1901. 1 183 



(1890) ; Stgr. and Wk. Cat. Tp. Eur., 309, No. 2304 (1871). Si/mmoca 

 stcechadelln, Cnst , Aun. Soc. Eiit. Fr., LIII (6.B.) IV (1884), 2G0— 1, 

 PI. X, 23 (1885). 



M. Constant, in describing his S}/inmocn stcBchadelJa, calls attention 

 to the basal joint of the antennae being ^^renjle,''' and suggests that this 

 character, together with certain differences in the neuration, might 

 justify the creation of a genus separated from Si/mmoca, Hb. These 

 differences are such as would remove sfceohadeJla to the neighbourhood 

 of Blnstohasis, 7i. 



I have bred numerous specimens of sttBchadeJIa, Const., from 

 larvfe taken at Agay, near Cannes, in the shoots of Lavandula sfcecl/as, 

 and after a careful comparison with the description of antliophaga, 

 Stgr., also bred from Lavandula, was unable to find any reason for 

 separating the two supposed species. The opinion that they are the 

 same has since been confirmed by the reception of a specimen of 

 antliophaga from Staudinger, and I find in the late M, Ragonot's copy 

 of Staudinger's C^italog a MS. note showing that he was also aware of 

 their identity. 



I hesitate to separate from antJiophriga a rather larger and more 

 clearly marked form bred in some numbers from similar larvae feeding 

 on the same plant at Corte in Corsica. These at first sight would 

 appear to be distinct, the first costal shade being somewhat more 

 widely separated from the discal shade beyond and below it than in 

 the French form, but as this is the only difference observable I prefer 

 to regard them as local forms of the same species. 



/3. ANTHOPKAGA, Stgr. + ROSMAEINELLA, vav. n. 



Two specimens bred from 'Rosmarinus officinalis from the neigh- 

 bourhood of Eeaulieu in 1890 are extremely similar to anthophaga, 

 Stgr. The larvae were taken in April among refuse accumulated by 

 other larvae around the stems and among branches of the plant. 

 These did not emerge until August, therefore much later than the 

 Spanish or Cannes specimens. The difference in the larval habit is 

 also remarkable, and if it should be proved that retarded emergence 

 owing to starvation is not the real reason of their diminished size 

 (barely 12 mm.) I should suggest for them the name rosmarinella, 

 but the only divergence from anthophaga is in the almost obliterated 

 markings, giving a generally blurred appearance to the wing, in the 

 somewhat greyer (less yellow; cilia of the hind-wings, and in the 

 smaller size. 



