144 THE entomologist's record. 



only one brood. The dates given by Mr. Young — end of March to 

 July 29th — are certainly somewhat of a poser, but these dates are, 

 undoubtedly, for very early and very late seasons, and are not normal. 

 Mr. Young states that there is no interval in the emergence, and that 

 he believes, as the result of long experience, that there is only one 

 brood, and this is my own opinion. Mr. Kane asserts, without 

 hesitation, that the Irish specimens, which emerge from April to June, 

 are all to be referred to one brood. 



A distinct interval between the emergence of the first brood of 

 T. histortata and T. crcpim-ulaiia is mentioned by Mr. Porritt. This 

 does not, in reality, seem to exist, as my notes prove. Mrs. Bazett's 

 second brood (wild) of T. rirjinscularia {hiundularia) is possibly 

 referable to T. bistortata, with which the specimens seem to correspond. 

 Mr. Fenn states that the two species occur at different times of the 

 year. This statement is only partially correct, as several gentlemen 

 record their occurrence together, and will not dispose of the cross- 

 breeding. Mr. Fenn asks whether it is possible that there can be two 

 forms or races of one insect appearing in the same district, one of 

 which is in the larval state and nearly full-fed, whilst the other is on 

 the wing. Mr. Tutt states, in a letter dated April 19th, 1896 :— " It 

 would appear that the discussion ten years ago, in the Entomohxiht, 

 landed us about as far as we are likely to get. Evidently it (bistortata) 

 is a species still in process of development." Mr. C. G. Barrett, 

 writing on April 17th, 1896, says : — " I thought that the subject was 

 about thrashed out." 



Now, having gone through the whole of the controversy, I fail to 

 find anything that would warrant such an assumption as that made 

 by Mr. Barrett. Indeed, I am convinced that most of you will agree 

 with me, that the controversy, and subsequent remarks thereon by 

 Messrs. Barrett and Briggs, only made the confusion worse confounded. 

 That Mr. Tutt thinks that there was more to be said is proved 

 by his " Critical resume of the arguments for and against T. biator- 

 tata and 2\ nriiuscularia being considered distinct species," the 

 published part of which I have read with much interest, whilst all 

 lepidopterists owe a deep debt of gratitude to Mr. Prout for the 

 masterly manner in which he has dealt with the intricacies of the 

 synonymy of these two species (Jvnt. Ecc, viii., pp. 76-81). 



With regard to the variability of both species, Mr. Adkin says that 

 " both are variable." Mr. Lawson says the Perth specimens " vary 

 little, but females are lighter than males." Mr. Bush states that the 

 Perth specimens " vary considerably," and Mr. Wylie says that the 

 "males are generally darker than the females, and vary much." 

 Mr. Kane says that " the Irish specimens do not vary much, except 

 in size." A peculiar banded form is taken by Mr. Mason, of Clevedon, 

 and is only recorded from that locality. Messrs. Mason, Prout and 

 A. Jones say that T. bistortata varies the more, whilst Messrs. Nesbit 

 and Fenn say that 7'. crcjmsmlaria (biundidaria) varies the more. 

 (To be amtiniied). 



Notes on the Cocoon and Pupa of Saturnia pyri. 



By A. BACOT. 

 CocooN AND PUPA OF Saturnia PYRI. — A larva of .*?. /'//'■') which I 

 received from Mr. Tutt, spun up among the twigs of its food-plant, 



