THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 343 



One is creamy whitish, as mentioned in my former notes. The 

 series shows a gradation through. 



Fasciatella Grt. is entirely distinct, and I have no authentic 

 Canadian record. Hampson places it by itself in Fruva Grt. I have an 

 Arizona specimen compared with the type in the British Museum, 

 from Texas. 



417. Drasteria erechtea Cram. — The species I have listed 

 under this name is apparently that of which Holland figures both 

 sexes on PI. XXX., figs. 14 and 15, the latter figure as crassiiiscida. 

 Of local captures I have at present twenty-five males and three 

 females. 



418. D. crass iuscula Haw. — I have taken no more females 

 than the one I previously referred to. Males, of course, I am un- 

 certain about. 



419. D. distincta Neum. — Under this heading in my previous 

 notes, Vol. XXXVHI., p. 47, line 8 of the note, instead of "for 

 these species," read "for three species." It was a printer's error, 

 and the correction is an important one, as the point I wished to 

 emphasize was not that I had gone to the trouble of verifying the 

 names, as far as that was possible, but that I was under the im- 

 pression that I had taken three allied species in Alberta. I have 

 recently spent some hours studying the group again with the aid 

 of material from other localities, and have found no reason to alter 

 my opinion. Separation into three species in Alberta is quite easy, 

 excepting, of course, with males of erechtea and crassiuscula, but I 

 have much difficulty in coming to a decision about some outside 

 material. For instance, I have males from the eastern coast which 

 are superficially inseparable from my local males of distincta, but 

 no females at all like mine, which differ very little from the males. 

 From Vancouver Island I have females of crassiuscula and erechtea 

 and a series of thirteen good males, which probably includes both. 

 Another species from there is about the size of Alberta distincta, 

 but shows very much stronger sexual dimorphism. The males are 

 like dark and ochreous distincta, but the females are not unlike 

 very small crassiuscula, though the subapical black marks are 

 usually lacking. It seems not unlikely that we have a fourth 



