154 THE entomologist's record. 



" In the meantime the hind wing had not yet doubled its original 

 size, with the part from which the tail was to come showing as a slight 

 break on an otherwise even edge ; the same routine was followed in 

 the development of the hind wing as in that of the front, and by the 

 time the broad part of the wing had attained its full size, the tail was a 

 little more than half an inch long and very much crumpled. This was 

 the last part to expand, but as the fluid passed into it, it also took size 

 and form. The whole time occupied in the operation, from first seeing 

 it until it was completed, was about one hour and three-quarters." — 

 J. Alston Moffat, Victoria Hall, London. Ont. yuly T,ot/i, 1891. 



Towards the end of June I had a number of Arctia villica i)upa; 

 emerging, and what struck me as being rather peculiar was the difference 

 in time which the wings took to attain their maximum expansion. I will 

 quote two instances. A female which emerged while I was looking at 

 it, and which I helped out of the cocoon, had its wings fully expanded 

 in a minute or two from the time it left the cocoon, an unusually 

 quick operation I should think ! Another specimen, this time a male, 

 took at least twenty minutes to develop. This species, as far as I know, 

 never " flutters " while the wings are developing, the only movement 

 perceptible being a slight raising and lowering of the wings. 



I am inclined to agree with Dr. Buckell's idea that the process is one 

 of coagulation and evaporation, and I think the reason why the insect 

 climbs to the top of the cage is to prevent the wings from adhering to 

 the body during the process. 



I have frequently found bred specimens with the two main joints of 

 the fore legs adhering together almost in a straight line and rendered 

 quite incapable of grasping anytliing, their incessant and vain efforts to 

 do so making the movements of the insect appear pitifully ridiculous. 

 — ^D. U.S. Steuart, Royal School of Science, Kensington, W. 



Disuse of Wings = Apterous Females (?) — Mr. Front's footnote 

 {^Record, vol. ii., p. 113) is very interesting. But, can the suggestion 

 it contains be supported by such examples as E/idroiiiis versicolor, 

 Satitrnia carpmi, Boinbyx nensfria, B. qiiercus, etc. ? I believe, 

 amongst lepidoptera, males use their wings more than females. Why 

 should not the converse to the suggestion be true, viz., that the 

 greater use of wings should produce greater wing development ? But 

 this is not so. As a rule the females have the larger wings. — J. Arkle, 

 Chester. July 22nd, 1891. [The species mentioned here by Mr. 

 Arkle are not at all parallel cases with that of Bistou hirtaria mentioned 

 by Mr. Front. The latter is a remarkably veil- known instance of a 

 female with a considerable wing area, but weak, given to malformation 

 and ill-development of the scales. The species Mr. Arkle mentions, 

 have also a larger wing area, but here the reseniblance ends. The 

 wings of the females of these species are as thickly scaled and strong, 

 muscularly, as those of the males. The dimorphic condition, which in 

 these species happens to be correlated with a pale coloration, is not 

 necessarily a sign of weakness or strength, and the wings are equally 

 well-developed, though not of the same area in either sex. The 

 assumption that "amongst lepidoptera, males use their wings more than 

 females " may have an apparent tinge of truth in it, from the fact, that, 

 when they are in search of the females either during the day or at dusk 

 we see more of them, but long after the flight of the males is over the 



