1865.] 235 



Prof. Foey's collection, Avhich show an extent of variation that leaves 

 no doubt on my mind that l\ oriiafn'x is merely a form of that species. 

 To a specimen which actually corresponds with the figures of U. orna- 

 trijc of Drury, Cramer and Iliibner, and which I have also received 

 from the West Indies, there is a perfect gradation of obsolescence in 

 the marking-s of the upper surface of the primaries, from the typical 

 form described under the specific name of hella, by Liunocus. The 

 fii-st specimen above f. oriiafn'.r, exhibits one or two disconnected dots 

 of the transverse macular bands of U. hella ; in this specimen the pos- 

 terior wings correspond exactly with the figures and with the specimen 

 of U. ornafn'x, which I have before me. The markings of the posterior 

 wing's are so variable that no specific character can be drawn from their 

 ornamentation. From a specimen in which these are largely taken up 

 with black bands and markings, to one entirely pink, with no black, 

 except a narrow broken terminal line, there exist all sorts of variation, 

 too numerous to describe, but sufficiently to be understood by the two 

 extremes. The under surface presents no specific characters by which 

 the two species might be separated, neither do the caputal, thoracic and 

 abdominal parts. I seem, therefore, authorized to unite these two spe- 

 cies, while I am not decided as to the value to be acceded to the form 

 hitherto known as U. ornatri.r ; intermediary individuals will probably 

 prove as plentiful as either form, and it is perhaps better to consider 

 them all as constituting one variable species which may retain the name 

 of Utctheisa hella. I am doubtful that Deiopeia apeciosa Walker, is dis- 

 tinct from the present species. The description in the C. B. M. is in- 

 sufficient to separate the species from D. hella ; indeed it corresponds 

 accurately with the specimens of Z). hella from Cuba, in which the usually 

 orange-colored primaries are more or less red or pink. With regard to 

 Utetlicisa (.?) aurea^ (Deiopeia aurea Fitch) supposing Dr. Fitch's generic 

 reference to be correct, I must consider it to be a distinct species, having 

 seen no approximation to the description in the specimens of U. hella 

 that I have hitherto examined, while its smaller size indicates its spe- 

 cific distinctiveness, since i\ hella is remarkably constant in alar ex- 

 panse. I refer to some interesting remarks on the variability of U. 

 hella, by Dr. Packard, in his paper on the Bombycidje of the United 

 States, and briefly mention here an extraordinary accidental variety 

 which I find among Prof. Poey's specimens. This is a female speci- 

 men in which the anterior wings display the normal ornamentation of 

 U. hella, though the ground color is red, (D. specwsa Walker) not 

 orange-yellow, but the secondaries are sub-hyaline with pale testaceous 



