250 THE entomologist's record. 



The dark suffusion in the marginal area of the females is but a 

 little more intense than in the two males which have a similarly placed 

 darkening. This set agrees- on the whole with the British Museum 

 series of tni.r. 



2. This set consists of two specimens from South France, labelled 

 as var. terranea. One of them in texture and colour suggests that of 

 a somewhat faded ISoctua oleracea ; it has a smoother surface than the 

 other. These examples are smaller than average tni.r, still they are 

 larger than British lunigera, to which they have not the slightest 

 resemblance. 



3. This is a set of three insects from the South of France labelled 

 lunliiera. It is significant that Doubleday did not place this set next 

 to the series of trii.v but in quite a different group of the Agrotids. 

 [" The species stand in the order in which Doubleday left them." — 

 See Official Catalogue.] He evidently did not consider the two 

 species comparable. 



These three insects certainly resemble lunujera in character of 

 marking and even approach that species in colour and texture, but are 

 larger and much more robust, and without the delicate surface so 

 strong a character in the latter. All three are females but not so 

 dark as the average females of British limifiera. The stigmata of the 

 first and third are well developed and emjphasised ; in the second 

 specimen the stigmata are scarcely developed and it is so aberrant that 

 one feels inclined to say that the specimen is hardly co-specific with 

 the other two. The third specimen is quite one-third as large again 

 as average lit^iii/ero. If these are continental representatives of our 

 species hiuii/era, they belong to a very remarkable geographical race. 

 They are certainly separable from tnt.r to which they have little or no 

 resemblance. 



Thus our investigation of what has been done in the past fiftv-six 

 years with the " Poser " which Stainton put out in 1859, shows that 

 his suggestion of placing tni.r and liinii/era "side by side " in the same 

 cabinet has been faithfully carried out. (See the British Museum 

 series which has recently been re-arranged with this suggestion 

 incorporated). But yet we have not reached the consideration of the 

 inference one should draw from Stainton's suggestion, viz., to 

 satisfactorily settle the question as to the specific distinction of tni.r 

 and haiii/L'i-a. Thus far have we progressed in more than fifty-six 

 years. 



From the above facts and observations there are very few ento- 

 mologists but will be perfectly satisfied to consider British Ar/rotis 

 lunifu'va as a good species, and as quite distinct from the continental 

 species known as Agrotis trnx. There is, however, one other line of 

 investigation which has not been used, and that is the comparison of 

 the genitalia of the two species. The genitalia of A. liinii/eya have 

 been figured and shortly described by Pierce, but I do not know if 

 those of A. tni.v have been done. Later on, no doubt, when we can 

 get specimens of the latter species from the continent, the compari- 

 sons can be made, and. this final test applied to confirm the decision, 

 which is so strongly foreshadowed in this article. 



