36 THE entomologist's record. 



the exact spot where I had taken mine, that he, in June, 1894, also 

 took three specimens at the same place. Now it is a most curions 

 fact that Kane says of this insect, " three specimens at Jiicki, near 

 Sierre." 



We took nothing else of any particular interest at Sierre. I saw 

 one Pieris daplidice — I once saw it very abundant in the hotel grounds 

 — and I caught two or three Thecla w-album, and one or two ('i/anins 

 argioliis. This species is fairly abundant in that part of the valley, 

 though I could never find either holly or ivy on which it could feed ; 

 and further, though L. Camilla and L. sihylla are by no means rare in 

 the Pfyn Wald, there is, so far as I could discover, no honeysuckle 

 in that forest. 



Mr. Merrifield left for home about the 2nd or 3rd July, and the 

 next day I walked over the Gemmi and on to Friitigen, and thence to 

 St. Beatenberg, but with the exception of one Erehia {/lacialis. caught 

 near the inn at Schwarenbach, a few M. athalia further on, and a 

 number of E. ceto, just before reaching Kandersteg, I saw extremely 

 few butterflies of any kind. At St. Beatenberg, with the exception 

 of swarms of Pieris brasdcae and a few A. cratacgi, I saw hardly 

 anything whatever in the butterfly way. 



I found, however, two or three interesting plants on the mountain 

 behind, and though, on the whole, I do not think the expedition was 

 altogether a success from a lepidopterist's point of view, yet the 

 beautifnl weather, the charming Alpine plants and the exhilarating 

 mountain air made our short visit to Switzerland extremely enjoyable. 



On the value of Larval Characters. 



By HAEEISON G. DYAR, Ph.D. 



Professor Grote, in the December number of the EntomolmjiHt' s 

 Record, seems to challenge the entire value of larval characters in classifi- 

 cation. In reality, he does not question the validity of my super- 

 family groups, but attacks rather certain family groupings, on which 

 I am not inclined to insist strongly. I have tried to make clear that 

 the natural family characters do not come out strongly in the larvje ; 

 not so well as in the imagines, as a rule. The definite larval characters 

 are of a higher grade, and define the super-families with some 

 exactness, better, I think, than the neuration. There exist many 

 larval characters for family definition, but they are comparatively 

 recent, and are often blurred by special adaptations. 



After this general statement, I will join issue with Professor Grote 

 on the special point which he has raised. Professor Grote divides 

 the Saturnians into two groups: — 1. — Aglia, Oitheronia, Antonicris. 

 2. — Attaciis, Saturnia, Hemileuca, using as the basis of division a 

 single neurational character, viz., the degree of approach that nervure 

 IV 2 has made to the apex of the cell. He uses this character to 

 establish dichotomous divisions, but improperly so, for it is not here a 

 matter of two different tendencies, such as there would be if nervure IV 2 

 moved toward IV in one group, and toward IV 3 in another. Here 

 the nervure is either stationary, arising in the middle of the cell (as 

 in Automeris), or approaches more or less toward nervure IV^^ (as in 

 Aglia, Saturnia, Hemileuca, in ascending order). It is thus simply a 



