Prof. Frei/, and some American Teneina. 201 



The Professor has clone wisely in stearing clear of the genus Ornix, 

 a very troublesome one to manage, in this country at least. 



The next genus which the Professor takes in hand, is Lithocolletls, 

 and his first species which he calls L. querdtoriim, is evidently L. Fitch- 

 ella, Clem., which had previously been described by Dr. Fitch as 

 Argyromiges qtiercifoUcUa, but the specific name being already in use 

 for another species. Dr. Clemens changed it to L. Fitchella. 



The next species, L. Hagenii, is probably new ; at least, I am not 

 able to recognize in Prof. Frey's description any LitJiocolletis yet made 

 known in this country. 



Then come some remarks on the question, whether a micro which he 

 bred from the leaves, and calls L. Longestriata, is identical with L. 

 Argentifintriella, Clem., a question on which I, of course, can say nothing, 

 not having the insects, nor full descriptions of them. 



Prof. Frey's next species is marked, provisionally, L. alniella, Zell. 

 He does not describe it, but states that he had a male, which, at first 

 sight, he believed to be this species, but closer inspection yields doubts. 

 The Professor has been lucky if he has had either a new or old species 

 from a mine in an alder leaf. With the closest search, I have never 

 been able to find a micro of any kind feeding in or on alder leaves, 

 and had given them up in despair. He also mentions rearing (from 

 what?) a species which he does not name or describe, but which he 

 states resembles the European L. acerifoliella^ Zell., (jC. sylvella of Stain- 

 ton's Nat. Hist. Tin.,) and it is probably L. hamadryadella, Clem. 



I am unable to recognize in Prof. Frey's new species, L. intermedia, 

 any species known to me. It evidently belongs to the same group 

 with L. celtisella, Cham., Avhich is our nearest congener of L. coryli- 

 foliella, as figured by Stainton, Nat. His. Tin., vol. ii., but is nearly as 

 close to L. Vimintella, loc cit. It differs from Corylijoliella, in having 

 the ground color frequently much brighter, much more densely 

 flecked with black ; the first dorsal and first costal white streaks touch 

 each other, are not quite so oblique as in that species ; are very dis- 

 tinctly dark margined, internally, and the rather dense dusting of the 

 apex appears to be on a faint white ground. There are also 

 the usual lines on the thorax. But it is astonishing what a different 

 insect it appears to be when worn or rubbed a little, and even 

 frequently without, in its natural condition ; it is a very variable 

 species, especially as to the intensity of the ground color and markings ,* 

 some species being very pale, and Avith the markings and dustings 

 very indistinct. I am almost persuaded that L. nonfasciella, Cham., is 

 not a true species, and that it was described from varieties or worn 

 specimens of this species. But then there can be no probability that 



