1899.] 35 



and Wk., Cat. Lep. Eur., 298, No. 2063 (1871) ;13 Sorhagen, Kleinsclimet. M. 

 Brand., 332 (1886) ;ll Dumans, Bull. So*-. Ent. France, 1892, lxxii.15 



= Anacampsis immaculatella, Stgr. and Wk., Cat. Lep. Eur., 298, No. 2070 (1871). 1^ 



Imago — t,14 vi,9 H 14 vii,9 10 14 Tiii.8 -S 



Hab. : Scotland— Oban (Grfth.). England— Abbotts Wood (Flchr.), Dartford 

 Heath (Stn.), Grange, Lanes. (Stn.), Steyning (Flchr.), Tarrington (J. H. 

 Wood), West Wickham.6— 8 France— Pont rEveque,Calvados.i5 GeemanyS— 

 Glogau,9 Gottingen,10 Hannover, 14 Neustrelitz,9 10 Eegensburg, 9 10 

 [? Wiesbaden]. 12 Austria— Nanos,io Semmering,^ 10 Vienna.'-' lO Carniola.13 

 Switzerland — Bergun,ii Bremgarten,l0 n Lausanne, lo n Ziirieh. lo H 

 Spain — Castile. 13 



A. unicolorella closely resembles A. tenehrella, Hb., but apart from 

 its being rather lighter in colour, not purple-tinged, and as a rule 

 somewhat larger, it may with certainty be distinguished from it by the 

 fact that the terminal joint of the palpi is quite as long as the middle 

 joint, whereas in tenehrcUa the terminal joint is invariably shorter than 

 the middle one. For this reason, Von Heinemann placed these two 

 species in different genera, Lumprotes and Monochroa, but the dis- 

 tinction has been held by Meyrick insufficient to justify such separation, 

 and moreover the name '' Lamprotes " is a homoi^ym. Again, in uni- 

 colorella the antennae of the female are dark throughout, as in the 

 male, whereas in tenehrella they have the apical third white, while the 

 male has them entirely dark. The female of te7iehrella was, on 

 account of its white-tipped antennae, described by Zeller (Isis, 1839, 

 p. 201) as distinct under the name tenehrosella, and it was not untd it 

 had been abundantly proved by breeding from precisely similar larvae 

 feeding together in roots of Bumex acetosella, that their specific 

 identity was generally recognised. 



In justice to Mr. W. Warren, I should mention that in 1S87 he 

 correctly identified as " unicolorella, 7i.,'' some specimens taken in 

 Sussex by Mr. VV. H. B. Fletcher, but Mr. Stainton, in spite of his 

 note in Ent. Mo. Mag., iii, 78—9 (1866), then told him {in lift.) that 

 they represented the species that he considered to be tenehrella, as 

 distinct from fenebrosella, of which the males were unknown, and his 

 remarks prove that he included under the name " tenehrella " both 

 sexes of tmi col or ell a. Dp., and the males of tenehrella, Hb. Staintou's 

 British series of " Tenehrella, Hiib.," consists of eleven specimens, 

 all males, of tenehrella, Hb., and eight examples, representing both 

 sexes, of unicolorella. Dp., whilst his set of " Tenehrella, F. v. E.," 

 includes both sexes of tenehrella, and one specimen of unicolorella. 

 And although in the Douglas collection immaculatella, Dgl., is only 



