84 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



notes, he is better fitted to pass judgment than I, and I wish to thank him 

 for giving me further information on the subject. Packard, on the whole, 

 made very few mistakes, considering the great amount of work that he 

 did, but on difficult groups like Eois and Eupithecia, one wonders how he 

 could put so many different species under one name, on which I shall 

 comment at another time, and in the case of efiucleata, this may have 

 been one of his errors. 



NOTE ON THE BROWN CRYPTOLECHIA {CRYPTOLECHIA 



QUERCICELLA, CLEMENS). 



V,Y ARTHUR GIBSON, CENTRAL EXPERLMENTAL FARM, OTTAWA. 



On several occasions we have observed the leaves of Aspen Poplar 

 tied together by a small yellowish-green caterpillar, but it was not till 

 1907 that we succeeded in rearing the perfect insect and finding out its 

 name. On August 25th, 1906, I collected a number of these larvae on 

 Popuhis tremuloides in the Arboretum of the Central Experimental Farm, 

 and was rewarded on June loth, 1907, by finding that one of the moths 

 had emerged. Soon after that date Mr. W. D. Kearfott, of Montclair, N. 

 J., visited Ottawa, and on submitting the specimen to him, he identified it 

 as CryptolecJiia quercicella^ Clemens. My note taken on Aug. 25th, 1906, 

 reads as follows : 



Larva, 12 mm. long. Head shining jet black, wedge-shaped, 

 roughened ; clypeus reaching about two-thirds to vertex ; mouth-parts 

 brownish. Body pale yellowish green, with a pulsating dorsal vessel. 

 Thoracic shield blackish, brown in centre of dorsum. Tubercles indis- 

 tinct, setae pale. Spiracles round and black. Anal shield blackish. 

 Segment 1 1 has a few blotches of crimson above spiracles. Feet pale 

 brownish. The larva lives in a tent, which is made by sewing two or 

 three leaves together. These tents are conspicuous on the trees. 



In Packard's " Forest Insects," the Brown Cryptolechia is treated of 

 under Insects Injuring Oak Leaves, but Aspen Poplar is also mentioned as 

 a food-plant. The description of the larva there given differs in some 

 respects from that given above of the specimens which I had under 

 observation. 



Errata. — February number, page 53, last line of second paragraph, 

 for "presence" read "absence"; page 54, 9th line, for "female" read 



"femora." 



March, 1908 



