THE POLLISTATION OF THE PRIMROSE 321 



April 16 was cold, wet, and windy, at night, and quite unsuited for 

 making any observations. A few moths were flitting about on the 

 first night, but no nocturnal Lepidoptera were seen to visit the 

 Primrose either then or on any subsequent occasion. Three of the 

 four larger Coleoptera {Otiorhynchus and Sciaphilus) were feeding 

 on the petals, while the fourth was apparently devouring the anthers 

 of a short-styled flower. Several of the earwigs (Forjicula) were 

 observed with their heads inserted well into the mouth of the corolla- 

 tube and feeding upon the pollen and anthers. 



One of the slugs was devouring the stigma of a long-styled 

 flower and the other had visibly modified the corolla of another. 

 Several blossoms showed distinct traces of recent visits by Gastro- 

 poda, the silvery trail on the corolla — sometimes also on stigma 

 (long-styled) and andrcecium (short-styled) — being unmistakable. 

 1 have not included in the foregoing list a couple of Lepidopterous 

 larva) which were observed on the flowers — one (April 14) was a 

 small Looper Moth caterpillar, one of the Geometric!®, the larger 

 was evidently some species of Tripheena. I do not think these were 

 more than accidental visitors or of any significance in regard to 

 pollination. It may be added that the various moths of the genus 

 Tripheena are not in evidence until the flowering-period of the Prim- 

 rose is past. 



Five of the species in the above list of nocturnal visitors have not 

 been previously recorded in connection with the Primrose. Com- 

 paratively few plants were kept under night observation, and that 

 for a relatively short period — about two and a half hours in all, — - 

 while the climatic conditions were not too favourable. Mr. Day, 

 who made occasional nocturnal observations at Bryn Goleu after I 

 left wrote (early in May) that he had seen "the usual visitors, 

 snails, slugs, earwigs, thrips, and two kinds of beetles." 



Another visit was paid to Cwm the following year (April 20-25). 

 The climatic conditions on this occasion were fairly favourable and 

 there was less wind, though some nights were rather chilly. The 

 same fifteen plants at Bryn Goleu were visited on five successive 

 nights between 8.30 and 10.30. The periods of observation ranged 

 from ten minutes to an hour and only represented about two hours 

 in all. The following were seen : — 13 Forficula auricularia N., 

 3 Otiorhynchus picipes Fab., 3 O. lic/neus Oliv., 2 Meliyethes picipes 

 Sturm., 2 Limax agrestis L., 2 Helix sp., 2 JPorcellio scaber Lath., 

 1 Araneid. 



The total is nearly double that of the previous list : the more 

 congenial climatic conditions on this occasion and the fact that 

 these observations were a week later may have some bearing on this. 

 Moths were seen flying about the garden on three nights, but none 

 visited the Primroses. Several of the earwigs were again observed 

 feeding on the anthers ; the two specimens of Helix — a much larger 

 snail (probably Helix aspersa Mull, or an allied species) than 

 H. hispida L., which was seen on flowers at Eibistock — were both 

 feeding on corollas, and were probably the same species of snail 

 as observed here by Mr. Day in 1911. The two woodlice (Porcellio 

 Journal or Botany. — Vol. 59. [November, 1921.] z 



