1899] 285 



irrorated with fuscous in the male ; basal white streak of moderate length and width, 

 black-margined above, and rarely uniting with the first dorsal tooth. First dorsal 

 tooth not 80 proportionately broad and conspicuous as in the last five species. 

 Costal and dorsal teeth neatly black-margined internally, the first costal and first 

 two dorsal ones being also partially black-margined externally. Dorsal margin gene- 

 rally with a narrow white line, or white spot, between the base and the first tooth. 

 At the apex is a black streak, of which the apical end is often conspicuously broad, 

 resembling an oval black spot. Exp. aL, 7 — 9 mm. Posterior tarsi whitish, 

 unspotted. 



Very variable in size, but averaging larger than mespilella, Hb., 

 and smaller than blancardella, F., which two species it most nearly 

 resembles in colour : it has, however, the ground-colour more often 

 mixed with fuscous, and much more golden and less orange than 

 these, whilst from mespilella it is also separated by its usually having 

 a white line or spot on the dorsal margin near the base. The fact that 

 the posterior tarsi are almost invariably wwspotted also serves to dis- 

 tinguish it from both these allies. 



I have compared numbers of specimens, bred from mines found 

 on Pyrus auciiparia in the south of England, with the original type 

 specimens in the Frey collection, and they are clearly identical : more- 

 over, the male genitalia of British specimens agree precisely in every 

 detail with those of continental sorhi. For this reason I cannot 

 accept Mr. Tutt's assertion (Ent. Rec, x, 168), that "it is clear that 

 none of our known British species is sorbi, Erey," based as it was on 

 Lord Walsingham's guarded statement that he had not so far " seen 

 an English specimen agreeing with the continental sorhi., Erey." It is 

 worthy of special notice that Frey mentions as a peculiar habit of 

 so7'hi that the imago emerges through the upper-side of the leaf, and 

 Dr. Wood and I have both independently observed this habit in the 

 British-bred moths which on otlier grounds we refer with certainty to 

 sorhi. Tn the synonymy I have treated L. padella, Glitz, as identical 

 with sorhi. Neither the British Museum, nor any other of our finest 

 libraries that I have tried, contains the volume of the magazine in 

 which Glitz's original description was published, but both the Erey 

 and the Stainton collections include specimens actually bred by, and 

 received from Glitz, from Hanover, as his '^padella" and a comparison 

 of all these with the original type specimens of sorhi, Erey, leaves no 

 doubt in my mind that they are one and the same species.* The late 



* Since this was written Mr. Durrant has drawn my attention to a remark by Herr P. C. 

 Snellen, in VlinJ. Ned. Microlep., 904, footnote 1 (1882), that padella is so closely allied to sorbi 

 that he thinks it not unlikely that they are specifically identical, the only difference he notices 

 being that the ground-coluur of the fore-wing in the former is slightly greener than in the latter. 

 I may add that the ground-colour of sorbi, bred from aucuparia, ia somewhat variable in tone. 



