THE SPECIES OF CALYPTOCOME WARREN 87 



are heavily shaded with purple red, giving the appearance of suffused red 

 bands on a yellowish ground, on the style of conversa Warren, to which 

 this may be allied. 



Calyptocome turbata Walker. 



Cambogia turbata Walker, Cat. Brit. Mus., xxvi, 1755, 1862. 



Cr\fpsit^la turbata Warren (in part), Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus,, xxx, 437, 1906. 



Very close to pannaria Guenee, perhaps only a local form of it with 

 rather darker ground color. Having no c? , I do not know whether the 

 secondary sexual characters are identical. Described from Brazil, from 

 whence I have three specimens, all females. 



Calyptocome purpurissata Grote. 



Acidalia purpurissata Grote, Can. Ent., iii, 103, 1871. 



Described from Alabama. Placed as a synonym of pannaria by 

 Hulst, but certainly distinct. I have a single 9 from Bryam, Mississippi, 

 bred on cowpeas by W. R. McConnell. It looks most like the Costa 

 Rican form of suhruhella Warren, but the lines are more continuous and 

 straighter. The receipt of a c? is much desired. 



Calyptocome roseoliva Warren. 



Calyptocome roseoliva, Nov. Zool., vii, 148, 1900. 



This species is unknown to me except by description. Apparently it is 

 near to carnearia Dyar from Jamaica. It was described from St. Vincent. 



Cinglis inornata Warren. 



Calyptocome inornata Warren, Nov. Zool., xi, 33, 1904. 



This species does not fall in Calyptocome, having subpectinate antennae 

 in c? , one reduced spur on hind tibiae, tarsal joints all present amd two 

 accessory cells in fore wing. It agrees with Cinglis by Meyrick's defini- 

 tion (Proc. Ent. Soc. Lond., 90, I 892), though it has not the appear- 

 ance of the European species that he makes the type of Cinglis. It looks 

 more like some North American species which Hulst placed in that genus. 



In 1 904 (Nov. Zool., vii) Mr. Warren placed the species here con- 

 sidered in his genus Calyptocome ; but in' 1906 (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 

 xxx) he places them in Crypsit^la, another of his own genera (Nov. 

 Zool., vii, 1 52, 1900) of the same date with Calyptocome but later by 

 pagination. I think this is due to a confusion of names on Mr. Warren's 

 part and not an intentional change of genus. 



