254 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS [J une > ' J 3 



is either a type or co-type, and probably in the Rutger's Col- 

 lege collection. If it is there I overlooked it.* There is a possi- 

 bility that it is not the same species as the type at Washington, 

 though there is nothing in the description to suggest that the 

 two specimens were not exactly alike. Hampson replaces Ar- 

 silonche Led. by Simyra Ochs., and under colorada Smith, de- 

 scribes and figures a Denver male which seems an Arsilonche 

 all right, very near, or identical with henrici, and which is at 

 any rate not a bit like cirphidia. The specimen happens to be 

 greasy. 



Before referring cirphidia to colorada, it will perhaps only 

 be fair to wait and see what Smith's other type or co-type 

 turns out to be. 



Platisenta albipuncta Smith. 



This was described from nine males, eight of them from 

 Harris Co., Texas, and the other from Colorado Springs. 

 Smith sent me Shovel Mt., Tex., specimens nearly ten years 

 ago, and I have a Harris Co. series from Mr. George Frank, 

 who supplied the types. I have no note of the actual type, 

 but have seen a co-type in the British Museum. I have videns 

 from Pittsburgh, Pa. ; Shelby, Ohio ; and Chicago, and have 

 compared a great many more with Texas specimens, and see 

 no reason whatever for keeping them distinct. 



Smith says under the description of albipuncta: "Like 

 videns in appearance, but paler, not so reddish, not so glossy 

 in appearance, and more contrastingly marked." Hampson thus 

 separates them in his tables : 



"Videns. Fore wing rufous" and "albipuncta. Fore wing ochreous, 

 slightly tinged with reddish brown." 



The types of videns Guen., and indigens Walk., are from 

 Florida, and that of atriciliata is labeled "U. S. A." These are 

 one species, as treated by Hampson and Smith. Why albi- 

 puncta should ever have been considered distinct I cannot dis- 

 cover. The differences between a series of each are. at best, 

 hard to find, and I have Shovel Mountain and Pennsylvania 

 specimens absolutely identical. 



*I find that Smith wrote me later that the species was not in his 

 collection. (F. H. W. D.) 



