SCIENTIFIC NOTES. 105 



characters I employ are solely structural, and the meaning of the 

 passage iherelore requires explanation. Fourthly, the comparison with 

 Mr. Butler's paper " On the genus Acronycta,''' appears to me extremely 

 unfortunate, smce, in attemptmg to break up that genus, and distribute 

 it amongst several different families, Mr. Butler was guided solely by 

 these remarkable differences ui the earlier stages, ot which Mr. Tutt su 

 strongly advocates the nnportance. No one who is guided by the 

 structure of the imago has ever proposed to break up Acrofiycta on 

 that ground ; and if Mr. Tutt, or any other reader, will take the trouble 

 to compare the neuration of the species of Acronycta with one another, 

 and with the families in which Mr. Butler placed them, he will easily see 

 why. Fifthly, with regard to the statement that synonyms for the same 

 species are placed in different genera, Mr. Tutt quoted what he sup- 

 posed to be an instance of this at the February meeting of the Entomo- 

 logical Society, viz., Platyptilia similidactyla, Dale, which name he 

 stated to be truly applicable to Alucita lithodactyla, Tr. ; but I then 

 pointed out to him that the species for which I had used the former 

 name was in no way related to A. lithodactyla, and that, although my 

 use of the name might be erroneous, I expressly stated, in the introduc- 

 tion to my paper, that I had not entered at all mto synonymy or correc- 

 tion of specific names, and had simply employed the name in general 

 use {Trans. Ent. Soc. 1890,432); the authority followed here, being 

 Staudinger's Catalogue. If any other instance can be alleged I will ex- 

 plain it. Sixthly, in regard to such a species as Tephrosia biundularia, 

 showing seven distinct forms (not types) of neuration, it should be 

 understood that in any given species or genus those characters which 

 have been found to be variable have not been used for definition ; this 

 species was mentioned by me as an example not of characters which I 

 had used, but of characters which I had not been able to use. The 

 characters which are variable in this species are found to be constant in 

 Eucosmia undiilata, for instance. Mr. Tutt has described many vari- 

 ations of colour and markings in species, yet he has never proposed to 

 wholly reject colour and markings as a means of distinguishing species. 

 Seventhly, Mr. Tutt says "Fancy a classification of Vertebrata on the 

 same lines ! " It is unnecessary to fancy one, as any text-book of 

 Zoology will give the very thing. All classifications of Vertebrata which 

 I have ever seen proposed in modern times are actually founded on the 

 identical lines which I have adopted, namely, on the structural charac- 

 ters of the adult animal. Embryology is indeed considered to give 

 valuable information as to the line of descent of an animal, and embryo- 

 logical characters have occasionally been employed for leading divisions 

 (as the placenta in Mammals), though this is exceptional ; but the 

 special value of embryological characters is due to their being protected 

 from the influence of external environment, which is not the case with 

 the characters of the young after birth. The generic characters of 

 Mammals are usually drawn mainly irom the bones and teeth, which 

 may be regarded as quite analogous with the neuration and palpi of 

 Lepidoptera. But I am exceeding my proposed limits, and must abstain 

 from a discussion of the general question of the relative value of 

 characters. 



One word on behalf of Prof. Fernald, whose knowledge Mr. Tutt lias 

 under-estimated. So far from Prof. Fernald being a mere Museum 



c 



