42 THE entomologist's record. 



sional phenomeucil abundance of certain species in certain districts, 

 and other complex and probably closely interrelated problems, can 

 never be successfully attacked without the prior accumulation of a 

 large amount of reliable facts, as the result of organised systematic 

 observations, carefully carried out over a Considerable extent of both 

 time and country, rather than by the fitful, haphazard, and fortuitous 

 " methods " at present in vogue. 



Some genera of the Amorphid and Hemarid Sphingids. 



By J. W. TUTT, F.E.S. 

 In British Lepidojitcra, iii., p. 386, I have noticed Bacot's sugges- 

 tions re the phylogeny of the Amorphid Sphingids, of which MiiimK 

 tiliae, Si»ryi)ithiis nvcUata and Amorji/ia ixipHliave the three representa- 

 tive British species. Based on these suggestions, I drew up, for use 

 in my Avork, the following tribal divisions of the subfamily Amor- 

 p/iinae : — • 



1. MiMANTiDi. — Mimas (tiliae). 



2. SiCHiiDi. — Sichia (quero'is), Biirroicsia. {w.^eipenni'i), Kai/eia [iitanckii). 



3. S:*ii''.RiNTHiDi. — Duddia (kindenn/nini), Bcllia (caecum), Smcrintliuti (ocellata), 



Nicholsonia (saliceti), CalasyniholiDi [astylus). 



4. Clakkiidi. — Clarkia {disHimilis) . 



5. Amokphidi. — Triptogon {modeata), Amorpha {jJopuli). 



Before creating a number of new genera to illustrate my views of 

 the relationships of the species, 1 enquired of the authorities whether 

 generic names were available for the various subdivisions I suggested 

 making, and was duly informed that, so far as could be ascertained, I 

 should be perfectly justified in proposing the names Sichia, Burrowsia, 

 Kaijeia, Daddia, Bcllia, Xicholsania, and (Jlarkia, and I did so, naming 

 them after well-known lepidopterists in the City of London Entomo- 

 logical Society. In a recent correspondence with Mr. Kaye, I learned 

 that 1 had not been quite correctly informed about the matter, and 

 that my genus Clarkia fell before L'hijllosphingia, Swinhoe, dissijiniia 

 being the specific type of the latter and older genus, as well as that of 

 my (Jlarkia. 



Both the scope of my work and the space at disposal precluded my 

 describing these genera at length, and I have been informed that the 

 genera, being without descriptions, would, by some lepidopterists, be 

 held to have no standing. On this rule ('?) i hope to have something 

 to say some day. However, to simplify matters, and in order to meet 

 such objections, I have recently obtained the following generic diagnoses, 

 and now publish them, so that the heathen may have less cause to 

 blaspheme. 



The list published {luc. cit., p. 386), may be modified as follows : — 



I. MiMANTiiu. — 1. Mimas, Hb., Verz., p. 14'2 {circ. 1822). — Mivias tiliae (type). 



II. BicniiDi. — 1. Sichia : Palpi broad, very truncate when viewed from beneath, 



projecting level with head when viewed from above, dark brown in strong 

 contrast to general straw colour of underside. Antennte in d with 

 exceeding strong pectinations. Forcwing with very dentate hind margin. 

 Ilindwing very much less so, and hardly excised between vein 6, 7 ; 

 beyond vein 7 evenly curved to costa. Forewing with central pale broad 

 fascia, and with the transverse lines not sinuate and fairly straight. 

 • Abdomen robust — Siclnci (juerci'ti (type). 



2. Ihirrowaia : Diagnosis not yet made. 



6. Kaiieia : Palpi rounded, not visible from above. Antennas with tufts of 

 hair forming pectinations reduced to a few bristles. Forewing short (for 



