334 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



resembles at first sight the male type of dactylina. My identification of 

 this species is correct. 



It may not be quite out of place to say that additional material 

 received in t.Sqq makes it quite certain that the form named, tentatively, 

 Canadensis, on p. 57 of the Revision, is really a good species. 



Acronyda innotata, Gn. The type is a male. 



Acronyda dactylina, Grt. The type is a somewhat crippled male. 



Acronyda contacta, Wlk. The type is a female, and Mr. Grote 

 rightly refers it to Polia. The reference oi di fits His as a synonym is just 

 a little doubtful ; a point to which I will recur in a later paper. 



Acronyda sperata, Grt. Types male and female are here. There is 

 also an example marked " type " in the Coll. Am. Ent. Soc. 



Acronycfa tota, Grt. The type is a male. 



Acronyda pallidicovia, Grt. The type is a small female. 



Acronyda impressa, Wlk., type; Acronyda fasciata, Wlk., type; and 

 Acronyda Verrillii, Grt., type : these are all the same species, and are 

 what Mr. Grote called bruvwsa. There is also a "type" of Verrillii in 

 the collection of the .\merican Entomological Society. 



Acronyda distans, Grt. The type is a male. 



Acronyda superans, Gn. The type is a poor female. 



Acronyda brtitnosa, Gn., type, is the same as A. persuasa, Harv., 

 type, and the same as a male example of A. longa, Gn., which is not the 

 type. There is nothing to warrant the belief that longa was named by 

 Guenee himself, and, as I have shown, the description fits closely to 

 xyliniformis. On the other hand, Mr. Butler was correct in uniting 

 bruviosa and superans, and I was wrong in connecting bruvwsa with 

 subocJirea. It seems likely that there was a mix-up among the larvre 

 described by Giiene'e, and tiiat in this case an erroneous adult was placed 

 with a subochrea larva. 



Acronyda perdita. Grt. The type is a male. 



Acronyda extricata, Grt. The type is a male. 



Acronycta subochrea,Gn., type. A good species, and not ifnp/eta,\V\k. 



Acronyda imp/da, ^Vlk., type. Subochrea, Grt., is not to be associ- 

 ated with this species ; but, on the other hand, luteicoma, G. & R., is, 

 without question, the same species. 



As a result of these notes, Acronycta brumosa in the Revision, p. 1 17, 

 should read subochrea, and corresponding corrections should be made 

 whenever the species there described under that name is referred to. 



I 



