the very smallest didactyli, and has, in
common with this species, and with Pterophorus tristis, the long hind tibial spurs, the’
longest in the whole genus; its palpi, however, are different from those of both
species. I took eight examples, of which my collection only retains four, on a
peat-moor near Frankfort, at the end of July. It is named Pterophorus paludum,
Zell. (amaurodactylus, in litt.), and should, still less than P. tristis, be considered
in connection with Degeer’s or Linné’s didactylus (Zeller, Isis, 1839, p. 277).

{; his description is taken from Zeller’s own copy (in Nat. Hist. Museum
Library); both the paragraphs marked + are ‘‘?’’ in Zeller’s handwriting, and
unterbrochen (=interrupted) is deleted, verloschen (=extinguished or faint)
being substituted: ee

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 495

plebejus. According to news from Herr Fischer v. Roéslerstamm, this
plume occurs also near Berlin (Zeller, /sis, 1841, pp. 866-867).

Imaco.—12mm.-l5mm. Forewings fuscous-brown, with very deep
cleft, the lobes narrow and pointed; the costa narrowly blackish to the
first lobal line; two bright, shiny, silvery-white, transverse lobal lines;
apices of lobes also white; discal area thickly sprinkled longitudinally
with white scales; asmall white fissural spot at end of fissure, directly
above a tiny black one; fringes fuscous, with white streaks (sometimes
edged with black) terminating the transverse lines, and at the apex ;
several crowded short black scales towards centre of upper and lower
edges of fissure. The hindwings very deeply cleft; dark fuscous;
fringes not quite so dark as the plumules; there is no trace whatever
of any scale-tuft, or isolated scales_of a specialised character, on the
ard plumule.*

SexuaL DimorPHismM.—The ¢s are distinctly larger than the @?s,
averaging from 2mm. to 8mm. more, with much longer and more slender
abdomina, wider wings, and generally with somewhat darker ground-
colour, and more abundant silvery-white scales. The paludum
in the Frey Coll. also show distinctly the smaller size of the ¢.
Bankes writes (in Jlitt.), “Although both sexes vary considerably
in size, there is, on the whole, a marked difference between
them in this respect, the females averaging about 2mm. smaller
in wing-expanse than the males. In my lengthy series of second-
brood specimens, all captured, the alar. exp. of the latter runs
from 18mm. to 15°5mm., while that of the former is only 12mm. to
13-5mm. I have little doubt that the individuals of the first brood,
of which I have not sufficient for useful comparison, would, in both
sexes, average rather larger than those of the second, and my only ? of
the earlier brood expands 14°5mm., although none of the few first-brood
3d s before me measures more than 15mm. The ? s seem a little variable
in colour, but my limited number of representatives of this sex are,
on the whole, rather hghter and brighter than the gs, the brown
ground colour showing a stronger tendency to be tinged with reddish.
Owing partly to this, and partly to the white markings being more
concentrated because the wing expanse is smaller, the females, in
general, present a rather more variegated appearance, and remind one
more of O. parvidactylus than do the males. The sexes can be easily
separated by a glance at the abdomen, that of the g being long,
slender throughout, especially anteriorly, and appearing broader
terminally than elsewhere, while that of the @ is rather shorter,
markedly stouter, and of a totally different shape, being of greatest
girth somewhat behind the middle, and tapering thence gradually
towards the thorax, and rapidly towards the anal extremity. In
addition, there arise on the abdomen of the male, shortly before the
termen, which they surround, six separate tufts of hair-scales, viz.,
two subdorsal (long), two lateral (short), two ventral (long), projecting
obliquely outwards and backwards. A view from above frequently
shows clearly the tips of the two subdorsal tufts on either side of the
tip of the termen proper, which is seen between them at a somewhat

* This is absolutely true of every specimen we have seen in different collections,
but Chapman observes that, in some bred specimens, there are sometimes three
or four scattered scales of the ‘* tuft’’ set. We have never seen such.

496 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

lower level. These remarkable tufts of hair-scales are absent from the
abdomen of the female.”

Variation.—The imagines are variable in size, the larger specimens
looking also much wider-, as well as longer-winged. The ground
colour varies somewhat, an occasional example being quite bright brown
(tinged with reddish) rather than dull fuscous-brown ; the quantity
of white scaling on the costa, and in the discal area also, varies
considerably, some specimens occasionally having quite a white discal
area ; in one example under observation, the white is very much more
developed on the left, than on the right, forewing. The continuation
of the inner lobal line over the lower lobe is also at times somewhat
ill-developed, but the actual amount of variation does not appear to
be very great or very marked. Bankes observes (2m litt.) that the
moths vary but moderately in colour, but the sexes show con-
siderable difference in size, good-sized gs expanding 15mm., whereas
good-sized 9s only expand 13mm. Barrett observes that Yorkshire
specimens are much larger than those taken elsewhere, but, as only two
Yorkshire examples are known, the data hardly warrant such a
sweeping generalisation. Hofmann writes (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p.
170): ‘‘ The distribution of the markings is quite similar to that of
the species of Oxyptilus. The ground colour grey-brown at the base,
with white scaling forming an indistinct longitudinal stripe; on the
costa, likewise, a few white scales. Inner-marginal spot and discoidal
spot white (sometimes indistinct). The inner-marginal spot is bordered,
towards the base, by a more or less strongly expressed short black
streak. Immediately before the fissure there is, in the (height)* neigh-
bourhood of the costa of the lower lobe, a black spot, and a white spot
above it (fissural spots). Across the lobes run two, often indistinct,
white transverse lines, which are continued into the dark brown costal
fringes. At the extreme apex these (the fringes) are white, and cut
below by a narrow, deep black, longitudinal dash. On the inner
margin of the upper lobe the fringes are brownish, with a strong black
dash bordered on each side by white just before the apex, which cuts
through the whole length of the fringes (in contrast with Oxyptilus,
where the dash, at the situation named, cuts only through the basal
line of the fringe, and is often very small or altogether absent). Under
the white transverse line are a few white scales, and also on the inner
marein of the upper lobe, and besides, between these situations, there are
some broad black scales. The fringes of the lower lobe are brown, at
the extreme apex white, with several single black scales, at the base, on
the costa, as well as on the inner margin, and with a broad white dash
below the outer transverse line, bordered with black towards the base,
which cuts the whole length of the fringes. Below the first transverse
line the fringes of the inner margin are sometimes, for their whole
length, cut through with white, but more narrowly than below the
outer band, and beset with single, coarse, white scales. This second
white dash is bordered outwardly with black scales. Hindwings,
together with the fringes, grey, only at the apex of the 3rd plumule
are a few white hair-scales. Underside grey; the white dashes in the
fringes of both lobes, as well as the outer transverse line on the upper

* Hofmann has Hohe (=height), but I suspect this must be a misprint for
Nahe (=neighbourhood) (Sich). .

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 497

lobe, distinct ; Ist plumule of the hindwings, especially towards the
apex, beset with broad white scaling. Head and thorax brown-grey ;
palpi the same, on the lower edge of the second joint white; the third
joint outwardly brown, inwardly white; antenne brown on the edges,
with fine white, somewhat erect, scaling, indistinctly white-ringed
towards the apex. Thorax yellow-grey ; coxe brown, the middle ones
outwardly bordered with white. Femora brown, bordered with white
on both sides. Fore and middle tibize brown above, white below, only
slightly thickened at the extremities. Hind tibize white, before the base
of the spurs, to a greater or less extent, brown, and thickened with
brown scales. Spurs very long, brown above, white below. ‘Tarsal
joints white, at the apices of the joints more or less extensively brown.
Thorax, behind, yellowish-white. The 1st abdominal segment on both
sides broadly whitish. Abdomen brown, with interrupted white longi-
tudinal lines on the back and below, on the 2nd and 8rd segments very
long. Thelong, wedge-shaped, brown, anal tuft of the gf is bordered above
by two brown, below by two shorter white, scale-tufts.’”’ In the Frey
collection the Bremgarten specimens are of a pale, grey-brown, tint,
clearly marked with white, transverse, lobal lines, and white fringe-streaks
towards the apex of the upper, and the inner margin of the lower, lobe
of the forewings. The median part of the forewings paler, very
thickly scaled with grey ; one example much browner than the rest.
From the Katzensee are two quite brown specimens, a g and 9°, the
@ very small. Erom Bunzen, three similar specimens, two g's and
one 92, the latter also small; the gs particularly well-marked with
clear, white, and complete lobal lines, the apices of the lobes of the
forewings, and those of the plumules of the hindwings, being
exceptionally well-tipped with white.

Comparison OF BucKLERIA PALUDUM WITH ITs ALLIES.—Very closely
resembling Pterophorus siceliota, but easily recognised by the antenne,
which have no rings. It differs much from baptodactylus by the hind
lobe of the forewing, which is not white-coloured, the white-banded
front lobe, etc. (Zeller).

Heenayinc.—The egg is laid (in confinement) on the petioles of
the glands near the margin of the leaves of Drosera rotundifolia; this
was sufficiently frequent to suggest it as the situation preferred.
They were also laid on the undersides of the leaves, on the petioles
and on the dead flower-stalks of the previous year, and even on the peat
beside the plant (Chapman). A @ captured near Wareham, Dorset, on
August 28rd, 1904, refused to oviposit on Nartheciwm ossifragum, at first
supplied to her, but, when given a green seed-head of Drosera rotundi-
folia, she laid altogether fourteen eggs on its calyces, branchlets, and
stem, before dying on August 80th. [Although Drosera rotundifolia, from
its well-known peculiarities of structure, etc., and carnivorous habits,
seemed so unlikely to be the foodplant of Buckleria paludum, I had
suspected, ever since 1890, that it might be so, from having then
noted it as apparently the only possible foodplant which was common
to the spots known to me for the insect. A thorough search, however,
on this and other plants, in 1891 and subsequent years, produced no
result, doubtless owing to the great abundance of Drosera and the
scarcity of the larva.] The details of the egelaying were as follows :—
Single ovum laid August 23rd, 1904, by 2 (no. 1) caught near Wareham,
Dorset, August 20th, 1904. Single ovum laid August 28rd, 1904,

498 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

by 2? (no. 2) caught near Wareham, Dorset, August 20th, 1904. Single
ovum laid August 23rd, 1904, by 2 (no. 8) caught near Wareham,
Dorset, August 20th, 1904. These three @s all died after laying
a single egg each, one egg being attached to the paper of the cardboard
box, while the other two were dropped as the moths were expiring.
Two ova laid August 26th, 1904, by ¢ caught near Wareham, Dorset,
August 23rd, 1904. Fourteen ova laid August 26th-380th, 1904, by ?
caught near Wareham, Dorset, August 28rd, 1904. All these ova were
sent to Dr. Chapman (Bankes). Chapman writes: “ My observations
began in August, 1904, when I received several eges from Mr. Bankes,
laid by ° s captured near Wareham, Dorset. I find from my notes that
2s, taken August 20th, laid eggs from which two larve hatched on
August 80th, and from a @, captured August 28rd, two larve
hatched on September 6th. A further supply of eggs was received
on August 31st. The first larve that hatched were placed on all
sorts of bog-plants obtainable near Reigate, but without result, and
when these were finally placed on the Drosera plants, sent by Mr.
Bankes, they were already rather exhausted. It was on August 31st,
1904, that the plants of Drosera arrived, along with sixteen eggs on the
same date. Some of these eggs were laid loosely, two were on leno,
and the rest on a flower-stalk, or rather fruit-head, of Drosera. A
curious point is that, of the August 31st eggs, those separate, and one
on the muslin, hatched; the others on the muslin proved infertile and
did not change colour. Those hatched September 6th; the eggs on
the seed-stem are still (14th) unhatched; they changed colour a day
or two later than the others, and their hatching was expected about
the 8th, but they make no sign. The young larve inside have, since
that date, been obviously mature. The eggs remain free from
shrinking, mould, or other sign of death or decay, and give the
impression of intending hibernation. On September 16th, 1904, the
remaining eggs were still unhatched, and they ultimately proved to be
dead’’ (Chapman). Moths that were confined over growing Drosera in
June, 1905, with a view to eggs, never got caught by the plants except on
one occasion, when a moth escaped only by losing a leg caught in the ©
glue; another moth fell on a leaf, where it died, and, being left there,
was largely enveloped by the leaf after a few days. Some moths thus
confined, between June 18th-29th, 1905, laid eggs in confinement, one
was detected beneath a leaf-petiole, another attached to a gland-stalk
at the margin of a leaf, and soon. On June 17th, 1905, South also
obtained a pairing in confinement, the @ remaining alive some days
over the foodplant; she laid eggs on, and around, the foodplant; it”
was from the eggs thus obtained by South and Chapman that our
knowledge of the life-history of the summer brood was obtained.

Ovum.—Bright yellow at first, becoming afterwards duller in tint.
It is oval in any longitudinal section, circular in any transverse one.
Its length is 0°'38mm., and its diameter 0°24mm. It has very large,
bold, sculpturing, consisting of a net-work of ribs enclosing irregular
polygons. The ribs are broad, about one-third of the width of the
enclosed hexagons (or as may be). The diameter of the cells is about
0:02mm., of a cell and one wall about 0:026mm. (Chapman).

Hasits oF Larva.—Autumn, winter, and spring larva: The first
larvee that hatched (two on August 30th, 1904, from eggs laid by 2S
taken August 20th) were placed on all sorts of bog-plants obtainable —

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 499

near Reigate, but without result, and when these were finally placed
on Drosera plants sent by Bankes, they were already exhausted, and
only three ultimately survived; these seemed more at home on the
Drosera than on anything yet tried; one placed on a leaf was, however,
in process of digestion next morning; the others had disappeared
somewhere, apparently in the hearts of the little plants. A new set of
eges began to hatch on September 6th (from eggs laid by a 9 captured
August 23rd); much time was spent in watching the young larve on
the plants; none were placed amongst the glands on the leaves, but
the largest of the unexpanded leaves was selected. They eventually
got down towards the centre of the plant, and became much more quiet
and sluggish there, but still on the move. The next day none of them
could be found. September 14th: Looked at occasionally ; nothing
could be made of the Drosera plants, but to-day a careful examination
shows a small pile of frass, near the centre, in two of the plants.
Another shows nothing, and in the fourth is a living larva of paludum,
a little grown, but out, exposed, and looking sluggish. September 16th:
On one planta small larva, by the conspicuousness of its darkish
tubercles, in its second skin, is seen down amongst the leaf-stems just
outside the central heart, covered by a slight web of silk, and this a
little obscured by some frass. On another plant a small larva is
exposed in about the same situation; this one is well-fed up in first
skin. September 17th: The larva under the web has thickened it, both
with silk and other material (frass ?), so that he is now invisible. On
another plant the exposed larva is now quite fat, in first skin, but is
still exposed. September 22nd: The cocoon is still firm and opaque,
its strong structure leads one to suppose itis for hybernation. It is
placed between an outer dying leaf-stalk {of a not thriving plant) and
the central bud-bulb, and the adjacent leaf, on its inner side, looks as if
dying at the tip, from being eaten or excavated ; this is the only point
to suggest that the larva is feeding. The “‘exposed’”’ larva, though
looked for every day, has been invisible since the 17th, and it was feared
something might have happened to it; to-day, however, it is out,
crawling over the minute leaves of the leaf-bud in the centre of the
plant; no trace is seen (of course, without pulling the plant to pieces) of
where it spent the interval. It is now in the second instar. September
24th: A plant, in which a larva was placed, September 6th, and of
which no trace could since be found, although the plant has been
examined most carefully nearly every day, when examined to-day,

was found to have on it a larva in second skin, which was constructing
a silken web over itself at the side of the central bud, and close to the
base of a larger leaf. No trace of any of the work of the larva in the
interval can be found. The larva, found on the 17th, has thickened its
web, and pellets of frass are conspicuous on its upper surface. The
larva can still be faintly outlined beneath. The first larva is quite
invisible. October 22nd: The three inhabited plants are not looking
flourishing; two, which have the largest green centres, have the cocoons
as last described ; the third, however, has only a small central bit of
erecn, and there is a new and larger cocoon on the other side of this
from the original one, that does not look much different; the new
cocoon is still imperfect, and one glimpse was got through it of the
black head of the larva moving about, and apparently spinning, and
again of the body of the larva, of which no details appeared, but it

500 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

was decidedly larger, and of a flesh tint. It is unfortunate that
the larva was not seen when on the move, and transferred to a
better plant, and a description of it taken. The presumption is that it
is now in its third skin. October 24th: This larva is found crawling
about outside to-day. It may be merely in second stage, although
two days since noted as being presumably in the third (see infra).
October 27th: The larva was found to have made some slight spinning.
Yesterday (October 26th) the spinning formed a fairly complete cocoon,
with some black dots of frass, and to-day it is more dense, and the
larva is completely hidden. November 20th: Larva (no. 2) noted 27th,
remains in statu quo. Another (no. 1) is found to-day to have begun
a new tent; it is still somewhat visible through the silk, and can be
seen to be fat, and larger, if anything, than no. 2 at its spinning, but
no details are discernible. No. 8 has its cocoon wet, from water
soaking up the plant; on this plant the central bud is wet, as it is not
in plants of 1 and 2. The cocoon does not look very satisfactory, and
possibly the larva inside is not doing very well. December 10th, 1904:
No. 2 (of November 20th) is found to-day outside its tent, on the
move, and opportunity taken to describe it. It does not seem to have
grown, or to be in feeding-humour—moves very sluggishly. January
14th, 1905: Not liking the look of my plants, I examined them; the
first was dead, remains of a larval head detected; the second was alive,
but no trace of larva could be found; the third contained a larva,
which was preserved, lest worse befall him. He seemed much as
described at the last entry. The cavity, containing his cocoon, was
excavated towards the heart of the button, or bud, of the plant, several
of the small undeveloped leaves (?) being well eaten into. This bud
was preserved in formalin. When the cocoon was removed, the eaten
portion, or rather what was not eaten, formed a small hollow, into
which, or on to which, the cocoon would just fit. This closed the
campaign with the 1904 eggs. It appeared from this that the young
larva feeds somewhere in the centre of the plant as an internal feeder,
and finally makes a cocoon in the heart of the plant for hybernation.
The one cocoon, of which I made the most satisfactory examination,
consisted of a cavity, the greater part of which was excavated out of
the material of the outer leaves of the centre bud (winter bulb), and
completed by a silken cover. This renders it certain that some of the
central material of the plant is eaten; but for this, my experience in
1905 would have led me to suspect that the young larve fed on the
leaves, as those of the summer brood do. The larve, in their first
instar, on the leaves, are often very difficult to see and find, even when
one is sure they are there, so that, in my ignorance, in 1904, I might ~

easily have overlooked them. I am still inclined to suspect that itis
possible that, in the first instar, they feed on the leaves, in the same
way as the summer brood do, and only descend to the centre of the
plant in the second instar. Against this is the fact that the young
larvee directed their wanderings to the centre of the plant, and that
the centre was found to have afforded a good deal of food material. —
The note in describing one larva, as to the presence of secondary hairs —
(October 22nd), and the surmise that it was in third instar, agrees
with later observations; it is probable that this larva was endeayour-
ing to complete its cycle without hybernating, and really was in the —
third instar, as the second instar larve do not show any secondary

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM, 501

hairs. This larva probably perished earlier than the others. So the
matter remained for further investigation in 1905. The larva, like so
many of the Platyptiliid division of the ‘‘plumes,” clearly hybernates
full-crown in its second instar, and ought to be discoverable in the
spring in its further stages. I owe it to Mr. South that I was able
to visit a locality for the species, and to continue the observations in
1905. Of course I did not quite know what to look for, but, as good luck
would have it, the discovery of the larva in the spring proved fairly
easy. May 81st, 1905: Accompanied Mr. South to a locality in the
EKsher district of Surrey, where Drosera is found, and where BD.
paludum had been taken, and searched for larve of B. paludum, and
found about a score. The first specimen was found seated on the
underside of the petiole of a leaf of Drosera. It was nearly full-grown,
and was of about the length of the petiole. This will give some idea of
the size and state of the plants, which were growing on peaty ground
amongst heath, and apart from Sphagnum; most of them were very small,
with the leaves lying flat to the ground, the one above noted being a fine
specimen, about twice the size of the majority. There had been a
drought for a considerable period before this, and the ground was by no
means boggy. The small size was more probably due to drought than to
the period of the season. A fine plant would be 85mm. across only,
majority 25mm.-30mm., and some only 20mm., and even less. The
remaining larvee were found in various positions, some on the petioles,
some under, and some on top of, the leaves, and some sitting across the
centre of the little plants. In no case, either in the field, or in various
observations afterwards at home, did a larva place himself on the top
of a sound, healthy, leaf. They seemed on the whole, however, to be
rather reckless in the way they moved about amongst them. Their
hairs probably protect them against contact with the leaf-glands,
unless they actually walk over them. They would eat any part of the
plant, least frequently, however, attacking the central bud. The most
usual point of attack was the margin of the leaf, approached by the
larva seated on the petiole or beneath the leaf, and, in several cases, the
attack was continued till the whole leaf was eaten, and a portion of the
petiole also. In one or two cases the larva attacked, and ate, the
elandular processes, until it had cleared the middle of a leaf, which
then formed its resting-place. Twice a larva, looking for a place to
pupate, escaped from a flower-pot by crossing the water in the saucer,
so that they are probably able to deal with the habitat, when flooded,
without much injury. The larva is a brownish-red above, varying
from rather dark to a bright rosy colour, and sometimes with some
greenish shades; beneath, it is green. The dorsal tubercles are darker
and more rosy, and retain a bright rose-colour, whilst the rest of the
larva, when fixed for pupation, becomes quite green; the colour
involves not only the tubercles, but a little of the base around them,
especially behind. The hairs are long, and slightly clubbed, or rather
flattened at the end, and so the ends reflect light so as to look larger
than they actually are. The resulting appearance of the larva is that
it looks very much like some aspects of the Drosera leaf, sometimes
the hairs, sometimes the red tubercles, suggesting the glands, and their
supports, on the Drosera leaves, and the general tone of colour is much
that of the green leaf seen through the forest of rosy hairs. In looking
for a larva, a slightly edgewise view of a leaf often suggests a larva,

502 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

and a larva is probably easily overlooked by its close assimilation to the
plant. The larva taken were, for the most part, in their last skins, and ~
their measure was 7mm., and a large or well-stretched one 8mm. long.
Several were, however, in the previous skin, and one so small that I
took it to be in the antepenultimate. This was probably erroneous.
The following day, June 1st, several fixed themselves for pupation,
etc. Summer larvae—June 26th-28th, 1905: Eight larve hatched
from eges received from Mr. South, and were placed, each on a plant
of Drosera, on petioles low down, in the belief that they wanted to go to
the central bud. June 29th: Four of these larvee are now easily seen, in
the centre of a leaf, leisurely eating the very short-stemmed hairs and
glands that occupy that position; one has already cleared a little
circle of more than his whole length in diameter. The intestinal
contents look dark. One concludes that these eggs are most naturally
placed that are on the stem of the glands at the margin of a leaf. One
observes also that the Drosera is infested by an Aphis. This is of
interest, as bearing on the supposed immunity of the plant from insect
attack, due to its insectivorous habit. Such immunity would appear to
be a fiction. July 2nd: These larve clear the centre of the leaf of the
short stems and glands that occur in that position, leaving the longer
marginal ones alone; the little larva itself, even when grown a little,
is very inconspicuous and difficult to find. With a lens, the cleared
central portion of the leaf, with red frass scattered over it, is easily
seen; but, without a lens, the red frass gives very nearly the same tone
to the leaf as the glands do, so that, except by very close scrutiny,
nothing unusual presents itself. This morning one larva is found to
have changed its skin, and appears to be eating the cast skin. The
moult occurred near the centre of the leaf, where the feeding was done;
the only protection by way of web, tent, or any other shelter, being a few
threads spun across the tops of the adjacent glands, making a flimsy,
and almost invisible, cover. The larva has a, relatively, rather large
head, and the hairs are about as long as the larva is thick, and look
dense and crowded together. The larva is still pale and transparent-
looking, but the eye-patch is densely black, the dorsal tubercles
(not the hairs) are dark, and the dorsum has a pale ruddy tint;
the longer hairs are slightly clubbed at their tips. In the first
skin, the larva grows a good deal, but remains very colourless,
or rather transparent, the dark intestinal contents being conspicuous,
and the only coloration being a denser white round the bases of the
dorsal tubercles. July 3rd: Two larve (of the eight that hatched
from Mr. South’s eggs), that had gone a-missing, are now seen to have
hidden themselves, and still are in unopened leaves amongst the
undeveloped glandular hairs, with which their interiors are full.
The leaves are now slightly opened, and frass is very evident. These
larve, therefore, went into incompletely-expanded leaves in order to
eat the glands; these were not, however, probably functionally active
at this stage. July 8th: A small larva (very young in second skin)
had wandered off in the test-tube, in which I had put it for observation, ©
and was probably hungry. I put him on the petiole near the base of
a vigorous leaf, on which the red glands had each a large globule of
gum. He walked very deliberately to the base of the leaf (upper side),
apparently spinning a web, and also searching carefully from side to
side; at length he arrived at the gland-hairs, which, next the petiole,

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 503

are deflexed down it; these he carefully examined on each side of his
way, even moving quite to the side of his proper tracx; his method
looked as if he contemplated climbing up them. The largest are about
three times his length (2mm.), but actually, when he reached as far as
he could without removing more than one pair of prolegs from the
leaf, he withdrew, and continued his march. At length he got nearer
the middle of the leaf, and found that his reaching-up process brought
him to the glandular top of the hair. This, the red knob and trans-
parent gum, is thicker than, and in bulk nearly one-third that of, the
larva. I watched him demolish one of these, which he did rather
quickly, and make considerable inroads on another. The gum, which
is thick and glairy, and draws out into threads, was eaten ; he got his
legs into it, and ate the stuff off his legs, and also ate up the portion
drawn out between them; he did not, however, appear to completely clean
his legs, yet, shortly after, they were certainly quite clean, and the gum
was removed ; though he worked at one side only, it disappeared also
from the other. Possibly the elasticity of the gluey stuff pulled it off,
_ but I was certainly puzzled to know how several legs got quite clean in
some mysterious way. He ate up the red knob of a size about
equal to his own head. He left the green gland-stem. In attacking
the second gland, he appeared to get the front of his head into
the gum, and drew it out, showing the front of his head, and his legs,
to be involved in it. He ate away, however, quite unconcernedly, and,
though again I saw no definite cleaning process, he was apparently
quite clean immediately afterwards. The gum stuck to his head and
legs in such a way as to make it difficult to suppose they got clean
because it did not stick to them, nor did it appear to be wiped off
against the plant. Up to full-growth in the second skin, the food of
the larva seems to be entirely the red glands and their secretion.
July 14th: Visited B. paludum in its habitat, and observed three larve,
two laid up for second moult, and one fora third. July 16th: The
larve fed up in confinement have been paler than the captured ones
of the first brood, and also than those taken two days ago. These
pale larvee are green, with no red, except on the dorsal tubercle, as in
the ordinary newly-changed pupa, and a pupa is without any trace of
red whatever. These green larve show very well the greenish-yellow
subdorsal lines (just dorsal to the tubercle 1 and ii), and also the
slightly oblique one below them. The larve, when small, were given
to wandering, if the plant was not strong and healthy enough to
surround the red glands with plenty of fluid gum, these glands, and
the gum, being their favourite (and only) food, unlike the winter brood
which eats the central portion of the plant. Later, the larve would
eat anything, being fond of the flower-buds and flower-stems, and
eating nearly the whole of the leaf. When nearly fullfed, if the plant
was a small one and the leaves well demolished, the larve would eat
portions of the petioles, and finish by clearing off the young leaves and
central bud of the plant. One or two young larve appear to jerk the
frass away, but, as a rule, the frass remains where excreted. The young
larvee thus leave minute red dots, more or less in rows or groups, in
some degree replacing the devoured glands in the colour-scheme of the
leaf. In its later stage, a larva would sometimes eat a large quantity
without moving; this especially happens when it takes to the middle
of the plant, and can reach much food without moving, a pile of green-

504 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

black frass, about twice as bulky as the larva, accumulating in some
instances. All being well with the foodplant, the larva has no tendency
to move until the time for pupation arrives. These detailed notes on
the progress of individual larve were much broken up, and rendered
of little use, by the way in which the larve succeeded in hiding them-
selves, as well as by cases of wandering away to another plant, really
getting lost, etc. This occurred with single larve, each on a separate
plant. In several cases I gave up the larva for lost, but it duly
reappeared again. These facts apply mostly to the youngest larve, and
are the ground for my suspicion that, in the autumnal larve, I may
have been wrong in thinking they all fed only in the centre of the
plant, though the extrusion of frass there, in one instance observed,
could only be compatible with the larva being ensconced amongst the
leaf-buds of the central rosette. These notes refer frequently to the
young larvee (first and second instars) eating especially the glands, the
leaves themselves being attacked only by the older ones (in third and
fourth instars). It is also noted that the larve eat their cast skins.
As to one larva, it is described as very green and yellow, with no red
except the dorsal tubercle, and that it was on a rather pale plant of
Drosera, surrounded by plenty of Sphagnum. The identity of their
schemes of colour with that of the plants, or leaves, they were on, is
several times referred to (Chapman).

Larva.—The larva appears to have four instars. In the /first
instar it is without tubercle vi, and without skin-points. In the second
instar it acquires these, and i and 1 acquire a common chitinous base.
There are no secondary hairs. At this stage it hybernates, in the
autumnal brood. In the third instar it acquires a small number of
secondary tubercular hairs, making the tubercles into warts. In the
fourth instar it differs from the third in the secondary hairs being more
numerous, but there do not appear to be any secondary hairs on the
general skin-surface; vi remains a solitary hair, and there is no indica-
tion of secondary tubercles, either on the thorax, or behind the spiracles
on the abdomen; i and ii form one compound wart, though the two
primary hairs are quite distinct. The prolegs have six and seven
crochets. Autumnal to spring larva.—First instar (newly-hatched,
? September 6th, 1904): The newly-hatched larva is fully 1mm. in
length, when stretched out. Head, prothorax, and anal plate, dark, but
not black; hairs and bases dark, the rest white or colourless. Tubercles
i and ii are distinct from each other, but very close together, i very
small, hair about one-sixth the length of that of 11, which is about
0-:06mm. long; both incline backwards. The corresponding hairs on
the 2nd and 3rd thoracic, and the 9th and 10th abdominal, segments
are no less than 0:20mm., 0:23mm., 0°'40mm., and 0-20mm. long,
respectively, that on the 9th abdominal segment being, in fact, as long
as half the length of the larva, when it is not extended; 111 is about
0-17mm. long, and is directed forwards; tubercles iv and v are on
‘distinct bases, but very close together, rather more on a level than

usual [the contrary, for example, of Amblyptilia cosmodactyla (acantho- a

dactyla)| , the front hair 0-06mm., posterior 0'18mm.,long. Along way —
below, Shout the middle of seoment, are two hairs, one about 0:17mm.
long, and the other, below and in front of it, about O‘-lmm.; viappears
to be absent, and there are two of the three hairs of vii. On the pro- —

thoracic plate, one of the three usual front hairs seems to be absent,

oa | es Cae ve tek! Me 9 70 aw
HK . ; aN ni’ / . : ‘ . > Tes
winery «
od ae , . a

a } 7 - ‘

ue ee ‘ 2

Hy ‘ "
‘ A ’

¢ '
I
ry
{
.
7 an
:
,

EXPLANATION OF PLATE.

(To be bound opposite Chromo-litho. plate of Buckleria paludum.)

Fig. 1.—Ege magnified x 56.

Fig. 2.—Larva in lst instar x 30.

Fig. 3—Larva in 2nd instar x 20.

Fig. 4.— Larva in 3rd instar x 14.

Fig. 5.—Larva in 4th (and last) instar, lateral view x 83.

Fig. 6.—Larva in 4th (and last) instar, semidorsal view x 84.

Fig. 7—Pupa, lateral view x 84.

Fig. 8.—Pupa, dorsal view x 84.

Fig. 9—Larva in 2nd instar in centre of leaf. [In the figure the conspicuous-
ness of the larva much exaggerated ; correctly represented it would
hardly be visible.] x4.

Fig. 10.—Larva in last instar feeding.

Fig. 11.—Portion of leaf as eaten by larva.

In Fig. 2, except a dorsal hair or two, the sete shown are only those of one
side—those of i and 11 together, 111, (spiracle not shown,) those on iv and v together,
(vi wanting,) two hairs of vii.

In Fig. 3, the tubercles i and 11 of both sides are shown; vi present; vil
hardly visible, being beneath ; spiracles hardly indicated.

In Figs. 4 and 5, the dorsal tubercles of other side only indicated by a hair or
two.

Fig. 9 almost impossible to show satisfactorily.

B.C. Knight del.

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM, Zeller, West,Newman chromo

Lhe Natural History of the British i eplidoptera, 1906

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 505

and only the long central one of the back row is clearly seen. Of the
usual four pairs of hairs on the meso- and metathorax, the third appears
to be represented by one hair only. The props of prolegs are about
0-04mm. long, with three crochets, four on claspers. Second instar
(September 22nd, 1¢04): About 1:5mm. long; head dark, of about same
width as body ; tubercles i and ii are on one large chitinous base; iii,
iv, and v, are smaller. These bases have a slightly dark tint; the hairs
are long, 11 nearly as long as width of body, i perhaps a quarter of il,
ili long, iv and v each rather shorter. The larva might be described
as pale whitish-fuscous, with a reddish dorsal line, and another between
ii and iii, but it seems more accurate to say the ground colour is pale
reddish-brown, and that there is a narrow white line round each large
tubercular plate. The larva being young, in this instance i and il
reach practically from front to back of segment, leaving only room for
the narrow pale line. The hairs are very distinctly thickened at the
tips. The larve hybernate apparently in this instar, forming little
cocoons amongst the small leaves of the winter buds. One larva,
however, in November, 1904, apparently went on to the Third instar
(but may still only be in the second) (October 24th, 1904): It is fully
2mm. long, head black, general tint flesh-colour, made up of white and
reddish markings. The tubercles i and ii are united on one base; il
carries the longest hair. Base of hairs, and spiracles, dark; 1st thoracic
plate has a white central line, with black line on each side, and a black
spot further out. Hach tubercle is surrounded by a white area; between
is dull red; the red area has fine skin-points, which are absent, or very
indistinct, in the white areas. Hairs slightly clubbed, that on
i bent forwards, the front (upper) one of iv+v directed rather
forwards, shorter than the posterior, which is directed outwards.
The white and red are, perhaps, better described as being in
longitudinal lines, a red dorsal one, then a broad white one,
including i and ii, then a red one, which has various processes, sO
that the description of the white circles round the tubercles results
from these taking circular arcs, with the tubercles, spiracles, etc., for
centres. But there are other centres with white, that are not at present
occupied by tubercles. On the 1st segment is a little longitudinal
stripe of red, from i forwards, and, on the thorax, the dorsal and next
red line are more or less conjoined. Under low magnification, the
thoracic plate looks nearly black, and somewhat homogeneous in
colour. Inside i and ii is a dark depressed spot. Anal plate not dark.
[The larva is not tormented to get a fuller description, but is carefully
placed on a better plant in hopes of rearing it.]* Same larva (December
10th, 1904): Short and thick; yellow, with very large porcellanous-
white plates, or, perhaps, is rather porcellanous-white with certain
yellow, or orange-ochreous, lines. The plates being apparently
surroundings of tubercle, the tubercle and hairs are black, so that the
little larva is a rather striking object when closely examined. Length,
when stretched, 2-7mm. Taking the white as the ground colour, there
is a narrow, dorsal, orange line, a little widened in front of each
Segment, and sending branches, pale and less conspicuous, along the

* The endeavour to describe this larva, without disturbing it, probably explains
why it is said (Trans. Ent, Soc. Lond., 1906, p. 136) to have had secondary hairs,
which the further note shows to have been an error (Chapman).

506 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

front and back margins of segment, so that they are lost in the
incisions, when the larva is not stretched. Tubercles i and 1i are close
together, and on a common eminence, and almost conjoined. These,
and other tubercles, single-haired. Between i, 11, and iil, is another
longitudinal, ochreous, line. Round i and 11 the surface is smooth and
porcellanous, but, in front of segment, on each side of dorsum, is an
area with fine skin-points. Head and spiracles black. The subdorsal
yellow line (between i, 11, and ii) sends down branches marking off a
somewhat square white are around 111; 111 is placed slightly backward.
Of iv-+-v, the front one (v) is the higher with the shorter hair. Hairs about
half the diameter of the larva in length. Props of prolegs rather short.
When at rest, the incisions are deep, and the segments stand out high
and cushiony, with the elevation of the tubercles—especially 1 and 11, and
iv and v—making angular points. Below iv+v is a single hair, and,
at the base of prolegs, the usual three hairs, which are, however, very
conspicuous, being black on a white ground. On the 1st thoracic, the
plate is rather dark, divided centrally by a pale, hardly yellow, line,
with, on either half, a nearly central large hair, a small one at outer
angele, and three along front edge, a three-haired tubercle in front of
spiracle, and one at base of leg. The 2nd and 8rd thoracic segments have,
on either side, four double tubercles along the middle of the segment, the
8rd with an extra hair above, and behind, it. The prolegs carry seven
crochets in a circle, incomplete at its outer margin. The black
crochets on the pale white base have a very pronounced aspect,
different from the more usual pale brownish crochets on a yellowish
base. Antepenultimate instar (May 81st, 1905—taken wild near
Esher): The smallest larva found was just about to moult for the
last time but one. Its length is 4:5mm., and its longest hairs about
0:-5mm.; its general aspect precisely that of the larger larve, and the dis-
position of the primary hairs identical, though theseare notsolong ; there
are no secondary hairs, however, to be discovered.* Penultimate imstar
(May 81st, 1205): The next smallest larva was about to moult for the
last time; its length about 6mm.; the longest hairs about 0-8mm., and
there are a good many secondary hairs, two or three round 1 and 1i, one
behind iii, and one above, and behind, iv and vy. These are secondary
tubercular hairs, not skin-hairs, as are also those of the larva in its last
skin. Final instar (May 31st, 1905): The fullgrown larva is7mm.-8mm.
long, of a form much like that of the larvee of Hucnemidophorus rhododac-
tyla and Adkinia zophodactyla, thickest about the 8rd or 4th abdominal
segments, and tapering to either end, but, when at rest, or feeding, has the
forward segments rather contracted, so that it looks thickest about the
metathorax, and the mesothorax seems nearly as large; in colour, the
dorsum is red, or reddish-brown, or pink, with an underlying green tone,
the difference of tint being due rather to the attitude of the larva, and
the degree to which it is mature, than to individual variation. The
hairs are very long, and many of them are clubbed, being some-
what flattened, at the tips especially ; some are dark with white tips,
which look club-like. The hairs transmit, and reflect, the red of the —
larva and of the hair-glands of the plant, so that the resemblance of
the larva, in some aspects, to a leaf is very close; in others, a leaf, seen

* This specimen raises a doubt as to whether the wintering larvee do not have
five moults (an extra one on leaving hybernaculum) (Chapman).

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 507

edgewise, may be easily mistaken for the larva of which one is in search.
This is assisted by the lower surface of the larva being green, separated
from the upper red surface by a yellow line, sometimes not very
conspicuous in tint, but in some very bright; it occupies the lateral
prominence (upper portion of lateral flange) which carries tubercles v
and iv. Below this is a second flange-like projection carrying vi (a
single hair directed forwards), which is marked off, above and below, by
a rather deep sulcus, and which bends downwards in front, upwards
behind. There are two paler dorsal lhnes just within the dorsal
tubercles, rather curved outwards at the middle of each segment; the
space between them is a rather greener pink than the rest of the
dorsum, due to the dorsal vessel showing somewhat. There are other
pale marblings, especially a tendency to a line throughiandu. This,
however, is much interfered with by the large size of the combined
base of these tubercles, almost entitled to be called a hump, which is
of a dark dense red that extends a little beyond, especially behind, the
hump. ‘This red, which, at that stage, becomes a brighter pink,
persists when the larva is laid up for pupation, when all the rest of the
larva has become green. The lateral yellow line is abdominal only,
the same region of the thorax is pink. ‘There is a pale (yellow) spot
in front of iii, and, below, there is a pink shade in the green (yellow ?)
under-surface, above, behind, and below vi, which stands out on a
yellow eminence, as does also the eminence of the three hairs at base
of prolegs. The larva, at rest, is about 1-lmm. thick, whilst the dorsal
hairs (ii) are about 1‘6mm. long ; legs nearly colourless; pale (colour-
less) prolegs, tall, slender, with bulbous ends ; hooks, wanting on outer
aspect, seven or eight in number, nine on claspers (Chapman).
Quiescent staye preceding pupation (June 5th, 1905): The larva has the
depressed dark-coloured spots on the scutellum. The spiracles are
very low for a plume larva, almost flush with skin-surface ; they are
narrowly rimmed with black. There is a fine coat of spicules on the
skin, but no trace of scattered secondary hairs, only a few small
additional hairs attached to the wart-like groups into which the
primaries have evolved. Tubercles i and ii form a conjoined wart on all
segments from mesothoracic to 8th abdominal; there are no accessory
(supernumerary) groups behind these on meso- and metathorax, as is
usual in the species that develop warts, neither are there any behind the
spiracular tubercles. The hairs are noticeably knobbed at tip. Judging
by the silk threads spun about among the hairs, it seems questionable
if this larva would not attempt some sort of silk-spinning before
pupation, and form a slight, at any rate theoretical, cocoon (Bacot).
Summer larva :—VFirst instar (July 7th, 1905): Rather over 1mm.
long, whitish-green, almost transparent. Head black, thoracic plate
dark, as well as bases of tubercles and anal plate. Each tubercle has a
distinct plate, larger than the mere hair-base. 'Tuberclesiandiiare on a
common base, as are also iv and v; the hairs are black. The thoracic
plate has three hairs of the same length in front ; central of back series
very long, other two short. Single hair in front of spiracle. On
the 2nd and 8rd thoracic segments are the usual four pairs of tubercles
on each side, each pair on a single plate, and the third pair apparently
possesses a third hair on the same plate. ‘The head has a very long
hair on the centre of each side of the front of the cranium. The long
hairs on the head, and the Ist and 2nd thoracic segments, about

008 ; BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Points of hairs white, and apparently clubbed. Towards moult, shows
some reddish tinting between the tubercles. Second instar: 2mm.
long; hairs white, arising from black points, more clubbed and pro-
portionally shorter than in first skin. No secondary hairs. The
tubercles are on distinct largish plates of a faint cinereous tint, and
round them is a whitish shade, as of a porcellanous-white thickening of
the skin; the rest is a pale brownish-red, forming a dorsal band, a line
along the posterior border of each segment giving a branch forward
(and obliquely upwards) between 11 and i1i, and between 111 and sriracle.
There is, however, some variation in tint and extent of red marking,
either in different specimens, or according to different degrees of maturity.
The central hair on the head is still long. The first and third
posterior hairs of thoracic plate are very short compared with the
long second one, the outer one of the front row is also long. The
prothoracic plate is paler, with dark marbling on each side of the
central suture, and the dark spot between the second and third hairs is
distinct, rather nearer the posterior margin of the plate. The prespira-
cular tubercle has three hairs, and there are three hairs on the third
tubercle of the meso- and metathorax ; i on the 9th abdominal is very
small, but is quite visible. The anal plate carries six hairs on either
side. The spiracles are black, but not very large or prominent. Third
instar: 8:5mm. long, before feeding much; it has now quite the adult
‘“‘ plumage,” though the secondary hairs are fewer and much smaller
than in the final instar. The tubercles are on, or rather form, almost
raised humps. ‘The secondary hairs are, four on i+, two or three of
them very small and inconspicuous, one on iil, none on iv+y, or on
vi. These secondary hairs are white, and clubbed. The primaries
arise from black points, are ochreous, with white clubbed tips. The
skin-points, wanting in the first instar, transparent and sparse in the
second, are now abundant. The tubercular areas are free from them,
these areas, which probably correspond with the earlier tinted scuta which
are not present now, have a little differentiation of colour, and texture,
to mark them off from the surrounding skin. The larva is still very
transparent and flimsy-looking. The white, under the tubercles,
seems subcutaneous, as does also the red-brown of the dorsal stripe,
and of a great part of the rest of the larva. The red is, however, in
marks or marblings, and not in continuous streaks. The two hairs
on the head and on the mesothorax are long, but only a little longer
than the longer ones on the abdomen. ‘The longer hairs are from
0:35mm. to 0-4mm. long, not quite three times as long as the others, as
in previous instar. The prolegs are long props, slightly bulbed at the
end, and with seven dark crochets round the inner margin. The six

eyespots are very prominent, more than hemispheres. The head is

translucent, with ochreous marblings. A large black mark under
the eyespots, but three of them escape it, or seem to do so, at certain
angles, and look quite white. There is a short hair, ventrally, closeto
the middle line on the abdominal segments without prolegs, probably __
present in other instars, though not noted. The last joint of the true
legs is markedly long and slender (Chapman). |

Fooppiant.—Drosera rotundifolia (Bankes). The foodplant, Drosera _
rotundifolia (and probably the other forms; I found many larve on D.
rotundifolia, but the Dorset plants varied somewhat towards intermedia),

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 509

is one that was probably never before suspected to support a lepidopterous
larva, and was therefore never searched, except by Bankes, for that of
this species. The prevailing idea is that the plant devours insects, and
_ though this is undoubted, it now appears that to assume that insects
would not, and could not, also eat it, is to fall into a plausible,
but false, method of reasoning. Nevertheless, it comes as somewhat.
of a surprise to find that a lepidopterous larva, without any special
means of protection, but simply acting in the ordinary larval manner,
attacks it with entire impunity. No doubt it avoids walking over,
and especially resting upon, the gluey glands, but it does this,
apparently, merely because it has no need to do so, and the glands
with their secretion are certainly favourite items of its food,
especially when it is small (Chapman).

Puration.—Fullfed larvee found in the Esher district, May 31st,
1905. The following day, June Ist, several fixed themselves for
pupation, one on the underside of a Drosera leaf, another on a thread
of heath-stem. On June 2nd, several more fixed themselves up; one
pupated this afternoon. By June 3rd, 7 a.m., two are now in pupa.
The rapidity with which they finish feeding is apparently great. The
temperature of the last day or two has been about 70°F. On June
15th, the last larva pupated (Chapman). Of four larve, taken by
Mr. South on May 31st, he remarks that one was suspended when he
found it ‘‘ head downwards from its anal attachment to a slender twig
of heather. Another was on the middle of the crown of its foodplant;
neither of them changed its position, but they are now pupz in the exact
places they occupied as larve, when I came across them. A third larva
had pupated on a heather-twig, and the fourth had pupated on the
flat rim of a fern-pan, in which I set the foodplants. A curious fact
in connection with this last larva is that, although I had twice
removed it from the rim of the pan, it succeeded in getting its own
way, and became a pupa on the spot it had fixed upon, and there it
now remains.’ ‘The larva seeks, for pupation, a bit of slender, upright,
stem, the ideal position, possibly, being the dead stem of last year’s
flowers ; a slender bit of heath will serve; one of mine pupated on the
underside of a leaf of Drosera, and Mr. South met with one that
pupated across the centre of the foodplant. But a bit of dead grass-
like stem is what the larva prefers; no fewer than three selected the
only piece of this material in one of my tins, and a fourth fixed itself
at its base, being crowded off by the previous tenants. Of six in this
tin, the two others selected slender stems of heath. The larva will
take a horizontal position, and does not much mind which side is up,
but appears to prefer one with dorsum upwards. When it obtains its
pupal position on a vertical stem, it always fixes itself head downwards
(Chapman),

Pura.—The change before pupation in the larval colour is very
marked, the whole larva becoming green, except the hump of i and ii,
which assumes a conspicuous dark rosy-pink. For some time after
pupation the pupa has the same coloration, the pink eminence being
very conspicuous, and ornamental, on the green pupa; gradually, however,
the colours change, the pink fades, and the rest of the pupa, remaining
green, acquires an overshading of faint ruddy brown, disposed, roughly
speaking, in longitudinal bands; in one of these the tubercles i and ii
still present a slightly darker shade, but in only one or two cases at

510 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

all decidedly so. The length of the pupa is 6-7mm.; width of thorax,
1-3mm.; abdomen, 1°2mm.; 1mm. at about the 5th abdominal segment;
the @ apparently a little shorter and thicker. The thickness is much
the same to nearly the end of the 5th abdominal segment (and wing-
cases), whence it (in 2mm.) tapers regularly to a rather fine point, at
least it does so, seen sideways, and, seen dorsally, the thorax is wider ©
than the following segments, and the tapering of the 6th abdominal
segment onwards is by a curved outline, with sharper finish in the 9th
and 10th abdominal segments. The head in front is rounded, but has
two lateral eminenges, and a double (or two minute) frontal one between
them. Seen dorsally, when the form has been fully acquired, but the
pink colour of the dorsal tubercles persists, it is a most beautiful
object, from the elegance of its outline and delicate, but bright, colouring.
The hairs are of some assistance to the pleasing effect. Before
describing the hairs, it may be best to note that there is the usual
double dorsal flange, or ridge, beginning behind the middle of the
mesothorax, with a rounded eminence, succeeded by a lower one, then
running across metathorax and abdominal segments in line of tubercles,
and ending with the tubercles on the 8rd abdominal segment. It is
not high and marked, as it is in some “ plume”’ pupe, but is quite
definite and distinct, the tubercles on the following abdominal seements
(4th, etc.) are in line with it, but represented only in the middle of
each segment, there being no continuous ridge between them. The
hairs on the mesothorax are, on either side, two in line of the dorsal
ridge but in front of it, and about the distance apart that the last one
is from the initial hump of the ridge; outside each of these is again
another hair; all equally spaced, so that there are two rows of four
hairs across mesothorax in front of anterior end of ridge. The
prothorax has a row of six hairs across it, three on either side, and one
or two of the head (antenna-basal ?) hairs come into this same dorsal
view. ‘These hairs are all colourless, and about O'7mm. or 0:8mm. long
(two-thirds thickness of pupa). On the head are, in front above, two
hairs on each side, and one on each side below, above the labrum.
These are 0'3mm.-0-4mm. long, colourless. On the metathorax are
two hairs, one on either side, white, about 0‘6mm. long, porrected and
arising, at front margin of segment, from the ridge. They appear to
correspond with the first of the two hairs in the following abdominal
segments, which have the same appearance, nearly the same length
and direction (porrected), but arise further back on the segment. The
metathorax has no posterior hair, as the other segments have. The 1st, 2nd,
3rd, and 4th, abdominal segments have each two hairs on either side,
apparently i and 1i, not arising very close together, but still on a common
eminence, which, on the Ist, 2nd, and 8rd, abdominal segments,
is part of the dorsal ridge, the hairs are at an angle to each other of
about 90°, the first directed forward, the latter backwards, and increasing
the angle by a little curvature; the posterior one is black, quite O‘-6mm.
long, whilst the front one is shorter on each segment up to the 4th

abdominal segment. On the 5th abdominal segment, and beyond,

there is only the posterior one, on to the 9th abdominal segment, where
it is at posterior margin of segment. It has about the same length
(0-6mm.) on each segment. On these segments 1s a little eminence and
scar, suggesting where the missing tubercle i would have been, On the
front outer angle of metathorax are two minute black dots. On the

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 511

1st abdominal segment, at the same place, is a similar dot, with a
large, spiracle-like, oval scar behind it, and of a dark colour. Otherwise,
there are no hairs, or other structures, except the small ochreous
spiracles down to the subspiracular flange ; on this, are two minute black
dots (iv-+v) on the 8rd to 7th abdominal segments; on the 8th abdominal
seoment thereare, at the same places, two short (0-3mm.) hairs. These are
repeated on the 9th, except that the 1st has another just below it. On the
10th abdominal segment, one similar hair seems.distinct from the cre-
mastral hairs in which it is very close, and equally short, but straight.
The double dots, that occur on the 8rd abdominal segment to the
7th abdominal segment, are forwards, rather close together, and behind
the spiracle. More ventral on the 5th, 6th, and 7th, abdominal
segments, in fact ventral, are, on either side, two short deflexed hairs,
vii, about O-lmm. and 0-2mm., long; on a pale line, between these and
the subspiracular flange, is a small black dot, hardly a hair, vi; a
similar trace of 111 is also to be detected. On the several lines of these,
viz., lll, iv+v, vi, and vil, there are longitudinal pale lines that look
sometimes like ridges, largely owing, however, to coloration, but this
is just so much raised on the subspiracular, iv+-v, line, that I have
ventured to call it a subspiracular flange. The appendages reach to the
middle, and even to the posterior margin (in g's ?), of the 5th abdominal
segment, and look attached to it, but are free beyond the 8rd
abdominal segment. The cremaster consists of two portions, a small
one in the centre of the 9th abdominal segment, and a larger one on
the 10th abdominal segment. The hairs, together with the dorsum of the
last two segments, are pinkish, about O-lmm. long, straight, or nearly
so, with a small knob at one side of the end, as though a hook had
soldered itself to the shaft, to which it had turnedround. The appendages
are transparent green, with rather darker olive shading, beside the
wing-veins, on the antenne and first legs (Chapman).

VARIATION IN PuPA.—The variation in the colour of the pupa is,
first, in the amount of pink. This tends to fade as the pupa matures,
and some pupe lose it altogether, becoming entirely green. One pupa,
on the other hand, has a dorsal, a broad subdorsal (through hump and
hair-bases), and a lower (along ui ?), rose-pink line, nearly continuous
from end to end of the pupa, and is consequently a handsome, brilliant,
pupa. The depth of green also varies a little, especially on the wings
and appendages, which may be pale and transparent, or a deep solid-
looking green. A certain olive-brown tint appears, as the pupa matures
for emergence, the eyes, wings, &c., becoming black. One other point
in the variability of the pupa has regard to the forward hairs (i) of the
abdominal dorsum. The most usual form is perhaps that described,
with this hair on the first five segments, and wanting in the others;
ib does not often show any length on 5th segment, and is more
frequently wanting on 4th, 3rd, or even 2nd, and presumably may be
entirely absent. When absent, it is, however, usually represented by
more or less of a stump, or abbreviated hair, and its site, when absent,
is marked by a basal circle or point. It is unusual, however, as
happened in the specimen described, for the hairs present to be well
developed and the rest to be absent, 7.e., merely a basal trace present.
It is more usual for there to be one or two intermediate, abbreviated,
hairs, as for example, 1st and 2nd, good hairs, 8rd, shortened hair,

512, BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

4th, very short, 5th, stump, 6th, wanting, or some such formula
(Chapman).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—The species appears to be double-brooded
throughout the greater part of its range. In Britain it occurs in June
and August, each brood remaining on the wing from two to three
weeks. Cambridge says that, in Dorset, the first brood appears in the
second week of June, the second, and main, brood, from the beginning
to the end of August. At the end of May and beginning of June,
1869, at Ziirich (Frey); a fine specimen captured, August 11th, 1908,
in a marsh at Ottignies (Crombrugghe). In Germany, there are two
generations, the first at the end of May and beginning of June, the
second at the end of July and beginning of August; it is reported in
June, and again in August, near Wiesbaden (Réssler); in May, and
again in August, near Constance and Ueberlingen (Meess and Spuler);
it is also recorded, without any suggestion of double-broodedness—in
July, near Stettin ; end of June and July, near Friedland (Stange) ;
in July, near Parchim (Gillmer); in August, near Bahrenfeld (Sauber);
in June and July, in Hanover (Glitz); June and July, near Berlin
(Pfiitzner); end of July, near Frankfort-on-Oder (Zeller); and
mid-June on into July, in Silesia (Wocke). In Spain, in May,
at Barcelona (Cuni y Martorell). The following dates have been
recorded in this country: June 20th, 1857, near Crewe (Thompson) ;
June 10th, 1865, at Woolmer Forest (Barrett); August 238rd-
September 4th, 1886, at Wareham (Cambridge); August 23rd, 1886,
in the Isle of Purbeck (Digby) ; August 80th-31st, 1886, at Wareham
(Bankes) ; June 14th-16th, 1887; again August 4th-27th, 1887, at
Wareham (Cambridge); August 5th-11th, 1887, in the Isle of Purbeck
(Bankes); August 13th, 1889, near Lyndhurst (Holland); August
29th, 1889, at Wareham (Cambridge); August 18th, 1890, in the
Isle of Purbeck (Bankes) ; July 18th, 1891, on Thorne Moor (Porritt);
June 4th, 1895, and following days, and again August 4th-5th, 1896,
abundant at Wareham (Cambridge); August, 1904, at Claygate (South);
August 20th-23rd, 1904, at Wareham; August 24th-29th, 1904, in the
Isle of Purbeck; June 24th, 1905, at Wareham; June 28th-July 8th,
1905, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes); bred June 15th, 1905, from
larvee collected in the Esher district (South); bred June 18th-29th,
1905, from larve collected in the Esher district (Chapman); July
Ath-5th, 1906, in the Isle of Purbeck (Bankes).

Haszits.—South notes that, on July 25th, 1905, he watched an
imago of this species emerge about 12 0’clock (noon). ‘ When first
seen, about half the insect was free from the pupa, which was attached
to the side of a tumbler; it then remained perfectly still, except for a
slight, gliding, forward motion which continued for about three minutes,
by which time only three segments remained in the pupal case; then
all movement ceased for a few seconds, when, with a sudden jerk, the
insect shot forward and downward, alighting on the glass about two
inches from the pupa. All the time it was under observation, the
antennee and first pair of legs were free, but perfectly still.’”’ Chapman
adds that “this describes very well the habit, of this and some other
plumes I have observed, of resting during emergence, and of a good
deal of wing-expansion taking place during the process, so that it
almost looks as if the wing was extended by the process of drawing it
out of the pupa-case.”’ Barrett says that “the moth hides during the
day among the low-growing herbage—stunted heather, bog-asphodel,

BUCKLERIA PALUDUM. 513

cranberry, and short grasses and sedges—on the boggy portions of
heaths or the edges of fens, but flies up, if disturbed by a passing foot-
step, to hide again at a few feet distance; it flies naturally at sunset and
atter.’”’ Bankes observes (in litt.) that ‘the imagines, which only fly
on very calm and warm evenings, flit about, amongst the herbage of
the bogs on the heath-districts, like gnats, though with a peculiarly
jerky flight. They come on the wing some time before sunset, and
continue to fly until about dusk, if the temperature remains high, but,
when it falls rapidly at sunset, as not infrequently happens, their flight
ceases almost immediately. Of the first brood, the only example taken
by myself on the wing was netted at 8.40 p.m., on July 8th, though I
secured a few others by sweeping, viz., a 9 at 4.30 p.m., a ? at 7p.m.,
anda g at 7.30 p.m., on June 24th, anda ? at 7.10 p.m., on June
28th. Much experience with the second brood, of which | have
netted many individuals, August 5th-31st, shows that all have
been captured between 6 p.m. and 7.80 p.m., the most productive
time being from 6.15 p.m. to 7.15 p.m., and that their appearance
is not affected by whether their haunts happen to be in sunshine
or in shadow at the time. Several of both sexes of this brood
have been taken by sweeping the herbage between 7 p.m. and
7.30 p.m., after the flight was over. Of the specimens captured
on the wing, avery large proportion (probably well over 90°) are
males.’’ Cambridge observes that, “on August 28rd, 1886, walking
across a bog, at the end of the afternoon, two specimens were disturbed,
and a careful search revealed several before darkness came on; working
for the species every suitable evening, the insect was found scarcely
ever to move of its own accord until about half-an-hour or less before
sunset, and for a very short time after; indeed, of its own accord, it
was seldom seen flying, generally not flying until disturbed, when it
would flutter up, gnat-like, among the bog-grass and rushes, and jerkily
fly off, for, at most, a few yards, settling again on a blade of grass,
with its two long-spurred hind-legs stuck out, one on each side, in a
very characteristic way. On some evenings it would not fly at all;
the most favourable kind of evening appeared to be a quiet, dewy, damp
one, after a bright hot day.’’ In 1887, however, his experience was
entirely different, for whereas, in 1886, it appeared to fly for only a
very short time just before, and just after, sunset, yet, of 1887, he
says (nt., xx., p. 826), ‘although on some of our finest and quietest
evenings in August scarcely an individual was seen, it did not hesitate
occasionally to fly briskly inthe fullblazeof a hotsun; a moderately dewy
evening appears to draw this little moth out most freely, and the
evenings of last August were remarkable for an almost total absence
of dew.” As pointing to the same habit, Bankes writes (én litt.) :
“The six specimens taken in early July, 1906, were, with one excep-
tion, all netted whilst on the wing, in bright sunshine, over heath-bogs,
6.50 p.m.-7.55 p.m. The remaining one was swept up off the herbage,
growing in a bog on the heath, at 7.50 p.m.’ Holland writes (nt.
Mo. Mag., xxvi., p. 87) that, in a boggy hollow, near Lyndhurst, he
‘netted two specimens of this little plume, at dusk, on August 13th,
1889 : it was a very windy evening, and this was the only moth that
could be found moving.” In Pomerania, near Stettin, the insect is
said to fly among Ledum palustre (Bittner); near Wiesbaden it flies
freely at sunset (Réssler).

514 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Hasrtrats.—The species appears to have been first recorded in
Britain in 1851, by Stainton, who notes it as having been captured at
Whittlesea, etc., the preceding summer, and described it as ‘‘considerably
resembling parvidactyla, but differing essentially in the deeper fissure
and slender second lobe of the anterior wings, and in the third lobe of
the posterior wings having no black scales in the cilia” (Supp. Cat.
Brit. Pteroph., p. 18). Several were then reported to have been taken
‘on June 20th, 1857, in a small moss a few miles from Crewe’’ (Fnt.
Wk. Intelligencer, i1., p. 108). Our more recent knowledge shows it to
be confined to the areas where Drosera grows—fens, mosses, marshes,
etc. It was supposed, half-a-century ago, that the species was con-
fined, in Britain, to the fens of Huntingdon, Cambridge, Norfolk, and
Cheshire, but it has since been found to have a much wider distribution.
‘‘In Dorsetshire, if has never been found except on the heath
district on the eastern side of the county, and, although fairly widely
distributed thereon, it, of course, only occurs in actual bogs, or in
spots sufficiently damp for Drosera rotundifolia to flourish, and is, in any
case, excessively local. Numbers of apparently suitable bogs, where
the foodplant is abundant, have been worked altogether in vain, or have
only yielded the moth very rarely, and only two spots, many miles apart,
are known to me where it 1s not really scarce’’ (Bankes). When first
taken, in Dorset, in 1886, near Wareham, the bog on which the specimens
were found was, in some places, over ankle-deep in water (Cambridge).
Chapman says that, in the Esher district, the ground is swampy, and
not easy, in ordinary seasons, to get about on with comfort; itis peaty,
situated amongst heath, and apart from Sphagnum, but, at the end of
May, 1905, owing to the drought which had lasted for a considerable
period before the visit, the ground was not at all bogey, whilst the plants
of Drosera were very small, with the leaves on the ground, some of the
plants not being more than 20mm. across. Barrett notes that, in
Woolmer Forest, the insect occurs in a marsh, flying among the long
orass, asphodel, etc., the imagines being difficult to see on the wing.
He further notes it as “occurring in a small moss some miles from
Crewe” (teste Thompson). At Lyndhurst it occurs in a boggy hollow
(Holland); and, in Yorkshire, on the open part of Thorne Moor
(Porritt). Frey records it from turf-moors in Switzerland, e.g., on the
Biinzen Moss, near Bremgarten, and very rarely at Katzensee, near Zurich.
In Belgium, it is recorded as occurring in a marsh at Ottignies (Crom-
brugghe). In Germany, it was found on a peat-moor near Frankfort-
on-Oder, where Tipula fasciata, sepulchralis, and Tabanus plebeius
also occurred (Zeller), and is entirely an inhabitant of peat-moors and
swamps (Hofmann); it occurs, near Wiesbaden, in Pfaffenborn, in
marshy places, damp mountain-meadows, where Crambus_ sylvellus
occurs, flying over peat-mosses at sunset, in June, and again in
August; it was formerly common on the meadows at Hengberg,
between Schlaferskopf and the Aarstrasse, whence, however, it has
disappeared since the draining-off of the water by the municipal water-
works (Réssler) ; this reminds one of Barrett’s statement, that it was
‘‘formerly common in the fens of Cambridgeshire and Huntingdon-
shire— Burwell Fen, Whittlesea Mere, Holme Fen, etc.—but, since the
draining of the fens, it seems to have died out of these districts”; near
Hanover, it occurs in a marshy meadow, behind Hainholz, not rarely
(Glitz); near Berlin (in the Grunewald), on the ‘‘Fenn,’’ or peat-

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 515

swamps (Zeller); on a moor near Carolinenhurst, not rare in July,
where the moth is beaten out of Ledum palustre (Buttner) ; confined to
swamps and moors in Brandenburg (Sorhagen); in a peat-swamp near
Riemberg, also on the peat-moors of the Gorhtzer Haide, and near
Niesky (Wocke); on the turf-moors near Constance and Ueberlingen
(Meess and Spuler). In Austria, on the turf-mosses, near Moosbrunn,
rarely (Mann).

British Locatities.—Local and confined to boggy places, but widely
distributed. Oneexpectsthatit will be found in many places where Drosera

grows. Campripcze: Cambridge—Whittlesea Mere, the Fen district (Stainton),
Burwell Fen (Barrett). CuesHirE: a moss near Crewe, several (Thompson). Dorset :
the eastern side of county—lIsle of Purbeck, near Corfe Castle (Bankes), Studland
(Digby), Wareham district—Bloxworth (Cambridge). Hants: Woolmer Forest
(Barrett), Lyndhurst (Holland). Hunrs: Holme Fen (Barrett). Surruy: Haslemere
(Barrett), Esher district (Chapman), Claygate (South). Sussmx: near Arundel
(W. H. B. Fletcher). Yorxs: Thorne Moor, near Beverley (Porritt).

Distrrpution.— North Germany, Lower Austria, Switzerland,
Eneland, Holland, Finland, Livonia, French Alps; Catalonia
(Staudinger and Rebel). Avsrro-Huneary: Lower Austria, near Moosbrunn
(Mann), the Vienna district (teste Hofmann). Brnetum: Ottignies (Crombrugghe).
Germany: Baden—near Constance, Ueberlingen (Reutti), Silesia—Riemberg,
common, Gérlitzer Haide, Niesky (Wocke), Kohlfurt (Sommer), Upper Lusatia—
near Neukirch (Méschler), Brandenburg—near Grunewald (Sorhagen), Frankfort-
on-Oder, Berlin (Zeller), near Hamburg (Sorhagen), Hesse—near Wiesbaden, in
Piaffenborn, Hengberg, between Schlaferskopf and Aarstrasse (Réssler), Hanover—
behind Hainholz (Glitz), Pomerania—Stettin, Carolinenhurst (Biittner), Mecklenburg
—near Friedland (Stange), near Parchim, Htinken Moor (Gillmer). Hornanp:
North Brabant—Breda, Mastbosch, [Soeren, near Dienen] (Snellen). Russra:
Livonia (Teich). Spain: Barcelona (Cuni y Martorell). Swrrzertanp: Katzensee,
near Ziirich, Biinzener Moss, near Bremgarten (Frey).

ADDENDUM I (to page 319).

Since the portion of this volume referring to the Stenoptiliinae was printed
(antea, pp. 313 et seq.), Mr. G. F. Mathew has added (Ent. Rec., xviii., p. 245) the
following species to the British list.

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA, Treitschke.

Synonymy.—Species : Graphodactyla, Tr., ‘‘Schmett. Eur.,’’ ix., pt. 2,
pp. 233-4 (1833); Hofm., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pteroph.,’’ pp. 85-88 (1895); Math., ‘‘ Ent.
Rec.,’’ xvili., p. 245 (1906). Graphodactylus, Zell., ‘‘ Isis,” pp. 840-841 (1841) ;
“¢ Stett. Ent. Ztg.,”? iv., p. 150 (1843); ‘‘ Linn. Ent.,’’ vi., p. 370 (1852); H.-Sch.,
‘¢ Sys. Bearb.,”’ v., p. 377 (1855); Frey, ‘‘Tin. Pter. Schw.,’’ p. 413 (1856); Stoll.,
*« Verh. des Natur. Ver.,’’ p. 215 (1863); Hein. and Wocke, ‘‘ Schmett. Deutsch.,”
iii., p. 797 (1870); Glitz, ‘“‘ Nat. Ges. Han.,’’ xxvi., p. 51 (1877); Zell., ** Stett.
Ent. Ztg.,” xxxix., p. 164 (1878); Mann, ‘‘ Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien,” xxvii.,
p. 500 (1878); Frey, ‘‘Lep. der Schweiz,’’ p. 430 (1880); Heller, ‘‘Ber. Nat. Med.
Ver. Innsb.,’’ xi., p. 161 (1881). Plagiodactylus, Frey, *‘ Lep. der Schweiz,’
p. 430 (in part) (1880); Biittn., “‘ Stett. Ent. Ztg.,”’ xli., p. 472 (1880); Snell.,
‘¢De Vlind.,’’ ii., p. 1037 (1882) ; Snell. v. Voll., ‘‘ Sepp’s Ned. Ins.,’? 2nd ser.,
vol. iv., p. 188, pl. xxxiv., figs. 1-13 (1887) ; Hering, ‘‘ Stett. Ent. Ztg.,”’ lii., pp.
225-6 (1891); liv., pp. 117-120 (1893). Pneumonanthes, Biitt., ‘‘Stett. Ent.
Zte.,” xli., p. 472 (1880) ; [Hofm., ‘‘ Deutsch. Pter.,’’ p. 87 (1895); Math., ‘Ent.
Rec.,’’ xviii., p. 245 (1906). ]

ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION.—Alucita graphodactyla. Alig anticis hepa-
ticis, striis longitudinalibus obscurioribus, fimbriis apicis fissureque
albis. Herr Freyer, of Augsburg, discovered this species, recognised
by me as undoubtedly new after careful comparison, in the larval stage,
when he was wandering among the mountains in Bad Kreith, near
Tegernsee, in the beginning of June, 1828. The larve lived on the
yellow gentian (Gentiana lutea), in spun-together leaves of this plant.
There were usually ten to fifteen examples in one head. He carried

516 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

them with him and reared them. The examples kindly committed to
me certainly approach the two previously-described species (tesseradac-
tyla and calodactyla), especially the latter, though I am in a position to
bring forward special constant characters. The size is that of calo-
dactyla. Head and thorax are brown ; the former bears two fine white
longitudinal lines above the eyes. The antenne are white, ringed with
brown. The abdomen is yellow-grey ; here also are exhibited white,
but easily discomposed, longitudinal lines. The legs are grey, their
spurs whitish. The forewings are beautiful nut-brown, rayed with
paler and darker longitudinally, something like fossilized wood. On
the disc at two-thirds, in front of the usual fringed fissure, lies a liver-
coloured crescent; in front of this, on the main nervure, one notices
two distinct dark dots, and above it, towards the costa of the upper
lobe, the ground colour is again nut-brown. The costa is very finely
white-edged, without dots. The fringes of the hindmargin are also
white, but, on the inner margin, they become grey. One does not here
notice any black hair-tufts. The thrice-divided hindwings are brown,
their fringes duller, likewise without the distinction of scale-tufts.
All is nut-brown beneath, though all the margins are edged with
whitish, the fringes as above. We may now look forward to the
approaching illustration in the above-mentioned friend’s valuable
Neuere Beytrige zur Schmetterlingskunde (Augsburg, at the author’s, and
at the bookshop of Joseph Wolff) (Treitschke).
Imaco.—20mm.-24mm. Forewings brown, darker on the costa ; on
the inner margin, around the fissure, and at the base of the upper lobe
pale brown-yellow; with black and white scales arranged in longi-
tudinal rows. ‘The inner marginal spot seldom distinct, the discoidal
spot nearly always present. The dots before the fissure are small,
separated, one lying directly under the other, and separated from the
fissure by a pale, yellow-brown, crescent-shaped space, sometimes
dusted with white, which is continued into the pale spot at the base of
the upper lobe, by which feature S. graphodactyla is easily distinguished
from all the other species of the genus; the fissural spots are not rarely
continued in more or less lengthened black streaks. In the upper lobe
a deep black longitudinal dash usually les, which is cut by a fine
white oblique line extending into the fringes of the upper lobe. This
line is only continued extremely rarely into the lower lobe. Two black
longitudinal lines are generally present in the lower lobe; all these
markings are, however, very variable, and often only indicated. The
costa exhibits, above the fissural spots, an indistinctly outlined, almost
triangular, shade, which reminds one strongly of the costal triangle of
the genera Platyptilia and Amblyptilia. The costal fringes are more
or less distinctly white above the hght space at the base of the upper
lobe, and from the junction of the pale oblique line of the upper lobe
up to the apex ; otherwise dark brown. The outer marginal fringes of
the upper lobe are white, towards the inner margin brownish, at the
apex of the lower lobe rather extensively pure white, then towards
the anal angle dark brown, furnished on both lobes with an
uninterrupted dark brown basal line, a second chief distinction of S.
graphodactyla. Hindwings dark brown-grey, with yellowish-grey fringes,
which show, at the apices of the 1st and 2nd plumules, an indistinct
dark dividing line. Underside dark brown-grey, the apices of the lobes,
as well as those of the 1st and 2nd plumules, dusted with yellowish ;

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. sala

the fringes at the apex and outer margin of the upper lobe, as well as
those of the apex of the lower lobe, white; the white oblique line of the
upper lobe often showing through (Hofmann).

Historical Account oF spEcteS.—F reyer found larve in 1828, from
which imagines were reared and described by Treitschke (antea, pp. 515-
516). Imagines were then taken by Fischer v. Roslerstamm and Mann,
July 22nd, 1840, as they went up the Schneeberg. These were described
by Zeller (Isis, 1841, pp. 840-841), whose description reads :

“Alis anterioribus cinereo-gilvescentibus, antice late laciniisque fuscescentibus,
puncto geminato ante fissuram lituraque laciniz anterioris longitudinali fuscis ;
ciliis circa apicem albis.” (Forewings mixed grey and fawn colour, broadly
brownish along the costa and on the lobes; a double dot before the fissure, and a
longitudinal dash on the upper lobe black-brown; fringes white round the apex).
(One ¢ from Fischer von Réslerstamm’s collection.) . . . . Very similar to
P. mictodactylus, and might easily be looked on as a variety of the same; but an
uninterrupted brown line runs round the margins of both lobes, and the apex of the
upper lobe is bordered with white fringes on both sides. Larger than most examples
of P. mictodactylus. Head brown-grey; the upper margin of the eye white, and
this white colour extends round the small frontal tuft as in P. mictodactylus.
Antenne very finely ciliated, brown-grey, with an interrupted whitish longitudinal
line, which is especially broad and pale on the lower portion. Palpi formed as in
P. mictodactylus, pale, whitish on the upperside, as well as on the whole terminal
joint. Patagia brownish-grey in front, brownish-fawn behind, body the same ; this
has dark and faintly whitish longitudinal lines on the posterior segments and
beneath. Legs on the upper parts pale yellowish-brown, once or twice white-lined
longitudinally ; the hind tibie outwardly pale brownish, inwardly whitish ; first
tarsal joint the same, the remaining tarsal joints like the tibial spurs, white. The
upper spurs somewhat longer than in P. mictodactylus, not equal to each other ;
the longer greater than half the distance between its base and the apex of the tibia ;
the terminal spurs rather equal, shorter than the short upper spur, and equal to one-
third the length of the first tarsal joint. Forewings pale up to the fissure, purest
towards the inner margin, mixed with brown-grey towards the costa, and on the
costa quite darkened and brownish. (Of a white margin to the costa, of which
Treitschke speaks, I can see nothing.) In the disc before the middle a brown short
longitudinal dash. In front of the fissure, and separated from it by whitish scales,
lies, in a dark ground, a pair of dark brown dots, one just above the other. The
base of the upper lobe is very pale, scaled with whitish, and marked on the costa
by a white longitudinal line, not present in P. mictodactylus ; beyond this the
ground colour becomes abruptly dark, and remains so up to the outer margin,
except that it is scaled with white in the neighbourhood of this, and at some distance
from this there is a fine whitish transverse line (as in P. mictodactylus var. 6) ;
before the line near to the fissure lies a thick black-brown longitudinal dash. The
less dark lower lobe has two long, faint, blackish-brown longitudinal dashes. ‘The
margins of both lobes, as well as the inner margin of the wing, are bordered by a
fine black-brown line of scales which brings the fissure into strong contrast. ‘The
fringes of the same are whitish, those at the base of the fissure blackish ; the apex
of the upper lobe is edged by still purer white frmges; those at the apex of the
lower lobe are only whitish, the remainder more or less dark grey, on the inner
margin with fawn-coloured scaling at their bases. Hindwings brownish-grey ; the
plumules, especially the first, a little more obtuse than in P. mictodactylus, and
darker margined in the fringes at the apex. Underside pale yellowish grey-brown;
the forewings with whitish scales towards the very strikingly brown-bordered outer
margin ; on the costa of the upper lobe lies a short, quite white, longitudinal dash ;
the transverse line is curtailed in front, and fainter than on the upperside. The
fringes much the same as on the upperside. The first plumule very pale fawn-
yellow, with scattered brown scaling.”

He then adds: ‘ Herr Fischer y. Réslerstamm and Herr Mann
met with imagines on July 22nd, 1840, at the foot of the Schneeberg,
not rarely, but considered them as rather yellowish-brown specimens
of mictodactylus, and only collected two examples for comparison.”
In 1848 (Stett. Hint. Zty., iv., p. 150), Zeller enumerates it among his

518 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

captures in the Styrian Alps. In 1852, stating that it was taken on
the S6mmering on July 7th-Sth, 1842, he redescribed the species
(Linn. Ent., vi., p. 870) as:

‘“Alis anterioribus ochraceo-fuscescentibus, dorso fissura plagaque laciniz
anterioris gilvescentibus, striola media, puncto gemino ante fissuram lituraque
lacinie anterioris fuscis, cillis circa apicem albis; ciliis digiti tertii breviusculis
(¢ ¢). This species is to be separated from mictodactylus and plagiodactylus, the
most similar species, by the somewhat shorter lobes of the forewings, the black pair
of fissural spots being separated by a yellowish space from the fissure, the pale
yellowish space at the base of the upper lobe, the white frmges around the apex of
the same, ete. The fringes also of the inner margin of the lower lobe are white
round the apex; near their bases they are cut by a brown line, which contains a
black spot at the apex of the lobe.”

Zeller places this species between plagiodactylus (F.-R.), Stainton,
and fuscus, Retz. In 1855, Herrich-Schiffer described the species
(Sys. Bearb., v., p. 877) in his group in which the ‘fringes close to the
base have a sharp, brown, uninterrupted dividing-line.”’ He describes
the species as:

“Greyish-red or fawn-colour. The following are black-brown; a dot in the
central longitudinal line of the forewings, two in front of the fissure, of which the
first one extends in an evanescent manner to the costa, a longitudinal stripe on the
upper lobe divided obliquely by a white dash, or margined outwardly, a white
longitudinal dash on costa beyond two-thirds. The terminal half of the fringes of
the upper lobe wholly snow-white, those of the lower lobe towards its apex. Hind-
wings coppery. Examples in F.-R. collection.”

In 1856, Frey quoted (Tin. Pteroph. Schweiz, p. 418) Zeller’s Latin
diagnosis from the Linn. Entomologica, of 1852, adds “ 94'"-9'"” and
records it for ‘‘ Switzerland (Zurich district).” Freyer, in 1858, notes
(Neuere Beit., vil., pp. 175-6) that he had not previously described and
figured the insect himself (although Treitschke had done so from his
notes and specimens captured by him) but that, having found larve in
early May, 1857, near Augsburg, on Gentiana verna, of various ages,
he now supplied the omission. He then writes of the larva: ‘‘ Up to
the time it is fullfed it remains in the calyx of the flower, feeding
principally on the seed-capsules, and is rarely found in fresh blooms,
faded flowers being those usually affected, a habit that greatly facilitates
its discovery*.’’ The imagines bred from these larve are described as
being .—

“Very near to mictodactyla. Head and thorax ashy-grey ; the forewings more
grey-brown, with four bright grey nervures chequered with brown. ‘The fringes at
the apices of the forewing are white in the upper, and brown in the lower, part of
the fissure, whilst before them are brown streaks and dots. At the end of the cleft,
which is fringed with white, are two black-brown dots, which, with the brown dots,
form a lunule, the ends of which run along the veins towards the base, and jom a
distinct brown spot in the first third of the forewing; in the upper lobe is an
elongate liver-coloured spot, above and beyond which the costa is dusted with white.
The hindwings are unicolorous fawn-colour, with fringes of the same hue. The
whole of the underside is fawn-colour, with cnly the fringes at the apex white, as
on the upperside. The abdomen is grey-brown, with white lines, and with two
brown spots on each segment.”

* After this was written, Frey reported (Lep. der Schweiz, p. 430) coprodactyla
larvee as feeding in flowers of Gentiana verna, and Hofmann independently did the
same (Die Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 89). It is, therefore, possible that Freyer’s
description really did not belong to the species he captured at Tegernsee in 1828, in
Gentiana lutea, and which Treitschke named graphodactyla. Certainly, the larval
habits remind one much of pnewmonanthes, and graphodactyla, as well as coprodactyla,
may feed in G. verna.

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 519

In 1876, the species was further described by Heinemann and
Wocke (Schmett. Deutsch., p. 797) as having :—

“Forewings brownish yellow-grey, dusted with white, on the inner margin and
around the cleft lighter yellowish ; a tiny median streak ; a transverse spot, or a pair
of dots, just before the cleft, and a longitudinal streak in the upper lobe dark brown ;
behind the last is a white oblique transverse line; fringes around the apices of
both lobes white. 43-5 lin. The species is nearest to plagiodactylus, but differs by
the stumpier forewings and shorter lobes. The spot at the cleft is separated from
the latter by a yellowish space, and generally consists of two dots standing perpen-
dicularly above one another. The longitudinal spot of the upper lobe only reaches
to the pure white, strongly marked, transverse line; beyond this the lobe is yellow-
brown, strongly dusted with white. The fringes of the costa white above the spot
at end of cleft, brown above the longitudinal streak of the upper lobe; the outer
marginal fringes of this lobe white, with a dark brown border; the fringes of the
cleft white, on the inner angle of the upper lobe, and at the apex of the lower lobe
brownish ; the hindmarginal fringes of the latter at the base and anal angle yellow-
ish, at the apex white, also with brown basal line, without prominent spots ; fringes
of inner margin pale yellow.”

Two years later (1878), Zeller referred certain north German
specimens to this species (Stett. Hnt. Ztg., p. 164), whilst, in 1880,
Frey appears to have described (Lep. der Schweiz, p. 480) the species
under two names, viz., the type or mountain form as plagivdactylus,
Sta., and the lowland form as graphodactylus, unless, indeed, all his refer-
ences to theformer, except that of ‘‘ Zurich,” are not to the true scabious-
feeding plagiodactylus. In the ‘‘ Frey coll.’”’ the specimens under both
names are all apparently pnewmonanthes. In the same year, Buttner
describes (Stett. Hint. Zty., p. 472) the north German form under the
name of playiodactylus, or pneumonanthes, n.sp. Snellen also appears to
have dealt with graphodactyla var. pneumonanthes, under the name of
plagiodactylus, Sta. (De Vlind., 11., pt. 2, p. 1087), as also did Snellen
van Vollenhoven, in Sepp’s Ned. Ins., 2nd series, vol. iv., pp. 188 ct seq.,
pl. xxxiv., figs. 1-18, where he gives a first-class account and figures
of the species under the latter name. MHering insisted (Stett. Ent.
Zty., 1891, pp. 225-6; 1893, pp. 117-120) on the application of the
name plagiodactylus, Sta., to the north German form. He says (Stett.
Ent. Zty., 1891, pp. 225-6) that ‘‘Buttner has queried as a new
species, preumonanthes, Schleich, for the simple reason that Snellen
(De Vlind., p. 1088) has pointed out that there is not yet agreement
among authors with regard to the specific characters of graphodactylus,
Sorhagen calling the form, from Gentiana pneumonanthe, yraphodactylus,
Tr., whilst Buttner calls it plagiodactylus.”’ He adds that he sent
specimens (captured in August, 1888, at Finkenkrug) to Stainton and
Wocke; the former, he says, declared them to be his plagiodactylus,
the latter yraphodactylus. He goes on to state that he considers the
north German examples specifically distinct from graphodactylus that
he has received from Switzerland and Austria, to which two examples
from Lombardy, sent by Turati, come nearest. He then adds that
‘Snellen says (De Vlind., p. 1088) that, in his opinion, ‘the plagio-
dactylus of Zeller, Frey, and Wocke, all belong to graphodactylus, Tr.,
or are mixed up therewith.’ Snellen adds that ‘one cannot describe
the forewings of playiodactylus, Sta., as brown. They are coloured almost
like coprodactylus, Sta., but of a darker tint.’ Bittner says (in a
footnote): ‘It appears to me that graphodactyla, Tr., and plagiodactylus,
Sta. (de., var. prewnonanthes), are not specifically distinct, but that the
latter is a blue-grey variety of the former. The difference, quoted by

520 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Wocke, of the darker base to the fringes of the outer margin, is not con-
stant, and certainly does not denote a differentiation of species.’’’ In
1893, Hering gave (Stett. Ent. Ztg., pp. 117-120) further details, and
described at length the larva found on Gentiana pneumonanthe. In
1895, Hofmann had no hesitation in referring the lowland form,
pneumonanthes, as a variety to the mountain form, graphodactyla, Tr.
In Staudinger and Rebel’s Catalog, 1901, 8rd ed., p. 77, the mountain
and lowland forms are treated as distinct species, the former from the
‘Alps, Galicia, and Hungary,” the latter from “north Germany,
Holland, and ? England.’’ At this time the notion of “England”
being a locality was based on the records of true scabious-feeding
plagiodactylus, the gentian species not being discovered in this country
till August, 1906.

Variation.—Herrich-Schaffer notes (Sys. Bearb., v., p. 377) that
examples, taken in the Zurich district by Frey, are smaller than those
from the Schneeberg, the Sdémmering, etc. In 1878, Zeller referred
(Stett. Hnt. Ztg., p. 164) the north German examples to this species.
He says: ‘‘On account of a g taken by Dr. Schleich on July 4th, on the
island of Wollin, and four g sand two ? s which Mr. G. Stange captured
from among several specimens seen in the meadows near Spandau, June
24th and 29th, I must consider this species as one also indigenous to north
Germany, if it does not possess a specific distinction in that the white
transverse line of the upper lobe is also continued on the lower lobe,
although it does not touch either of the adjacent margins. The two
brown spots are separated from the fissure by a pale space. Perhaps
Gentiana pneumonanthe is the foodplant in our district.’”’ Hering
observes (Stett. Hnt. Ztg., 1891, pp. 225-6) that ‘the graphodactyla
from Switzerland and Austria appear to be specifically different from
examples from the north of Germany, to which two examples received
from Turati, and taken in Lombardy, approach the nearest.’’ The series
of fine somewhat large specimens of this species in the “ Frey collection,”
under the name of “ plagiodactylus,” and taken near Zurich, are exceed-
ingly well-marked, of a pale brownish colour, tinged with darker
fuscous-brown, strongly sprinkled with black scales along the nervures
and costa, the lobal line and transverse lunule (running through the ter-
mination of the cleft) white; the outer-marginal half of the lobes very
thickly sprinkled with white scales; the apical and outer-marginal fringes
of the lobes pure snowy-white, becoming grey at the anal angle of the lower
lobe and along the inner margin; the costa and median area longitudin-
ally white-scaled; a small, linear, black, median dot; a distinct, double,
black dot, often united, and often with an inner branch towards the
centre of the wing, just inside the termination of cleft; a very con-
spicuous linear spot in the transverse band of the upper lobe; a narrow,
black, outer-marginal line passing between the outer white area and
the white fringes of the upper lobe. Hindwings very dark grey-brown,
fringes a shade paler than the lunules, markedly paler basally. The
specimens in the “Frey collection’ labelled ‘“ graphodactylus”’ from
Zurich, are somewhat smaller, less markedly contrasting between the
dark and paler tints, more uniformly greyish-fuscous, the white parts
less strongly marked and scaled, the black markings in “ playiodactylus”’
are, in this, only a darker shade of fuscous-brown, and scarcely, if at all,
distinguishable from the ground-colour; the fringes of the forewings
and the character of the hindwings as in the preceding. One from

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 521

Bremgarten, is of the more contrasting tints of ‘ plaqiodactylus,” but
without the black marks in the forewings ; two others, from the same
locality, being very unicolorous. Two from Breslau (Wocke) are
remarkably well-marked with white, the ground-colour much lghter,
and only the dark dots and streaks of the forewings conspicuous in a
fuscous-brown tint. Four examples from Hanover (Glitz) are uniformly
whitish-grey, with little brown or fuscous shading ; one with only the
upper lobal streak and cleft dots faintly marked; the three others with
these characters distinctly marked (Tutt, October, 1906). In a long
series of the var. pneumonanthes examined, taken at Finkenkrug, there
is the slightest possible difference in size and markings between the
first and second broods. We have before us eleven specimens (nine 3's
and two ¢s), takeu June 7th, 1906, and twenty (ten gs and ten 9s)
taken towards the end of July, 1906, by Dadd. The excess of gs in
the first, and of ¢@s in the second, batch, makes the former appear
rather larger and more uniformly marked, the latter rather smaller
and more contrastingly marked, but actual measurement shows very
little difference in size, all the ?s being 20mm.-21mm. (except one
about 28mm.), whilst the gs vary from 21mm.-23mm. (except one
of the early brood which is just 24mm. Comparing two British
specimens, g and ¢, loaned by Mathew, one finds that, in tint and
markings, they are exactly similar to specimens of the second brood
taken by Dadd, at Finkenkrug. The ¢ is smaller and rather better
marked than the g, but the size of both is somewhat below that of
the German specimens, the g being 19°5mm., the ? 17°5mm., about
2mm. each less than the smallest examples of the corresponding sex in
Dadd’s consignment. ‘The proportions of the three colours of which the
forewing may be said to be made up, viz., the grey (or whitish) ground
colour, the blackish sprinkled costa, and the brownish inner margin, leads
to considerable difference in the appearance of individual specimens. In
some the whole of the wing-area is essentially grey, the usually dark
costa and brownish inner margin being practically obsolete, the dark
shade (including the little streak) of the upper lobe, the costal triangle
(including the fissural dots), and the white transverse lobal and
fissural lines sometimes distinctly marked, but usually only moderately
so, making the whole wing-area particularly unicolorous in appearance.
This is almost entirely a ¢ torm. ‘he second form has the brownish
colour of the inner margin spread over the whole of the median area
of the wing, occasionally reaching almost to the costa; the grey
ground colour is here reduced to the costal and outer lobal areas, and
the wing itself has'a general brownish or fawn-coloured hue. The
normally dark costal and lobal markings are usually ill-developed, but
sometimes clearly and distinctly marked; this also is usually a g
form. ‘The most striking form is one in which the black scaling of
the vosta spreads downwards into the middle of the wing absorbing
the usual dark markings, and thus making a very conspicuous
triangular patch, as in the Platyptiliids and Amblyptilids; in
addition, the transverse white lobal and fissural markings are very
distinct, and the snow-white costal tip and outer marginal fringe,
contrast against the dark marginal outer edge of the wing. This
dark, contrastingly marked, form is usually ?. Both sexes differ in
the distinctness of the discal spot, which, in some, is quite con-
spicuous, and in others absent, with almost every intermediate form

522 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

usually, however, present. Similarly there is considerable difference
in the conspicuousness of the fissural dots, although both are almost
always present and usually separate. The lineola in the upper lobe
1s apparently always present, but the amount of dark shading that
surrounds it varies very considerably. The following are Buttner’s
original description and Hering and Hofmann’s notes on the life-
history of :—

a. var. pneumonanthes [Schleich], Biittn., “Stett. Ent. Ztg.,” p. 472 (1880) ;
Hofm., “Deutsch. Pter.,” p. 87 (1895); Staud. and Reb., “Cat,” 3rd vede span
(1901); Mathew, ‘‘ Ent. Rec.,” xviii., p. 245 (1906). Plagiodactylus, Snell., “De
Viind.,” i1., pt. 2, p. 1037 @n part) (1882) ;. Hering, “ Stett. Ent. Ziem sapeeeee
(1891); p. 117 (1893).—Mimaeseoptilus plagiodactylus an nov. sp. pneumonanthes,
Schl. (?)—As large as the smaller (examples) of plagiodactylus, and otherwise
similar to them, but separated by the black spot, not reaching up to the fissure, but
divided from it sharply by a pale, even if narrow, space, and by the sharp whitish
transverse line. This commences, as sometimes in plagiodactylus, on the costa, and
terminates at the inner margin of the upper lobe; it has, however, on the lower
lobe, a continuation consisting of two very distinct whitish spots (only in one ? is
this indistinct). Schleich took several examples near Misdroy, in July, in a swampy
meadow on the western shore of the Vietziger See, where Gentiana pneumonanthe
grew. In similar situations also, with Gentiana, six examples (one ? included)
were caught in the last third of June, near Spandau (Biittner). Larva: The fullgrown
larva is 9mm.-11lmm. long, pale yellow-brown, witha more yellowish dorsal vessel dis-
tinctly showing through the skin. Head and anal segment are pale leather-colour, the
mouth-parts darker brown, the thoracic legs still paler than the head, and, like the
anal claspers, pale leather-coloured ; the ventral prolegs of-the ground colour of
the body, the crochets of the same, scarcely noticeably darker than the thoracic
legs. Dorsal line sharply contrasted, intense green, accompanied, on each side, by
a pale yellow longitudinal line, straight and broad; immediately below this runs a
finer waved line, and just above the legs another, with somewhat lesser undulations,
likewise pale yellow, and running parallel with the upper. The whole larva is
beset regularly with short, stiff, dark-coloured hairs ; they are somewhat longer on
the dorsum than on the sides of the larva (Hering, Stett. Ent. Ztg., 1893, p. 118).
Hasits oF Larva: It lives, in the middle of July, in the blossoms of Gentiana
pneumonanthe, which only hetray the presence of the larva by the slightly
discoloured, spotted, exterior, and eats out the disc deep into the stalk. Many
larvee bore from the outside into the blossoms through large holes, and seem to
change often from one flower to another. Pupation takes place in the usual manner.
Pups: The pupa is, at first, pale yellow-green, and becomes gradually darker on
the dorsum, dark violet-brown, on the venter and on the wingcases more purely
dark brown, that is, sepia-colour. The coloration appears to be very variable. In
shape it is closest to that of S. pelidnodactyla and serotina. 'TIME OF APPEARANCE:
The imago develops as early as the end of July, after only 10 days’ rest in the pupa,
and flies up to the end of August ; probably there is also a spring brood, anyhow,
Stange took some, already very worn, examples on June 24th. DISTRIBUTION:
S. var. pneumonanthes occurs near Berlin (Finkenkrug), Spandau, Stettin, on the
island of Misdroy, also near Breslau, Hanover, and near Karlsruhe (Reutti) (Hofmann).

Hiofmann notes (Deutsch. Pteroph., pp. 87-88): ‘ Forewings 8mm.-
limm. It is distinguished from the type by the much purer grey
eround colour, while in the latter the brown predominates, and by the
less contrast to the rest of the wing of the inner margin, that being
only somewhat paler (not yellowish or whitish). The discoidal spot
is rarely distinct. The fissural dots are, as in the type, often partly
obliterated, or united, or form a transverse streak, the upper one
often quite absent ; the pale yellow-brown space between the fissural
dots and the fissure, as well as the pale space at the base of the upper
lobe, is absent. The black longitudinal streaks in the lobes are
rarely well expressed, usually both in the upper and lower lobes,
they are very indistinct or quite absent. The white, oblique,
transverse line of the upper lobe runs on one side into the fringes of

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 523

the costa, and is continued usually in two very distinct white spots on
the lower lobe, while, in the type, these spots on the lower lobe only
occur very rarely. ‘The outer marginal fringes of the lobes have, as
in the type, a connected dark brown basal line, which, however, is
sometimes on the upper lobe, more rarely, also, on the lower lobe, cut
through once or twice with pale colour, or is much fainter in places.”
He adds that ‘‘ this variety seems up to the present to have been but
little noticed, and that it, therefore, probably has a wider area of
distribution than is at present suspected.”’

ComMPARISON WITH ALLIED spEciES.—Although Chapman notes (in
litt.) that there is very little difference in the genitalia of A.
zophodactylus, A. coprodactylus, and A. var. pneumonanthe, yet to
us the imaginal facies of these insects seem entirely different
(see pls. 1. and ii., antea p. 317). A. graphodactyla var. pneu-
monanthes is, in the outline of the forewing, especially the apex
and outer-margin, the character of its dark markings, and the trans-
verse lobal lines, peculiarly Platyptiliid, and very different from its more
slender and pointed-winged allies, and one suspects that Hofmann is
not really far wrong in his separation of this from the allied grey
Stenoptiliid species. The nearest ally to this species is, Chapman thinks,
A. coprodactylus. So near is it that Chapman is inclined to consider the
two insects to have scarcely reached specific rank. He writes (in
litt.): ““Adkinia graphodactylais probably very closely allied to Adkinia
zophodactylus, although each falls into a different one of the two
divisions, that Hofmann makes of the genus, founded on the absence
of the pale space separating the double spot from the division of the
forewing. That this distinction is of no great validity is obvious from
the circumstance that, of two of Mr. Mathew’s specimens before me,
one has, on one side, the dark fringe at the bottom of the cleft
connected by black scales with the spots, whilst of two A. coprodactylus
taken at random from those I have secured abroad, one from Fusio has
a large black patch at the cleft containing some white scales in a little
line, which is all that is left to represent the white band separating
the two dots from the cleft.”” He then adds: ‘‘ My own belief is, that
all the gentian-feeding Stenoptilias are one species, divided into many
races (usually distinguishable) according to habitat and foodplant. Of
these it may be admitted that zophodactylus has reached, or almost
reached, specific rank ; pneumonanthes, also, is a rather distinct form,
with a definite foodplant, Gentiana pneumonanthe. The gigantic
(29mm.) brilliantly-marked form of coprodactylus (7), reared from larvee
found on Gentiana lutea, at Larche, is equally deserving of subspecitic
rank (an ordinary form of A. coprodactylus, which must feed on
Gentiana verna or G. acaulis, is common in the same locality, and
probably not syngamic with it); the ordinary form of coprodactylus is
usually distinguishable easily, but varies in many features towards
graphodactyla.’ Chapman finally notes: ‘The question, of course,
of what is a species, arises. In this case, I only mean to suggest that
these are all very close together, closer than we usually allow distinct
species to be.’”’ As noted above we consider these insects to be
Specifically distinct.

Hasirs or rarva.—Hofmann says (Deutsch. Pteroph., p. 86) that
“the larva of S. graphodactyla lives, according to Treitschke and Frey,
on Gentiana lutea, in June, in spun-together leaves,” and states that he
himself found the larva formerly in the Allgiiu, in spun-together shoots

524 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

of Gentiana asclepiadea, but, unfortunately, did not at that time make
any description. In August, 1895, he says, he found its traces commonly
on the above-named plant, near Urfeld, on the Walchensee, in situations
where the imago was still flying, but the larval webs were either all
empty, or occupied by the yellow cocoons of a Microgaster. The descrip-
tion of the larva of Freyer (Newere Beitriiye, vil., p. 176) as being found at
the commencement of May on Gentiana verna, he considers, “ may equally
well belong to coprodactyla.’’? One is not quite clear as to this paragraph,
for reference to Treitschke’s original account (anted, pp. 515-516) shows
that it was Freyer himself who gave the latter the information that he
found, near Tegernsee, the larve of yraphodactyla, livingin spun-together —
leaves of Gentiana lutea, ten to fifteen examples in one head, and it was from
imagines bred from these larve that the species was named. In this he
is followed by Frey (Die Tin. Pter. Schweiz, p. 418), but, at the same time,
Frey, evidently from first-hand knowledge, also described the larva, under
the name of plagiodactylus (op. cit., p. 412), that feeds in May and June
in the spun-together leaves of Gentiana asclepiadea, as belonging to
this species. He says that the larva draws together the topmost leaves
into a large globular mass, so that affected plants are somewhat con-
spicuous. These larvee are green, with dark mediodorsal line, covered
with dark long stiff bristles, thickest at the sides, where also are some
whitish ones; the legs green. Later, in May, 1860, Freyer found
larve at Deuringen, near Augsburg, in the flowers of the little spring
gentian (Gentiana verna), that he thought were the same as those he
had found in June, 1828, on Gentiana lutea. Zeller remarked (Ists,
1841, p. 841) that the larve appeared to live on Gentiana lutea much
in the same way as Pterophorus hieracii lives on its foodplant
(Hieracium laevigatum). These various notes of habits of larve
feeding on Gentiana lutea (Freyer, Frey, and Zeller), G. verna
(Freyer), and G. asclepiadea (Frey and Hofmann), are somewhat
puzzling. The foodplant of coprodactylus is G. verna, of grapho-
dactyla (the first reared) is (7. lutea, of var. pneumonanthes is G.
pneumonanthe, and one is a little puzzled as to these insects (see
Chapman’s remarks on the imagines, antea, p. 523), although we have
no trouble whatever in discriminating coprodactylus and pneumonanthes.
Of the larvee of the latter insect, which is fairly abundant in north
Germany and Holland, and which has been taken in Switzerland and
England on G. pneumonanthe, there are many notes. Thus Chapman
writes: ‘‘I received from Mr. Gillmer (November Ist, 1906) a
parcel of shoots of Gentiana pneumonanthe ; the majority of these
were about three to six inches long, green and leafy for their upper
haif, and, like a similar lot examined some ten days ago, not one
of these leafy examples afforded a larva. In two only were traces that
might have been those of ‘‘ plume’”’ larve found; in both of these the
mines ended on the lower cut end, so that the larva had either escaped
after the shoot was cut, or was left behind in the root-portion. One
portion, however, was cut much lower than the others, and consisted
of several shoots attached to a portion of upper root-stock; all the
others were separate. One of these shoots was about an inch and an
eighth long (29mm.), tender and succuient throughout, and with only
a faint trace of green on the unopened leaf-bud at the top. The older
shoots were often very woody. In this little shoot was a mark of
entry about 8mm. from the top, thence a burrow descended in nearly

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 525

the middle of the shoot for 16mm., and at the lower end was a larva,
head downwards, and possibly continuing the burrow; that it was not
doing so, but had taken up its winter-quarters, might be concluded
from the way in which its cavity was rounded out at both ends, no
silk, however, being found, and especially by some lttle discoloration
at the head-end, of a brownish tint like that of some of the upper part
of the burrow, and suggesting that it had not been touched by eating,
or otherwise, for an appreciable time. Apart from the presence of the
burrow, the shoot seemed healthy and uninjured, and one would have
expected it to shoot up next spring about as well as if nothing had
happened to it.”’ Later (November 19th) he writes: ‘‘I have examined
ten more plantsof Gentiana pneumonanthe, sent by Mr. Gillmer, and found
six larve. Of these one was in a rather older shoot, 7.e., about three
inches long, with some leaves at the top, rather a slender shoot, but it
had bored a considerable burrow, about a quarter of an inch on one
side of the shoot, and nearly as much on the other (if both done by
the same larva). This larva was in the first instar. The other five
were all in the second instar, and were all in central shoots without
leaves, and very little green at the top. In the case of two of these,
a neighbouring older, but still small and young, shoot, contained an
empty burrow. ‘This seems to imply that the young larva, if the
shoot it begins with during its first instar is at all old, ¢.¢., has leaves
at the top, quits it and enters a younger, more central, shoot. All
the shoots with these larve in them were found to have a mark of
entry, in one or two cases this seemed too large and recent to have
been made by a newly-hatched larva, but since such mark alters in
size, etc., as the plant grows, this must be regarded as a matter of
rather vague opinion. A stronger point is that these mines were
shorter, but wider, than the empty ones in the older shoots, and
seemed all to have been made by a second instar larva. The plant
appears to have a more or less perennial root, and has the bases of the
stems of the season of various sizes, a good many quite young, with
leaves at the top, five or six inches (possibly shoots sent up after
autumn mowing ?). All the shoots seem to come from a central head,
of which a root may have more than one, and, up to nearly an inch
long, or rarely more, each shoot is within a sheath, and the younger
shoots, each in its own sheath, are included with it. In one case, the
larva was found in a shoot still within its sheath, and it had not
only penetrated this sheath to reach the shoot, but also the sheath
exterior to this proper one, 7.e., the sheath of the next older shoot.
I suspected it of having penetrated a still exterior sheath, being so far
down in the heart of the plant, but I had already damaged the plant
too much to be able to settle this point” (in litt.). So much for the
autumn and winter larve of the early brood. Of the larve of the second
brood Hering observes (Stett. Hnt. Ztqg., 1893, pp. 117-120) that, near
Finkenkrug, on July 15th, 1893, he examined carefully the flowers of Gen-
tiana preumonanthe, and ‘soon found four amongst them, which ditfered
from the sound ones by a slight spotted appearance ; on opening the
closed blooms, they were found to contain several small light-green
larvee, which had eaten away the base of the fruits, and were more or
less deeply hidden in the upper part of the stem; their presence was
betrayed by the frass. Another caterpillar, a very young one, must
have been hidden in one of the blooms taken home as food. During

526 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

their confinement the larve bored into the blossoms, which were not
before attacked, from the outside, making quite conspicuous holes, in
fact, they ate freely, and moved from one bloom to another; on July 19th
four of the larger ones pupated.”” Mrs. Mathew discovered the larvee
in Britain, in the middle of August, 1906, near Wimborne, Dorset. Her
husband notes (Hint. Rec., xvui., p. 245) that “she collects plants, and,
among a number of specimens she was drying, that had been obtained
near Wimborne, was a head of marsh gentian, containing several
flowers. After they had been pressing for several days, under a
considerable weight, she examined them to see if they required placing
between dry sheets, and was not best pleased to discover that some of
the flowers had been much eaten by a couple of little larvae, which
looked none the worse for having been subjected to such pressure.
She brought them to me as she thought they might be something
good, as they were feeding upon rather an uncommon plant, and I at
once saw they were the larve of some kind of ‘ plume.’ ;

This was about the middle of August, and these two larve were
then nearly fullerown. . . . . ‘The larve, later, appeared
to be rare, for, after several days’ careful search among the
gentian, which itself was by no means plentiful, I could only find
about a dozen, and two or three more were found among the drying
plants.” Chapman notes (in litt.): “It is rather remarkable that
Mrs. Mathew’s method of discovering the species in Britain seems to
be a very usual way of meeting with it elsewhere. Two years ago
Mr. Wheeler sent me living pups (which emerged on the way), which
he discovered on stems of a bunch of marsh gentian placed in water.
This year Mr. Sich gave me the remains of a male found in a similar
way, and these three are, as it happens, the only sources of my pupa-
cases of the pneumonanthes var. of A. graphodactyla. These, and other
pupee of graphodactyla, show that, though the larva is apparently well
hidden in the somewhat folded-up flowers of the gentian, it leaves
them for pupation, but does not travel far, no doubt naturally fixing ©
itself up on the stem of the plant on which it has fed.” Dadd notes
(in litt.) : “‘ Larvee were found feeding on the flowers and seed-vessels of
Gentiana cruciata.* The large blue flowers of this plant are fairly
common at Finkenkrug, and round holes bored in the bells first drew my
attention to the larve, which J at first expected to find to bean Hupithecia.
They devour principally the stamens and seed-pods, apparently never
touching the bell except when entering or leaving a flower. When
fullfed they emerge, and, selecting a spot either on the outside of a
flower or a leaf of the foodplant, spin a slight web of white silk, and
change to a pupa in the course of two or three days.’ Crombrugghe de
Picquendaele notes the larve in great numbers at Heide; he says that
they live in the flowers of Gentiana pneumonanthe, and are adult at the
commencement of July. He adds that he once found a larva as late

* Finkenkrug is the place where Hering found larve on what he called
‘Gentiana pneumonanthe, no doubt the same locality as that worked by Dadd, whilst —
Stange found the larvee at FE inkenkrug and Spandau on G. pneuwmonanthe, so one
is inclined to suggest that the “two” foodplants here noted are really the same
species. Of course there is no reason why the larva must be confined to one
species of gentian only ; one would suppose it would eat any species; still most of
the authorities seem to suggest that the various species of Adkinia have specialised
‘to certain species of gentian.

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. ly

as August 11th, 1905, and that, probably, also, there is an early brood of
larve which are fullerown in May. Gillmer observes (7m litt.) that
he obtained larve in abundance on the Wérnitz (Mosigkauer Haide),
in Anhalt: he collected the flower-heads, leaves, and stems of (rentiana
pneumonanthe on July 14th, 1906, for eggs of Lycaena alcon, which
were abundant thereon; the larvee were quite hidden in the flowers
which they perforated, leaving the flowers, when fullfed, over the period
from July 16th until early August. Wheeler found larve towards the
end of August, 1902, at Bouveret, feeding on the flowers of the same
plant, usually, though by nomeansexclusively, insidethem. In Hanover,
the larvee are to be found in the flowers of Gentiana pneumonanthe in
July (Glitz), similarly in Silesia (Wocke), whilst Sorhagen says that the
larvee are to be found, in Brandenburg, in the beginning of May, and
again in July, in the flowers and in the seed-capsules of Gentiana
verna,* G. lutea, and G. pnewmonanthe. Kaltenbach appears simply
to copy Frey, for he says that the larve of plagiodactylus (=pneu-
monanthes) feed upon Gentiana asclepiadea in May and June, the larva
drawing together the summit-leaves of the plant into a considerable
bunch, with silken threads, so that the plants affected by the larvee
easily catch the eye. Hartmann, Steudel and Hofmann, and other
- authors also, only copy this statement.

“Larva (pneumonanthes).—First instar: The first stage larva is
1-7mm. to 28mm. long, according to extension; the head is nearly
black; the thoracic plate and anal plate conspicuously dark ; the rest
of the larva, including the hairs, spiracles, etc., is white or transpar-
ently colourless; most of the tubercles, however, show a dark point.
There are a few very short hairs on the head. The prothoracic plate
has three hairs (on each side) in front, the middle the shortest, a large
central one in back row, inner one small and well forward; one at
outer posterior angle wanting or too small to be detected ; three hairs
on prespiracular, lower one very long (0.12mm.), posterior one quite
minute (0.01mm. or less); on meso- and metathorax four pairs of hairs,
the second of first pair 0-18mm. long, first O‘8mm.; of second pair, first
nearly 0-2mm., second 0:04mm.; of the third, first 0:-lmm., second
0:03mm.; lower pairO‘5mm. On the abdomen the hair on tubercle iis
rather stouter than that on 11, but those of 1, 1, and 11, all about
O-1mm. long; i and 11 widely apart, iv and v level, very close together,
the posterior about O-lmm., the front one about 0°3mm. long; there
are two very long hairs on the 9th abdominal (11 and v?), and
another on the anal plate (0°-16mm.), there are six or seven altogether
on each side of the anal plate; no hair representing tubercle vi is
present, and I cannot discover vil. Prolegs on cylindrical props about
0:05mm. high and with four hooks, claspers seven. The skin-surface is
generally quite smooth, but, over the lateral region of the prothorax,
and on the sides of the meso- and metathorax, there is a sparse coating
of very fine sharp spicules ; these recur again in the anal region; here
and there in the intermediate region near the spiracles are some
skin-points in the form of small transparent nodules (November
19th, 1906). Second instar (hybernating stage): The little larva

* This is the foodplant of S. coprodactylus (teste Frey, Lep. der Schweiz,
p. 430) ; probably, therefore, it was copied from Freyer (Neuere Beitriige, vii., pp.

175-6).

528 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

is nearly 8mm. long, white, with brownish-grey head and anal
plate, and small fuscous plates to the tubercles. The hairs are
rather long and dark. Seen from above, the hairs of tubercles iv and
vy are conspicuous, the posterior (iv) about 0-25mm. long, directed
slightly backwards, the front (v) a little forward, about O-lmm.; that
on tubercle i is about 0-1lmm. long, on ii 0-3mm., and their bases are
well apart ; the hair on iii is about 0‘°2mm. All these have brownish-
fuscous plates, and are themselves slightly dark-tinted, and continue
thick to the extremity, without being actually swollen at the tip. The
spiracles are also conspicuous dark circles. On the meso- and meta-
thorax are the usual four pairs of hairs on each side; the first pair
trapezoidal, on a common base, common rather by the extension of
the bases than the approach of the hairs, which are well apart, and
much like tubercles i and ii of the abdominal seements as to length.
The second pair reversed trapezoidal, on a common base, the lower
(front) hair the longer. The third pair has an extra (third) hair, all
on separate bases, the accessory (upper posterior) the shortest. The
fourth pair is near the legs, the lower (posterior) hair the longer ;
(0-2mm); these have separate bases. The prothoracic plate has the usual
six hairs on each side. The end ones of the lower row and the middle of
the upper being long ones, the others not half their length. The hairs on
the last segment are long; two on each side of the 9th abdominal are
0-3mm., apparently representing tubercles i1 and iv. The dark anal
plate has three hairs on each side, and one very long one is just
outside it, with shorter ones along the posterior margin of the
segment and on the bases of the claspers. The prolegs carry seven or
eight strong brown hooks, the anal claspers eight that are decidedly
larger. On tubercle vi is a hair about 0-1lmm. long at posterior
margin of segment; the three hairs of vi are all strong for this
tubercle, about 0-0€mm., 0:°09mm., and 0:'12mm. long. There is a
small hair internal to these, but I cannot find it on the segments with
prolegs. The general surface is covered with fine, rounded, skin-
points, apparently wanting along the posterior borders of the segments.
The feature of the larva is the marked colour of the head, anal plate,
spiracles, tubercular plates, and hairs. There is no trace of any sort
of secondary hairs. The diameter of the head is about 0-45mm. [Itis
highly probable that it is fullgrown in the second instar. It is, with the
highest probability, the larva of S. graphodactyla var. pnewnonanthes.
It was taken on the ground in the Wornitz (Mosigkauer Haide), in
Anhalt, where this species was abundant last July and August,
but it may be some other gentian-feeder, or even zophodactylus|
(Chapman). ullgrown larva: Pale green, with a darker green dorsal
line, below which is another dark subdorsal line, bordered on each side
by a pale greenish-white line, the lower edge of which is rather
indented ; spiracles minute, white, in a black ring; the anal segments
somewhat attenuated ; the 2nd segment much smaller than the others;
head pale yellowish-brown, clouded with darker reticulations; the
whole surface covered with a pile of short pale brownish hairs, with
longer ones in groups of two, three, or four, arranged along the sides
and back. In some larve, the dorsal stripe is tinged with purple, and —
the general colour a yellowish-green (Mathew, August 25th, 1906).
Length tin. Colour grass-green. Head, anal claspers, and prolegs
somewhat yellowish; the face is smooth, mottled with brown mark-

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 529

ings; eyes black. The whole body is covered with very short black
bristles, these being, however, so small, as only to be observable with a
lens. Besides these short bristles, which clothe the body, each tubercle
is defined by a long brown hair, which is generally curved back-
wards. The spiracles are brown and somewhat prominent. There are
sheht indications of two dorsal and lateral stripes ; they are, however,
very faint, slightly paler than the ground-colour, and broken up at each
segmental division (Dadd, July 20th, 1206). ‘The fullerown larva
10mm. long, green; head yellowish, mouth-parts red; four points
inconspicuously marked on the first segment, of which the two median
are almost obliterated; dorsal vessel inconspicuous ; stigmata black ;
two lateral whitish streaks on each segment; valve yellowish; sub-
dorsal whitish ; hairs on back whitish, on sides black (Crombrugghe
de Picquendaele). ~[Bluish-green in colour, with a dark dorsal line,
whilst three white lines run below each other along the sides. Head
paler with darker reddish dots. The dorsal area is pale red, and con-
-spicuously cut by a darker red dorsal line in some examples, while at
the side, centrally, a red line sometimes replaces a white one. The
tiny larvee are completely and thickly covered with fine hairs (Freyer,
from larve found in early May, 1857, near Augsburg, on Gentiana
verna).|

Lares found at Finkenkrug were fullfed on July 19th,
1893, when they surrounded themselves with a silken web, attached
partly to the box in which they were confined, and partly to the leaves ;
in this web the larve pupated, the pupal stage lasting ten days. One
larva was observed about 11 a.m., and, whilst being examined under a
lens, movements of the front of the body towards the anal seement
took place frequently; at 4p.m. it hung from the silk web, and already
showed, by the complete contraction of the body, the pupal form
within, in particular, the more pointed character of the abdomen, the
bent position of the head, the bulging pro- and mesothorax, and the
more conspicuous dorsal vessel. The true legs reached forward as a
support. The supporting pad of silk was most dense at the anal
attachment. The larva remained in this position till late at night on the
second day, but, by the morning, metamorphosis had taken place, and
a licht yellow-green pupa was there, which, however, changed colour
before night. During metamorphosis the larva had curved itself so
that the pupal dorsum had been turned towards the glass (on which
the silken pad of the one examined was spun) instead of the ventar,
but this was only temporary, for, later, 1b was observed that the pupa
was in its normal position, and so remained until emergence took place
(Hering). The pupa is suspended by the anus, and further, by some
bristles on the under surface of the 8th abdominal segment. These latter
ensure the pupa a rigid position, so that, even if turned upside down,
the pup remain erect. In one case, where I forcibly dislodged these
bristles from their hold, the pupa always hung head downwards (Dada).
Gillmer says (in litt.): ‘The larvee leave the flowers of Gentiana pneu-
monanthe when fullfed, and spin up on the leaves, stems of plants, or
the walls of the breeding-cage in which they may be kept, suspending
themselves vertically. The larve are green when fullfed, and the pupa
also is at first green, with a purple-bordered wing-case; the pupa,
however, gradually darkens as it matures, the colour becoming more
and more reddish; the pupal stage lasts about fourteen days. Mathew

530 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

observes that the larve he obtained at Wimborne were placed in a large
glass-topped box with some flowers of gentian, into which they crawled,
but, in a day or two, they came out, spun pads of silk on the glass,
and, in about forty-eight hours, changed to pupe, hanging head down-
wards. Chapman says that ‘the larve leave the flowers for pupation,
but do not travel far, no doubt naturally fixing themselves on the
stems of the plants on which they have fed, probably like A. zopho-
dactylus in an inverted position quite near the flowers (this can, of
course, as with A. zophodactylus, apply only to examples of the
summer brood); nearly all my specimens are on bits of round stem,
as the other species of the genus so frequently are, and those of A.
zophodactylus are so commonly in this position, that we may call it
almost the invariable rule in that species.’’ [Freyer says: “‘ When
fullfed the larva leaves its hiding-place and takes up a position either
on the stem of the foodplant, or on the stem of some other plant near,
or on something on the ground, or a culm of grass, and on this fastens
itself by the middle (?) and anus, and thus pupates.’’ (This refers to
the larvee found feeding near Augsburg on Gentiana verna.)|
Fooppiants.—Gentiana lutea (Freyer), [G. verna (Freyer),|

G. asclepiadea (Frey, Hofmann), G. pneumonanthe (Zeller). [Frey —

notes (Lep. der Schweiz, p. 480) Gentiana verna as the foodplant of
coprodactylus, G. ascleptadea as the foodplant of plagiodactylus (=pneu-
monanthes), and ‘‘gentians’”’ generally for graphodactyla. There is little
doubt that the plagiodactylus and graphodactylus of the ‘‘ Frey coll.” are,
so far as his own captures are concerned, the first and second broods of
the latter species. Sorhagen says (Die Kleinschmett. Brandbg., pp. 4-5)
the larve feed in the capsules of Gentiana verna, G. lutea, and G.
pneumonanthe. This is probably obtained from Freyer, who recorded
graphodactyla (teste Treitschke) from G. lutea at Bad Kreith, and from
G. verna at Deuringen, near Augsburg.

Pupa.—The pupa of graphodactyla exhibits, in its form, no aberra-
tion from the type of the genus; it is pale yellowish-brown, darker
on the wing-cases, and has, on the abdomen, several dark brown, faint,
longitudinal lines, that is, one in the mediodorsal region, two on each
side above, and one, very broad and darker, below the lateral flange
(Hofmann). [The following descriptions, taken from a dead pupa and
an empty case of A. var. pneumonanthes from Mr. Mathew, are, therefore,
from authentic English material, but might, so far as I can tell, have
been as satisfactorily made from A. graphodactyla or from English
A. zophodactylus.| The empty pupal shell is about 11mm. long, the
dead pupa about 8:5mm.; the latter is, however, obviously one that was
a starveling, and the moth probably died inside it, instead of emerging,
for some such reason. It is cylindrical, 7.e., not flattened in any way ;
a transverse section of, say, the 5th abdominal segment would be a
circle. It is also very smooth, no hump, spines, or hairs (without
considerable magnification) being present. It has a definite beak, the
ventral line from the end of the free appendages being quite straight,
and meeting the equally straight line of the front of the pupa at its
point. ‘This front line is only straight if taken in profile, the anterior
ends of the dorsal flanges then filling up what is really a curve over
the thoracic dorsum if the actual middle line be followed; the beak,
when magnified under a hand lens, is seen to be really rounded, with
no sharp point as in pupe that have to break open a cocoon, etc. (as

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 531

in Aigeriids for instance); still, the undersurface and front meet here,
at an angle of about 85°. The thorax (at the middle of the meso-
thorax) is broader and higher than any other part of the pupa, but .
so slightly that it would be almost correct to say it is of the same width
from here to the 3rd abdominal. There is, however, a slight tapering
in this length, but no bulbousness of the thorax as in the pupe of some
Stenoptilias. The width at the 8rd abdominal segment is about
1:5mm., of the 4th abdominal segment (without appendages) hardly
less, and it thence tapers slightly to the end of the 6th abdominal
seoment, and then more rapidly to the point of the cremastral spine.
From the nose-spine to the end of the 3rd abdominal segment, to which
the appendages are fixed, is 5mm.; beyond this, the free appendages
(maxille and second and third tarsi) extend 2mm., and are accom-
panied by the special wing-tips for nearly half the distance. The first
tarsi reach to the end of the 8rd abdominal segment (to the end of
the wings, without tips); the antenne 1:‘5mm. less. The maxille
disappear beneath the first legs a little higher up, at 2-6mm. from
their base, to reappear again in the free appendage-process. The
first femora do not appear, and only the minutest, narrow, triangular
piece of labium. The mandibles meet in the middle line for a short
distance ; the labrum is thus short and obtuse, but with a sharp
point. There appears to be one (very minute) hair on the face; none
are detected on the labrum or at the antennal bases. They may,
however, be present, as, in these unmounted specimens, those on the
eye-covers are quite invisible till got into profile. The eye-covers have
two hairs of approximately the length already given; the covers are
circular, apart from the flat edge against the antenne, and have the
eye-facets as fine points round the margin. The small prothoracie
piece, tolerably closely attached to the mesothorax, is connected (on
dehiscence) to the eye-piece by a long membrane, of which a slight
fold may be the dorsal head-piece; the prothorax, membrane, and
eye-piece (as in the dehisced pupa, not stretched out but bent
and twisted) are about 0O°65mm. in length, divided so that, of
five parts, two are prothorax, two membrane, and one eye-piece.
The prothoracic spiracle-cover (on mesothorax) is like those of others
of the same genus, forming a little arched hood (longest in line of
incision), beautifully ornamented with microscopic spicules or hairs,
which differ a little in size and arrangement from one end of
the cover to the other. The mesothorax opens by a dorsal suture on
dehiscence; the metathorax remains undivided. The dorsal ridges
hardly affect the prothorax, but cross the mesothorax, are rather wide
apart and high in front (where they have already been alluded to ag
eiving a straight outline to the front), lower and approximate, towards
the metathorax. On the metathorax they begin a little further apart
than they were at the posterior border of the mesothorax, and gradu-
ally get further apart till they terminate before the posterior border of
the 8rd abdominal segment. They are low and rounded, but still quite
pronounced. There is a slight hollow, placed dorsal to the wings, deepest
at the 1st abdominal seement, where it would form a waist, but that it
does not affect the dorsal line appreciably. The wings are rather
polished, but show some of the neuration. In this, and in a good many
other “plume” pup I have examined, the wings contain a large number
of the imaginal scales, torn from the wing in emerging, so that the

532 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

resulting moth, even when quite fresh, was by no means perfect. The
hindwing extends to beyond the spiracle of the 2nd abdominal segment,
and, though looking very narrow, being curled into the hollow, is
really fairly wide, very nearly 0:'2mm. at base, the forewing being about
0-8mm. The prothorax has two hairs, the mesothorax two pairs, the
metathorax three, that might represent i, 11, and iii. The 1st abdo-
minal segment has tubercle ion the ridge at the front margin of the
segment, 11 a long way back on ridge; the 2nd abdominal has i on ridge,
about middle of segment, 11 on ridge, 0-4mm. behind i, ii above
spiracle. The 8rd abdominal segment has i and ii much closer
together, 111 above, and then iv + v below, spiracle. The following
segments, 4, 5, 6, and 7, have these, and also vi, lower and towards
posterior border of segment, and two hairs lower still, representing
vii; the 8th has all the tubercles from 1 and ii down to vi, and
there are several on the 9th abdominal. In this particular pupa,
the dorsal hairs (1 and 1i) are 0:18mm. apart, on the 4th ab-
dominal segment. All the hairs are very small, curved, and
clubbed, as already noticed. The last segments, 8th, 9th, and
10th abdominals, are inclined to be flat beneath, and also carry ridges
above, so that they are quadrangular in section; the upper surface
narrower than the lower. The 8th abdominal segment is very narrow
ventrally, and the flat surface reaches up to it. There is the usual
group of cremastral hooks at each end of the surface, and the anal sear is
rather prominent on it centrally. The front group of hooks consists
of two portions, one on each genital eminence; each portion has about
40 hairs, each nearly 0-2mm. long, with a hook set back closely to the
stem, and with but little terminal enlargement. The hairs of the anal
patch are much more numerous, but their appearance is identical. On
the dorsal aspects of the abdominal segments the sculpturing consists
of about 18 or 20 ridges, running transversely, but not always all the
way across. They are fairly straight, with no lateral ridges, and are
quite smooth on the top, the circular pits, that thickly sculpture the
spaces between, not reaching to theirtops, and producing little or noirregu-
larity on their flanks. Ventrally, there are similar ridges less marked,
but more numerous (say 26 across a segment), and a little encroached
on by the fine sculpturing, which here, especially in the middle line,
and to the front of the segments, changes from pits to minute skin-
spicules (Chapman). The pupais about half-an-inch in length, is long
and slender in build, and reminds one strongly of a butterfly pupa,
particularly that of Thais. The head is very much depressed, the top
of the thorax, the nosehorn, and the shoulders forming prominences,
which cause the superficial resemblance to butterfly pupz; the wing-
cases are long and slender, the legs so long that they project quite an
eighth of an inch beyond the tips of the wings; at the lower extremity
(from the tips of the wings) they arefree. The median abdominal segments
seem to be all free, as, although, when undisturbed, the pupa remains
rigid, it will twist violently sideways when interfered with. As before
mentioned, a remarkable fact about this pupa is the presence of
hooked bristles on the 8th abdominal segment, these enabling the
pupa to maintain a rigid stretched position similar to that assumed by
many Geometrid larve. Unfortunately, I have only a small magnifying
glass (16 times), and could not examine them in detail, but they appear
to be a small clump of short stiff bristles with curved points, and easily

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 533

attach themselves to the silk spun by the larva on the surface of the
leaf (Dadd). [Abdomen slender, ending in a sharp point; along the
edge of the wing it is dark green, with darker streaks; the abdomen
light green or yellowish, on which the markings of the larve are visible;
these markings and streaks are, as a rule, red-brown (Freyer, from
pupe obtained in early May, 1857, near Augsburg, on Gentiana verna).|

VaRIATION oF PuPA.—In colour the pupa is dimorphic, the colour
apparently being in relation to the surface to which it is attached,
though this is not invariably the case, those attached to leaves being
mostly green, those on the stalks and petals purplish-brown, and
even almost blue-purple on the flower-heads. The green pupe
have always a red spot on the back of the thorax, and many are more
or less mottled with reddish-brown spots (Dadd). The pupa in itself
appears not only individually to be coloured very variably, but it lke-
wise changes its colour daily, so that at the outset it is lighter and
_ variegated, but gradually becomes unicolorous and darker on the back,
on the whole dark violet-brown, on the ventral side and the wing-
covers more of a pure dark brown i.e., sepia colour. In its shape it
comes nearest to those of S. pelidnodactyla and serotina (Hering).

CoMPaRISON OF PUP OF ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA, PNEUMONANTHES,
ZOPHODACTYLUS, BIPUNCTIDACTYLA, AND STENOPTILIA PTERODACTYLA.— he
pupe of A. graphodactyla and pneumonanthes seem to be absolutely
identical. The difficulty is to be sure of any grounds for not adding
that they are identical also with that of A. zophodactylus. The com-
parison is made with empty pupa-cases, which are much more satisfactory
for the purpose in nearly all respects, except that of the colour of the
living pupa, nor can I discover any difference between them and that
of A. coprodactylus. I havemany pupa-cases of A. zophodactylus, but only
about a dozen of graphodactyla and pneumonanthes together. This is
probably the reason that I find no pupa of the latter with any colouring,
whilst a few of A. zophodactylus have a broad band of brownish tinting
on each side above the spiracles; the others, however, are like 4.
graphodactyla. After examining the pupe for a very long time, the
only differences I can find are very minute ones, in the lengths of the
hairs, and in the closeness together of tubercles i and ii. The pupe of
Stenoptilia pterodactyla (fuscus) and Adkinia bipunctidactyla differ more
conspicuously in the lengths of the hairs. The hairs are definitely whiter,
and the tubercles closer together, in prewnonanthes than in zophodactylus.
The hairs are, perhaps, also a little more curved. The following
comparative table gives some details :

WIDTH

Reronnd LENGTH OF HAIRS ON EYE- | ON TUBERCLES I AND II APART OF I
, COVERS, ON 4TH ABDOMINAL, AND II ON
4TH AB. SEG.

A. zophodactylus .. 0:045mm.-0°050mm. | 0°050mm.-0°055mm. 0:14mm.

A.var.pneumonanthes | 0:038mm.-0°040mm. | 0:040mm.-0°042mm. 0:09mm.

A. bipunctidactyla 0:10mm.-0°12mm. | 0:15mm.-0°;l6mm. = 0:12mm.

S. pterodactyla ws 0:08mm.-0'09mm. 0-10mm.-0°'l6mm. § 0:l4mm.

It seems also as if the wing-tips down beside the free appendages
were wider at their bases in 4. var. prewmonanthes, and more slender in

534 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

A. zophodactylus, and that the length of the appendages beyond was
rather less. This difference, however, seemed not quite securely to
separate itself from various others that at first seemed promising, but
were found, on further examination, to be individual, and to occur in
both species, or possibly to be errors of observation. The most dis-
concerting circumstance of all, however, is that the differences in
measurements between zophodactylus and pneumonanthes, given above, as
to the dorsal tubercles, are from continental pnewmonanthes compared
with British zophodactylus, and that Mr. Mathew’s pneumonanthes give
measurements (so far as they can be got without injuring the specimens)
that agree with the English zophodactylus, or are even on the other
side of them from the continental ones. My final conclusion, therefore,
is that no pupal distinction can be drawn between the two species.
The pupa of A. var. pneumonanthes seems to be fractionally smaller than
that of A. zophodactylus, but the difference is slight, and with the curved,
empty, cases, accurate measurement of a sufficient number to be of any
use is impossible. The larger specimens of A. pneumonanthes (of the
spring brood)t+, taken by Mr. Dadd near Berlin, would certainly be larger
than any English (summer brood) zophodactylus pupe I have (Chapman).

TIME OF APPEARANCE.—The species is no doubt double-brooded,
occurring in May-June, and again in August. Stange says that he
captured it near Spandau and Finkenkrug, on June 24th and 29th, 1878,
whilst Hering bred imagines from July 29th, 1898, onwards, also from
Finkenkrug (the same locality), so that Sorhagen has no hesitation in
calling it double-brooded, the imagines appearing in June and again in
August. We have here also a long series under observation, one part (11)
captured by Dadd, at Finkenkrug, on June 6th, 1906, and the other part
(20), at the end of July, 1906, respectively. Frey’s records (Die Tineen
und Pter. Schweiz, p. 112) of plagiodactylus (= pneumonanthes) in June and
July near Zurich, and graphodactylusin August, suggest also the two broods
of the same species. Wocke, for Silesia, gives mid-Juneand early Septem-
ber, Freyer recordsit in June from larve found in the very commencement
of June, 1862, near the Tegernsee. August alone is given for Hanover
(Glitz); beginning of August, near Regensburg (Schmid) ; July, for the
Rhine Provinces (Stollwerck); July and August, in Baden (Meess and
Spuler) ; Julyand August, in Bavaria (Hartmann, one of whose localities
is Tegernsee, whence Freyer bred it in June); July, in Wurttemburg
(Steudel and Hofmann), etc. Hering says: ‘Like Snellen, I do not
doubt that the species has a spring brood, examples of which, in some
instances, e.g., the imago caught on July 15th, 1893, overlap the second
generation ; at all events the larva of this early brood cannot have the
same life-history as the later one, because, with us, Gentiana pneu-
monanthe only comes into bloom at the beginning of July,” etc. Crom-
brugghe records it as occurring in great abundance in July and August,
1901, at Heide, in Belgium; he notes one larva as late as August 11th,
1905, which gave an imago quite at the end of August. He thinks
there is a spring brood. Fologne also records it as occurring in
August at Genck, and at Calmpthout. Other details that may be noted
are: Imagines, July 22nd, 1840, not rarely about the foot of the
Schneeberg (Mann and Fischer v. Réslerstamm); on the Sdmmering,

+ The larger specimens (imagines) of these spring pnewmonanthes are 23mm.
in wing-expanse, exactly the same size as the largest of the Berlin summer brood
(see anted, p. 521).

ADKINIA GRAPHODACTYLA. 535

July 7th and 8th, 1842 (Zeller); [bred June 23rd-30th, 1857, from larve
found near Augsburg, in early May, on Gentiana verna (Freyer).| In
Germany it is recorded after mid-August, 1888, near Finkenkrug
(Hering); July 4th, 1878, on the Island of Wollin (Schleich); June
24th and 29th, 1878, in the meadows near Spandau and at Finkenkrug
(Stange), a record that shows that, in the Berlin district, the insect is
doubie-brooded, since imagines emerged July 29th, 1898, from larve
from Finkenkrug that had pupated on the 17th (Hering), a fact since
confirmed by Dadd (supra). Imagines emerged freely from July 30th to
the middle of August, 1906, from larve taken July 14th on the Wornitz
(Mosigkauer Haide), in Anhalt (Gillmer). Imagines emerged from
September 15th-19th, 1902, from larve found at Bouveret, on the shores
of Lake Geneva, at the end of August (Wheeler). The first moth reared
from the Wimborne larve, taken by Mathew, in 1906, appeared on August
29th, the next on the 81st, and so on up to September 20th. On
September Ist he netted an imago on the ground whence the larve
came, and on the 4th two more were beaten from mixed herbage in the
locality where the gentian occurred.

Haszrts.—Mathew says that on September 1st and 4th, he beat one
or two of the moths during the day from a mixture of coarse herbage
erowing ina bogey place; he adds that, when disturbed, the moth
only flies for a short distance and settles again on a stem of grass or some
other plant, and it is very easy to catch; it probably flies gently at dusk.
Gillmer says that the ‘‘plumes’’ which emerged in the breeding-cage
between theend of July and the middle of August, 1906, were not observed
to pair. By day they hung about the breeding-cage, on the curtains of
the room, etc., with their wings spread out horizontally, but, at dusk,
they commenced to fly and tried to get into the open air, and this would
seem to be their natural time of flight. Of the imagines which Freyer
found near Augsburg, and which we have already noted as being
possibly coprodactylus (since the larvee fed on Gentiana verna), he writes:
“This species has a ight floating flight, and is to be found sitting on
erass-blades, at the end of June and beginning of July, in forest
meadows.”

Hasirats.—The species is distinctly addicted to the marshes in its
more lowland localities (probably also in the mountains). It was first
found by Freyer among the Bavarian mountains at Bad Kreith, near
Tegernsee. It was then found on the Schneeberg (Mann and Fiseber
von Réslerstamm), and the S6mmering (Zeller), and then locally in
Switzerland, in mountain-meadows, and in the woods on the mountains
on either shore of the lake, at the beginning of August, in the neighbour-
hood of Zurich (Frey). Hofmann says that the true S. graphodactyla
occurs mostly in mountain regions; it is found in Upper Bavaria
(Tegernsee, Urfeld), in the Allgiiu, in the Austrian alps (Schneeberg,
Sommering, etc.), in the Tyrol, Carniola, and in Switzerland near
Zurich. Its reported occurrence near Regensburg, he says, as well asin
North Germany, rests on its confusion with S. var. pnewnonanthes,
Buttn., or some other species. This latter is recorded as occurring in
marshy meadows in various parts of Germany. Hering observes that, on
July 15th, 1898, Dr. Schleich and himself found it in a dry bog-meadow,
near Finkenkrug, where there were, besides many bushes of Myrica
gale, a few plants of Gentiana pneumonanthe in bloom, among which a
worn specimen of Stenoptilia pneumonanthes ( plagiodactylus) was ca ptured.

536 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

Attention being directed to the blooms of the gentian, some peculiarly
spotied flowers were found to be attacked by the larve of the same species.
Schleich himself had long before this reported the capture of the species
in a Swampy meadow on the western shore of the Vietzig Lake, near Mis-
droy; and Stange, in the marshy meadows near Spandau (comparatively
near Hering’s Finkenkrug locality). Guillmer found it in a wet meadow
near the Mosigkauer Haide, in the Dessau district. The place is very wet,
and the water oozes up as one walks over it in the summer as well as
autumn. The meadowis mown in July, so that the larve have to be nearly
fullfed at this time in this locality, or they might possibly be destroyed,
unless, as was the case with Mathew’s larve, the cut flowers retain
sufficient freshness for some time to serve for food. It is difficult, at
the end of October and early November, to search such a wet locality,
but Gillmer was so far successful that he obtained plants containing
tiny larve, which, on arrival in England, were discovered by Chapman
mining in the foodplant, the young shoots made by the gentian,
since the summer mowing, being at this time about 18cm. in length.
In the Rhone Valley, Wheeler found the insect in flowers of Gentiana
pneumonanthe growing abundantly at Bouveret, at the southeast corner
of the Lake of Geneva. The locality is at the end of a huge, partially-
drained marsh, which is, however, quite dry in autumn. Of the
British locality, Mathew notes (in litt.) that 1t is a moist boggy heath
in Hast Dorset, where the foodplant is not at all abundant.

British Locatities.—Undiscovered in Britain till 1906. Probably
in most places where Gentiana pneumonanthe occurs. DorsEr: near
Wimborne (Mathew).

Distripution.— Widely distributed, but local, occurring in Austria,
Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, ? ltaly, and England.
Austria: Hungary,Galicia(Staudinger and Rebel, ‘‘Cat.’’), Lower Austria—near Hain-
feld, on the S6mmering (Rogenhofer), the Schneeberg Alps, Lackerboden, Heuplacke,
etc. (Mann), the Sémmering (Mann and Fischer von Réslerstamm), Tyrol—Glockner
district, Val Popena (Mann), Brenner, Serles, Monte Bald, Trafoi, Franzenshéhe
(Heller), Styrian Alps (Zeller), Upper Carinthia—at the fort of the Fiinfspitz (Zeller).
Beteium: Genck, Calmpthout (Fologne), Heide, very abundant (Crombrugghe de
Picquendaele). Germany: Hanover— near Hanover (Reinhold), near Misburg, not rare
(Glitz), near Géttingen (Jordan), Rhine Provinces—on the banks of the Ahr (Weymer),
Hesse—near Cassel (Neumeyer), Thuringia—near Sommerda (Jordan), Anhalt—on
the Wornitz, Mosigkauer Haide (Gillmer), Brandenburg, rare—Spandauer Haide
(Bittner), Finkenkrug (Hering), near Spandau (Sorhagen), Silesia—near Breslau,
Bruschewitz, Oels district (Wocke), near Gorlitz (Sommer), Bavaria—Urfeld on the
Walchensee, the Allgau dist. (Hofmann), near Regensburg (Schmid), Niederaschau,
Oberaudorf (Hartmann), Bad Kreith near Tegernsee, Augsburg, near Deuringen
(Freyer), Baden — Thalmiihle, Geisingen, Herrenwies (Meess and Spuler),
Pomerania—Isle of Wollin, Misdroy near Stettin (Schleich), Hamburg—Hamburg
(Sauber), Wiirttemberg— Hisenbach (Steudel and Hofmann). Iraty: Lombardy
(Turati teste Hering). NrtHER LANDS (Snellen). SwirzeRLAND: near Ziirich—on
the Uetliberg (Frey), Bremgarten (Frey collection), [? Degersheim and Gabris
(Miiller)], Rhone Valley, near Bouveret (Wheeler).

ADDENDUM II (to pace 389).
Hypripisation in LEPIDOPTERA.
Spuineipes. la. [To p. 24.] Humorpua hybr. pernoxpr (elpenor f
x euphorbiae @), Jacobs, Iris, xvill., pp. 821-7, pl. ix., figs. 1-4 (1906).
—Bred 1905, from eggs, the result of a pairing that took place in
confinement. Imaco.—Superficially observed, gives one the idea of a
reddish FE. elpenor, separated, however, at once from this species by
(1) a conspicuous dark stripe on forewings, commencing at third costal
spot, and running parallel to the oblique band, common to most

ADDENDUM: HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 5357

EKumorphids, into the inner margin; (2) the absence of the red
abdominal mediodorsal stripe; and (3) the presence of a dark hind-
marginal band on hindwings. lixpanse 50mm.-62mm.; smaller than
average elpenor, distinctly smaller than euphorbiae. Head pale olive-
green, bordered with reddish on each side; antenne of same length as
those of elpenor and euphorbiae, but intermediate in bulk; above
greyish-white, reddish at base, brown below on the pectinated side.
Thorax pale olive-green. Patagia bordered interiorly with reddish, less
intense than in elpenor, but white-bordered exteriorly more conspicuously
than in elpenor, though less so than in euphorbiae. The red thoracic
stripes peculiar to elpenor scarcely recognisable. Abdomen slender, of
the same colour as the thorax above; the anal segment (red in elpenor)
olive-green; the red mediodorsal line quite absent; the sides pale
red; the upper olive-green portion narrower than in elpenor, thus
making the red sides more conspicuous; on each side of the Ist
segment a black spot, as in elpenor, but much larger and more intense;
anal tuft strong, of the same colour as abdomen. The forewings
intermediate between the more slender ones of elpenor and the broader
ones of euphorbiae ; the ground colour of a more or less pale carmine-
red ; the costa bordered for three-fourths of its length with pale olive-
green ; at the base for about one-fourth, and again beyond the middle
up to the apex, this border is enlarged into costal spots; the basal spot
more elongated than in euphorbiae, and not so sharply circumscribed ;
the second spot may be looked on as a combination of the second and
third spots in euphorbiae; in the apical portion of this spot (in the
place where, in ewphorbiae, the third costal spot arises) is a small dark
spot, from which, to the middle of the inner margin, runs a pale olive-
green stripe, slightly bent inwardly about the middle, and of an even
width of about 2mm. From the apex of the wing runs the character-
istic Phryxid band, widening as it reaches the inner margin; in colour
pale olive-green, its inner margin parallel with the first-mentioned
stripe, about 8mm. distant, regular in outline, whilst the outer margin
is irregular, but conspicuous owing to its dark colour, and joins the
inner margin near the anal angle; the band is narrower than in
euphorbiae, and approaches the form of that of hippophaes. The
space between the band and the wing-margin is slightly darker than
the red ground colour; it is broader than in edpenor, but not quite so
wide as in euphorbiae. A black dash bordered with white hairs hes at
the base on the inner margin, intermediate in size between those of
the parents. The red line on the extreme costa, present in elpenor, is
here wanting. The outer marginal fringes short, of the colour of the
outer margin. The hindwings of the hybrid are intermediate between
those of the parents, both in shape and coloration, as also is the
black basal portion; along the outer margin, about 1mm.-2mm.
distant, runs a blackish band, terminating before reaching the anal
angle ; this band, totally absent in elpenor, is a trait from euphordiae,
although neither so broad nor so bright as in that species ; the colour
of the space between the basal spot and marginal band, and between
these and the margin, is red, like the ground colour of the forewings; at
the anal angle where, in ewphorbiae, is a conspicuous White spot, which
is absent in elpenor, the colour is faint light reddish. Fringes white.

- . . . Pl. ix,, fig. 4, represents an asymmetrically marked aberra-
tion. . . . . Among the other examples bred is one in which all the

538 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

red coloration is absent, the red being represented by pale grey; the.
markings are pale olive-green as in the type, but confused on the left
forewing ; hindwings crippled. All the moths bred are gs. Larva
(pl. ix., fig. 1)—_Head brown; a reddish dorsal stripe from head to
caudal horn; on both sides of this a velvety-black stripe, and a similar
one above the legs. The space between these stripes is sprinkled with
innumerable fine yellow and reddish dots, and similar, but much finer,
dots occur in the black bands. These dots are so arranged that five
narrow black bands are formed on each segment, which run also
across the reddish dorsal stripe. On each segment, at the lower
margin of the black, longitudinal, dorsal stripes, is a pale yellow spot.
Those on the first four segments are larger than the rest. Spiracles.
white, oval; immediately below each is a suffused red spot. On the
8th abdominal segment there is the slightly-curved black horn, with
only the extreme tip white. At the base of the horn, on both sides,,
is a large yellow spot, extending into the base. The length of the
horn is intermediate between that of elpenor and euphorbiae. Legs
blackish, red-brown in the middle, sprinkled with very many flesh-
coloured dots. The larva beneath is flesh-coloured, and sprinkled,
except in the incisions, likewise with fine dots. The larva appears
shagreened, by reason of the innumerable dots. It approaches nearer
to that of euphorbiae than to that of elpenor. The enlargement of the
metathorax and 1st abdominal segment, noticeable in elpenor, is not
to be observed. Pura (pl. ix., fig. 2)—Brownish-grey, darker on the
most prominent parts of the segments, the wing-cases, and on the
dorsum. The cephalic parts are less pronounced than in elpenor,
though more sharply modelled than in euphorbiae. The cremaster
terminates in a point broad at the base, and turned sharply down-
wards. The spines on the abdominal segments of elpenor are only
weakly expressed in the hybrid pupa (Jacobs).

3a. [Top.24.] THaumas hybr. pensot (vespertilio § x euphorbiae @ ),
Muschamp, Ent. Rec., xviil., pp. 287-8 (1906).—Two g and two 2
moths emerged after three weeks of pupal life. The females are full
of eges. The ground colour of the forewing is of the vespertilio-grey,
with, in two cases, a yellowish-pink shading combining with the grey;
the bands exist as in euphorbiae, but are greatly diminished in breadth
and in length. The hindwing is the hindwing of vespertilio, but with
a broader pink outer margin. The underside is much pinker than in
vespertilio, which it resembles with regard to the grey marginal bands
of the hindwing. The abdomen and thorax strongly resemble those
of euphorbiae. However, in two insects, the 8rd abdominal black
band is visible as in vespertilio. Larva.—First stage: Ground
colour light yellowish-green, head rather darker, with a little inter-
mixture of olive. Caudal horn from 0:'2mm. to 0°3mm. long. Anal
segments, and prolegs, darkish green. The larva of vespertilio, in this
stage, has the ground colour light yellow, the head of the same colour,
anal segment rather darker. The sete are exactly the same in the
three different larve. Nocaudalhorn. The larva of euphorbiae has the
ground colour light olive-green, the head and base of prolegs being of
a very dark olive-brown colour. Caudal horn from 0-5mm. to 0°-6mm.
in length. Second stage: The larva of densoi differs from that of euphor-
biae in that the yellow-grey subdorsal line is very much more clearly
indicated, and the white spots are prominent. The ground colour is

ADDENDUM : HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 539

nearer that of vespertilio at the same stage. The shield on the head is
black, and the prolegs vary from green, as in vespertilio, to black, as
in euphorbiae. The stigmatal line is more distinctly marked than in
euphorbiae, less so than in vespertilio. The caudal horn is short and
stumpy, relatively the same length as in the first stage; exceptionally,
in a very few cases, 1t is completely missing (in not one case was it
wanting in the first stage). Third (and final) stage: The larva of
densot varies in the adult stage very much more than in the first two
stages, but is, altogether, within the broad limits of the euphorbiae
larve, from which, however, it differs with regard to the length of
the caudal horn. In no case was this horn more than one-half the
size of the caudal horn of euphorbiae, and, in several cases, it did not
exist at all. In the course of the last stage the larvee were attacked
by the fatal ‘“flacherie,”” and, in spite of every care, 90 per cent.
perished. Pupm.—These are rather nearer vespertilio than euphorbiae
in size and general appearance; the black markings (almost non-
existent in vespertilio) are clearly defined, though not so dark as in
euphorbiae. To obtain these hybrids several Thaumas vespertilio § s and
Hyles euphorbiae ¢ s were placed, in June, 1906, by Dr. Denso, in one
side of a silk-covered cage, and, on the other side, separated only by a fine
silken screen, afew H. cuphorbiae § sand T. vespertilio 2 s. Of the former,
two euphorbiae 2s paired at once with vespertilio § s, and subsequently
laid respectively 108 and 97 eggs. No pairing, however, took place
between vespertilio 9s and euphorbiae gs. The eggs all hatched, and
the larve at first did well, feeding hungrily on Euphorbia, and

_-- continued to do so up to the final stage (Muschamp).

a

Attacipes. [To p. 27.) Saturnia hybr. casparu (hybrida g
xX pavonia 9), Frings, Soc. Hnt., xxi., p. 25 (1906).—Imaco.—
Very close to S. pavonia; the g antenne rather more expanded
and-body rather more robust. The basal transverse line of fore-
wings not nearly so strongly angulated, sometimes nearly straight,
as in spint; the second sinuate line runs nearer to the base as in
hybrida-minor. Forewings of g rather of a grey-brown, not so bright
a brown as in pavonia, though they retain the admixture of red in the
disc. The coloration of the hindwings is very interesting; in one
example the hindwings are of the pale grey of spini, but, in some others,
they attain the intensity of a rather pale pavonia, these two forms being
connected by intermediates. Sometimes the base and disc are orange,
but the hindmargin dusky-grey as in hybrida-minor. The underside
varies from almost as deep an orange as pavonia to quite a grey colour.
The g hybr. casparit, therefore, connects hybrida-minor and pavonia

* The parentage of this hybrid is given as hybrida-minor ¢ xX pavonia ¢.
As we have already noted (anted, vol. iii., p. 297) S. hybr. hybrida (or as it was later
called hybrida-minor) has never yet been recorded as reared in confinement, and its
existence is assumed only on the strength of captured specimens. Frings, unfor-
tunately, does not say whether Caspari obtained his ¢ parent, for this crossing, in
confinement, or whether it was captured wild. It really is a most important
detail, as some pavonia exhibit usually-considered spini characters. Frings
himself notes that two of the generally accepted differences between spiné
and pavonia are not to be relied on, viz., (1) Basal line—a 2? pavonia bred from a
pupa taken at Bonn, with basal line exactly as in spini ¢; he has also captured
a similarly marked ¢, and has seen others from Budapest, Russian Poland, and
Ferrara. (2) Abdominal bands—¢s from Rhenish Prussia often have the pale
abdominal bands as broadly and strongly white-ringed as those of spini. On the
other hand, examples from Dalmatia possess no white rings.

540 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

by all conceivable intermediatest. A g, with deep wine-red hindwings,
and forewings deeply flushed with dark red above and beneath, can
only be looked upon as an aberration. The @ of casparii has the
antenne more strongly-pectinated than pavonia, the body more strongly-
tufted, and the white rings broader. The discs of both wings mostly
show a strong admixture of red scales. Many 92s had no eggs; some
a few normal-looking eggs, and others many, but not so many as the
average of pavonia. Though one might not have supposed it, the
black spini-like larve yielded all the forms, even those most closely
approaching pavonia. The hybrid schaufusst (=bornemanni x pavonia)
naturally comes closest to casparii, but gs have less of the brown
ground colour of pavonia in the forewings, the g schaufussi exhibiting
more of the greyish-red of bornemanni. Hees were obtained in 1908
by Caspari, who shared them with Frings; 62 per cent. of the eggs
hatched, and both Caspari and Frings reared imagines. Larva.—
First instar : The black larve not separable from those of S. pavonia.
Second instar: Black, shiny (inherited from spint), about two-thirds
with the reddish-yellow lateral stripe of pavonia, the rest quite black.
Third instar: The majority unaltered; a few exhibit a row of pale
yellow spots above the reddish-yellow stripe; the lateral stripe often
quite absent ; several with the fine whitish-grey hairs of spin.
Fourth instar: Very variable; a few still quite black; most with a
dark or pale yellow lateral stripe; many with green spots; in some
the green was so abundant as to make them inseparable from pavonia
in the same stage. Head black, marked with green. Tubercles shiny
black (seldom yellow or pink) ; hairs often whitish, as in spind ; some
marked laterally, and round the tubercles, with rusty-yellow. Lith
instar: Ground colour mostly a peculiar dirty, dark, olive- or black-
green, not at all like the clear green of pavonia, which occurred in a
single individual only. This dirty green was sprinkled with irregular
spots and stripes of light green. However, the broad black saddles,
with sulphur-yellow, or more rarely reddish, tubercles, resembled
those of pavonia larve. Three-quarters of the larve had the broad,
continuous, black dorsal stripe of hybrida-minor larva*, and usually
black markings about the spiracles and the two tubercles above the
spiracle. These were occasionally formed into a broad, black, longi-
tudinal stripe, leaving only two rows of green spots on the dorsum. A
few had these stripes so extended that the larve appeared black, but
even then the saddles were visible by their deeper velvety black.
These last were either black, or black-green, beneath. Anal claspers
black or green, but always with a green stripe. Head black with a green
frontal triangle, or green with black marks. Even those of the pavonia
type had traces of the black dorsal stripe. ‘Two only were without a
trace, so that they only differed from pavonia larve in the dirty, darker,
green ground colour. Only a few of the darker specimens were glossy.
The segmental elevations were not so tall as those of spini, agreeing
much more with those of pavonia. Asymmetry of the markings of the
larvee was most noticeable; many had only one side of. the head yellow.
It is very striking that the tendency of many of these hybrid larve is
far stronger towards the doubtless phylogenetically very old spini form
than towards that of hybrida-minor or pavonia, although the larve

+ This appears to be a very strong statement on the facts.
* This distinctly suggests that Frings knew hybrida-minor larva [see footnote
preceding page (p. 539)].

ADDENDUM: HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 541

possess only 25 per cent. of spint blood; some specimens differed, indeed,
only very slightly from spini larvee. Cocoons.—The cocoons mostly
agreed completely with those of pavonia, but one specimen. with that
of spint. The pupe only differed from those of pavonia in the g
antenna-case being somewhat more expanded, reminding one of spini
(Frings).

Grometripes. [To p. 29.| Hysrin Zonosomas.— Head notes
(Ent. Rec., xviil., p. 47) that, between 1901 and 1904, he obtained
pairings of Zonosoma orbicularia g x pendularia 2, the reciprocal
cross Zonosoma pendularia 3 x orbicularia 2, also Zonosoma orbicu-
laria § X annulata 2, and its reciprocal cross Zonosoma annulata g
x orbicularia 2, and lastly 7. orbicularia 3 x porata ¢. All these
produced fertile eggs and larve, and, although the larve of the last-
named cross unfortunately died-when nearly fullfed, owing, apparently,
to the very wet weather that occurred whilst they were being reared
(in the open in sleeves), the others produced imagines in due
course, that of annulata § x orbicularia 9°, however, only one
cripple in 1904. Of the others we note :—

la. [To p. 30.) Zonosoma hybr. orpicuLo-PENDULA (orbicularia 3
x pendularia °).—This hybrid follows distinctly the f parent in its
general appearance, and would be difficult to separate from orbicularia.
Tt has, however, something of the pale colour of pendularia, and the
fine mottling or peppering that characterises orbicularia is greatly
reduced, the ground colour being more uniform, although not nearly
approaching that of pendiularia. The general direction and position
of the markings of the two parent species being much alike, it is
difficult to seize on any very definite characteristics shown by the
hybrids in these directions; but the reduction of the red median band,
the character of the dotted basal line of forewings, and the dotted
median line of hindwings, appear somewhat to approach rather those of
pendularia than of orbicularia; so also does the transverse submarginal
shade of the forewings, when present; the median shade of the
forewings also is incomplete, reaching from the inner marein to just
beyond the ocellus, as in pendularia. Tutt Coll., 3 gs, 38 Qs. In
June, 1902, Head obtained a pairing of orbicularia 3 x pendularia 2.
Nearly all the ova were fertile and produced larve, and between four
and five dozen imagines emerged in July and August, 1902; two pup
that lived until July, 1904, died without emerging.

1b. [To p. 80.] Zonosoma hybr. peNDULO-oRBICULA (pendularia g
x orbicularia ? ).—This hybrid is much more characteristic of pendu-
larvia than orbicularia, and is much more intermediate in its appearance
and general character than its reciprocal orbiculo-pendula. The specimens
under examination are two $s, and, although much more uniform in
the ground colour of the forewings, owing to the reduction of the
peppering, or mottling, that characterises orbicularia, they still have the
eround colour rather of the darker shade that characterises the latter
species. They are ill-marked, and, in this respect, resemble pendularia ;
so also do they in the thick marginal dotting round the edges of all
the wings. An occasional pendularia character is most marked, e.y.,
the development of a submarginal shade on the hindwings, for the
development of which the dotted median transverse line in the hind-
wings of the hybrid is placed nearer the central ocellus than in
orbicularia, and, in this respect, follows pendularia, in which there is

542 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

usually a markedly greater space between the dots and the outer
margin than is the case in orbicularia. One cannot help noticing
the somewhat marked similarity between this hybrid and the sub-
roseata form of pendularia taken by Woodforde near Market Drayton.
Of this cross, Head obtained a pairing in June, 1901, the eggs hatch-
ing, and larve feeding up, and the imagines emerging at the end
of July, 1901. Only about 25 per cent. of the eggs were fertile,
and very few imagines were reared from this brood. The imagines
bred exhibited scarcely any variation.

1c. [To p. 30.] Zonosoma hybr. HEap1 (orbicularia § x annulata 9 ).
—All the wings are white, tinged with ochreous, and sprinkled with
minute dark grey specks, which give them a slight greyish appearance;
there are two dark purplish-grey, transverse, zigzag lines, which more
or less coalesce, the outer line being nearly black. The discoidal
spots are clear and well defined; between the discoidal spot and the
base of the wing there is also a third faint, zigzag, dark grey, line, and
a row of black dots on the outer margin of all the wings. The fringe
is of the same colour as the wings. The head, thorax, and body, are also
of the same colour as the wings. Maddison coll. (Head). Two pairings
of this hybrid were obtained, one in 1902, the other in 1903. Very few
of the ova hatched, and only about a dozen imagines were reared in 1902,
and seven in 1908. The eggs were in each case laid in June, and the
resulting larve fed up quickly, the imagines appearing at the end of
July. Head also reared the reciprocal cross of %. hybr. head,
obtaining a pairing in 1903. Few of the eggs, however, were fertile,
and only two of the resulting larve produced pups. Both of these
went over the winter; one emerged, deformed, in 1904, and the other
one died.

4a. [To p. 81.] Nyssia hybr. merana (zonaria 3 x lapponaria @),
Burrows, Ent. Rec., xvui., p. 182 (1906).—The male presents the
appearance of a dark suffused N. zonaria, thus following the rule of
resembling the parent of the same sex. There is an entire absence of
the orange costal streak on the forewing, so distinct in NV. lapponaria.
The wings are not transparent, but well scaled, perhaps a trifle whiter
than in N. zonaria. The subterminal line is completely different from
that of the male parent, in which it is distinct, unbroken, and direct.
In the hybrid the line is distinct enough, but wavy, following the
female parent, N. lapponaria. The central lines enclose a darker
shade, striking enough, but I have seen N. zonaria which approach it
closely in this way. The hindwings do not show the marginal shade
which is so distinct in N. zonaria, but are crossed by two dark lines,
only indistinctly marked in N. lapponaria. The female hybrid is
entirely without the series of orange spots on the central line peculiar
to N. lapponaria, the female parent, and is also without the transverse
bands of the male parent. The rudimentary wings are perhaps a trifle
more developed than in NV. zonaria, and about the same as in the case
of the female parent. The down upon the abdomen is not very
different from that of the female N. lapponarta. The specimens were
obtained by Mera, who crossed, in the spring of 1905, a g Nyssa
zonaria and ¢ N. lapponaria. The eggs proved fertile, and the
resulting larve pupated in due course. The females emerged much
earlier than the males on the whole, several appearing in early
January, but pairings of the hybrids were later obtained, yet no ova

ADDENDUM : HYBRIDISATION IN LEPIDOPTERA. 543

resulted, although the ?s went through all the actions of oviposition
(Burrows).

13. [To p. 35.] Casera hybr. FLETCHERI (pusaria gf Xx exanthe-
maria 2 ).—A brood of some eighteen specimens of this hybrid emerged
in 1892 from a crossing obtained by W. H. B. Fletcher in 1891.
Four gs and eight @s under examination show distinct sexual
differences, and the sexual dimorphism is as marked in ground colour,
amount of speckling, antenne, body, shape of wings, etc., as in the parent
species. The imagines themselves may be said to be excellent inter-
mediates between the parent species, the ground colour approximating
rather to the whiter tint of pusaria, the more abundant speckling
directly indicating exanthemaria, whilst the brownness of the transverse
lines also points in the direction of the latter. There is some variation
in the markings of the specimens inter se, one g and seven ?s having
a very distinct angulation in the middle line at the position of the
‘discoidal lunule, two gs and one ? showing the two basal lines united,
as in C. pusaria ab. rotundaria, and one g only having the three
transverse lines more or less typical of the parent species.

14. [To p. 35.] Oporasia uysBrips.—Allen asserts (Hnt. Rec.,
Xviil., pp. 85-89) the specific distinctness of Oporabia christyi. He
says that it breeds perfectly true. At the same time he says it pairs
readily with O. dilutata in confinement, and the progeny is fertile. He
has obtained pairings of 3 christyi x ? dilutata, and $ dilutata x 9
christyt. Some of the offspring might pass for O. christyi, and some
for O. dilutata, but most of them partake of the external character of
both. They exhibit all the tendencies to variation which occur in the
two species. He does not think that O. dilutata and O. christyi ever
pair in a state of nature. In the few doubtful specimens taken at large,
the difficulty of determining the species has seemed to be due merely
to bad condition. A few attempts to pair O. christyi and O. autumnata
have failed. [Compare anted, pp. 46-47.|

INDEX.

PAGE. PAGE.

abruptaria, Hemerophila ..42, 58, 59 acarnella, Alucita .. sh Pate s-

acanthadactyla (=punctidactyla), achillee, Anthrocera Sc io 30
Amblyptilia (Platyptilia, Alu- Aciptilia 74, 80, 81, 82, 87, 88, 91,

cita) iv, 271, 272, 274, 277, 278, 92,94, 95, 491, 492, 493

286, 292, 299, 300, 301, 385 Aciptilia (=Buckleria) an oo aOR

-acanthodactyla (=cosmodactyla), Aciptilie .. = oi) HGwake

Amblyptilia (us) (Alucita. Platyp- Aciptilius .. a a 2. 50a
tilia) iv, 72, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, Aciptilus (=Aciptilia) 81, 82, 83,

85, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95, 84, 86, 87, 94, 95, 491

99, 101, 109, 110, 111, 117, Aciptilus (=Buckleria) .. .. 491

156, 164, 269, 271, 272, 273, Actias a a ds io sas

274, 276, 277, 278, 281, 286, Adactyla (=Adactylus) 81, 82, 85, 135
302, 303, 309, 459, 486, 504 adactyla (huebneri), Agdistis
acanthodactyla (=punctidactyla), (Pterophorus, Alucita, Adactyla)
Amblyptilia ae 75, 299, 312 75, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 87,

acanthodactylus (=cosmodactyla), 89, 93, 94, 95, 128, 132, 135, 136

Amblyptilia (Platyptilia, Ptero- Adactylidi .. ys ate “eas
phorus) 80, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86, 87, Adactylus 79, 80, 94, 95, 135-136,

274, 459 330, 366

sacanthodactylus (= punctidactyla), Adaina 97, 105, 121, 153, 157, 254, 360

Amblyptilia ae si .. 499 Adainidi “fe 58 .. 104

544

PAGE.

adamas, Alucita 93

Adkinia 97, 156, 252, 254, 318-319,

360, 361, 526
adusta, Platyptilia .. se 92
senalis, Doxosteres .. ba a= 396
estiva (isodactylus var. gen. 2),
Platyptilia ae ae .. 186
estiva (tetralunaria var.), Selenia 31
sethiops, Erebia mee)
etodactylus, Pterophorus .. 80
7Kgeriides : = eee neh:
affinis, Fumea 10; 12. ST. us
agatha, Neptis
Aedistes Se ae 18, 80, “
' Agdistes (= Adactylus) sees

Agdistis 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 87, 88,
89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 107, 111,
113, 114, 115, 128, 330

Agdistis (= Adactylus) 135, 136
Agdistide . 113, 115, 127-135
Agdistides = 98; 104, 426. 197
Aodistidi : a 28
aglaodesma, Cosmoclostis .
Aglia .. sed p oiky
agraphodactylus, Pterophorus 92
agrorum, Marasmarcha (Alucita,

*Pterophorus, Mimeseoptilus) 83,
84, 87, 89, 93, 385, 387, 388, 403

albescens preneuGaetys ab.),
Adkinia .. 337
albescens (pallidaetyla ab. an var. )
Gillmeria .. - . 238
albicans, Platyptilia 92
albiciliata, Platyptilia 92

albida, Platyptilia Me be é 92
albida ipurounonty ab.), Amblyp-

tilia : 300-301
albidus, Aciptilia des oes 874
albidorsella, Platyptilia so. 02
albodactyla (us), Pterophorus 72,

14, 79, 81

albofasciatus {( Bears Alucita fal
aleon, Lyczena :

alniaria, Ennomos.. 31, 39
allisella, Exeretia .. -- 226
alpicola, Malacosoma :
Alucita 70, 71, 73, 75, 76, 79, 80,

81, 82, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94,

95, 105, 115, 160, 182, 219,

254, 268, 299, 303, 318, 360,

385, 386, 387, 409, 412, 413,

414, 449, 470, 491

Alucita (= Adactylus) Petes ba)
Alucita (= Adkinia) ests) |
Alucita (=Amblyptilia) .. 268
Alucita (=Buckleria) 491
Alucita (= Capperia) 2s. 470
Alucita (= Crombrugghia). . .. 449
Alucita (= Eucnemidophorus) .. 254
Alucita (= Fredericina) ir t60
Alucita (= Gillmeria) : “a5 29
Alucita (=Marasmarcha) .. oO
Alucita (= Oidematophorus) ;. 105
Alucita (= Oxyptilus) jas
Alucita (= Platyptilia) 1 EBD

| Alucitz

Alucitides

BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

PAGE.
Alucita (= Stenoptilia) -. 360
70, 71, 73, 145 (See

Alucitide 76, 80, 81, 98, 127, 152, 153

ee 128, 152-153

Alucitina : . 81,82, 85

Alucitine a 95, 118
amaurodactylus (= paludum), Buck-

leria (Pterophorus) . 80, 494
Amblyptilia iii, 80, 81, 82, 90, 94,

95, 98, 110, 111) 114i
155, 156, 157, 159, 161, 165,
252, 253, 254, 255, 268-273,
306, 314, 317, 385, 386, 387,
410, 413, 449, 450, 468, 470, 516

Amb! yptilia (=Capperia) .. .. 470
Amblyptilia (=Crombrugghia) .. 449
| Amblyptilia (= Fredericina) -' 16%
Amblyptilia (= Marasmarcha) . 387
Amblyptilia (=Oxyptilus)..81, 82, 413

Amblyptilie 74, 78, 153, 252, 269,

385, 404
Amblyptiliidi : -. 267-268
Amblyptiliine 94, 153, 251-253,

267-268, 269, 388, 407, 409
Amblyptilus (= Amblyptilia) 86, 87, 269

amelia (=vespertilioides hybr.),
Turneria .. si
americana hybr., Platysamia 26, 38
Amorpha : ae aa 108
Amorphide .. 23
Amphidasys bg he “a too
Amplyptilia (=Amblyptilia) 95,
268, 269, 413
amurensis, Pselnophorus (Crasi-
metis) . +, Sees
anachoreta, Gloster! 2, 6, 7, 2
14, 21, 22, Zan var
Anchinia 108, 109, 112, 417
angelic, Anthrocera 36
angloitalica hybr., Anthrocera 37, 39
angularia, Ennomos 31, 39
| angustus, Pterophorus .. 92
annulata, Zonosoma 42, 43, 53, 5A,
| 541, 542
| Antherra 38
Anthrocera .. 5, 39
* Anthrocerides 36, 39
Anthrocerine 2 lee
Apanteles 328
apollina, Alucita oe
apollo, Parnassius .. 17, 46
apollonius, Parnassius 18
approximata (punctidactyla ab.),
Amblyptilia :
approximata hybr., Clostera 10, 21,
23, 37
approximatula hybr., Drepana 35,
36, 39
arachnodes, Tetraschalis .. .. 296
| archippus, Limenitis 1,
Arctiides : 18
ardoisea (zophodactylus var.), Ad-
kinia 321

ardoisea- fusca (zophodactylus var. ,,
Adkinia “5 = =

545

INDEX.
PAGE. PAGE.
ardoisea-obsoleta (zophodactylus bicolor-excessa (bipunctidactyla
ab.), Adkinia 321 ab.), Adkinia 338
ye varlegate (zophodactylus bicolor-mixta (bipunctidactyla ab. iy
b.), Adkinia . 32 Adkinia . 338
ee (argyrognomon. var 1, bicolor-typica (bipunetidactyla ab.),
Rusticus .. 3 Adkinia 338
argyriodactylus (a), Heptoloba 96, bidentata, Gonodontis 4 42, 59, 60
114, 116 | bilinea (trigrammica ab.), Gram-
arida, Stenoptilia (Adkinia) ~ SY) mesia : oe Sie 55
aridus (= bipunctidactyla var.), Ad- bilunaria, Selenia .. : 31, 39
kinia (Mimeseoptilus, Ptero- biobsoleta (annulataab.), Zonosoma
phorus) 82, 84, 87, 88, 313, 335, 43,53, 54
336, 343-344, 359, 360, 363, 365 | bipunctidactyla (us), Adkinia (Pha-
arrindia, Philosamia 26; 38 lena, Alucita, Stenoptilia, Ptero-
astylus, Calasymbolus py, aie phorus) 70, 72, 74, 75, 79, 82, 83,
atalanta. Pyrameis . . a ou mle 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90,
athalia, Melitea .. ae 3, 16 93, 95, 96, 97, 99, 101, 104,
atlanticus, Smerinthus ..23, 24, 38 117, 155, 156, 167, 173, 184,
Atomopteryx 96, 113, 114 252, 279, 313, 314, 315, 317,
Attacides ..25, 38, 539 318, 319, 320, 321, 322,
aurelia, Melitza a ote LG 334-360, 361, 363, 364, 365,
aurinia, Melitea .. 8 3, 466 376, 379, 515, 519, 520, 521,
austauti, Smerinthus ..23, 24, 38 522, 524, 533
autumnaria (=alniaria), Ennomos 31 | bischoffi keaidaciy2 var.), Gill-
autumnata, Oporabia ..46, 47, 543 meria ‘ 236, 239-240
auxantidactylus, Karamaguia 96 | Biston ae OS,
bistortata, Tephrosia Dr 3, 5 be
bacoti hybr., Lasiocampa .. 4 48 13, 14, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, 43
bacoti hybr., Tephrosia a2, 39 biundularia (= ‘crepuscularia),
bacoti-suffusa hybr., Tephrosia 6, Tephrosia. . a eenalles
32, 33, 34, 39 | bohemanni, Oxyptilus 86, 87, 89, 93, 406
baia, Noctua os oe ye) | uolln Pterophorus ae os) Ga
bairdii, Papilio a ae Bee fa boremanni (ochrodactyla var.),
baliodactyla (us)(=niveidactyla), Gillmeria .. 3 222-223
Wheeleria (Aciptilia, | Ptero- bornemanni hybr., Saturnia 6, Taey
phorus, Alucita) 79, 81, 82, 84, 26, 27, 38, 540
85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 104, 118 bosniaca (ochrodactyla —-var.).
baptodactyla (us), Gypsochares Gillmeria . oe ee .. 223
(Aciptilia) 82, 84, 87, 88, 89, 93, Botydide .. ce a6 Sa be)
95, 96, 491, 497 brachydactyla (us), Pselnophorus
barrettii, Limneria .. 20 .. 485 (Alucita, Pterophorus, Leioptilus,
baroni, Pterophorus eae Crasimetis) 79, 80, 81, 82,84, 85,
beata hybr., Spilosoma Ig Bye 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96,
belfragei, Alucita aa ok OD, 118, 386, 491
bellargus, Polyommatus 15,16, 17 | bradyi (cambrica ab.), Venusia 60
bennetii, Adactylus (Agdistis) iii, brassice, Pieris 3
(omsOvese, 83, 85, 87, 89, bremeri, Parnassius : oa ALS
90, 93, 94, 95, 99, 101, 103, brightoni hybr., Zonosoma 29, 38
sn A, 122) 127, 128; brucei (bairdii var.), Papilio 17
129, 130, 135, 136-152, 264, brucei, Pterophorus : Oe
323, 396, 487 brittaniodactyla (=heterod uctyls a),
bennetti (=bennetii), Adactylus 136 Capperia .. . 471
bertrami (= pallidactyla), Gillmeria brunnea (isodactylus ab.), Platyp-
(Platyptilia) 87, 89, 90, 93, 111, tilia : . 187
TOO; L7O, JTL, 189), 196, brunneata (abrupte win ab ), Hemero-
198, 220, 222, 223, 224, 225, phila eats:
234, 236, 237, 238, 239, 249, brunneodactylus a - - didactylus ?),
250, 331 Oxyptilus .. A 87, 406, 417
bertrami (=ochrodactyla), Gill- brunnescens (distans ab.), Crom-
meria ; 221, 225, 226 brugghia : 4538
betularia, Amphidasys 4, 30, 89, brunnescens (bipunetidactyla ab.)
42, 54, 56, 57, 58 Adkinia 338

bicolor

(bipunctidactyla
Adkinia mh

ab.),

brunnescens-excessa

(bipunetidae.
tyla ab.), Adkinia

546

PAGE.

cohen rea mixta (bipunctidactyla
b.), Adkinia

brunnescens -typica (bipunctidactyla
b.), Adkinia

Bauklois 97, 10a, Att, 114, ER.

187, 254, 409, 411, 413, 455,

491-493

Buckleriidi .. st 406, 491-493

buphthalmi (carphodactyla var.),

Leioptilus .. ” a .. 106

338
338

exsia, Stenoptilia .. ae. 98
caffer, Oxyptilus (Pterophorus) 82, 438
eaia, Arctia .. 3. 18
calaminthe (cosmodactyla ab.),
Amblyptilia
Calasymbolus
ealearia (us), Aciptilia
phorus, Alucita) ..
californica (=rubra),

: se 3S)
(Ptero-
.. 87, 89,
Platysamia
26, 27,
ealodactyla(us) (zetterstedtii), Fred-
ericina(Alucita, Platyptilia, Ptero-
phorus, Stenoptilia) 71, 72, 73, 74,
cRgCD 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82,
83, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 93,
97,995 104, ae Ag Te 156;
157, 160, 161-175, 177, 182,
183, 192, 195, 201, 202, 271,
274, 424, 516
ealodactyla (= acanthodactyla),
Amblyptilia ae .. 85, 274
ealodactyla (us) (=cosmodactyla),
Amblyptilia ..201, 273, 274, 275

93
38

eambrica, Venusia . 60
eanariensis, Agdistis arr Os
candida (cribrum var.), Emydia .. 46

eanus (isodactylus ab.), Platyptilia
186-187

capnodactylus(a), Platyptilia(Ptero-
phorus) 80, 81, 82, 83, 87, 89, 93, 185

Capperia 97, 111, 154, 155, 406,
409, 412, 455, 470-477

Capperiidi 406, 407, 409, 411, 412,
413, 467-470

caradjex hybr., Malacosoma 12, 27, 38
cardamines, Euchloé Bs el
carduidactyla, Platyptilia . 92, 157
_ earniolica, Anthrocera 3

carphodactyla (us), ae (Alu-
cita, Pterophorus, Stenoptilia)
75, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85,

87, 88, 89, 93, 106, 360 |

carpodactylus, Pterophorus mo. hE

casparii hybr., Saturnia 539, 540

caspia (us), Aciptilia (Pterophorus,
Alucita) .. By Bycey faces ye ete)

casta, Fumea 10, AVS ie 39
castrensis, Malacosoma #7, 8, 12,

27, 28, 29, 38

ceanothi (=californica), Samia 26, 27
cecropia, Platysamia (Attacus,

Samia) .. ae peo. ebn os

Celerio ae tis me eis]

272, 276, 277, 278-279 |

BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

PAGE,
celeusi (heterodactyla var.), Cap-

peria 468, 474-475
Cenoloba - 88 41
ceramodes, Trichoptilus ? . 492
Cerura 37
cervinidactyla (us) (pallidactyla

var.), Gillmeria .. 224, 236, 240
chapmani, Platyptilia 93
charltonius, Parnassius Vi
chenopodiphaga, Mamestra 130

chi; Polia” <2 aM a th nese

chordodactyla (us), Aciptilia (Alu-

cita, Pterophorus) 78, 87, 89,
christyi, Oporabia .. sie 3s
chrysidiformis, Aigeria .. -
Chrysocorys .. ws 109, 122, 123
chrysodactyla (=didactyla), Oxyp-
tilus (Amblyptilia, Alucita) 71,
(3, 16) dig ss

chrysodona (= helichta) (erate

var.), Colias 55 1%
cinerascens, Pterophorus (Alucita) 92
| cinnamomeus (a), Marasmarcha
(Cnzemidophorus) 87, 89, 93,
ae 387
cinxia, Melitza . 466
citridactylus, Pterophorus. . 79
clara (gonodactyla ab.), Platyptilia 203
clara (mendica var.), Spilosoma .. 46
clara (parvidactyla ab.), Oxyptilus 416
clara-obsoleta (parvidactyla ab.),
Oxyptilus .. 416
clara- “variegata (parvidactyla ab. )
Oxyptilus .. - 416
cleopatra, Gonepteryx 16
Clostera : 21, 37
Cnemidophorus Ee —Eucnemido-
phorus) 86, 87, 94, 96, 255
c-nigrum, Noctua .. ae =
cocandica, Colias -. oa
ceelodactyla, Stenoptycha .. 97, 1G
coloradensis, Stenoptilia .. -
columbia, Platysamia 26, 38
comma-notata (truncata var.),
Cidaria 64
complexa hybr., Anthrocera 6, 37, 39
complexa hybr., Saturnia . 27, 38
complicata hybr., Anthrocera 37, 39
concursa, Steganodactyla .. 96, 115
confusa hybr., Anthrocera 37, 39
confusus (a), Aciptilia (Pterophorus)
4, 87, 88, 89
coniodactylus (a), Alucita (Leiop-
tilus) a ok .. 8%, ee
connexiva, Steganodactyla .. a
constanti, Alucita (Pterophorus) 89, 93
contaminatus, Apanteles .. .- 328
contortalis, Lineodes 113
conversaria (epandaug ab. ) Boar
mia , 60, 61
cooleyi, Platyptilia .. 92
coprodactylus (a), Stenoptilia ‘

(Pterophorus, Mimeseoptilus) iv,
82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 93,

\

INDEX. 547
PAGE. PAGE.
313, 318, 336, 337, 341, 518, 221, 222, 224, 225, 226, 237,
519, 523, 524, 527, 530, 533, 535 238, 239, 245
corydon, Polyommatus 3, 15, 16, 17 dictynna, Melitza oneelG

Cosmoclostis 88, 96, 113, 119

cosmodactyla (us) (=acantho-
dactyla, Auct.), Amblyptilia
(Alucita, Pterophorus, Platyp-

tilia) iv, 74, 75, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83,
85, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95,
99, 101, 109, 110, 111, 117,
121, 155, 156, 162, 164, 252,
269, 270, 271, 272, 273-299,
300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 306,
307, 308, 309, 312, 314, 333,
338, 385, 391, 400, 401, 486, 504
cosmodactyla (us) (=puncti-
dactyla), Amblyptilia 85, 276, 277,
278, 286, 299, 302, 303

cosmodactyla (=tesseradactyla),
Fredericina a a so LS
Cossus . 399
Crambidee ate ao. JB;
Crasimetis . 89, 95, 96

crassa hybr., Spilosoma me Wg). Bie
crepuscularia, Tephrosia 2, 5, 6,
12, 13, 14, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35,

39, 42, 43
cretidactylus, Pterophorus eo
cribrum, Emydia .. ae ia AO
Crocydoscelus oo IE
Crombrugghia _ 409, 410, 449-451
Curculio ue Peel 29
curtula, Clostera 2. 6, 10, 14), Wik

5 2B) Stl
curvatula, Drepana sd, oO, BY)
Cuspides... OG 78, 80

cymatodactyla, Alucita aye co te
Cymatophora Wes ae ad
Cymatophorides .. 3 35, 39
cynthia, Philosamia (Attacus) 2,
25, 26, 38
damon, Polyommatus ae ie a

dartfordi hybr., Ennomos.. Sly Bt!)
daubii (hybr. emiliz ab.), Saturnia 26
decipiens, Aciptilia (Alucita, Ptero-
phorus) in sos Shy YE
deione, Melitwa .. 3
delamerensis (crepuscularia ab.),
Tephrosia 12, 13, 32, 34, 35, 39, 43

delawaricus, Oxyptilus ay ERY
delius, Parnassius .. a Peale)
delphius, Parnassius a uly

densoi hybr., Thaumas 538, 539

dentellus (parvidactyla ab.), Oxyp-
tilus a

deschangei (lubricipeda ab.), Spilo-

soma 20 od, (62
desertorum, Aciptilia (Pterophorus,

Alucita) .. Ah ..87, 89, 93
desmodactyla, Alucita +e 82
Deuterocopus 82, fi 94, ae 14, 152
Diacotricha . ..82,94, 96

dichrodactyla (us) (= -ochrod: a la),
Gillmeria (Platyptilia) 87, 97,

417, 418-419

didactyla(us),Geina(Oxyptilus, Alu-
cita, Pterophorus, Amblyptilia), 70,
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78,

79, 80, 81, 86, 87, 88, 89, 93,

111, 117, 269, 406, 407, 408,

411, 415, 417, 461, 463, 467,

468, 469, 471, 476, 494
didactyla (us) (=distans), Crom-
brugghia .. ae Br .. 451
didactyla (=monodactyla), Alucita 71
didactyla (us) (=piloselle), Oxyp-
tilus 435
didactyla (= -tetradactylus), Acip-
tilus (Phalena) .. 81
didactylus (= heterodactyla), Cap-
peria : a Bs ei.
didyma, Melitaa ss Ae mee
difficilis, Apanteles .. ve BA Btsy
difficilis hybr., Clostera 6, 21, 22,
23, 37
dilutata, Oporabia .. .. 543
Dimorpha ee 5
diptera (= gonodactyla), Platyptilia
Alucita) 71, 201
discobolus, Parnassius 17
dispar, Porthetria 3
distans, Crombrugghia (Oxyptilus,
Pterophorus) ili, v, 82, 84, 85, 87,
88, 89, 90, 93, LET; 405, 406,
409, 410, 411, 412, 437, 439,
445, 449, 450, 451-467, 469,
476, 486
distinctus (a), Leioptilus (Ptero-
phorus, Alucita) 83, 84, 87, 88,
89, 93, 106
dixeyi hybr., Saturnia ae 27, 38
dodecadactyla, Orneodes (Alucita,
HKuchiradia) fa, ¢9,,8h,. $2
doéri, Atomopteryx.. : he 9G
dominula, Callimorpha 44, 45
donatella, Sochchora 94, 96
doronicella (calodactyla ab.), Fred-
ericina . : sa, L045) 165
doubledayaria (betularia ab.), Am-
phidasys .. 30, 42, 54, 56, 57, 58
Doxosteres .. + ve 88, 96
Drepana Ae se 39
Drepanulides ; Re 35, 39
dromedarius, Notodonta ..20, 21, 37
dubia hybr., Notodonta .. 20, 37
dubia (punctidactyla ab.), Amblypt-
tilia <a -. Jl
duponcheli, Leptidia 466
eboraci (lubricipedaab.), Spilosoma
50, 53
edusa, Colias 520160; G2
edwardsii, Amblyptilia 7 “Phisp
tilia) am 92. 270

ehrenbergianus (a), “Mi arasmare ha
(Mimeseoptilus, Pterophorus) 81,
82, 87, 89, 93, 385, 387,

DOO >
ads, os

548

PAGE.
Elachista ; . 109
elliottii, Pterophorus bre sn 79D

elongella, Gracillaria an ye ool
elpenor, Eumorpha 24, 25, 38, 536,
537, 538
emarginata, Stenoptilia .. ie IS
emilie hybr., Saturnia 6, 7, 8, 13,
26, 2, 930
Emmelina - 97, 115, 360
Endromis (= Dimorpha) ae)
Ennomos .. St ak 55 YY)
eogene, Colias ia 4 ee atley
Kpermenia .. i el22
epilobii hylr., Hyles 24, 38
epiphron, Erebia .. at sar AUS)
eques, Gilbertia .. bit gee 96
erate, Colias. . : oe rater Ng,

eremita (monacha ab. ), Lymantria
42,50, 55, 56
ericetorum, Oxyptilus (Pterophorus)
82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89,
93, 117, 405, 406, 411, 412,
414, 416, 417, 431, 438, 440, 448

eriphyle, Erebia.. 16
erminea, Cerura ae 20, 37
escheri, Polyommatus Ss eee ae 14
escheri hybr., Anthrocera .. at, 39
Kuchiradia .. a ae 81, 95
Euchiradie .. 5 ie
Kuchiridia (error for “Euchiradia) 94
Eucnemidophoridi . . 253-254

Kucnemidophorine 251-254, 267,
269, 388, 407
Eucnemidophorus iii, 90, 94, 96,
LOL AOS Aa, ANS. tos bo.
156, 157, 158, 159, 183, 251,

252, 253, 294-256, 268, 317, 386
eugeni hybr., Hyles A 24, 38
EKumorphide - a = V24
eupatorii, Pterophorus.. 50)
euphorbie, Hyles (Celerio) 24, 25,

38, 536, 537, 538, 539

EKupithecia tt he 2026

Kuroloba_ .. ai cee OF

exanthemaria, Cabera .. 543

exclamationis, Stenoptilia 2
extrema (punctidactyla ab.), Am-

blyptilia 301, 302
facilis hybr., Clostera Gt Oeaile

22,23, 37

faleataria, Drepana ns 13 ts oS 19)
farfara (ella) (= gonodactyla),

Platyptilia ts a5 YONI
farfarella, Platyptilia 87, 89, 93,

39 1605 161 tS83

fasciata, Ochyrotica x 96, 115

fasciata, Tipula .- 494, 514

fasciata (lubricipeda ab.), Spilosoma

50, 52, 53
fasciola, Diacrotricha (Aciptilia)
82,94, 96

fauna, Marasmarcha 93, 388, 392
fausta, Anthrocera .. Ab tO
ferenigra (tau ab.), Aglia .. 55) BIE

BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA,

PAGE.
ferrugata, Coremia.. 42, 61, 63, 64
ferrugineum, Crocydoscelus 97, 119
festaliella, Chrysocorys =a
filigrammaria, Oporabia .. 46, 47
filipendule, Anthrocera 3, 4, 36,37, 39

fischeri (= tesseradactyla), Frederi-
cina . 81, 82, 83, 85, 175, 176
fishii, Pterophorus .. a es
flavia, Arctia ce ols

flavofasciata (grossulariata ab.),
Abraxas iy 3, 44, 64, 65

fletcheri hybr., Anthrocera 6, 7,
36, 37, 39
fletcheri hybr., Cymatophora 35, 39
fleteheri hybr., Cabera .. O43
fragilis, Platyptilia . . ‘ 92

franconica, Malacosoma 4, 5, Uf 12,
27, 28, 29, 38

frankenie, Agdistis 82, 83, 87, 89,
93, 128, 131, 132

Fredericina 97, 156, 157, 160-161,
183, 255

freyi Ee ab.), oe
tilia .. 301
fringsi hybr., , Smerinthus . 12, 24, 38

fuliginosa, Phragmatobia (Spilo-
soma) : 3, 18
fuliginosus, Apanteles 286, 288, 309
Fumea Se ie 39
furfurana, Bactra .. . 199

fusca (pterodactyla ab.), " Stenop-
tilia 362

fuscata (abruptaria ab), Hemero-
phila 5 ne .42, 58, 59
fuscicostata, EKuroloba : 97

fuscodactyla (us) (= pterodactyla),

Stenoptilia (Alucita, Pterophorus)
72, 75, 79, 361

fuscus (a) (=pterodactyla [us]),

Stenoptilia (Alucita, Pterophorus,

Mimeseoptilus) 71, 72, 73, 74,

75, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 95,

96, 154, 155, 156, 238, 285,

313, 317, 318, 343, 361, 362,.
363, 364, 365, 366, 518, 533
fuscus (isodactyla ab.), Platyptilia 187

galactodactyla (us), Porrittia (Alu-

cita, Aciptilia, Stenoptilia, Ptero-

phorus) 71, 72, 73, 745 %o5 mG;

77, 78, 79, 80, Si) S23esa

85, 87, 88, 89; 90;93Seda-

98, 99, 101, 103, 104, 106,

107, 110, 112, 118; 1215 dass

153, 204, 259, 264, 369, 371,
396, 398, 484, 485, 487
gallii, Celerio ay Oe 24, ae
Geina : i fe .. 409
Geometrides.. : ..29, 38, 541

giganteus (a), eae: (Alu-
cita, Pterophorus) .87, 89, 93
Gilbertia .. 96

Gillmeria 97, 114, 156, 157, 161,
183, 219-221, 252, 255
elobulariz, Rhagades ae

INDEX. 549
PAGE. PAGE.
gloveri, Antherea .. ..20, 26, 38 cita, Rhipidophora, Kuchiradia)

gonodactyla (us) (trigonodactylus,

megadactyla), Platyptilia(Alucita,

son. orus) 71, 73, 74, 75, 76,

77, 79, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86,

87, 89, 90, 93, 95, 99, 101,

103, 106, 109, 110, IL 112,

117, 121, 155, 157, 159, 160,

161, 164, 166, 167, 169, 170,

176, 177, 183, 184, 185, 186,

189, 196, 197, 201-219, 220,

224, 229, 232, 241, 243, 244,

249, 349, 350,

gonodactyla (zetterstedtii var.),
Platyptilia -

gothica, Teniocampa : ae

ereseri (bremeri var.), Parnassius

graminis, Charezas.. os x

grammodactyla (us) (hexadactyla),

Orneodes (Alucita) ca Silly

grandis, Platyptilia (Pterophorus)

eraphodactyla(us), Stenoptilia (Alu-

cita, Pterophorus, Mimeseopti-

lus) iv, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87,

88, 89, 93, 313, 315, 317,

370
81

318, 337, 515-536

iy

gratiosus, Pterophorus bo BY
eriffithsi hybr., Platysamia 26, 38
grisea (bennetii ab.), Adactylus 137

grisea-lineata (bennetii ab.), Adac-
tylus on 5 -. 137

grisea-typica (bennetii ab.), Adac-
tylus 137
grisescens, Pterophorus .. 92
grossulariata, Abraxas 43, 44, 64, 65
guillemoti hybr.,Cerura .. 20, 37
guttatus, Pterophorus ae ce
Gypsochares 89, 93, 94, 96
headi hybr., Zonosoma .. 542

hedemanni, Gypsochares (Stenop-
tilia ae 93
helianthi, Pterophorus .. 92
helice (edusa ab.), Colias .. 3, 66, 67
helichta (erate vwr.), Colias c= hy
Hellinsia 97, 105, 124, 153, 360
hemidactyla (= fischeri), Platyptilia 81

hemidactyla(= par Verse OPE:
tilus ate 414
hemigena, Ocnogyna ne 345
Hepialus .. 424
Heptaloba 88, 96, 114, 116, 152

herefordi hybr., Amphidasys ial
30, 39

hesebolus (apollo var.), Parnassius

heterodactyla(us) (teucrii), Capperia

(Alucita, Amblyptilia, Oxyptilus)

IVE ACLS bits: (Os Os “SO, Soy Se,

89, 90, 93, 97, 99, 101, 103,

LO, VIL, 117, 127, 154, 156,

259, 369, 372, 386, 392, 406,

407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412,

415, 417, 437, 488, 439, 445,
448, 468, 469, 470, 471-491

hexadactyla (us), Orneodes (Alu-

(O74, 72; 1a, 44, io, TO:
80, 81, 82, 94, 95, 105

heydenii, Agdistis 82, 83, 87, 89,
93, 128, 129, 130, 132, 133

heyeri hybr., Platysamia .. 26, 38

hiarbas, Eurytela a ae 3
hibernica (cosmodactyla var.), Am-
blyptilia . 276
hibernica (tesseradactyla. ab.),
Fredericina : bie Bo 7/7
hieracii, Oxyptilus (Pterophorus)

81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 58, 89,
90, 93, 100, 117, 405, 406,
407, 411, 412, 414, 417, 431,
435, 438, 439, 440, 443, 444,
445, 449, 473, 474, 475, 476,
490, 494, 524
heterodactyla), Cap-
peria on 471, 472, 475
hieracii (= piloselle), Oxyptilus .. 435
hilaris hybr., Spilosoma 6, 19, 20, 37
hippocrepidis (stephensi), ‘Anthro-
cera . Xe os 1, 36
hippophaes, Hyles 24, 38, 437
hirtarius (a), Biston 8, 30, 31, 39
hirundodactylus (=plagiodactylus)
(bipunctidactyla var. et ab.),
Adkinia 50 Se .. 338
hispidaria, Nyssia .. ye Bee ee
hodgkinsonii (i) (bipunctidactyla
var.), Adkinia (Mimeseoptilus)
87, 321, 342-343
hofmannseggii (parvidactyla var.),
Oxyptilus 87, 89, 406, 417, 419-420
homodactylus, Pterophorus ea het
huebneri anon Adactylus
(Agdistis) . , 82, 94, 95, 135
hiinii hybr., Nyssia ", 8, 30, 31, 39
hyale, Colias oe, 3, AH

hieracii (=

hybrida hybr., Saturnia "25, 38, 539
hybrida-major hybr., Saturnia 25, 38
hybrida-media hybr., Saturnia .. 38
hybrida-minor hybr., Saturnia 25,
539, 540
hybridus hybr., Smerinthus 2, 7,
8, 10, 12, 13, 23, 24, 38
Hyles.. : aides weaee
hyperanthus, Enodia e st eae ae
Hypercallia .. 108, 109, 112
ianira, Epinephele .. os “oy,
icarodactyla (us) (=scarodactyla),
Adaina (Pterophorus, Alucita)
79, 80, 8l
icarus, Polyommatus me a ly
ichneumoniformis, geria Scot

icterodactyla (us), Aciptilia (Ptero-
phorus, Alucita) .. ..87, 89, 93

Incomplete .. . > Aa
inconditus, Pt terophor US 45 bint” ee
Indubitate .. + ae —- “4
ingens, Agdistis .. F A |
innocens, Pterophorus .. a igh |

inquinatus, Pterophorus .. ‘ave

550

PAGE.
integra, Scoptonoma sa 013
Integre : : .78, 80, 128
interfaunus hybr., Calasymbolus
12, 23, 38
intermedia hybr., Anthrocera 36, 39
intermedia hylr., Lasiocampa .. 48
intermedia (distans ab.), Crom-
brugghia .. wa
intermedia (lubricipeda ab. ), Spilo-
soma ae 49, 51, 52) 53, 56
intermedia (pallidactyla ab. ), Gill-
meria 3 a 225, 238, 239
intermedia (unidentaria ab.), Core-

mia af eo) Gf.
interrupta, Scoptonoma : . 118
inule, Leioptilus (Pterophorus,

Alucita) 82, 83, 84, 87, 88, 89, 93
inversa hybr., Amorpha Te 10, 12,

24, 38
inversa hybr., Antherea .. 75), BXS
inversa hybr., Anthrocera 36, 39
inversa hybr., Clostera Os ie) JU.

v eu BL BY
inversa hybr., Fumea ww. 1ON P39
inversa hybr., Spilosoma .. I ayy
iphis, Cenonympha af an Ly
iris, Apatura 141

isabelle, Graéllsia (Actias) me 5, 7,
26

ischnodactylus (a), Aciptilus (Alu-
cita, Pterophorus) 80, 81, 82, 84,
SiNSo199, 93
islandicus (a), Stenoptilia (Mimee-
seoptilus) .. . .87, 89, 93
isodactylus(a ), Platyptilia 82, 83, 85,
S7289) 90593599; 10L: 106,
111, 112, 117, 121, 153, 155,
156, 157, 160, 170, 183-201,
213, 220; 231, 232, 241, 252
italica (dominula ab.), Callimorpha 44
italo-anglica hybr., Anthrocera
Sly) ao

juliaria (bilunaria var.), Selenia.. 31

Karamaguia.. se) OG
kellicotti (i), “Pterophorus .. 92, 105
kirbyi hybr., Antherea .. 38
kollari, Oxyptilus 82, 83, 84, 87,
88, 89, 93, 405, 406, 411,
412, 417
Lachneides .. 27, 38
lacticolor (= flavofasciata) (grossu-
lariata ab.), Abraxas 43, 64
letidactylus (=distans?), Crom-
brugghia .. .. 451, 459
letus, Crombrugghia (Oxyptilus,
Pterophorus) iii, 82, 83, 84, 87,
89, 405, 406, 449, 450, 451,
452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457,
458, 459-460, 464, 466, 467,
469, 470
lstus (=distans), Crombrugghia

BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

PAGE.

(Oxyptilus) 87, 451, 455, 456, 457,

458, 459, 460, 464,
lapponaria, Nyssia ..
Lasiocampa ..
lathonia, Issoria
Leioptiline be
Leioptilus 85, 86, 87, 88, 91, 92,

93, 94, 96, 360,

leonie hybr., Mimas 3g 23,
leonuri. Capperia (Oxyptilus) 93,

106, 407, 411, 468, 470,
lerensis (rect. lerinsis), Ernestia

128, 131,

leucadactyla (=osteodactylus),
Hellinsia (Alucita) 2s 2° 105
leucodactyla (us), Pterophorus
(Alucita) 71, 12, 13314
leucodactyla (=theiodactyla=

tetradactyla), Aciptilus 76, 78,
leucodactyla (=tesseradactylus ?),
Fredericina (Pterophorus)
lienigianus (=septodactyla), Oven-
denia (Alucita, Pterophorus,
Leioptilus) 82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89,
90, 93, 94, 97, 99, 101 ae
118, 253, 264, 285, 386, 395,

396, 398, 484,

ligustri, Sphinx 3, 4, 28,
linearia (=trilinearia), Zonosoma
29, 30,

Lineodes 5 -%

linogrisea, Agrotis ..

liophanes, Marasmarcha .. 385,
ee (= Leioptilus) oe
ippei hybr., Hyles .. 24,
Lithocolletides

lithodactyla (us), Oidematophorus
(Alucita, Pterophorus) iii, 79, 80,
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89,
90, 93, 94, 96, 99, 101, 102,
105, 111, 112, 118, 121, 153,
160, 184, 185, 264, 280, 386,
396, 397, 398, 409, 412, 484,
lithodactyla (=similidactyla 2),
Platyptilia 160, 184,
lithoxylodactylus, Pterophorus
lobidactylus (a), Trichoptilus 92,
loewii (=zophodactylus), Adkinia
(Pterophorus) 82, 84, 85, 87, 313,
319, 342, 344, 360,
lonicere, Anthrocera 2,6, 14, 36, 37,
loranus (heterodactyla var.),
Capperia .. : 472-474,
lowei (=loewii), Adkinia (Ptero-
phorus) ..
lubricipeda, Spilosoma 42, “49, 50,
51, 52, 53, 54,
luctuosa,Phragmatobia (Spilosoma)
4,18, 19, 20,
lugens (tau ab.), Aglia .. 56,
lugubris, eae ‘
luna, Actias .. . 26, 27,
lunadactylus. (= Junedactyla),
Marasmarcha, (Alucita) ..

466

. 542

Fredericina Oe ae Toy ou
megillwformis, Aigeria 37
melampus, Brebia .. ° .. waa LG

moerens, Amblyptilia (Platyptilia)

93,
monacha, Lymantria 3, 42, 50, 55,

INDEX. 551
PAGE. PAGE.
lunsedactyla (us) (pheodactyla), meliloti (=viciz), Anthrocera 36
Marasmarcha (Alucita, Stenop- mendica, Spilosoma 4, 6, 18, 19,
tilia, Pterophorus) 74, 75, 78, 79, 37, 45, 46, 66
80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88, mengeli, Stenoptilia 92, 93
89. "90, 91, 94, 98, 99, menthastri, Spilosoma 18
101, 109, 111, 117, 118, 119, merana hybr., Nyssia ibe -- O42
155, 156, 252, 259, 268, 269, meridionalis, Agdistis . 82, 83, 87,
290, 314, 315, 385, 386, 387, Soma
388, 389-404, 410, 437, 453, meridionalis, Lasiocampa.. 47, 48
456, 463, 477, 484, 487, 488 | Merrifieldia . Bon), coin AE.
lunula (=arrindia, ricini) (cynthia metis hybr., Amorpha 12, 13, 24, 38
var.), Philosamia (Attacus) 2,26, 38 metzneri, Platyptilia 81, 82, 83, ;
lunuligera, Pelia ey 94, 96 87, 89, 93, 159, 160
luteocinerea, Stenoptilia 93 | miantodactylus, Pterophorus (Mi-
lutescens, Mimeseoptilus (Ptero- meeseoptilus, Stenoptilia) 80, 81,
phorus, Stenoptilia) 83, 84, 87, 82, 84, 87, 89, 93, 318
88, 89, 93, 313 | microdactyla (us), Adaina (Alucita,
lycidas, Rusticus 3 Stenoptilia, Pterophorus, Lei-
optilus, Marasmarcha) 75, 78,
macrodactyla (=nemoralis) (zetter- 79, 80, SI, 82;.84, 85, 86,
ctedtii var.), Platyptilia (us) 5 tel iin tele, (ie), SN), BRR CeE Giri
maculatus, Oxyptilus 87, 89, 93,406, 417 935799 LOO LOMO a 0b:
major (parvidactyla ab.), Oxyptilus 416 NOS), Jae, WS) UN) AL ea
malacodactylus (a), Aciptilia (us) 157, 191, 346, 360, 385, 386,
(Alucita, Pterophorus) 82, 84, 87, 387, 388, 491, 494
88, 89, 93 microdactyla (= osteodactylus),
Malacosoma 50 es} Pterophorus : ay Se) cd |
manicata, Agdistis .. . 87, 89 | microdactyla (us) (=parvidactyla),
mannii (pterodactyla var.), Stenop- Oxyptilus .. : 79, 80, 414
tilia (Pterophorus, Mimeeseop- mictodactyla (us), Stenoptilia (Alu-
tilus) 82, 83, 84, 87, 89, 93, 313, cita, Pterophorus, Mimeseop-
363, 364, 365-366 tilus) AIST 16,018) 09s SOs ol.
Marasmarcha iv, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 82, 84, 86, 313, 338, 360,
94, 96, 98, 105, 110, 111, 363, 517, 518
119, 127, 158, 155, 157, 252, mictodactyla (us) (= bipunctidac-
254, 268, 270. 314, 385, 386, tyla), Adkinia 74, 334, 335, 343
387-389, 409, 410, 430 | migadactylus (a) (=spilodactyla),
Marasmarchidi .. 385-387 Wheeleria (Alucita, Pterophorus)
Marasmarchinee 251- 253, 269, WAG, (23 10, ilgst Oy 405% 404.
385-387, 388, 409 485, 486, 487
marginaria (progemmaria), Hy. migadactylus (megadactylus)
bem .. me < ee eS (=pallidactyla), Gillmeria 72, 236
marginellus (parvidactyla var.), millieridactylus (= plagiodactylus)
Oxyptilus iv, 82, 83, 84, 87, 89, (bipunctidactyla var.), Adkinia 338
93, 405, 406, 416, 417, 418, Mimas 38
419, 434, 438, 473, 475 Mimeseoptilus 86, 87, 88, “94, 96,
marginidactyla (us) (pallidactyla 313, 318, 360, 361, 385
var.), Gillmeria .. 92, 236, 239 Mimeeseoptilus (= Adkinia) 218
marmarodactyla, Amblyptilia . 270 | Mimeeseoptilus (= Marasmarcha)
marptys, Pterophorus (Alucita) 89, 93 387, 388
mathewianus, Pterophorus Can oe Mimeseoptilus (= Stenoptilia) 360
megadactyla (us) (spilodactyla), minor (bipunctidactyla — ab.),
Wheeleria (Alucita, Platyptilia) Adkinia = is, COR
Vliet, 04s lO.. Ow Gs minor (cosmod: actyla ab.), Amblyp-
81, 98, 99, 101, 104, 109, tilia . 48 ee 4 (5
TO ee 8 minor (parvidactyla ab. ), Oxyptilus 416
megadactyla (us) (=calodactyla), minor (pterodactyla ab.), Stenop-
Fredericina 40 = 1162 tilia e ah te .. 362
megadactyla (= gonodactyla), mixta hybr., Tephrosia ..34,35, 39
Platyptilia 74, 75, 76, 77, 81, mixta (mendica var.), Spilosoma 46
95, 162, 182, 183, 201 mnestra, Krebia 16
megadactyla (= tesseradactyla ?), modesta, Platyptilia 92

552

PAGE.

monodactyla (us) (pterodactyla),
Emmelina (Alucita, Pterophorus)
105 78372, 73, 74, 10, 18; 09,

80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88,

89, 90, 92, 93, 97, 101, 105,

106, 110, 115, 118, 120, 121,

338, 360, 361, 379,

monodactyla (us) (=isodactylus),

Platyptilia “ 183, 184,
monodactyla (= pterodactyla),

Stenoptilia 74,
monoglypha, Xylophacia Ee: ae
montana, Alucita wis
moorei hybr., Anthersea Be
mortoni hylr., Actias sé 26,
Multifide ate wit
multistrigaria, Larentia
munda, Tzeniocampa :
mus(=mendicaab.), Spilosoma 45,
mylitta, Antherea .. 25,

napi, Pieris ..
nebuledactylus (pallidactyla ele iy.
Gillmeria . : Ora),
nemoralis, Fredericina (Alucita,
Platyptilia) 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 81,
82, 83, 86, 87, 89, 93, 159,
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166,
170, 178,
nemoralis (=doronicella) (calodac-
tyla var.), Fredericina .. 165,
nemoralis (=isodactylusj, Platyp-
tilia af;
nemoralis (= zettersted tii) (calo-
dactylavar.), Pepe ae
tilia) 81, 82, 162,
nephelodactyla (us), " Aciptilia (Alu-

cita, Pterophorus) 82, 87, 89,
neustria, Malacosoma 4, 5, 8, 12,
al ate, 20)

newmani hybr., Notodonta
nigerrima (tau ab.), Aglia..
nigra (bidentata ab.), Gonodontis

42, 59,

ail;

ningoris, Oxyptilus.. oS =
nivea omen? ab.), Amblyp-

tilia a =. call
niveidactylus (a) (baliodactyla),
Wheeleria (Aciptilia) 79, 104,

nolckeni, Stenoptilia (Mimzseop-

tilus) ae 3 acelin Sty
nomion, Parnassius ee
Notodonta oe ef a
Notodontides aa : 20,
nubilata (multistrigaria var.)

Larentia 5 de
oberthueri hybr., Smerinthus 23,
Obnubile 78,

obscura (conodactyla ab.), Platyp-
tilia

obscura (zophodactylus ab.),
kinia : &

obscura- fusca. (zophodactylus ab.),
Adkinia ae :

Ad-

203
321

. 321

|
|

BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

PAGE.

obscura-variegata (zophodactylus
ab.), Adkinia AF -« al

obscurus (parvidactyla), Oxyptilus

(Pterophorus) 81, 82, 84, 85, 86,
87, 405, 406, 414, 416, 417,

418, 419, 435, 438, 458, 459,

473, 474,

obscurus (=loranus) (heterodactyla
var.), Capperia 472,

obscurus (=marginellus) (parvi-
dactyla var.), Oxyptilus.. . 419
obscurus (parvidactyla var. ), Oxyp-
tilus 414, 417, 418, 499
obsoleta (annulata ab.), Zonosoma
42, 43,53, 54
obsoleta (parvidactyla ab.), Oxyp-
tilus : a ue .. 416
obsoleta (tiliz ab.), Mimas 66
obsoleta-brunnescens (distans ab.),
Crombrugghia Be .. 493
obsoleta-distans (distans ab.),
Crombrugghia ue .. 454
obsoleta-intermedia ace: ab.),
Crombrugghia_ .. .. 494
obsoletus (=spilodactylus), Acip-
tilus (ia) : 81, 82
Obtusee : .78, 80, 153
ocellata, Smerinthus 10, 12, 23,24, 38
ochracealis, Uttiean =F Q4, 96
ochrata, Acidalia .. 465
ochrea (bennetii ab.), Adactylus ax 137
ochrea-brunnescens (distans ab.),
Crombrugghia : 3 453
ochrea-distans cae av. \. Crom-
brugghia .. .. 454
ochrea-intermedia “(distans ab.),
Crombrugghia aan
ochrea-lineata (Sune r ab. ), Adac-
tylus die sie USa
ddiodacigia (us) (dichrodactylus),
Gillmeria (Alucita, Platyptilia,
Pterophorus) iv, 71, 72, 73, 74,
10, 16, 77,. 73, 195 SOem
82, 83, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90,
92, 93, 97, 111, Tear
157, 160, 182, 183, 184, 189,
197, 220, 221- 236, 237, 238,
239, 242, 245, 247, 250, 251,
270, 376
ochrodactyla (us) (=pallidactyla),
Gillmeria.. 222, 236, 238, 239
ochrodactyla (=albescens) (palli-
dactyla var.), Gillmeria. . 238
ochrodactylus (= gonodactyla),
Platyptilia 201
ochsenheimeri, Anthrocera 37, 39
Ochyrotica 96, 1138, 114, 115, 152, 157
octogesima (=ocularis), Cymato-
phora ae wid -. ‘ao
ocularis, Cymatophora ; 3D; 3g
odontodactyla (=acanthodactyla),
Amblyptilia bs 77, 303
Oidzematophorus (Oede-) 85, 86, 87,
88, 91,92, 93, 94, 96, 97,
105, 153, 499, 412

475
473

~.
~~

pallidactyla (us) (bertrami), Gill-
meria(Alucita,Stenoptilia, Platyp-
tilia) iv, 75, 79, 85, 87, 89, 90, 93,
ds ay, 28, 156, Hees 170,

171, 189, 196, 198, 220, 221,

222, 223, 224, 225, 296, 227,

INDEX. 553
PAGE. PAGE,
Oidematophorine .. at >» 94 228, 229, 230, 232, 233, 234,
olbiadactyla (us), Gypsochares 235, 236-251, 262, 270, 331,
(Aciptilus, Pterophorus) 87, 89, 93 350, 376
olivacea (chi ab.), Polia .. 099 | pallidactylus (=lunedactyla), Mar-
Oporabia 3 4. .. 543 asmarcha. . Sp 8) ery)
or, Cymatophora .. cee 30, 39 pallidus(isodactylus ab. Vie Platyptilia 186
orbicularia, Zonosoma 29, 30, 38, palodactyla, Alucita ae ise OE
541, 542 | paludicola (pterodactyla var.), Ste-
orbiculo-pendula hybr., Zonosoma 541 noptilia (Mimeseoptilus) 86, 87,
oregonia, Papilio 17 88, 89, 93, 317, 363, 364-365
Orneodes 72, 73, 74, 75, 80, 81, 82, paludum, lBuckleria (Aciptilia,

93, 94, 95, 102, 105, 109, 122, 123 Pterophorus, Trichoptilus) iii, iv,
Orneodes (= Alucita) 5 5 16 vi, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89,
Orneodides .. fe os Ol 90, 91, 93, 94, 97, 99, 105,
orthocarpi, Platyptilia ae 92, 157 111, 116, 117, 157, 254, 450,
ossea (punctidactyla ab.), Amblyp- 463, 469, 491, 492, 493-515

tila — Rs Ms .. 301 | pamphilus, Coenonympha are di
osteodactyla (us) (leucadactyla), Panpterotes Sa ie Hi ketenes:
Hellinsia (Alucita, Pterophorus, paphia, Dryas ap ee on 6G
Leioptilus) 74, 75, 81, 82, 84, papilionaria, Geometra.. 5 Lies)
80, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, Papilionides bs Ae sea) les,
Oy Ales OA PA Ua, SkeKs) paradoxa, Alucita ? as fea. a
Ovendenia .. we 97, 153, 409 paralia, Agdistis ee OP RS Oo oe
oxyacanthe, Miselia ; a5 B) |) JERP ORSON, a3 P i vine giles
Oxychirotide 123 | parthenie, Melitea <e 3, 16
~Oxyptili : 472 | parthica (us), Aciptilia (Alucita,
Oxyptilidi 104, 406, ‘407, 409, AlL- Pterophorus) iy 87, 89, 93
413, 449 | parvidactyla (us) (obscurus), Oxyp-
Oxyptiline 153, 253, 269, 404-411, 413 tilus (Alucita) iii, iv, 75, 79, 81,
Oxyptilus SIP 82, 83, 845 86, 87, 82, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90,
88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 93, 117, 405, 406, 408, 409,
105, 113, 269, 405-406, 409, 411, 412, 414-435, 438, 439,
411, 413-414, 449, 450, 457, 449, 450, 458, 459, 468, 469,
470, 474, 492, 493, 496 470, 472, 478, 474, 476, 514
Oxyptilus (=Capperia) . 470 | parvidactylus (=loranus) (hetero-
Oxyptilus (=Crombrugghia) 449 dactyla var.), Capperia .. seek
parvidactylus (=microdactylus),
Pelia.. We 94, 96 Adaina .. “is 79, 980
paleaceus, Pterophorus .. 92 | parvilunaria hybr., ‘Selenia al, 39
pallens, Leucania .. .. 38 | parvus, Pterophorus = Bice SMe
pallida (bipunctidactyla ab. ), Ad- pauli hybr., Hyles .. a 24, 38
kinia 2 .. 337 | paupera (piloselle ab.), Oxyptilus 438
pallida (calodaetyla ‘ab.), “Frederi- pavonia, Saturnia 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13,
cina ; : -. 163 25, 26, 27, 38, 539, 540, 541
pallida (erate } var.), Colias 17 | pectodactylus (a), Leioptilus (Alu-
pallida (gonodactyla ab.), Platyp- cita, Pterophorus) 87, 88, 89, 93
tilia : 203 | pelidnodactylus (a), Adkinia (Sten
pallida (pterodactyla ab.), Stenop- optilia, Mimeseoptilus) 87, 88,
tilia 362, 377 89, 93, 106, 317, 336, 341,
pallida (zophodactylus ab.), Ad- 348, 352, 522, 533
kinia ; 320, $21 pendularia, Zonosoma .. 4541, 542
pallida-excessa (bipunctidactyla pendulo-orbicula hybr., Zonosoma 541
ab.), Adkinia . 337 | pentadactyla (us), Alucita (Ptero-
pallida-mixta (bipunctidactyla ab. ie phorus, Aciptilia, Stenoptilia) 70,
Adkinia 337 (0 ar Ry (i a a Pay o> By!
pallida-obsoleta (gonodactyla ab. 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89,
Platyptilia 203 90, 93, 94, 95, 98, 99, 101,
pallida-obsoleta (zophodactylus LO3, LO4, 110, 112, 115, 116,
ab.), Adkinia 321 118, 154, 158, 396, 409, 412,

468, 484, 491, 494

penzigi hybr., Malacosoma 28, 38
perenodactyla, Platyptilia .. x ee
periscelidactylus, Capperia (Oxyp-
tilus) % . 92, 411
pernoldi hydr., Jumorpha .. 536

554

PAGE.
pernyi, Antherza 6, 7, 25; 26, 38
perny-yama hybr., Antherea 6, 7,

25, 38
persona ce ab.), Callimor-
pha : ay 44, 45

petradactyla (calodactyla ab. an
var.), Fredericina 74, 75, 78, 81,

92, 161, 164-165, 182, 183
petrodactyla( = petradactyla), Fred-
ericina (Platyptilia) s6 92
peucedani, Anthrocera .. 36
pheeodactyla (us) (= luneedactyla),
Marasmarcha (Alucita, Amblyp-
tilia, Pterophorus, Mimeseop-
tilus) 74, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84,
85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 96,
99, 101, 109, 118, 119, 269,
385, 386, 387, 388, 389
pheodactylus (=isodactylus), Pla-
typtilia 184
Phalena .. Be 10, 72, 73
Phaleena (= Adkinia) Ee 318
Phalena (= Alucita) a ae TKS
Phalena-Alucita .. “ ol
Phaleénes-tipules .. fs 4 Sl
phegea, Syntomis .. sro! he
phileuphorbia hybr., Celerio 24, 38
Philosamia .. 58, Bie)
phlomidis, Aciptilia (Alucita,
Pterophorus) 87, 89, 93
phebe, Melitea .. .. 466
pica, Platyptilia (Amblyptilia) 92, 270

pigra, Clostera DAE ee orh
pilosellee,Oxyptilus(Pterophorus) iv,
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89,
90, 98, 94, 95, 100, 117, 405,
406, 408, 411, 412, 414, 416,
417, 424, 427, 429, 434, 435-
449, 452, 455, 456, 458, 459,

460, 474, 476
pilzii hybr., Biston.. 7, 8, 30, 31, 39
pinarodactyla, Stenoptilia so) OB
pinastri, Hyloicus .. Me ee 7-49)
pini, Dendrolimus .. ae wi eo
pistacina, Orthosia . 3
plagiodactylus (a), (bipunctidactyla
var. et ab.), Adkinia(Pterophorus,
Mimeseoptilus, Stenoptilia) iv,
82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 313,
317, 322, 335, 336, 337, 338-
342, 354, 357, 358, 518, 519,
520, 521, 524,
plagiodactylus (= graphodactyla),
Adkinia -. Old, 530
plagiodactylus (= pneumonanthes)
(graphodactyla var.), Adkinia
527, 530, 533, 534, 535
plantaginis, Parasemia (Nemeo-
phila) - as pa HLS
Platyptila (Gillmeria) . 220
Platyptila (Platyptilia) . 182

Platyptilia (us) 80, 81, 82, 83, 86,
87, 88, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95,
98, 105, 110, 153, 156, 157,
182-183,

158, 160, 161, 176,

BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

PAGE..

220, 243, 252, 263, 268, 269,
292, 317, 330, 400, 405, 463,
485, 486,
Platyptilia (us) (= Amblyptilia) 268,
Platyptilia (us) (=EHucnemido-
phorus) .. oe te s
Platyptilia (us) (=F redericina) 160,
Platyptilia (us) (=Gillmeria) 219,
Platyptilie .. 78,
Platyptiliide 98, 127, 152, 153: 156,
157,
Platyptiliidi. . : 156-160,
Platyptiliine 94, 118, 153, 156, 251-
253, 269, 407,

Platysamia . ae wi
plebeius, Tabanus ..
Pleurota (=Anchinia) .
pneumonanthes (graphodactyla
var.), Adkinia (Stenoptilia)
iv, 93, 315, 317, 318, 337,
515, 518, 519, 520, 521, 522-
923, 524, 526, 527, 528, 530,
533, 534,
peecilodactyla (us), Orneodes (Alu-
cita) ; Se
polydactyla (us), Orneodes (Alucita,
Euchiradia) - $0, 7195 3i5

polyphemus, Telea .

pomonarius, Biston (Nyssia) 8, 30,

495,

populi, Amorpha 10, 23, 24, 38,
porata, Zonosoma .. a3 30,
porcellus, Theretra .h SAS
Porrittia 97, 104,

porrittii (suffumata ab.), Cidaria .
portlandica (bennetii var.), Adac-
tylus as aie ss Ay
prima hybr., Clostera 6, 7, 11, 14,
21, 22,
princeps (charltonius var.), Par-
nassius a Be
probolias, Alucita
Procris
Proprii
prunaria, Angerona
Pselnophorus 90, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96,
Psychides
pterodactyla (us) (fuscus), Stenop-
tilia (Alucita, Pterophorus, Mi-
meseoptilus) 70, 71, 72, 73, 75,
76, 79, 83, 86, 87, 88, 89,
90, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96799)
101, 117, 121, 154, 155, 156,
157, 238, 239, 240, 252, 285,
3138, 314, 315, 317, 318, 319,
343, 350, 351, 352, 360, 361-
385, 395, 396, 477, 485, 518,
pterodactyla (us) (= monodactyla),
Emmelina (Alucita, Stenoptilia)
Wl, 72, 73, 74, 78, 80;
82, 84, 85, 87, 360, 361,
Pterophore .. : 18;
Pterophoride 80, 81, 85, 89, 92, 93,
113, 115, 119,
ii, 82, 83,

?

Pteroph orina

516
269:

. 255-

161
220.
153

252.
183

409
38

514
417

535.

533-

319
80:

120
87

INDEX. 555
PAGE. PAGE.
Pterophorites (des) .. ..76, 80, 81 | Rhipidophore 78
Pterophorus (a) 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, rhodius, Parnassius Sota hS
75, 76, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, rhododactyla (us), Hucnemido-
85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, phorus (Alucita, Pterophorus,

93, 94, 95, 105, 135, 160,
182, 219, 254, 268, 313, 318,
344, 360, 361, 385, 387, 413,

449, 451, 470, 491
Pterophorus (=Adkinia) 318
Pterophorus (= Alucita) Be, we Che)
Pterophorus (= Amblyptilia) . 268
Pterophorus (= Buckleria).. .. 491
Pterophorus (= Capperia) .. .. 470
Pterophorus (= Crombrugghia) . 449
Pterophorus (=Eucnemidophorus) 254
Pterophorus (=F redericina) ee,
Pterophorus (= Gillmeria) .. 219
Pterophorus (=Marasmarcha) .. 387
Pterophorus (= Oxyptilus) . 413
Pterophorus (= Platyptilia) a5 Ley
Pterophorus (=Stenoptilia) 360, 364
ptilodactyla (us) (=pterodactyla),
Stenoptilia(Alucita, Pterophorus)

74, 75, 78, 79, 80, 81, 95,360, 361
pulchra, Stenoptilia 93
pulverulenta, Taniocampa 3
pumilio, Stenoptilia 92
punctaria, Zonosoma 30

punctidactyla (us), Amblyptilia
(Alucita, Pterophorus) iv, 75, 79,
Sool, So, 110, L117, 121,

156, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273,

274, 276, 277, 278, 279, 281,

286, 287, 292, 293, 299-313

punctidactyla (=cosmodactylus),
Amblyptilia : 276
punctinervis, Alucita (Pterophorus)

89, 93
pingeleri hybr., Fumea 10, 39
purpuralis, Anthrocera REC) ND
pusaria, Cabera ... : .. 043
pygmeus, Trichoptilus 92, 94, 96, 491
Pyralides : .. 123
pyri, Saturnia (Anthersea) 2, Onde

13, 25, 26, 27, 38
quercinaria (=angularia), Enno-
mos P Ate Silis: at!)
querciis, Lasiocampa 29, 38, 47, 48
querctis, Zephyrus (Bithys) 3
reschkei hybr., Clostera 6, 7, 10,
Die aamesy ool
radiata (=zatima) ae
var.), Spilosoma 42, 49, 50,
52, oa 56
raphiodactyla, Alucita 93
rebeli hybr., Drepana Welch 35, 39
reclusa (=pigra), Clostera 2, 14, 21,

22, 37
regia, Citheronia ate imc
repandata, Boarmia \. 42, 605 OL
reversa hybr., Tephrosia .. 35, 39
rhamni, Gonepteryx 16

Platyptilia, Cnemidophorus) 71,
72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80,

81, 82, 83, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90,

93, 94, 96, 101, 105, 106, 109,

111, 117, W583; 155, 182, 183,
256-267, 388, 398, 485,
rhypodactylus (a), Marasmarcha
(Mimeseoptilus) 87, 89, 93, 385,
387,

ricini (=lunula, arrindia), Philo-
samia (Attacus) Se Ay
ridingi hybr., Tephrosia 6, 7, 32, 33,
ridingi-suffusa hybr., Tephrosia 6,

32, 33, 34, 35,

rileyi, Pterophorus . .
Ripidophora ae 94,
risii hybr., Saturnia a 205) 2d,
rogenhoferi, Oidematophorus
(Alucita, Pterophorus) 88, 89,
romanovi (dominula ab.), Calli-
morpha : 50 44,
rotundaria (pusaria ab.), Cabera ..
roylei, Antherea .. ae 26,

rubi, Macrothylacia
rubra, Platysamia ..

-ruficincta, Limneria

russata (truncata var.), Cidaria ..
russula, Diacrisia (Huthemonia) ..
rustica (mendica ab. et var.),

Spilosoma 18, 19, 37, 45, 46,
ruralis, Botys ae ot

Samia

saracenia (calodactyla var. y. Frede-
ricina :

sareptensis (hyale var.), Colias

satanas, Agdistis? 89, 93, 129, 132,

133,
Saturnia .. de =s 5,
-scabiodactylus (= plagiodactylus

=bipunctidactyla var.), Adkinia
336, 337, 338, 339,

scabiose ( = plagiodactylus = bi-
punctidactyla var.), Adkinia 338,
seabiosellus, Nemotois
scarodactyla (us), Adaina (Alucita,
Pterophorus, Stenoptilia, Acip-
tilia, Leioptilus) 75, 78, 79, 80,
81, 82, 85, 86,

93, 94, 100, 118,

schaufussi hybr., Clostera. . :
schaufussi hybr., Malacosoma 8,
12, 27

>)
Saturnia 6, 7, 27

360,

schaufussi hybr.,

schlumbergeri hybr., Saturnia ‘

Scopariidse

Scoptonoma an

scotica (cosmodactyla var.),
blyptilia ot

Am-

87, 88, 89,'

506

341

.. 348

556

PAGE.
scotica (pallidactyla ab. et var.),
Gillmeria .. 238, 239
scythrodes, Trichoptilus ?. : . 492
secunda hybr., Anthrocera 36, 39
seeboldi, Amblyptilia (Platyptilia)
93, 270
seileri hybr., Spilosoma 6,20, 37
selene, Actias : 26, 38
Selenia 39
semicostata, Stenoptilia he so | GY
semiodactyla (us), Alucita (Ptero-
phorus, Aciptilia) sorely Se UB
septodactyla (us) (lienigianus),
Ovendenia (Alucita, Pterophorus)
79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87,
BO C9, 90595094 ono.
101, 111, 118, 153, 253, 264,
285, 369, 385, 386, 395, 396,

398, 409, 484, 485, 487, 488
sepulchralis, Chrysops 494
sepulchralis, Tipula .. 514
sericeus, Apanteles.. . 352
sericidactyla, Leioptilus a 103
serotinus (a) (= bipunctidactyla),

Adkinia (Pterophorus, Mimese-
optilus, Stenoptilia) 82, 84, 85,
86, 87, 88, 89, 313, 317, 335,
337, 344, 360, 363, 364,
365, 522, 533
shaste, Platyptilia .. 92
siceliota, Stangeia (Buckleria, Acip-
tilia, Trichoptilus) iv, 82, 84,
87, 89, 93, 94, 117, 450, 469,
491, 492, 497
sicula (quercts var.), Lasiocampa
47, 48
Siculodide .. oe a. 234
signipennella (elongella), Gracil-
laria (Ornix) : ne se peal:
similidactyla (lithodactyla), Oide- :
matophorus (Pterophorus) 79,
85, 160, 184, 185
similidactylus (a) (= isodactyla),
Platyptilia (Pterophorus) 87, 89,
160, 184, 185, 187
similis hybr., Clostera 2123, ot
sinapis, Leptidia ; .. 466
Smerinthus .. 3, 238
Sochchora ce ae 94, 96
sodorensium (repandata var.),
Boarmia 42
sordiata (prunaria ab. ), Angerona. 64
sordida, Spilosoma.. 18, 19, 20, 37
spadicearia, Coremia 61
Sphenarches (Sphenarchis by err oA
88, 96
Sphingides 235 38, 536
Sphinx ; 5
apilodactylatas) (megadactyla, miga-
dactyla, obsoletus), Wheeleria
(Alucita, Pterophorus, Aciptilia)
73, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84,
85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 97, 98,
99, 101, 104, 109, 110, 111,
112, 118, 403, 404, 486, 487

BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

PAGE.
spilodactyla ( = punctidactyla),
Amblyptilia . 302
spilodactylus (cosmodactyla var.),
Platyptilia

spini, Saturnia 2, a ites ‘le 25, 26,
27, 38, 539, 540, 541
stabilis, Teeniocampa ; 3
stachydalis (punctidactyla ab. et
var.), Amblyptilia 272, 278, 301,
302-303, 305

standfussi hybr., Saturnia 6, 26,27, 38
standfussi hybr., Spilosoma 18, 19,
37,45, 46
standfussi hybr., Theretra 24, 38
standfussi (rustica) (mendica var.),
Spilosoma ae ye 45, 46
Stangeia oN iM .. 492
statices, Adscita .. cs aes
staticis, Adactylus (Agdistis) 93,
128, 129, 130
Steganodactyla 96, 113, 114, 115,
152, 157
stellatarum, Sesia .. ay, Bp 405)
Stenoptilia (us) 80, 81, 82, 89, 90,
91, 92, 93, 94, 9535 9arMas:
156, 157, 252,254, 316, 317,
318,319, 330, 333, 338, 360-
361, 387, 388
Stenoptilia (= Adkinia) .. 318
Stenoptilia (=Gillmeria) .. .. 220
Stenoptilia (=Marasmarcha) .. 387
Stenoptilia (= ag 81, 82
Stenoptilie .. a 78, 313
Stenoptiliidi . . se, 313- 318
Stenoptiliine 153, 253, 313-318,
407, 515
Stenoptycha as 97; 113, at
stephensi( = hippocrepidis), Anthro-
cera a a i sic
stiomatodactylus (a ), Adkinia(Ptero-
phorus, Stenoptilia, Mimeseop-
tilus) 82, 84, 87, 88, 89, 93, 313,
317, 344, 363, 365
stoechadis, Anthrocera 36
stramineus, Pterophorus .. cs eae
strataria, Amphidasys . 4, 30; 39
subalternans, Aciptilia (Alucita,
Pterophorus) Bevery
subroseata (pendularia ab. ) Zono-
soma -. Jae
subochraceus, Pterophorus 92
suffumata, Cidaria . 60, 61
suffusa (piloselle ab. \F Oxyptilus
437, 438
suffusa (ulmata ab.), Abraxas 41, 66
sulphureodactylus, Pterophorus .. 92
sylvellus, Crambus . 514
synophrys, Sphenarehes 96
Syntomis .. ie so) ae
peniadaciy us (calodactyla var. et
b.), Fredericina 162, 164, 165, 166
faecal Herbertia (Agdistis,
Adactylus) 82, 83, 87, 89, 93,
127, 129, 131, 132, 134, 135, 253

INDEX. 557
PAGE. PAGE.
taminata, Bapta ve .. 8 | tremulifolia, Gastropacha.. ae Oe
tau, Aglia 27, 56, 57, 144 | trichodactyla (us) (didactyla), Oxyp-
tengstrcemi, Deuterocopus 82, 94, tilus (Alucita, Amblyptilia, Ptero-
96, 114 phorus) Talay No, hor sie,
tenuidactylus, Oxyptilus .. 92 78, 80, 81, 82, 84, 269, 405,
tephradactyla (us), Leioptilus (Alu- 414, 416, 435, 438, 459
cita, Stenoptilia, Pterophorus) trichodactyla (=distans), Crom-
fo. 13, 39, 80, Sl, 82, 84, brugghia .. 451
85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, trichodactyla (=piloselle), Oxypti
94, 96, 98, 99, 100, 101, 110, lus . 435
118, 167, 173, 351, 360, 386 Trichoptilus ‘88, 89, 90, 91, “92, 93,
tephrodactylus, Stenoptilin 80 94, 96, 105, 114, 406, 411,
Tephrosia 39 491, 492. 493
terminalis, Platyptilia .. 93 | Trichoptylus (=Buckleria) 491,
tessaradactyla (us) (=tesseradac- 492, 493
tyla), Fredericina. . 87, 175, 516 tridactyla (=pentadactyla), Alucita 76
tesseradactyla (us) (fischeri), Frede- tridactyla (us) (tetradactyla [us]),
ricina (Alucita, Pterophorus, Am- Merrifieldia (Alucita, Ptero-
blyptilia, Platyptilia) 70, 71, 72, phorus, Platyptilia, Aciptilia) 70,
75, 76, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 85, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80,
86, 87, 89, 92, 93, 117, 160, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90,
~ 161, 175-182, 516 93, 97, 98, 101, 104, 106, 118,
tesseradactyla (us) (=gonodactyla 121, 184, 202, 391, 436
{us]), Platyptilia : 81, 201 | Trifides bis 78, 89, 128
tesseradactyla(us) (= leucodactyla?), trifolii, Anthrocera 2 2, 1, 6 14, 36,37, 39
Pterophorus 72 | trifolii, Hadena 3
tesseradactyla (us (=puncti- trifolii, Lasiocampa 29, 38
dactyla), Amblyptilia 299; 300, 301 trigonodactyla (us)(— gonodactyla),
tesseradactyla (=zetterstedtii ?), Platyptilia (Alucita, Pterophorus,
Platyptilia See Vimar ol Stenoptilia) 79, 79, 85, 201
Tetraschalis. . eu we .. 96 | trigrammica, Grammesia . ates Pe
tetradactyla (us) (=tridactyla), trilinearia (=linearia), Zonosoma
Merrifieldia (Alucita, Ptero- 29, 38
phorus, Platyptilia, Aciptilia) 70, trimmatodactyla, Marasmarcha 89,
ie, £0, 09; (9, 80), Sl, 93, 385, 387, 388
82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, tristis, Oxyptilus (Pterophorus) 81,
Oayeon.. 98, LOL, 104, 106; 82, 83, 84, 87, 88, 89, 93,
118, 121, 184, 202, 391, 436 105, 117, 405, 406, 408, 411,
tetradactyla (=monodactyla), Alu- 412, 414, 416, 417, 435, 436,
cita at me we cre tl 451, 452, 458, 459, 460, 461,
tetralicella (cosmodactyla var.), 473, 494
Amblyptilia : .. 277 | tristis (=distans), Crombrugghia
tetralunaria, Selenia ; leag 451, 458, 459, 460, 461
teucrii (=heterodactyla), Capperia truncata, Cidaria 61, 64
(Oxyptilus) 85, 87, 89, 90, 93, 97, tuneta, Alucita $05
99, 110, 386, 406, 407, 408, Turneria elites b3-
417, 438, 445, 468, 471, 473, tuttodactyla (agrorum var. an spec.
474, 475, 476, 485 dist.), Marasmarcha 387
teucrii, Limneria a .. 485 typica-obsoleta (gonodactyla «ab. a
Thais <f ~ Se .. O32 Platy ptilia 203
theiodactylus (a) (leucodactyla)
( = tetradactyla), Merrifieldia ulmata, Abraxas os 41, 66
(Aciptilia, Aciptilus) Ike }s oil ulodactyla (us) (punctidactyla var.),
theirodactylus (=theiodactyla), Amblyptilia (Alucita) 81, 299,
Aciptilia o a ae 80) t 301, 302-303
Theretra : a8 . 88 | unidentaria (ata), Coremia 42, 61,
thoracicus, Ischnus se 398 63, 64
tilim, Mimas 93, 38, 41, 66 | Uroloba 115
Tineidw .. 124 | ursula, Limenitis e L7
Tineina .- 288 | urticw, Aglais Ke WF oo Ue
Tineodidie 123, 124 | urtice, Spilosoma .. Se
Tipulee ; -. 489 | Utuca 94, 96
torva, Notodonta : 20, a, |
tr: ansalpina (= hippoe repidis), An- | vaccilana, Stenopteryx 93
throcera a xfs 36 | vaccinil, Orrhodia .. :

558 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA.

PAGE. PAGE.
valesina (paphia var.), Dryas .. 66 Yponomeuta ‘ eel,
variegata (cosmodactyla ab.), Am- _ gatima (radiata) (lubricipeda ab.),

blyptilia .. .. 276 — Spilosoma 42, 49, 50, 51, 52,53, 56
variegata (parvidactyla ab. ) Oxyp- zetterstedii (tti, ti) (=calodactyla),

tilus ae : .. 416 Fredericina 162
Variegatze .. es .. 78 | zetterstedtii (= calodactyla), Fred-
versicolora, Dimorpha .. 27, 429 ericina (Platyptilia, Pterophorus)
verticalis (=ruralis), Botys 55 ele) | 74, 75, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86, 87,
vespertilio, Thaumas 24, 38, 538, 539 | 89, 90, 93, 97, 99, 104, Tt
vespertilioides hybr., Turneria 24, 38 | 156, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164,
viburni (quercts var.), Lasiocampa 165, 166, 173, 177, 192, 195,

47, 48 | 201, 271, 274, 424
vicie, Anthrocera .. 55 .. 86 | zetterstedtii (calodactyla var. et
viertli hybr., Spilosoma .. 6,19, 37 | ab.), Fredericina 163, 164, 165,
vinula, Cerura ae a 37 166, 173
virginalis, Angila .. te . 485 zetterstedtii (doronicella) (calodac-
vitticollis, Mesochorus bes . 485 tyla var.), Fredericina .. io Ge
volgensis, Aciptilia (Alucita, Ptero- | zetterstedtii (= gonodaciyi Pla-

phorus) .. sat sostiyishs SBy | typtilia .. .. 201

| ziczac, Notodonta .. ae 21, 37

waeneri hybr., Lasiocampa 29, 38 | zonaria, Nyssia .. He .. 542

wahlbergi, Oxyptilus - .. 82 | zonodactyla, Alucita Bs -« 92

wallacei hybr., Philosamia 6,7, 38. | Aoresoma, =- _ he: 38, 541
walsinghami, Alucita ne .. 92 | zophodactylus (a) (loewii), Adkinia
watsoni hybr., Platysamia 26, 38 | (Pterophorus, Mimeseoptilus, Ste-
wernickii, Alucita .. x se, 393.1 noptilia) iv, 80, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88,
Wheeleria .. a7) 4 89, 90, 93, 101, 109, 110, 117,
worthingi hybr., Anthrocera 6, 7, 156, 252, 313, 314,315, 347,
14, 36, 37, 39 | 319-334, 342, 343, 344, 360,
| 365, 376, 377, 378, 506, 523,

xanthodactyla (us), Aciptilia (us) | 528, 530, 533, 534
(Alucita, Pterophorus) 79, 80, zophodactylus (= hodgkinsonii =
81, 82, 84, 87, 88, 89, 93 bipunctidactyla var.), Adkinia

xanthographa, Noctua .. Sg 3S 342, 343

xerodactylus, Pterophorus §81, 82, zoragena hybr., Ocnogyna oe: as

83, 89 | zoraida (hemigena ab.), Ocnogyna 45

| zurichi hybr., Drepana .. a
yama-mai, Antherea ..25, 26, 38 ! Zygena(=Anthrocera) .. so are

WATKINS & DONCASTER, Naturalists.
36, STRAND, W.C. (five doors east of Charing Cross Station). A large Stock of
Insects and Birds’ Eggs.

Plain Ring Nets, cane or wire, 1/3, 2/-, 2/6, 3/-. Folding Nets, 3/6, 4/-, 4/6.
Umbrella Nets, 7/-. Pocket Boxes (deal), 6d., 9d., 1/-, 1/6. Zine Collecting Boxes,

1/-, 1/6, 2/-. Nested Willow Chip Boxes, 4 dozen 7d., 1 gross 1/6. Ento-
mological Pins, 1/6 per oz. Sugaring Lamps, 2/6, 4/6. Sugaring Tins, 1/6, 2/-.
Sugaring Mixture, per tin, 1/9. Mite Destroyer (not dangerous), per oz. 14d.,
Ib. 1/6. Store Boxes, with camphor cells, 2/-, 2/6, 3/6, 4/-, 5/-, 6/-.; Ditto book
pattern, 8/6, 9/6, 10/6. Larva Breeding Cages, 2/6, 4/-, 5/-, 7/6. Larva Preserving
Apparatus, including oven, lamp, hand-blower, &c., 5/-. Zine Larva Boxes, 9d.,
1/-. Coleopterists’ Collecting Bottles, with tube, 1/6, 1/8. Steel Forceps, for moving
pinned insects, 1/6, 2/-, 2/6. Cabinet Cork, per dozen, 1/-, 1/4, 1/9, 2/8. Glass
Top and Bottom Boxes, per dozen, from 1/- and upwards. Setting Boards, fiat or
oval, from 5d. and upwards. Setting Houses, 9/6, 11/6, 14/-. Taxidermist’s Com-
panion, z.e., a pocket leather case, containing most useful instruments for skinning,
10/6. Egg Collector’s Outfit, containing blowpipes, drills, &c., 3/-. Egg Collector’s
Climbing Irons, with straps, per pair 5/-. Botanical Cases, 1/6, 2/9, 3/6, 4/6. Bo-
tanical (drying) Paper, 1/1, 1/4, 1/9, 2/2 per quire. Botanical Press (for travellers),
3/6, 6/-. Portfolios for dried plants, from 3/6 to 6/-. Label and Reference Lists of
every description for lepidopterists, oologists, botanists, conchologists, &c.

All articles enumerated are kept in stock, and can be forwarded immediately on receipt of
order. Books on Natural History (new and secondhand).
CABINETS OF EVERY DESCRIPTION.
Birds, Mammals, Horns, &c., preserved and mounted by first-class workmen.
For particulars ask for our new Catalogue (100 pages), which will be posted to any address.
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C.

inn

The Entomologist’ Library.

Books written by J. W. TUTT, F.E.S.
{All orders for which should be sent direct to 119, Westcombe Hill, Blackheath. |

A Natural History of the British Lepidoptera, their world-
wide variation and geographical distribution (illustrated).

(A text-book for Students and Collectors.)
Vols. I, II, III, IV, V and VIII, Price £1 each volume, net. Demy 8vo.,
thick, strongly bound in cloth.
Complete set of 6 vols., 5 guineas net.
The most concise and thorough book on Lepidoptera ever offered to the
entomological public.

A Natural History of the British Butterflies, their world-wide.
variation and geographical distribution (illustrated).
(A text-book for Students and Collectors.)

Vol. I one guinea net. Vol. II in course of publication.

A detailed account of the biology and variation of each British species,
and a consideration of the literature and classification of the Palearctic
species.

A Natural History of the British Alucitides, their world-wide
variation and geographical distribution.
(A text-book for Students and Collectors.)

Vol. I one guinea net. (To be completed in two volumes.)

Full details of the life-history of every British species; full historical
account of the group and its classification.

‘The British Noctuze and their Varieties. Complete in 4 volumes.
28s. per set net. Demy 8vo., strongly bound in cloth. Full account of
the typical and all known described forms, with original descriptions.

Melanism and Melanochroism in British Lepidoptera.
Demy 8vo., bound in cloth. Price 5s. A full account of all the facts
known bearing on the subject, and a closely reasoned explanation of
probable causes.

Migration and Dispersal of Insects. Demy 8vo. Price 5s. net.
A detailed account of the migration of the Aphides, Orthoptera, Odonata,
Diptera, Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, and Lepidoptera.

Practical Hints for the Field Lepidopterist (illustrated).
Complete in 3 parts. Part I, 9s.; PartII, 6s.; Part I1I,6s. Complete set
£1 net. A detailed set of some 3000 practical hints. Full details of
collecting, preserving, and using the material for scientific purposes.

100 Practical Hints on the British Eupitheciids. Price ls.
A series of hints on the method of finding and rearing eggs, larve, pup
and imagines of the ‘‘ pugs.”

Monograph of the British Pterophorina. Demy 8yo., 161 pp.
Bound in Cloth. Price 5s. net. Anaccount of every British species and
its life-history—each described under a series of detailed headings.

Rambles in Alpine Valleys. Crown 8vo. Bound in Cloth. With map
and photographs. Price 3s. 6d. net. A graphic account of the rambles
of an entomologist on the Italian side of Mount Blanc.

Random Recollections of Woodland, Fen, and Hill. Crown
8vo. Bound in Cloth. Price 3s. net. A detailed account of the fauna
and flora of some well-known British natural history localities.

Woodside, Burnside, Hillside, and Marsh. Crown 8yo. _Illus-
trated. Bound in Cloth. Price 2s. 6d. A full and detailed account of
the fauna and flora of certain parts of Kent and Argyleshire.

Stray Notes on the Noctuse. Price ls. net. An account of the
classification of the Noctuid moths, ete.

Notes on the Zygzenidze. Price Is. An account of the habits, ete.,
of several species of the Alpine Burnet moths.

Some considerations of Natural Genera and incidental

reference to the nature of Species. Price ls. 6d. net.
A detailed consideration of the nature of genera and species.

Some considerations of the Nature and Origin of Species.
Price 1s. 6d. net. A detailed consideration of the causes that have led to
specific forms and their isolation.

Some results of recent Experiments in hybridising
Tephrosia bistortata and T. crepusculapria. Price 2s.
net. Full account of experiments conducted by Dr. Riding and Mr. Bacot
in hybridising these allied species.

The Drinking Habits of Butterflies and Moths. Prices. 6d.
An interesting essay on the habit as observed in many parts of the world
and its possible meanings.

The Nature of Metamorphosis. Price ls. 6d. net. An essayon the
nature of the various forms and degrees of metamorphosis in different
orders of insects.

The Scientific Aspects of Entomology. PartsI.andII. 1s. each
part, net. Critical review of the various scientific uses to which the work of
entomologists may be put.

Catalogue of the Palzearctic Psychides. Price 6d. net.

Catalogue of the Paizarctic Lachneides. Price 6d. net.

Catalogue of the Palzarctic Dimorphides, Bombycides,
Brahmeeides, and Attacides. Price 6d. net. These give
all the family, tribal, generic, and specific names, as well as those of all
named varieties and aberrations most useful for labelling.

Reissue of Hubner’s ‘‘Tentamen.”’ (Only two copies of the original
known.) Price 6d. net. A reprint of this rare pamphlet; of the greatest
use to all lepidopterists interested in synonymy.

Books by other Authors.

Monograph of Peronea cristana and its aberrations.
(Chromo-lithograph Plates.) By J. A. Cruarx, F.E.S. Price 2s. net. A
complete review of this polymorphic species, with all original descriptions
and descriptions of new forms, and figures thereof.

Butterflies of Switzerland and the Alps of Central
Europe. GerorceE WHEELER, M.A. Price 6s. net. An interleaved
book dealing with the variations and localities of all the central European
species. Specially bound as a travelling companion.

The South-Eastern Naturalist. (1900-1906.) 15s. per set (7 vols.,
net). Scientific articles by the first scientists of the day. Pror. Francis

Darwin, Dr. Furypers Petrig, etc. The early vols. all out of print.

The Entomologist’s Record and
Journal of Variation.

(An illustrated Monthly Magazine of General Entomology.)
Edited by J. W. TUTT, F.E:S.
Published on the 15th of every Month.

Annual Subscription 7s. per annum.

Price for back volumes, 10s. 6d. each, net. Complete set of 18 volumes, £6 10s.
Special Indexes for Vols. III.-XVIII., 1s. 6d. each net.

No Natural History Library in the world ought to be without a set of
this important Magazine and its indexes.

Each volume is full of important articles of the highest Scientific
interest to Entomologists everywhere.

For all the above works, Postal orders should be sent to J. Hrerrert Torr
119, Westcombe Hill, London, §.E.

;
» i 7,
2 \ , uate “
o* Se “ J cyte |
a |
r 7.
2 .
= » f, J
. ; 4
: ‘ ~ 7% * =
. —_. * .
i - Z .
i ‘ = . ge
‘s , ‘ -" “4 7 >
f
° .
om OI
t ? ~ oe
* te om
ot
= %

ln A ty enn

ees?

SMITHSONIAN | TITUTION

LIBRARIES

(Ain

3 9048 OOUy4TL

nhent QL555.G7T96
v. 5 A natural history of the British

ES RSE
ake
ee
age ea
us
a

SARE

:
Re
iE