THK CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 57 



according to Prof. Smith) which, as a whole, are smaller, less powdery, 

 and lack that faint ochreous tinge present in all Calgary specimens. In 

 fact, Sir George's figure of incallida resembles the Manitoba form, whilst 

 that o{ lutuknta is much nearer the Calgary series. The two series look 

 more distinct than many recently closely described species in the 

 Noduidce, though the constrast is hardly apparent when single specimens 

 are compared. However, I think it probable that, were more known of 

 the geographical variation of this, as of so very many other poorly-defined 

 forms, we should find that it had more synonyms already than have ever 

 been suggested. Middle July to middle Sept. 



251. E. Laggance^^mxxh.. — Described from Laggan (B. C in error), 

 one ^ (T. E. Bean). The type is in Washington, and is figured in Can. 

 Ent., XXXII., PI. 5, and also in Sir Geo. Hampson's Catalogue, PI. 

 LXIV. The figures bear no resemblance to one another whatsoever. 



252. E. testula, Smith. — The type is a Calgary ^ , and is in the U. 

 S. National collection. It seems to bear no date. I cannot recall the 

 specimen, but from Sir George Hampson's figure I strongly suspect that it 

 is a form of acornis. 



253. E. difformis, Smith. — A single $ at light, Aug. i6th, 1901, 

 which Prof. Smith thinks must be this species. It is, however, not at all 

 like Sir George Hampson's figure of the type. 



254. E. recticinda. Smith. — Described from a single % taken at 

 light, August or September, 1894, and figured vvith the description. It 

 still remains a unique. When more % % oi acornis come to hand, this 

 may prove to be a form of that very variable species. The type is in the 

 Washington Museum. 



255. E. holoberba, Smith. — Described from here. Very rare. July. 

 Treacle. The type is at Washington, and is figured in Can. Ent., 

 XXXII., No. 8, PL 5. 



256. E. objurgata, Smith. — I have taken $ specimens so named by 

 Prof. Smith, and ha/e two or three others which unquestionably fit into 

 the series. To my eye, however, the form is poorly defined, coniing from 

 a grmip of over 70 specimens which have long been a i)uzzle to me, and 

 to individuals of which Mr. Smith has at different times given me diff'erent 

 names. For instance, I am unable to separate one of my co-tyi)es of 

 pestula from Calgary so-called objurgata. I may be wrong, but feel sure 

 that some of these species can never be separated without the most 



February, 1905. 



