1903.] Q7 



siinihir iiiiinner, (liougli on iliflVreiit iiij^lit?. The iiuiIl- isceiiii'd (Ictcrniiiicd to make 

 tlio most of his opportunity, for liis fciist, wliirli liiid been bef:;uii before 8. 15 .-inil was 

 not eoiieluded at 9.15 p.m., wlien I u^tvin visitetl tlie spot. TIu'sl? observations 

 clearly sliow tliat tiie general belief, that a "sweet tooth" has been altoj^other 

 denied to L. testacea, is quite untenable. — EusTACii K. liANKKa, Norden, Corfe 

 Caatle : December 31.?/, 1902. 



Leucania l-alhum, L., in South Devon. — On October 3rd, 1901, at 7.25 p. in., I 

 liail the good fortune to capture at sugar in South Devon, not UO miles from 

 Plymouth, a great prize in tiie shape of a specimen of Leucania l-alhum. The 

 night was one of those — all too few, alas — on which, with a very warm south-west 

 breeze, and the sky black with gathering rain-clouds, the attractions of sugar seem 

 quite irresistible. On ascertaining that the moth, which unfortunately was ratlier 

 worn, was a female, I was sorely tempted to keep her alive in the hope of obtaining 

 ova, but in view of the facts that there was, at that time, no thoroughly reliable 

 record of the occurrence of the insect in Britain, and that tlie cliances of her being 

 fertile seemed to me decidedly small, I reluctantly determined to kill and set her 

 while still in clearly recognisable condition. I was, of course, not then aware that 

 a fine specimen of L. l-albiim had been taken at sugar at Sandown, Isle of Wight, 

 by Mr. S. J. Bell, about three weeks previously, as recorded by him in Ent. Record 

 for November 15th, 1901, and liad no knowledge of the existence of the example 

 referred to Ent. E,ec., xiii, 376. Tliere is some reason for believing thiit one speci- 

 men of L. l-a/bum was really captured near Canterbury by Mr. F. J. Parry in 1869, 

 as recorded in Entom., iv, 355, though in view of what is known about the reputed 

 productions of that district, the record cannot be accepted with any degree of 

 conGdence, while further captures of the same species near Canterbury, must, of 

 course, not be taken at all seriously. — Id. : January 2nd, 1903. 



Striking sexual distinction in Leucania albipuncta, Fb. — It may be useful to 

 draw attention to an interesting, but apparently little known, sexual distinction in 

 this rare and attractive species. Some time ago, when determining, by an examina- 

 tion of the frenulum, the sex of some imagines, I was at once struck by the fact 

 that every male exhibited, on the under-side, near the base of the abdomen, a 

 conspicuous tuft of black hairs, of which there was no trace whatever in any of the 

 females. A more critical examination showed that this tuft was in reality composed 

 of two converging tufts, arising one on either side of the central line. On subse- 

 quently consulting Mr. C. G. Barrett's " Lepidoptera of the British Isles," v, 173, 

 I found that, while carefully describing the under-side of //. albipuncta, he omits 

 all reference to this striking sexual distinction, though mentioning it in the case of 

 its well-known congener, L. lithargyria. My esteemed friend will, however, pardon 

 me, I feel sure, for pointing out that he inaccurately gives this black tuft as arising 

 on the femora of the hind-legs, whereas it has no connection with these, but is, in 

 both species, attached to the abdomen near the base : this is easily proved by 

 breaking off the abdomen at its junction with the thorax, when all the legs will, of 

 course, remain on the latter, while the black tufts will come away with the former. 

 I notice that Mr. Meyrick in his " Handbook of British Lepidoptera," p. 68, refers 



