280 THE entomologist's record. 



Some British aberrations of Polyommatus astrarciie, Bgstr. 



By J. W. H. HA.RRISON, B.Sc, F.E.S. 



Poli/oDi Hiatus astrarciie, like many other " Blues," was a little- 

 understood species until it was finally diagnosed as a distinct species 

 by Bergstrilsser in 1779. Previously, owing- to the sex distinction 

 being marked in most blues by the colour, it had been passed over as 

 a variety, I think, of /'. Icarus. The first noteworthy account of any 

 aberration of P. astrarchc, was that of Fabricius, describing /'. ab. 

 arta.rer.ces. He did not, of course, recognise its specific identity with 

 P. astrarche, but described it as a distinct species. This description 

 (made from a drawing sent by one of our earliest British workers) 

 appears in the Kntoiiinloiiia Si/stematica, published in 1798. It is. at 

 the most, a very unsatisfactory description, and reads as follows : — 



Alis integerrimis nigris ; anticis puncto medio albo, punctis lunulis rufis, subtus 

 albo rufo punctato. 



This remained the only description of the insect for ten years, when, in 

 1808, Haworth, from a single specimen he possessed, made a very 

 satisfactory and minute description in his Lepidoptera Hritannica. To 

 one phrase in it, however, I must say I object. He says that it is 

 " prtecedenti {astrarche) simillima at minor." Comparing my series 

 with a series of F. astrarche from Dover, 1 would say " at major." P. 

 artaxer.res ranked as a species for some years. Then a small band of 

 energetic workers in Durham soon discovered P. ab. arta.rer.res and 

 other forms on the Durham coast. Stephens recorded this occurrence 

 in his Illustrations, in 1827. At the same time he mentions a variety 

 "B" of F. arta.rer.res, having the white ocelli on the lower side with 

 black pupils. Soon after, Mr. Wailes sent Stephens some specimens 

 from Durham. Amongst these, Stephens imagined he detected a new 

 species. This species he named P. .^almacis, and the description appears 

 in the third volume of his Illustrations, published in 1881. The 

 description is : — 



Alis fusco-nigris, subtus fuscescentibus niaculis subocellatis, anticis supra in 

 masculis puncto discoidali atro, in fceniinis albo, posticis utrinque fascia sub- 

 maiginali rubra. 



To this there are several objections. One would have thought that 

 Stephens would have recognised that his variety "B " of P. arta.rer.res 

 was exactly the same as the female of F. sahiiacis described above. 

 Again, the whole description was made vipon insufficient data. 

 Undoubtedly specimens may be freely obtained answering to the above 

 description, but to place the white discal spot as a sexual distinction is 

 entirely wrong. Both males and females, with, perhaps, a preponder- 

 ance of the latter, possess occasionally the white spot. Further, in 

 the species as we get it in Durham, the white spot is as often absent as 

 present. If one had a long series of Durham P. astrarciie, it would be 

 seen that individuals were present rejoicing in all the various combina- 

 tions of black discal spots, black spots with a white ring around, etc., 

 with ocelli with pupils and ocelli without pupils, and also that another 

 factor, in the extent of the red band on the upper side, added to the 

 variation. From a consideration of the large number of individuals 

 which had passed through his hands, Wailes was able to point out some 

 of these objections in the I'lntoinohxiical Mai/adiw, July, 1882. Study 

 of long series of all three forms resulted in the recognition of their 

 specific identity. I may say that I have had the larvje of all three 



