NOTES ON COLLECTING, ETC. 335 



Short papers of scientific interest to lepidopterists are about as 

 numerous as usual. The first place, scientifically, must be given to Dr, 

 Chapman for his paper on " The pupa3 of Heterocerous Lepidoptera "' 

 (Trans. Enf. Soc. Lond.); "Notes on Stauropus fagi" (Ent. Eecord) by 

 Mr. Bayne ; " The Genus Xnnth'ia " {Eat. Becord) ; '* The Variation of 

 Papilio macliaon " {Ent. Eecord) liy Mr. Farren ; " Experiments in 

 hybridising Burnet moths" {E.3L3L) by Mr. W. H. B. Fletcher; 

 " Specific Nomenclature " {Ent. Record) by Dr. Buckell ; " On a 

 Lepidopterous pupa with functionary active mandibles " (Trans. Ent. 

 Soc. Lond.) by Dr. Chapman ; " Catalogue of the Lepidoptera of Ire- 

 land " (Entom.) by Mr. W. F. de V. Kane ; " On the earlier stages of the 

 Nepticulaj" (E.M.M.) by Dr. Wood; "The History of Butterfly 

 Classification " (Ent. Bee.) by Dr. Buckell ; " Variation in Vanessa 

 atalanta and V. cardui" (Entom.) by Mr. South, whilst the same 

 author's " Spilosoma Inhricipeda var. zatima " was entirely marred and 

 rendered abortive by the supposition that the variety of this species- 

 called by the Yorkshire lepidopterists, rndiata, was in reality the extreme 

 form ; " The effects of temperature in the pupal stage on the colouring 

 of Pieris napi, Vanessa atalanta, Chrysoplianns phhvas and Epliyra 

 punctaria " {Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond.) by Mr. F. Merrifield ; " On the 

 phylogenetic significance of the variations produced by differences of 

 temperature in Vanessa atalanta " (Trans. Ent. Soc. London) by Dr. 

 Dixey. Dr. Chapman's paper " On the Larva of Arctia caia " (Ent. 

 Becord) is now in coarse of publication. 



Some very remarkable contributions to science (?) have appeared 

 during the course of the year, of which probably the ' decoy ' article 

 in The Entomologist, and ' Notes on the Synonymy of British butterflies ^ 

 in The British Naturalist, are the most noteworthy. It is also perhaps 

 time to consider how far certain papers are suitable for Magazines, on 

 account of their length and the period of time over which they are 

 necessarily spread. As examples, I may instance my own " Monogi'aph 

 of the British Pterophorina " in The British Naturalist, which has been 

 some years in process of publication, and of which the first part will be 

 some four or five years behind date by the time the last part is finished. 

 Mr. W. F. de V. Kane's " Catalogue of the Lepidoptera of Ireland," 

 now in process of publication in The Entomologist, and which cannot be 

 finished for some years without ousting other equally important 

 matter appears to be in a very similar position. Such papers 

 as these are not altogether unsuitable for Magazine publications 

 if space could be spared to bring them out in a reasonable time, 

 but as it cannot under existing conditions, it is evident that they 

 should be brought out in separate publications. It is generally sup- 

 posed that lepidopterists will not support the production of separate 

 publications, and there is perhaps rather too much truth in the matter, 

 although personally my experience is exactly to the contrary, as 

 evidenced b}^ the generosity of the entomological public in helping me 

 to bring oiit my Varieties of the British Noctiue. At any rate, I feel 

 satisfied that authors of separate papers, such as local lists of importance 

 with scientific details, monographs of large genera, &c. would do better 

 to appeal to the entomological puljlic and leave to the magazines more 

 perishable matter, unless indeed their j^f^pers will not be lessened in 

 value by slow production, and will be published separately afterwards. 



Of individual efforts the first volume of Mr. C. G. Barrett's British 



