78 THE entomologist's record. 



Ledereria, Grt., 1874, is proposed. The type, viiseUoides, is an average 

 Hadenoid form, with naked eyes, unarmed tibia?, tufted dorsum, and 

 with the shape of the wings different from Xylena (= Xylophasia) and 

 much as in 3Iamestra, somewhat squarer and broader. The name may 

 be used for all the species included by Smith under Hadena, until they 

 can be compared with the European species and the real types of all syn- 

 chronous names exactly designated. 



Hauena, Schrank, Fatm. Boica, II., 2, 158, 1802. — Type: H. 

 cucubali. Certain names now in use in European works have attained 

 in process of time an entirely new and conventional use, quite at vari- 

 ance with the original intentions of the authors. Not a single one of 

 Boisduval's original species of Lnperina (1829) is contained in Luperina 

 Lederer (1857); consult Grote, Bull. Buff. S.N.S., 2, 54 (1874). 

 Lederer's first species, liawortliii, is the type of Celaena, Stejoh. (1829). 

 But the most striking case is that of Hadena Schrank (1802.) Mr. 

 Smith cites incorrectly 1804, but if, instead of copying the citation, he 

 had opened and studied the page he cites, he might have been staggered. 

 Schrank gives no definition of his genus ; indeed, no description could 

 have been drawn up from such heterogeneous material. Schrank cites 

 his families M. and N. as belonging to Hadena, and translates the name 

 into the vernacular as " Triibeule." He further says, that the male 

 antennas are more or less fringed, but he says that this is shared also by 

 the males of his preceding genus Noctua, his families K. and L., Faun. 

 Boica, II., 2, 158. There remains then the word " Triibeule," as the 

 sole definition of Hadena, Schrank, so glibly quoted by authors whose 

 genus Hadena contains not one single species originally included by 

 Schrank. Let us search for the generic type of Hadena, the genuine 

 " Triibeule." Hiibner, in the Tentamen, does not allude to Hadena. He 

 takes the species lH}w.v//Jea, a Hadena, (in sensn Lederer), as the type of 

 Xylena. This genus is re-named Xv/Zop/ms/a by Stephens. Ochsenheimer 

 in 1816, has, however, tlie genus Hadena, Schrank, and a study of the 

 mixed contents shoAvs that he excludes all the species of Schrank's 

 family M., but includes (and therefore restricts the genus in this sense), 

 the three species of Schrank's family N. These are meticniosa, lucipara 

 and cncMhali. The last is a Dianthoecia (with hair}^ eyes), Ind. Metli., 

 124 (1840). Lncijmra is the type of Eiiplexia, Steph. (1829). There 

 remains then meticidosa, which is the type of Brotolomia, Led. (1857). 

 Hiibner, Ferz. (1816-18), 216, includes under his genus Hadena, two of 

 Schrank's original species : typica and cnctibali. The first is excluded 

 by Ochsenheimer's prior exclusion in 1816. Therefore, cncnhaU seems 

 to be the genuine " Triibeule," and Dianthoecia to be a synonym. 

 Hardly any two of the original twelve species included by Schrank 

 belong to the same modern genus. Of the nine in family M. : typica 

 belocgs to Naenia ; atriplicis is the type of Achatia; pisi, oleracea, 

 chenopodii belong to Mamestra ; praecox and xanthoyrapJia are referred to 

 A(jrotix ; piniperda is a Panolis ; deaurata (?) belongs to Phisia. In 

 another case I have shown that Xylina, Tr., is constantl}' used for Xylena, 

 Hiibn., that the original tyjie is a Hadenoid form, and that Ochsenheimer's 

 mixed genus, which includes Hadenoid and Orthosian tj'pes, has become 

 erroneously applied to the latter, and that the true title of the Orthosian 

 genus is Lithophane, Hiibn., with my restriction of the type in 1875. 

 1 have with patient study ascertained the tyj^es of the genera of the 

 NocTUin.^ ; they will mostly be found in my Buffalo List of 1874. I 



