184 THE entomologist's record. 



the cavilling which has given rise to this article, or to that of the 

 entomologists who oppose work of this kind. (8) Zenobia, Oken 

 (Lehr. ZooL, p. G81, 1815), was a mixed genus, being proposed for oo, 

 (lelphinii, and irtusa ; the two former having been made the types of 

 good uionotypical genera, it seems best to declare retiisa to be the type 

 of Zenobia. The generic synonymy of the last-named species is already 

 in a state of confusion, and it will be little or no loss to have to 

 resuscitate Zniobia for it. Not only has Tethea, Ochs., been variously 

 applied by various authors, but Boisduval in 1829 {Ear. Lep. luil. 

 Met/t., p. 58) rejects it as pre-occupied by Tethi/a (Oken) " genus 

 Polyporum." Should Boisduval's opinion not be maintained, I may 

 point out that Samouelle in 1819 cites irttisa, .siibtK-'ia and riflens as 

 types of Ti'tht'a,iind that this restriction was certainly prior to Hiibner's 

 (to iliijdaris and fiacttiosa) ; Stephens, following Samouelle, rightly 

 rejected ridcns, and retained retitsa and >tiibtii.!ia. (9) Aniphipijra, Ochs., 

 should be used for trcuiopoijonh, L., which Duponchel specified as its 

 type; it can hardly be considered congeneric with Pi/ropJiila jn/rainiilea. 

 (10). C. cruciata, Enoch, in my list, was of coui'se a lapsus for Hctero- 

 ijenea cruciata : I did not for a moment mean to imply that I thought 

 it congeneric with ('ochlidioii Uniacodcs. — L. B. Prout. March WtJi, 

 1901. 



Rapidity of wing-growth in Cyclophora (Zonosoma) pendularia, 

 Cl. — On looking into a box containing some pupje of the above-named 

 species, at exactly 3.20 p.m. to-day (May 13th), I noticed a male in 

 the very act of emerging from the pupa-case. I removed it into a 

 glass-bottom box, and, on looking again at 3.28 p.m., I noticed that 

 the wings were already nearing full growth ; I then watched them 

 closely and found that they attained their full size at 3.30 p.m., the 

 tips, however, still very slightly curled outwards ; at 3.32 p.m. these 

 had completely straightened, and the wings were beginning to assume 

 their final rigidity. I do not suppose this betokens abnormal rapidity 

 of development for this species, and it certainly does not equal that of 

 some Psychids {cf. Tutt, Brit. L<'j>., ii., p. 331) ; but as there seem to 

 be too few exact observations recorded on the subject, I think it 

 desirable to publish this note. — Ibid. 



Shape of Gaixs, etc. — Referring to Mr. Bignell's note {antea, 

 pp. 126-127), I may say that when writing on the formation of the 

 gall {antea, p. 20) I was thinking both of those of the TcntlirccUnidae 

 and the Ci/nijridac. Of the galls formed by them, Cameron says: " In 

 the Tentkredinidac the gall is already formed before the larva leaves 

 the egg, while in the Cipdpidae the birth of the larva is synchronous 

 with the formation of the gall." I ought, therefore, to have written 

 " How the mere oviposition in the leaf or bud or the presence of the 

 larva should cause such a different growth in the dift'erent species is a 

 great mystery " — not less I think in one case than in the other. I 

 have put in italic the additional words. — (Rev.) E. N. I>loomfieij), 

 M.A., F.E.S., Guestling. April 2Gth, 1901. 



The anterior and posterior legs of insects. — The writer of 

 " Current Notes" in the Kntonud'njisVs llccord for April, 1901, objects 

 to my definition of the terms "anterior" and "posterior," in reference 

 to the legs of insects. Does he not know that the comparative degree 

 applies to the comparison of one thing against one other thing only, 

 but that the superlative degree is a comparison against all others ? 



