22 THE entomologist's record. 



Xant/idiiniis tli^taiix, Kr. — It is obviously quite impossible for the 

 authors of a catalo.i^Mie to insert or remove insects from the list on 

 such evidence, or want of evidence rather, as shown by Mr, Newbery's 

 notes on this species. Mr. Newbery merely says " are most probably." 

 Has Mr. Newbery seen all the specimens of fli.stans, and if not, what is 

 the value of " most probably " "? It is neither scientific, nor does it 

 lead to accuracy, to make statements of that nature when all the 

 specimens in collections have not been examined. 



{To be concluded.) 



:iglOTES ON COLLECTING, Etc. 



OviPosiTioN OF Heliophobus HispiDA. — I am now rearing some of 

 these larvae from bred parents. I found no difficulty in getting a 

 pairing, but the ? s refused to oviposit unless provided with fiower- 

 heads of grass, on which they laid freely, placing the ovm anywhere 

 along the small branches. I placed the o\a on a potted plant of '/'liticiini 

 rcpenti, and thelarvne are now about three-quarters of an inch in length, 

 and come up to feed every night unless very cold. — Percy C. Reid, 

 F.E.S., Feering Bury, Kelvedon. Deci'iiiher I'dth, 1904. 



Ptilophora PLUMiGERA AT LIGHT. — On December 2nd I captured 

 a 5 specimen of Ptilopliora plainifjera at light. Is not this a very 

 unusual date for this species ? — AV. K. Lister, Great ^Yalton, Eastry, 

 Kent. Decc'Dibio- it/i, 1904. 



Manduca atropos in Ireland. — I have to record that a specimen of 

 Mandiua atrajios was talsen in a house at Bangor, co. Down, on the 

 morning of September yth. — J. E. R. Allen, Enniskillen. Drconbcr 

 Vlth, 1904. 



Foodplant of Thestor hallus. — Mr. Raine sends me a correction 

 as to my notes on the foodplant of T. hallux [Knt. ilec, vol. xvi., 

 p. 284). Mr, Raine says the mistake is his, but if it is not entirely 

 mine, I must at least share it. My note was to displace Lotus /lispidus 

 from the first place on the list of foodplants of T. hallux, and give that 

 eminence to Antlnjllis tctrapJiyllux, which is, at Carqueiranne, the food- 

 plant. The correction now to be made, further displaces Lotus 

 hisjjulus, to the position, probably, of a foodplant, possibly the food- 

 plant at some other habitat of the species. Mr. Raine says that the 

 plant which I took to be Lotua hispid ux, Desf. (and on which he has seen 

 'J'hc-.stur ballus, Colias edusa and var. helice frequently deposit eggs), is 

 iMtuHornithopodioidea, L. " Lotus ornitJiopodioides is," Mr. Raine writes, 

 "very common here and at Carqueiranne, and only on it have I seen 

 T. biillus, ('. edusa, and its var. helice, deposit eggs; I will look out for L. 

 hisjiidus in the spring, and see if it occurs where T. ballus is found, and 

 if it has any attraction for the butterfly." I am not sure that I have 

 seen Lotus hispid us, it is certainly not common, at Carqueiranne, 

 There can be little doubt that T. ballus would eat L. hispidus and 

 many other herbaceous leguminous plants, but this further elucidation 

 makes me still more suspicious that the original statement that T. 

 ballus feeds on L. hispidus, may have been founded on an erroneous 

 determination of A. tetraphijllus, precisely such as has recently 

 occurred, and which I corrected. — T. A. Chapman, j\1 .])., Betula, Reigate, 

 December 1904. 



LePIDOPTEKOLOGICAL notes I'KOM BURNLEV, ETC., 1904. At 



