( 471 ) 



with a central Hue of narrow black spots, followed by a cnrved row of black blotchc 

 on the veins, oblong in shape towards costa, ronnd below median, succeeded by a 

 similarly cnrved row of smaller spots, wedge-shaped towards costa and round below, 

 between the veins ; marginal area occupied by a double row of oblong spots 

 traversed by a pale submargiual line ; basal half of costa with three large black 

 blotches, the first trapezoidal, the other two triangular. 



IThuhvings : slaty grey, with the veins darker. 



Underside of both wings slaty grey with blackish veins. Face, palpi, vertex, 

 and patagia black ; collar and thorax deep yellow ; abdomen and legs slaty grey. 



E.xpanse of wings : 52 mm. 



One ? from Ghiriqni, Panama. 



A handsome insect and very distinct from the other species of the genns. 



Stamnoctenis gen. nov. 



A new generic term is wanted for tlie species described by the late Mr. Hulst 

 (Tr. Ani. Ent. Soc. 1896, p. 293), as Xanthorkoc volucer. It is true that the $ 

 antennae are bipectinate ; but a moment's comparison will show its close relation- 

 ship to Stamnodes Gaen. { — Marmoptcnjx Pack.), of which it is an offshoot with 

 bipectinate antennae in S , just as in South America the genus Cophocerotis Warr., 

 with uniseriate antennae in both sexes, is derived from a similar group of insects. 

 Moreover, I cannot help thinking that the identical species had already been 

 described by Mr. Hulst as Marmopteryx morrisata {Ent. Am. ii. 1887, p. 190). The 

 two examples of moi-risafa were ? ? ; those of coluccr (presumably) all c? <? : a fact 

 which may be taken to account for the mistake. The descriptions are exceedingly 

 similar, that of volticer being the fullest. Of four examples from Colorado, the 

 three S S , from Dnrango, are all worn above, the single ? , from Rico, is in fairly 

 good condition ; and though owing to this difference of condition the sexes super- 

 ficially might be taken to belong to different species, the markings are precisely the 

 same, and more particularly the dark line on the hindwings. 



A second species described by Mr. Hulst as a Marmopteryx, will, I fancy, have 

 to be transferred to Stamnoctenis. I have seen only one specimen, a <? not in the 

 best of condition, from Colorado which answers precisely to the description of 

 M. odontata Hulst {Tr. Am. Ent. Soc. 1896, p. 289), but the antennae are fully 

 bipectinate. Unfortunately in the descrij^tion Mr. Hulst has omitted to state the 

 sex, or the number of his specimens, but from the size given, and no attention being 

 called to the unwonted pectination, it may be very fairly presumed that all were ? ? . 



Subfamily HETERUSIINAE. 

 Apodroma gen. nov. 

 Differs from Iletcrusia, first in having the areole of forewiugs double ; secondly 

 in the antennae of the S , which are thickened and flattened, strongly serrate below 

 and rasped above. 



Type : Apodroma siibcoerulea sp. nov. 



88. Apodroma subcoerulea sp. nov. 

 Forewings : blue, speckled with black : costa at base blackish ; marginal half 

 dull black ; the edge of this black portion is curved from middle of costa to vein 3 

 and there angled, preceded on costa by a short white mark, and interrupted at 



