276 THK entomologist's RECObD. 



drURRENT NOTES. 



'Sh. Newstead describes {K.M.M., March) a new Coccid from 

 Snettisham Beach (near K. Lynn) and Llandudno, and names it 

 LfcanopsiH hrcvicomis. It is easily recognised by its very short, 

 7-jointed antenna", short legs, large spiracles, and by the $ covering 

 her body at gestation with a glassy test. He also adds (1) Cinonasjiis 

 asjiidistraf, Sign., discovered in a greenhouse near Chester on 

 Aspli')iiu)ii, and (2) Jn'n/a ari/i/jitiara, found on Ari.stolor/iia sarrata 

 (imported from Calcutta), in the Royal Gardens, Kew, to the British 

 list. The male of llipcrsia fra-i'ini is also described for the first time. 

 ]\Ir. E. R. Bankes records that Axi/r/nia acratdla, bred from larvae 

 in galls on the stems of I'dli/i/fDiniii ariodarc, found on the downs near 

 Shoreham, Sussex, emerged freely in 1895, after having remained two 

 years in the larval state. 



Mr. L. B. Prout calls attention {/■jifdiii., February) to the con- 

 fusion which exists in the application of the names /urifoniiis and 

 bniiihi/lifonnis to our bee-hawks. Following Zeller, he concludes that 

 (1) " ?'nrif(in)iis, Linn. = fucifoniii-s, South's List = IxDiilii/lifonnis, 

 Auct. Brit. = the narrow-bordered or scabious species. (2) Jhniihi/lifDriiiis, 

 Ochs. = hiniihi/lifnniiis, South's List = furifurinis, Auct. Brit. = the 

 broad-bordered or honeysuckle species." Mr. Kirby points out that in 

 his I'atahxiw he has accepted the "honeysuckle" species as /■(/r//'"''""''', 

 Linn., chieHy on account of Linne's citations ; thus reversing Zeller's 

 decision. The name houihiiliforwis is shown to be untenable, and the 

 two species work out thus : — (1) J-'urifiiniiis, Linn, (broad) = hawhijli- 

 formis, Och., South's fjst. (2) Titijus, Linn., S.N., ed. x., p. 493 

 (narrow) = fuci/oniii'A, Ochs., South's TAst = hoinhijlifinDiis, Esp., 

 Dbld., Newman, &c. 



Although Ave have ]>uckler and Hellins' Larrac nf liritis/i 

 lluttcrjiies and Moths still in hand, we are asked by Messrs. W. A. 

 Rollason and H. Foster Newey to state that they are preparing 

 a work upon the larvte and pupaj of ]3ritish Lepidoptera. Probably 

 the drawings are meant to supplement those which are missing from 

 the above work, and the descriptions are intended to give us the many 

 essential details that Buckler and Hellins have overlooked. We want 

 much information on the moults, changes and modifications of 

 tubercles, the sub-segments and other details of larval structure, also 

 on the anal armature, mode of dehiscence, etc., of pupt?. If our 

 assumption that this is intended be correct, there is no doubt that the 

 work will be a useful addition to our libraries ; but if the describer and 

 artist are about to describe and depict the larva? which other authors 

 and artists have already described and depicted, we are at a loss to 

 know what good purpose the work wall serve. 



It is amusing to find that someone has at last taken Mr. Arkle 

 seriously. Mr. G. A. K. Marshall, writing from Mashonaland, dis- 

 cusses the remarkable notes that Mr. Arkle wrote on the " Senses of 

 Insects " (J\)it(iiii., xxviii., 80 and 248) in the most serious vein, and of 

 course slates him most unmercifully. Mr. Marshall's own remarks on 

 the hearing of the Cicadas and Termites are exceedingly good, and 

 show him to be an intelligent observer. 



Professor Smitli states that the generic nnnu' Xoctua was used by 

 Klein in Mollusca, 1751 (or 1758) ; by Fabricius in Lepidoptera in 177G ; 



