%\\t imm\k\{ Jiitoittolojobt, 



Vol. XXXIX. LONDON, JUNE, 1907. No. 6. 



STUDIES IN THE GENUS INCISALIA. 



BY JOHN H. COOK, ALBANY, N. Y. 



III. — Incisalia Henricl 

 Previous Paper. — In the Canadl^n Entomologist for June, 1905 

 (Vol. XXXVII, No. 6, p. 216), I published an article in which I pointed 

 out the more obvious differences which serve to distinguish this species 

 from /. inis^ with which it has been confused. In addition to the 

 charactcr.s su|)plied by the coloration of the wings, I mentioned that the 

 male Ilciirici has no discal stigma,* a fact which seems to have been 

 overlooked by other observers. I stated further that this furnished a 

 reliable diagnostic character for the identification of the species, and, 

 inasmuch as irus males invariably have the stigma, the specific validity ot 

 //f«77V/ should be recognized " at least until the test of breeding could be 

 ajiplied." Being, at the time, unacquainted with the life-history of either 

 species, and being unwilling to express hasty and possibly premature 

 conclusions, I did not feel wholly warranted in holding that AV. H. Edwards 

 was right and Dr. Scudder wrong in their respective opinions concerning 

 the butterfly bred by the former, l-^d wards described the early stages as 

 those of Henrici, but Scudder, not recognizing Henrici as a species, 

 2,\^'<^\\Q^ \\\ii.\\\( all excepting the egg) \o iriis. I took the ground that we 

 were justified in withholding judgment in the matter until further facts 

 were discovered. Since there did not appear to be any strong probability 

 that another would supply me with the necessary facts, I set about getting 

 them for my.=elf Having succeeded in breeding both species side by side, 

 from egg to imago, both parents being known in each case, I can now state 

 positively that Edwards bred Henrici (as he stated) and not irus^ and that 

 his descriptions of the early stages are correct to the minutest detail. 

 Moreover, Scudder was in error in quotir^' the description!; of the larval 

 and pupal instars under the caption irus. The two species differ so 



*In his " Biblioffraphy of Canadian Entomolog}' for the year 1905." Dr. C. J. 

 S. Bethune has credited me with having: stated that " wwt? males .... are 

 without the characteristic stig-ma." A careful reading- of the article will, I think, 

 make it apparent that the statement was intended to cover all the males. 



