THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 179 



these to Mr. 1-. B. Prout, thinking it might be one of Walker's species. 

 He writes me that it is the ifidicataria, Walk., the tvpe of which is in the 

 Hiilish Museum, comj.arison having been made with it. Here, I think 

 we have the explanation of Dr. Dyar's reference of //////^/vjif?/-////// to C/eora, 

 but whv he should ignore the name i/uiicaiaria, since one was so labelled, 

 1 cannot explain. The Nat. Mus. specimens bear Dr. Packard's labels, 

 and as he mingled the two si)ecies in his collection, it is quite probable 

 that he distributed them also under one name. Unibrosarhctn is more 

 heavily powdered with black, while iiuiicataria is gray, but rubbed 

 specimens of the former might be taken for the latter. Probably they are 

 mingled in most collections, but I tind innbrosariuin rather rare. Recently 

 I have obtained three males and two females from Atlanta, Ga., and am 

 inclined to the belief that its habitat is more strictly southern than is 

 generally supposed, while indicataria is found throughout the temperate 

 zone. The localities given by Dr. Packard (Mono., page 441) refer 

 mostly to indicataria, and his remarks partly to one and partly to the 

 other species. 



Dr. Hulst ])laces Polygrammaria, Pack., as a synonym of Cleora 

  indicataria, ^Valk. This is an error. The type in the Packard collection 

 is a male having no hair pencil, and belongs to Selidosenia. 



Before me is a male taken in Arizona, which I conclude is this 

 species. It agrees exactly with Packard's description and plate, and in 

 the points to which he calls attention m his remarks. Many of the 

 species of Alci^s, Cleora and Selidosenia are incorrectly placed, as 

 evidenced by their structure. For instance, Haydenata is not an Aids, 

 having no hair pencil ; Dr. Hulst created the genus Soniatolophia, which 

 he states is without hair pencil, and places as its type what 1 believe to be 

 this species. I cannot account for the '•' tufts on first and third 

 segments" of abdomen, which certainly are present in that specimen, and 

 not in any other which I have examined, except that it is or was freshly 

 emerged, and the tufts had not been rubbed off. I know by experience 

 in raising Geometrids that these tufts are detached by a slight wind or 

 touch. Dr. Dyar some time ago called attention to this genus, and says 

 " both genus and species must fall." Perhaps if Haydenata is not an 

 Aids, it may remain as a Somatolophia. Until these groups can be 

 studied and rearranged, this had better stand, however, until a decision 

 can be reached by a study oi all. Again, Dr. Hulst places in the genus 

 Epimecis, Hub., our large (ieomeirid Virginaria, Cram. He charac- 

 terizes the genus as without hair pencil in male. If that be correct, then 

 our species is not an Epiinecis, since it has a hair pencil. 



