394 THE CANADIA.N ENTOMOLOGIST. 



A.," and my note on it 1=, "pale ochreous, black marked, slightly rufous- 

 banded." 



I have not yet seen any real intergrades between the forms above 

 tabulated, though the species is often extremely common in the latter part 

 of the summer, and the larva very destructive as a cutworm in this district. 

 I have, however, no reason for doubting their unity. 



Grote twice published a translation of Guenee's description of 

 ochrogasier, and in Can. Ent., XXXIII, 178, points out that it does not 

 seem quite to fit any form of the species we call by that name. Its author 

 compares it with Noctua pleda. In addition to the discrepancies pointed 

 out by Grote, I have never seen a red form which had a conspicuously 

 paler collar, though I do not see why such a form might not occur. But if 

 Guenee were really describing what we have been taught to believe, it 

 seems strange that he should have omitted to mention one very striking 

 difference between this form and/Z^t'/^z, viz.: the colour of the secondaries, 

 which in //^^Az are usually most conspicuously pearly-white. Sir George 

 Hampson, however, lists a variety of plecta from Sweden, anderssoni 

 Lampa, with fuscous secondaries, though Staudinger does not mention 

 thi=! character. Neither doesTult in "British Noctuae and their Varieties," 

 ii, 126-7, or iv, ^i^- Guenee's type is in Mr. Obertlmr's collection, I 

 think, at Rennes. The species figured by Holland as ochrogaster is, as 

 already mentioned, declarata Walk. 



269. E. idahoe?isis Grt. — I have a Calgary specimen of the grayish 

 form compared with the male type from Idaho in the British Museum. 

 JFurtivus was described from three females from California. I saw types 

 in the Brooklyn and Washington Museums. One at Brooklyn was labelled 

 "Sierra Nevada." But another type there, and one at Washington were, 

 according to my notes, labelled "Colorado." The locality is mentioned 

 in Smith's Catalogue, though my notes on types may err. The variation 

 -was from gray to red, but I thought that all were one species, and the 

 same as idahoensis Grote. I think this is probably correct, but do not 

 feel sufficiently sure about it to risk the reference definitely at present. If 

 two species are involved, then the types oifurtivm may be a mixture. I 

 should not think so were it not that there appear to be two species at 

 Calgary, as I still have two series as I originally diagnosed them, and they 

 do not appear to overlap. In Vol. XXXVII, p. 146, bottom line, after 

 *'species," insert "colour red-brown." I may after all be wrong in thinking 

 them distinct, or it may be that my No. 270 is undescribed. Hampson 



