SYNONYMIC NOTES ON ACIDAMA IIUMILIATA ANll A. DirUTARIA. 13?> 



does not extend so far) and other characters settle its identity. The 

 Zeller specimens show tliat no reliance can be placed on the precise 

 width of the wing. 



Treitschke's osaearia (Die Schmet. von Europa, vol. vi., pt. 2, p. 32) 

 is comprehensive ; that is to say, he takes the species with red costa as 

 the type, but mentions a variety " which with several collectors passes 

 for a separate species " which lacks the red costa. That may possibly 

 be interjectaria, Boisd. ; but, inasmuch as the central spots are also 

 lacking, it is probably hoIoKericat<t, Dup. ; though, no doubt, interjectaria 

 is also included in this one species, as it would hardly have escaped 

 Treitschke's notice. Duponchel's desci'iption and figure (177, o) — 

 none too good — also belong to the species witli red costa. 



Owing to the influence of Treitschke, it was probably some time 

 before the German entomologists again acknowledged that they were 

 dealing with two or three species under one name ; but Herrich- 

 Schaeffer, who adheres jjretty closely to Boisduval's nomenclature, 

 introduced interjectaria and holosericata to their notice ; he figures the 

 former (upper and under sides) in figs. 78 and 79 of his well-known 

 work, though, as Guenee remarks, " not in a clearly recognisalile 

 manner," and cites dilutaria, Hb. 100 (" rough and too strongly 

 marked ') and marginepunctata, Steph., ? Wood 724 (" too small, too 

 white ") as synonyms. Lederer, however, in 1853, reinforced the law of 

 priority, giving dilutaria, Hb., as the name, with interjectaria, Boisd., as 

 a sjnionym. Since that time there has been no disturbance of the 

 synonymy on the continent. Guenee, it is true, adhered to the newer 

 name, but the French authors have now yielded to Staudinger's 

 authority (Berce, Faun. Ent. Franc. Lep., vol. v., p. 150). 



Mr. Tutt has dealt so exhaustively with the history of the British 

 records of supposed osseata, Hb. (as it was called until Staudinger gave in 

 his adhesion to Werneburg's determination of humiliata, Hufn., 1871), 

 that I need not go into it again. As he pointed out, our writers were, 

 no doubt, dealing only with one sjiecies — ossearia. Haw. =^ dilutaria, 

 Stgr., Hb. Mr. IJoubleday's last note (Entom., vol. iv., p. 30), after he 

 had seen the Continental species, osseata, Hb., was to the effect that he 

 had " never seen ixny British specimens like tliem," and it is more than 

 probable that even five or six British examples " which appear to be 

 identical with a pale variety (of osseata) " were reall}^ also onl}' varieties, 

 with a reddish costa, of our common species.* If so, it seems likely 

 that humiliata, Hufn., is, in this country, entirely confined to Fresliwater, 

 or, at any rate, to some of the southern cliffs of the Isle of Wight, Mr. 

 Barrett, having in view the small size of our native specimens, suggested 

 (Ent. Mo. Mag., vol. xxix., p. 66) that the species has here reached its 

 extreme limit and "maintains itself with difficulty." This seems by no 

 means impossible, notwithstanding some more nortlierly localities given 

 by Staudinger ; for, witii regard to Scandinavia at least, only one of tlie 

 two allies is recorded; and, though that is under the name of /iumiliata 

 ^osseata, it is quite possible that that is an error of the same kind as 

 that for which Haworth, in our own country, was responsible. 

 Hofmann, in his recent work. Die Grossschmetterlinge Europas (p. 135), 

 says that it belongs rather to Southern Europe, Asia Minor and North 



* Since writing this, I have examined two or three of the specimens in 

 question, which still exist in Doubleday's collection, and am confirmed in this 

 opinion. 



