56 THE entomologist's record. 



and the emergences of the two not synchronising, a new species might 

 arise, developing a different facies in the imago by isolation and in- 

 and-in breeding ? Or failing this, if the species was constitutionally 

 delicate, and not capable of acquiring larval hybernation, a])ortive 

 attempts at a second brood would result in its extirpation from tnne to 

 time (till re-introduced) in the intermediate zone, leaving the northern 

 single-brooded and southern double-brooded races partially isolated, 

 thus giving rise to stable varieties which might eventually become well- 

 marked species. In fact, with all the varying multitudinous elements 

 of interference, both external and internal, which have taken part in 

 the evolution of Lepidoptera, I cannot but consider that every imagin- 

 able divergence of habits must have arisen, without having recourse to 

 remoter originating causes such as that propounded in the interesting 

 article under discussion. 



One set of phenomena presented by different groups of insects has 

 been passed over in silence : I mean the survival by hybernation of 

 the females only. Dasi/p<>li<( temfdi is an example among the Lepid- 

 optera, and among the Hymenoptera the females, or females and 

 workers (sterile females), of certain groups similarly survive the 

 winter. Now it would seem likely that if the " resting habit" was, as 

 suggested, based on a survival of an extremely archaic tendency in the 

 Order, it would affect both sexes ; while if its origin was of a more 

 recent nature in the history of the species, natural selection would 

 sufficiently account for it. And where parallel phenomena obtain 

 partially, only in different and unrelated orders, it wonld seem pro- 

 bable that similar necessities had given rise to similar adaptations, and 

 that the survival of the females only in a few genera or species has 

 been the outcome of reproductive exigencies in connexion with recent 

 climatal influence. 



SCIENTIFIC NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS. 



On the British species of Smerinthus. — I have read Avith great 

 pleasure the interesting paper of Mr. A. Bacot, and the intelligent note 

 by Mr. Geo. C. Griffiths, on the English Smerinfbi, contained in the last 

 volume of the Record. I can assure the latter that the three British 

 species belong to as many genera. So far as I have yet proceeded 

 in my study of the literature, these genera and their types are as 

 follows : l^Smerinthus, Latr., 1801, with the type popnli. I formerly 

 thought that the type was ncellatus, but Latreille, I believe from 

 my subsequent notes (I have not at this moment the works to 

 consult), designates poindi alone, thus restricting his term. With 

 this genus, Amorpha, Hiibn. 1806, proposed for the same type, becomes 

 a synonym. 2 — Mimas, Hiibn, 1818, with the sole species, and there- 

 fore type, tiliae, 3 — Copismerinthns, Grt., 1886, to this belongs 

 ocellatus ; the type is cerisii, and ophthalmicus from California 

 agrees, as well as orellntus from Europe, in having a blunt spine at the 

 extremity of the fore tibi?e. We have thus three eyed forms, two in 

 America, one from Europe, all three with a blunt spine, raoniits, 

 Hiibn., 1818, is a mixed genus, and I have restricted it (in 187H) to the 

 N. American /'. excaecutns, a species properly named and Avell figured 

 on the cover of this year's Canadian Entomologist. Since Paonias was 

 neglected in Europe my restriction has priority, and must be followed. 

 Our SynonymiciJ Catalogue of 1865, and my "Buffalo Check Lists of 

 N. Amer. Sphingida?," in the Bulletin, form the basis of subsequent 



