. NOTES ON COLLECTING, ETC, 48 



were, unfortunately, by no means exceptional specimens. The outer 

 rows had been injured to a very considerable extent, but damage de- 

 creased rapidly towards the centre of the field, indicating that the 

 insects hacl come on from the outside. But it was not on corn that the 

 greatest money injury was caused by the pest, but on tomatoes. Dr. 

 Eiley has given a very characteristic figure of the larva on tomato, and 

 I had abundant opportunity of verifying its fondness for the fruit or 

 vegetable. Early tomatoes are a very important feature in the money 

 crop of the farmers of southern New Jersey, and they force their plants 

 along as rapidly as possible, to get the high prices ruling for early 

 sj)ecimens. Late in June, and early in July, they realise as much for 

 a quart, as they do a month later for a bushel. In 1892, more than 60 

 per cent, of the very earliest tomatoes were destroyed by this larva, 

 and a money loss was caused totally disproportionate to the actual per 

 centage of the crop injured. The same larva would sometimes enter 

 two or even three tomatoes in succession, and, even where little eating 

 was done, the rain and dew entering caused decay. Early in July the 

 larvai were maturing rapidly, and the next brood, finding an abundance 

 of sweet corn, neglected the tomatoes, which were not disturbed ; nor 

 did I find the larvfe, except in corn, when this was available " (Entom. 

 News, iv., pj). 10-11). There ajjpears to be no doubt that the tomatoes 

 from which Prodenia littorah's have been bred, have been imported from 

 the Canary Isles or the Mediterranean littoral. It would, however, be 

 interesting to learn whether we imj^ort tomatoes from America, and 

 whether Heliothis armigera has lu'obably been imported from that 

 country. I notice that Professor Smith further states, that the insect is 

 in the pupal stage during the winter in the United States ; those bred 

 by Mr. Fox were larvfe during the winter. — J. W. Tutt. February, 

 1892. 



Time of emergence of Gnophria rubricollis. — I have been 

 much interested in Mr. Hewett's notes, in the January number, on 

 Gnojihria rubricoUis. My experience has been much the same as his, 

 except as to the time of appearance. Last year, I bred about 70 

 imagines from New Forest pupa?, they were kej^t out of doors in dani}) 

 moss, the first emerged on May 13th and the last on May 29th, except 

 one which emerged on June 4th. It would be interesting to know the 

 locality of Mr. Hewett's insects as they appeared much later (June and 

 July). Newman gives August, which seems to me much too late ; 

 Stainton's Manual gives June, while in the Entomologist's Monthly 

 Magazine, vol. i., p. 49, Mr. William Buckler wrote : " I found it 

 (rubricollis) swarming on a lichen-covered j^ark jjaling, and reared a 

 large number of the perfect insects, which appeared during the month 

 of May." I always found mine drying their wings between 7 and 8 

 a.m. I have collected for several years in the New Forest, and although 

 I have often taken and seen this imago in June, I never remember 

 taking or seeing it as late as July. — Eeginald S. Sellon, The Hall, 

 Sydenham, S.E. 4:th February, 1 893. 



The Larv.e of Tanagra CHiEROPHYLLATA (atrata). — My friend, the 

 late Howard Vaughan, of London, is credited with the discovery of this 

 larva, upon the streng-th of a single example forwarded to Mr. JBuckler, 

 from which the moth was reared. I liave always understood, however, 

 that he took two larv£e, unknown to him, from one of which he bred 

 the moth. This may have been in 1866, but, in looking over his diaries, 



