250 BULLETIN 44, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



P. verruca Fabr.* 



1794. Fabr., Eut. Syst., in, 2, 81, Xoctita. 

 1811. Oliv., Eucyc. Meth., viii, 31.5, Nociua. 

 1852. Gn., Spec. Gen., Noct., ii, 342, Plusia. 

 1857. Wlk., C. B. Mus., Het., xii, 906, Plusia. 



omega Hbn. 

 1820. Hbn., Zutrsege, 29, f. 373, 374, Argyrogramma. 

 1852. On., Spec. Gen., Noct., ii, 342, pr. syu, 

 1857. Wlk., C. B. Mus., Het., xn, 906, pr. syn. 



00. Cram. 

 1782. Cram., Pap. Exot., iv, 45, pi. 311, f. E, not F., Nochia. 

 1852. Gn., Spec. Gen., Noct., n, 342, pr. syn. 



1856. Wlk., C. B. Mus., Het., xii, 906, ? pr. syn. 

 omicron Hbn. 



1816. Hbn., Verzeichniss, 251, Autographa. 



1857. Wlk., C. B. Mus., Het., xii, 906, pr. syn. 

 qaesUonis Tr, 



1835. Tr., Scbmett. Eur., Supplt., 132, Plusia. 

 1840. Bdv., Gen. et Ind. Meth., 158, Plusia. 

 1852. Gn., Spec. Gen., Noct., ii, 342, pr. syn. 

 1857. Wlk., C. B.Mus., Het., xii, 906, pr. syn. 



Habitat. — New York to Florida, Texas, Central andSoutli America; 

 Massacliiisetts in Angust; New Jersey in May; Texas in November; 

 Kansas. 



The synonymy above is tliat given by Guenee and after bim by 

 Walker. The latter questions oo Cramer, as the same, but Guenee 

 seems to consider that Cramer had two species under that name, 

 and cites figure E only to this form. Walker makes this the omicron 

 of Hiibner, nee Linnaius. 



P. rogatiouis Gn.* 



1852. Gn., Spec. Gen., Noct., ii, 344, Plusia. 

 1857. Wlk., C. B.Mus., Het., xn, 906, Plusia. 



hamifera Wlk. 

 1857. Wlk., C. B. Mus., Het., xii, 917, Plusia. 



dyaus Grt. 

 1875. Grt., Can. Ent., vii, 202, Plusia. 



Habitat. — New York to Texas; Colorado; South America. 



In the British Museum are types of hamifera and dyaus, and these are 

 unquestionably alike. There are also specimens of dyaus under ^re- 

 cationis Wlk.; but there are no specimens of ro(/atio)iis under the label. 

 In the Berliner Museum, however, is a series of South American speci- 

 mens marked rogationis Gn,, and among them is a specimen from Boll, 

 Texas, exactly like dyaus. Guenee mentions his species as from divers 

 collections, not rare, and gives " Am. Sept." as one of the localities. 

 His comparative description applies perfectly, and though I have not 

 seen absolute types, I make no doubt the Berlin specimens are correctly 

 named and that dyaus Grt., is the same si)ecies. Hamifera is recorded 

 from Brazil and Venezuela, covering thus the localities given by 

 Guen6e. 



I 



