70 THE CANADIAX EXTOMOLOOrST. 



Alypia Laugtoni, Conper. 



Fourteen ^ and two % specimens received. The males are eight- 

 spotted, the females six-spotted. The male is correctly described by Mr. 

 Couper in the Can. Nat. It is only with difficulty that it can be separated 

 from the male A. octoniaculata. It appears to differ by the parallelism of 

 the inferior edge of the basal sulphur spot on the fore wings with the 

 margin of the wing ; in octoniaculata this spot is oblique. Neither the 

 vine nor Ampelopsis grow on Anticosti, and Mr. Couper states that he 

 has observed A. Langtonii ovipositing on the stems of grasses. I have 

 formerly determined a specimen of A. Langtonii ^ , from Anticosti, sent 

 me by Mr. Strecker, with other species of the genus, as A. 8-niaculata. 



Haemorrhagia iiniformis^ (G. & R.) 

 Hyles cJianiacncrii^ (Harris.) 

 Lethia gordiiis, (Cramer.) 

 Trochiliuni., sp. 



Ten specmiens of a species that I do not venture to describe on- 

 account of the number of unidentified descriptions extant in the group. 



Platai'ctia parihenos, (Harris.) 



As early as 1864, I drew attention to the probability of Mr. Moesch- 

 ler's A?'ctia borealis being identical with the present species, as also to the 

 fact that Mr. Moeschlers papers on the Lepidoptera of Labrador had 

 been written Avithout reference to Kirby or the writings of American- 

 Entomologists. It is unfortunate for Mr. Moeschler that Mr. Strecker, 

 whose acquaintance with entomological literature is so slight, should have 

 been selected to make an unnecessary correction. Until Dr. Packard's 

 later separation of the two species is properly contradicted, I do not 

 understand why they should not be separately cited in S, catalogue. Mr. 

 Couper collected a single female specimen in fine condition, which seems 

 only to differ from Mr. Moeschler's figure by the collar not being all red 

 as Mr. M. paints it, aside from the sexual characters and the greater size. 

 But Mr. Moeschler's description accords perfectly with my specimen 

 where his figure contradicts it. So far as I can see, my specimen in no 

 way essentially contradicts Harris' original description and figure in 

 Agassiz's ''Lake Superior." It is evident, however, that Dr. Packard; 

 separates an allied species from P. parthenos^ as the borealis of Moeschler. 

 Without having seen the material upon which Dr. Packard's two 

 descriptions are based, it is useless for me to express any further 

 opinion. 



