INSECUTOR INSCITI^ MENSTRUUS 43 



No. 1028. Platyprepia does not belong to the Arctiidae. Its 

 family is Hypsidse, which is the same as Pericopidae as here 

 used. 



No. 2751. Deva ornata Ottol., for which I created the 

 genus Rodriguesia, is made a synonym of Chalcopasta hozvardi 

 Hy. Edw., on the bold assumption that the type has a substi- 

 tuted head, as explained by Barnes & McDunnough in a re- 

 cent issue of the "Contributions." I have examined this head.' 

 It is too large; the vestiture is not quite consonant with the 

 mesothorax; the antennae are as bizarre for the genus as are 

 the palpi and front; the type came from Dr. Ottolengui and 

 was prepared by Mr. Jacob Doll, a notoriously clever patcher 

 of specimens. Therefore I accept this synonymy, at least pend- 

 ing the receipt of further material. 



No. 2754. N. sagittalba Ottol. should be resurrected from 

 the synonymy and listed as a good species as 2754, 1. It is 

 larger than poetica and the costal stripe distinctly different. 



No. 2756. N. pendula Otto^. should be "a," not a strict 

 synonym ; it may even be a distinct species. Judgment is diffi- 

 cult, as material in this genus is distressingly scant. 



No. 3220. The subfamily beginning here is called Plusiinse 

 instead of Hampson's unfamiliar Phytometrinae. 



No. 3228. The subfamily name Erebinae is adopted to re- 

 place Hampson's Noctuinae. 



No. 3360. This is a synonym of A. repugnans Hiibner (see 

 Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 47, 425, 1914). 



No. 2SM. This species is called fimbriago Stephens, a name 

 not found in Hampson or Staudinger. Whether it is earlier or 

 later than xanthindyma Boisduval, I cannot say without study- 

 ing over Stephens' works and repeating the labor already per- 

 formed by Dr. McDunnough. Original synonymy like this 

 should not be given in a Ust where all references are omitted. 

 Xanthindyma plainly applies to this form, as Boisduval says in 

 his original description of Cosmophila: "Antennes legerement 

 pectinees dans les males" (Faun, ent. Mad., 94, 1833). Barnes 

 & McDunnough, in a highly excited paper (Cont. Nat. Hist. 

 Lep. N. A., ii, No. 5, 1914), tried to show otherwise and fran- 

 tically quoted Hampson. I never paid any attention to this 



