120 
JOHN B. SMITH. 
Several specimens are before me from Mr. Jseumoegen and Mr. 
Bruce, and n<) two of them are alike. One male bears a deceptive 
resemblance in maculation to Valeria grotei, the dark color and con- 
trasting white ordinary spots causing the likeness, others have a very 
decided reddish suffusion through the median space and some are 
entirely concolorous, even, blackish gray. 
The ordinary spots are sometimes well separated, usually quite 
close together, rarely confluent inferiorly. The vestiture is scaly, 
and in appearance the species is associated with my first group in 
which the ordinary spots are usually fused. It is readily distinguished 
from all. The male genitalia are unlike the others of the genus. 
The harpes are narrow, the tip somewhat produced superiorly. The 
clasper consists of a corneous hook with a basal short s])ui\ 
belirensisina Grt. 
This species, unknown to me in 1889, I have identified in speci- 
mens sent me by Mr. Edwards for name. It agrees well with the 
description, but varies excessively in distinctness of maculation, in 
ground color and in the amount of black powdering. The sexual 
characters are unlike any figured in my Revision (Proc. U. S. Nat. 
Museum xii, pi. xxii, figs. 1-5), but resemble most nearly those of 
normalis, save that the clasper is double. 
In the Verb. k. k. zool.-bot. Gesell. in Wien, 1872, p. 502, Zeller 
describes Sedenia (cavifrous) blundulalis, a Pyralid. He says of it: 
“ Frans conica, superne cornea, excavata," using this character to ally 
it with cervalis. The specific diagnosis is short and characteristic : 
■■ Alls albis, anterioribus serieeis, strigis duabus crassis, undulatis, nigris 
$ .” The description is full and careful, and, in connection with 
the figure given on pi. iii, fig. 1-f, leaves no doubt that the s])ecies 
before me is really that intended by Zeller. The locality, Texas, is 
also identical. Mr. Grote has omitted the genus, and apparently the 
species as well, in his List of 1882. A few days ago Mr. Hulst 
handed me the insect, with the remark that Prof. Feruald said it 
was a uoctuid. A glance at the habitus convinced me that this was 
so, and that I had a close relative to some forms which had been in 
my hands for name for some time. Zeller’s description points so 
convincingly to a Pyralid that it could leave no feeling of doubt on 
the reader. He says, among other matters, that the maxillary palpi 
are small, brown, resting on the labial pal[)i. An examination of 
my specimen shows a curious error, induced probably by the con- 
