NOTES ON COLLECTING. 23 



feet above the ground. The first eight or ten times I carefully 

 observed the spot on which tbe insect was, and when she left 1 

 searched it for ova, but was on every occasion disappointed. I did 

 not think of looking under the bark, so I conclude from Mr. 

 Merrifield's note that this was the cause of my want of success. I 

 may mention that, during the whole time I was in the Forest (August), 

 sugaring, larva-beating, and in fact every method of collecting, was 

 a dismal failure. — G. D. Millward, Downing College, Cambridge. 

 November 1st, 1906. 



Egglaying of Hipparchia semele. — I do not know whether you 

 have any observations as to the oviposition of Hipparchia sonde, but I 

 was much interested in watching the operation this summer in Devon- 

 shire, around Salcombe. My attention was attracted to a female for some 

 reason or other, so I tracked her down several times, and, in each case, the 

 following habit was carried out. Hhe settled restlessly, and then felt 

 up a green blade of grass with the tip of her abdomen, at least, my 

 naked eye could see no more than that, the green blade did not suit her 

 and she came to a last year's broken stem, up which she again felt 

 with her abdomen, and then on the very top of the stem she placed 

 her egg, this process happened each time I tracked a female down. I 

 never noticed her hit on a dried stem the first time, and only once did 

 she succeed at the second time, but she always oviposited on the very 

 tip of a broken, dried-up, blade. The ova struck me as very small for 

 the insect. — George T. Bethune-Baker, F.E.S., 19, Clarendon Road, 

 Edgbaston. November 21st, 1906. 



^OTES ON COLLECTING, Etc. 



Another note on N;enia typica. — In reference to Mr. Colthrup's in- 

 quiry about Naenia typica (antea, vol. xviii., p. 213), I may mention that 

 1 have never taken the insect at light or sugar, but have found it com- 

 monly at privet bloom just after dusk. Neither larva? nor imagines are 

 nearly so common in Kensington as they were three or four years ago. 

 In 1902 and 1903 I could get the larvae in some numbers off dock, but 

 this year I have not seen half-a-dozen, and last year I saw very few 

 more. The last remark also applies to Arctla caia, of which I did not 

 see a single larva (i.e., in Kensington) in 1905 or 1906. — G. D. 

 Millward, Downing College, Cambridge. November 1st, 1906. 



"Bath whites" for sale. — We have received from a corres- 

 pondent the following: " Will you kindly put a notice in your next 

 issue to the effect that two Bath whites (Tint's daplidice) were caught 

 this year by me, one very good specimen in Devon, and one very poor 

 one in Cornwall, and I should be willing to sell the former. — Yours 

 truly, M. Lyon, Esq. October 25t/i, 1906." [We should prefer to 

 insert "sale advertisements" on our tinted sheet at ordinary 

 rates. — Ed.] 



Manduca atropos at Mucking. — A tolerably perfect male specimen 

 of this insect was brought to me on October 16th, having flown into a 

 sitting-room the previous evening, evidently attracted by the light. 

 This is the only specimen of which I have heard this year. — (Rev,) 

 C. R. N. Burrows. November 1th, 1906. 



Eupithecia succenturiata and E. surfulyata. — Referring to 



