406 NOVITATES ZOOLOGICAE XXIV. 1917. 



also feeds on other plants, as at Biskra and southwards there are no tere- 

 binths at all. 



3 Tilghempt, April 1911-1912, W. R., E. H., and Faroult. 



2 Oued N^a, April 1914, E. H. and C. H. 



1 Kef-el-Dor, March 1912, E. H. and C. H. 



157. Hypopta reibellii Oberth. 



Ht/popla reibellii Oberthiir, Etud. Entom. livr. i. p. 4(1. t. 4. f. 1 (1876) (Biakra). 



3 Mauretania, Grum-Grshimailo coll. 

 9 Algeria, Staudinger, etc. 



1 Ain Sefra, Julj' 1915, Faroult. 



158. Dyspessa vaulogeri (Stand.). 



Hypopta vaulogeri Staudinger, Iris, vol. x. p. 155. pi. 5. f. 13 (1897) (Chellala). 



We captured a considerable number at Ain Sefra, 24 in all, and so did Dr. 

 Nissen, but very few in good condition. The J proves it to be closely allied to 

 Dyspessa suavis. 



6 <?,?, 18 ?? Ain Sefra, May 1913, W. R. and E. H. 



159. Dyspessa saharae Luc. 



Dyspessa saharae Lucas, Bull. Soc. Entom. France, 1007. p. 197 (1903) (Zarcine). 



I have examined again carefully the figure of this insect, which is very 

 coarse and crude, and I cannot, any more than Mr. Oberthiir, ventufe to say 

 positively what it is. I, however, have more than a shrewd suspicion that it 

 represents a much rubbed specimen of vaulogeri. Perhaps Mr. Oberthiir will 

 compare my forthcoming figures of cj? of tlie latter with this picture, and then 

 give us a deciding vote. 



ICO. Dyspessa suavis Staud. 



Dyspessa jordana var. suai-is Staudinger, Iris, vol. xii. p. 355. pi. 5. f. 7 (1899) (Bi»kra). 



1 ,?, 3 ?? Bou Saada, May 1911-1912, Faroult. 



1 (J, 1 ? El Mesranc, June 1913, Faroult. 



1 9 El Arich, east of Guerrara, April 1914. E. H. and C. H. 



1 ? Kef-el-Dor, April 1909, W. R. and E. H. 



3 ?? halfway between Ouargla and El Golea, March 1912, E. H. and C. H. 



In the British Museum 1 ? Hammam-es-Salahin, May 1903, Lord Walsing- 

 ham. 



161. Dyspessa fuscula Staud. 



Dyspessa fuscula Staudinger, Iris, vol. v. p. 283. No. 41. pi. 3. f. 10 (1892) (Tunis). 



The members of the genus Dyspessa allied to ulula Borhh. are most difficult 

 to determine, and have led to much controversy. Herr Piingler and many 

 of his colleagues consider them all aberrations of ulula, while others think they 

 are all distinct. I am of opinion that the greater number, viz. marmorata 



