94 THE entomologist's record. 



I sent Mr. Bacot in March and April last, Luijla cases from Cannes, 

 from Savona, and from Luino, these were all small, and it was then 

 impossible to say what they were. Those from Cannes i^roved, how- 

 ever, to be L. fercha III fella. At the end of July Mr. Bacot found 

 amongst these a ? moth and a number of newly-hatched larvn?, the 

 remaining cases Avhen I got them were practically dead in August. 

 This date (mid- July) for emergence of L.ferchaultL'lla is about right 

 for England, possibly rather late for Cannes. The cases from Savona 

 and Luino, proved to be L. lajiidella, and produced ? moths from 

 middle to end of September, and two males from Luino, one on 

 September 25th, and one on October 1st, and two from Savona, one 

 October 11th and the other on October 14th, some three months 

 later than they would have done in the habitats from which they 

 were brought; I ought, however, to say that I only judge so by 

 comparison with the general habit of the species, as I never took 

 the imagines in these localities ; the L. lajiiddla from Val Maggia, as 

 we have seen, were so belated as to perish. The L. fcrchaultdla suffered 

 much less by being brought north than the L. lapiddla. I suppose 

 we are justified in correlating this with the different range of the 

 species, /.. fercliaultcUa existing commonly beyond the northern limit 

 of L. lapiddla. 



To return for a moment to /.. iiiaii<iidla, I present this as a good 

 species, and largely for this reason, that if it is not, the fact must go 

 a long way to break down the specific distinctness of the two recognised 

 species. I have but one more isolated fact that tends to support the 

 view that L. lapiddla and L. frrehanltdla are really one species, or one 

 may express it better by saying, perhaps, that the two species are so 

 recently separated, i.e., L. fcrchaidtdla has been so recently derived from 

 L. lapiddla, that it still reverts occasionally to a form like /.. niainiidla 

 that is intermediate. Amongst the Vnitish L. fricJiaiiltdla bred this 

 year by Mv. Bacot Avere some from Lurgashall, of which he has the 

 following notes on July 11th : " Nine out, 8 are calling, 6 are egg-laying, 

 one that was calling on the 8th is still calling, all save this last- 

 mentioned soon ceased calling (within 20 or 30 minutes) and started 

 laying." On the 27th : " No males or any trace of male pup^e, swarms 

 of young larvse hatched out in the jars containing Sandown, Effingham, 

 Brentwood and Lurgashall cases." We have here then in these 

 Lurgashall L. fcivliaiiltdla a definite approach to the L. lapiddla habit, 

 in the case of 1 $ precisely the same as in that species or in L. 

 inaipjidla. 



Amongst the Liirgashall specimens which I received from Mr. Bacot 

 is one still fall of eggs, I assume this to be the specimen we have 

 just been considering. It differs in no way, so far I can find, except in 

 distension by eggs, from the other specimens from the same locality. 

 My knowledge last year of the differences between L. lapiddla and L. 

 fi'ir/iaidtdla, as stated in Tutt's Britisli Lcpidojitcra, vol. ii., pp. 233-234, 

 showed that L. lapiddla had always four joints to all the tarsi, but that L. 

 fcrcltanltdla varied in this respect but never had more than three on 

 the first tarsus. This distinction now breaks down, L. ferchaultella 

 from Lurgashall has four joints to all the tarsi, and so have the speci- 

 mens from C'annes. 1 think the Lurgashall form has also thirteen 

 joints to the antennie, this is more difficult to say than might be 

 supposed as there are usually one or two joints in an antenna that look 



