THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 143 



FURTHER NOTES ON ALBERTA LEPIDOPTERA. 



BY F. H. WOLLEY DOD, MILLARVILLE, ALBERTA. 



(Continued from Vol. XL, p. 193, June, 1908.) 



During the course of studies at my own and various other collec- 

 tions, I have paid far more attention to variation in colour and maculation 

 than to structural characters upon which "Genera" are based. I am 

 strongly of opinion that by far too little importance is usually attached to 

 these characters in articles published on Lepidoptera on. this Continent. 

 I have no wish to under-rate the value of many structural characters in 

 showing the relationship and phylogeny of forms. But though, theoreti- 

 cally, a tabulated key of genera should enable a student to identify an 

 unknown species with far greater ease than where no such key exists, it is 

 a deplorable fact that I have noticed some far worse mixtures of species, 

 and often of very distinct genera, in collections owned or supervised by 

 systematists, than in many of those of collectors who make no pretense of 

 studying generic characters at all. It may be asked, "How can I prove 

 it ?" I can at present only offer the dried specimens themselves as evi- 

 dence, it is true, and in the knowledge of many very variable species there 

 can be no such thing as certainty, except by careful breeding from known 

 parents. But in the case of little varying forms, there is such a thing as 

 knowing a species by sight, and suggested errors have in very many 

 instances been borne out by non-related, or at least admittedly disasso- 

 ciated points of structure. 



This state of affairs is, it seems, due to several causes. Nowadays, 

 unless a student classifies by structure and dissects, and publishes articles 

 on these lines, his work is not considered of much value. It is too ele- 

 mentary ! Systematic work unquestionably is of high value, but close 

 attention to such limits the time necessary for familiarization with the 

 species separated by its aid. Then again, most of these systematic workers 

 direct their attentions to so many different families or orders that their 

 knowledge becomes too general. And another reason, perhaps coincident 

 with and resulting from both the foregoing, may be that, once their system 

 is laid down, their work is too hasty. 



Frequently in looking over other collections I have been struck by 

 the small amount of material exposed for study, even where much more 

 was really available. It is obvious that lack of both time and space has 

 often been the reason for that, but it, nevertheless, suggests that variation 

 is not studied as it might be. One notable exception was in the American 



Mav, 1911 



