M^OVITATES ZOOLOCICAB XXI[. 191S. 3l9 



ami absence of definite crests refer it to Neromia. Palpus still shorter than in the 

 species named, reddish-ochreons (not whitish) beneath. Abdomen dorsally mixed 

 with black on the segments which bear the crests in atridisca. 



Wings slightly bluish green. Forewing rather more pointed, hindwing less 

 elongate, discal dots mnch smaller, postmedian line somewhat more visible between 

 the veins (lunnlate-dentate), terminal line and fringe almost as in L. annnUgera 

 Swinh., the former brown, the latter white, spotted with brown at vein-ends. 



Congella, Durban, November 18, 1904 (G. F. Leigb). Type in coll. Rothschild. 

 Umkomaas, January 27, 1914, a c? in coll. A. J. T. Janse. 



Very distinct in coloration, etc., from all other Neromia. 



19. Neromia clavicornis sp. nov. 



c?, 29-33 ram. ; ¥,38 mm. Superficially like ruhripunctilla Front, but larger, 

 rather bluer green, more strongly irrorated with whitish, the red discal dots rather 

 less minnte, foreleg more strongly red ; quite distinct in the c? antenna. Structurally 

 like phoerdcosticta Front, forewing with apex slightly more pointed, the termeu 

 being straighter and rather more oblique, postmedian line rather thicker, not 

 crenulate, further (4-4'U mm.) from ternien, discal spots much smaller. The 

 variation is also as in phoenicosticta — SC of forewing free or anastomosing with 

 (J, R' of forewing and M' of both wings short-stalked or just separate, dor.sal ridge 

 of abdomen and tips of fringe sometimes (1 S) crimson, sometimes (1 cj, 1?) 

 wliitish. 



Selukwe, S. Rhodesia, August 1913, 2 c?c? (type and another), April 1913, 1 ?, 

 all collected by F. W. Short and presented to my collection. 



I have long hesitated whether this might be a constant aberration or form of 

 phoenicosticta, and even now do not think the possibility absolutely precluded, 

 though the ? palpus seems to have slightly longer third joint ; the difference of 

 wing-shape is quite appreciable, and I have seen no intermediates. In both, the 

 antenna is reddish rather than (as given in the description of phoenicosticta) 

 " ochreous " ; in phoenicosticta, so far as I yet know it (2 c? (?, 3 ? ? ), the colour- 

 difference in dorsal ridge and fringe is sexual. 



20. Lathochlora perversa sp. nov. 



? , 20-2C mm. Face dull olivaceous, somewhat mixed with reddish above. 

 Palpus rather short and slender, second joint smooth, third joint small ; tongue 

 developed ; antenna pubescent ; vertex pale greenish : thorax and base of abdomen 

 concolorous with wings ; abdomen dorsally with dull red spots on segments 2-4, 

 slightly mixed with fuscous at the posterior extremities of the segments. 



Forewing with termen not prominent at R^ ; M' well stalked ; grey-green ; 

 costal edge dull ochreous, spotted and strignlated with black ; a large discal spot 

 and two lines ochreous, probably discoloured from green, chiefly indicated by spots 

 on the veins and the antemedian at posterior margin ; postmedian from two-thirds 

 costa, strongly incurved between radials and again between M' and SM'' ; terminal 

 line not darkened, slight indications of pale dots at vein-ends ; fringe concolorous 



proximally, less green distally. Hindwing with pronounced angle at R^ but not 



at R', only the slightest suggestion of sinuosity between ; discal spot, postmedian 

 line, termen and fringe as on forewing. 



Under-surfiice dirty whitish, least pure in basal and costal region of forewing, 

 costal edge of forewing nearly as above, the black marking somewhat reduced. 



