AN EASY METHOD OF IDENTIFYING CNEPHASIA. 101 



ovipositor of the female, and coiinnitnana, which Kennel and Hofmann 

 evidently consider a good species. 



Mr. A. Thurnall, in a letter to j\Ir. Mansbridge, 26 : 1 : 15, writes: — 

 " WaliUxmiiana I never could make out. It appears to me that this 

 name has been used (in this country at all events) as a sort of entomo- 

 logical scrap-heap on which to pitch all dubious specimens of this 

 difficult genus ! ! The late Mr. Ragonot told me once {in litt.) that the 

 species was a good one and not unlike siibjectana." 



Bankes, hhit. Mo. Mcu/., 1906, p. 84, writes of " the various forms 

 included by Rebel under the all embracing term ira/ilbdwiaiia." 



From the above it is evident that wahlbomiana is a hotch-potch, a 

 group of species to which any dubious specimen can be relegated. It 

 must be left to those versed in the law of priority to state a case as to 

 what should be done with the name ! 



Another difficult point is : What is ahramna .' It has not been 

 possible to obtain specimens for examination, and the only definite 

 particulars to hand are contained in an article by Prof. 0. Hofmann, 

 EntoDioloiiist'ti Annual, 1873, p. 50, where he describes the female as 

 possessing a long ovipositor. As this long ovipositor only occurs 

 among our British species in siibjectana, id follows that abraf<ana could 

 only be confounded with this last named species. Mr. Meyrick writes, 

 " my specimens (Ik'itish) are only $ . 1 see no reason why they 

 should not be unicolorous females of /laaciiana, and this is probable. 

 Kennel does not figure the male genitalia, and therefore probably had 

 also only females, though he does not explicitly say so." 



Mr. Thurnall writes, " With regard to abramna I never saw but 

 two, and these seemed to me simply small melanic specimens of cJinjs- 

 aiitheana such as I have bred (with the type) and captured." 



Barrett, Lep. Brit. Isles, vol. x., p. 271, places it next to siibjectana 

 and describes it, " Forewings short and broad, uniform dark olive 

 grey." His figure is a unicolorous olive-brown. He says, " A very 

 rare species in this country, and one of which next to nothing is 

 known." 



All other collectors appealed to report that they do not possess 

 specimens, and the probable conclusion is that in Britain no such 

 species exists. 



In conclusion, a few remarks on the distinguishing features on the 

 genitalia as figured may be of use. 



In section (a), the Cnephasia group, the important feature to note 

 is the position of the blackish extremity of the sacculus. In this group 

 the four species, c/iii/saiithea)ia, octmiiacnlana, enuniiinuina, and ixisciiana, 

 are the only ones which will present any difficulty. 



In rlinjsatitheana the extremity of the sacculus is seen on the edge 

 of the margin of the valva, u'cll towards the tip. If it appears toicards 

 the centre, the specimen must be either connminana, pascnana, or 

 octoinacida)ia. 



In coinniiinana the edge of the sacculus is very straight, the point 

 turning sharply inwards at the middle. The long narrow wings are a 

 useful guide, and if in addition it be known that the insect was 

 captured at the end of May or in early June, this fact provides further 

 confirmation. 



In jiasrnana the margin of the sacculus is more curved and the 

 extremity emerges at the middle, with rather more of its length free 

 from the valva. 



