THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 113 



NOTES ON ENTOMOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE. 



Part II. 



BY W. H. EDWARDS. 

 (Concluded). 



In coitus 26 are 4 species, 3 of which are put in Myrina Eab., one 

 of the genera of the Lycaeninae, and 1 in Euselasia Hub., of the 

 Lemoniinae. But the coitus Euselasia is in the other Tribe, and third 

 Stirps of same, the Napaese ! 



Second Stirps Archontes (Papilio, etc.), 1st family Heroici, 2nd coitus 

 Jasonides, under which stand Machaon and Turnus. Third coitus 

 Euphueades, under which stand Glaucus (black female of Turnus), Troilus 

 and Asterias. That is, according to the Hiibnerian view, Turnus is 

 nearer to Machaon than to its own female, and Glaucus is nearer to 

 Asterias than to its own male ! In Scudder's Revision he puts Asterias 

 in the genus Amaryssus Dalman, and Glaucus into Euphceades Hiibner, 

 bringing Turnus out of Jasonides to join his mate, and puts Troilus into a 

 new genus, calling it Pterourus Scopoli, 1,777. But m tQe Hist. Sketch 

 he sees fit to condemn Scopoli's Pterourus with ignominy, in spite of the 

 inexorable, on account of " the incongruity of the materials of which the 

 genus is composed." However Scopoli's group only contained Papilios, 

 Theclas, Hesperians and heterocerous moths, and why it should be so 

 treated when Hiibner' s amazing coitus are called generic and made much 

 of, is not clear to the average mind.'- 4 But as it would not do to leave 

 Troilus outside because of Scopoli's bad taste, Mr. Scudder felt compelled 

 to utilize Jasonides, and into it is* now thrust Glaucus, with which the 

 ghost of Hiibner may well feel disgusted. After he had gotten his little 



* I have taken some pains to compare the coitus names with the generic names 

 given in the Hist. Sketch, to see if any had been rejected on account of the "in- 

 congruity of the materials," but in no case do I discover that this has happened. 

 In Callidula, where the Sketch says the coitus is made up of one butterfly and two 

 moths, the author merely suggests that the " genus may be referred to the hetero- 

 cerous lepidoptera. " Had there been two butterllies and one moth, he Mould have 

 referred it to the butterflies. 



