THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 245 



THE GEOMETRID^: IN "THE MOTH BOOK." 



BY REV. G. W. TAYLOR, WELLINGTON, B. C. 



It'seems a little ungracious to call attention to errors in so excellent 

 a work as " The Moth Book," and presumptuous for a novice to criticise 

 so eminent an authority as its author, but perhaps it is as well for the 

 sake of the many amateur collectors who will name their captures from 

 Dr. Holland's beautiful plates that the few mistakes that seem to have 

 crept in should be pointed out. 



There are four plates upon which species of Geometridse are figured, 

 and I think that in a few cases the names attached to the figures ought to 

 be changed. 



On Plate XLH., figure 25 represents Ahophila pometaria, not 

 Paleacrita vernata. Figure 32 on the same plate is Macaria infimata, 

 as pointed out by Dr. Dyar in the January number of this journal. I have 

 on several occasions received specimens of M. infimata from eastern 

 collectors as Eupithecia absyjithiata. Figure 49 is Petrophora fltictuata 

 not Mesoleuca intertnediata. 



On Plate XLHI., figures 10 and 11 represent Hydriomena 

 exciirvata = Ceratodalia Gueneata, Packard, not Hydriomena custodiata, 

 which is the Ochyria Gueneata, Packard. ^Figure 36 seems to be 

 Deilinia erythreinaria rather than D. variolaria, and figure 39 represents 

 the European form Philobia notata, and not the western American 

 P. enotata. 



On Plate XLIV., figure 2 is an excellent portrait of the Caripeta 

 sedudaria of Strecker, and is not the species figured by Packard in his 

 monograph as C. a?igusiiorata, Walker. I possess both species, and 

 they are quite distinct. Figure 32 is, I think, Plagodis akoolaria, not 

 P. eviargataria. 



I may also call attention to the fact that there are some evident 

 misprints in the " Key to the Families," on page 24, which will, I fear, 

 make tlie use of the key difficult for beginners. 



Lastly, I may point out that Dr. Holland does Dr. Dyar an injustice, 

 unintentional of course, when he says on page 344 that he has overlooked 

 in his catalogue the C/eora atrifasciata of Hulst, for, as a matter of fact, 

 Dr. Dyar has placed that form just where Dr. Hulst himself (see Ent. 

 News, VI., 43) said it should go, namely, as a synonym of Mesoleuca 

 iininanata. I must admit that this appears a strange position for a moth 

 described as a C/eora, and as Dr. Holland has the type it is interesting 

 to know his opinion of its specific value. 



