THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 77 



Proc. of the Academy of Natural Sciences, that " C. nupera appears to 

 me to resemble the European C. exoleta, rather than C. curvitnacula, in 

 opposition to Mr. Morrison's opinion on the subject." I intended to 

 dissent from Mr. Morrison's assertion that C. curvitnacula may stand for 

 the American representative of C. exoleta, by showing that C. nupera was 

 nearer both the European species than C. curvitnacula. In regard to the 

 position of solidaginis, I consider it the type of a distinct genus, following 

 Hiibner and Stephens. Guenee refers the species to Cloantha, Lederer 

 to Calocampa. Now that we have a closely allied North American repre- 

 sentative, and that Mr. Morrison himself gives us at least a single 

 "material structural difference," I feel warranted in considering my 

 adoption of Lithomia for solidaginis and germana authoritative and 

 reasonable. A. R. Grote. 



ON ADITA. 



Dear Sir,- — 



Mr. Morrison recently corrects my statement that the tibiae are spinose 



in this genus. Mr. Morrison says that " the only spines visible are the 



pair before the spurs on the middle tibiae and a single spine (there 



possibly may have been two) between the two pair of spurs on the hind 



tibiae." I have re-examined my specimen, and I find on the outside of 



the middle tibiae a series of eight spines in irregular pairs before the 



spur, besides several finer spines, and on the hind tibiae three spines are 



plainly visible. The spines frequently break off, as has been noticed by 



European Entomologists. Perfectly fresh specimens will probably show 



he presence of more spines on the hind tibiae. The fore tibiae are 



furnished with a stout, terminal claw. 



A. R. Grote. 



In reply to Mr. Morrison's enquiry as to the propriety of retaining 

 Cirroedia Guen. (1839) instead of Atethmia Hubn. (18 16) for a genus 

 of Noctuidae, I would state that I gave the subject careful consideration 

 when preparing my " List." I was finally led to adopt the older name 

 from the following considerations. Dr. Herrich-Schaeffer (Corr.-Bl., 75) 

 remarks that he doubts the validity of Guenee's genus Atethmia for the 

 South American species. The point is here as to subusta, of which Mr. 

 Morrison says that it is " South American, " as if he were giving a struc- 

 tural character. Again, Atethmia is dated 1816, and although Hiibner 



