THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 101 



NOTE ON GRAPHIPHORA, HUBN. 



BY A. R. GROTE, A. M., BREMEN, GERMANY. 



On page 92 of the Bulletin U. S. N. Museum, No. 28, Prof. Smith 

 says : " Mr. Butler says augur is the type of Graphiphora, Ochs., in 

 Nvhich case the application of the name to the Tae?iiocampa series by Mr. 

 Grote would be unwarranted." I never fixed the type of Ochsenheimer's 

 genus Graphiphora. What I did was to fix the type of Hiibner's genus 

 Graphiphora (see Check List, Part II., 1876, p. 37). Hiibner proposes 

 the name in the Tentamen for gothica, which, as it is the only species 

 given, is therefore the type. Afterwards, in 18 16, Ochsenheimer, 4, 68, 

 includes ravida and 16 species not separable from Agrotis. Hubner's 

 type, gothica, Ochsenheimer includes under Episema. By what process 

 Mr. Butler assumes augur as the " type " of Ochsenheimer's genus is 

 unknown to me. In any event Hiibner's genus Graphiphora has pre- 

 cedence for Taeniocampa of Guenee'. 



I may here also correct a misapprehension of Prof. Smith's with regard 

 to the use of vetusta by Mr. Walker. On page 212, 1. c, Prof. Smith 

 says : " Mr. Grote has suggested that this (/. «?., Agrotis vetusta, Walk.) 

 may be the same as viurceiiula, G. & R., but this can scarcely be so if the 

 description is at all to be relied upon." In reply I would say that I never 

 suggested that ^^/-^//.y vetusta. Walk., ^SiS = murcenula,h\i\. that Mames- 

 tra vetusta, Walk., might be that species (see Essay, p. 43.) It appears 

 that Walker has two vetustce, consequently Prof. Smith's apprehension 

 that inurcenula may come to be discarded for either of them, proves 

 groundless. 



From an examination of Walker's type of Mamestra insuisa I came 

 to the conclusion that it was probably an Agrotis. Prof. Smith says, 

 Bulletin, p. 209 : " Mr. Grote, whose reference of the species to Agrotis 

 has been followed, gives no suggestion as to the species it most resembles, 

 or where its allies are to be found." On page 43 of the Essay, where I 

 make the reference, I say : "The specimen (from Canada) is evidently an 

 Agrotis, allied to Repe?itis, and unknown to me." 



