1S86.J 1G3 



■would much like to have tested the theory that the peculiar squeaking of Atropos 

 affects the bees so as to prevent them from hurting it. — J. Hbllins, Exeter : 

 October I6th, 1886. 



Pterophorus dichrodactylus and P. Bertrami. — In August last, Mr. G. C. 

 Dennis of York and I found Pterophorus dichrodactylus in plenty on our coast at 

 Saltburn. In one of the ravines tansy grew in large and luxuriant patches, and on 

 it dichrodactylus had evidently long been at home. Mr. Stainton (Ent. Mo. Mag,, 

 ii, 137), Mr. Barrett (Ent. Mo. Mag., xviii, 177), and Mr. Sang (Ent. Mo. Mag., 

 xviii, 143), satisfactorily pointed out the differences between this species and 5er- 

 trami, but none of them have recorded one important particular, which, if necessary, 

 still further strengthens their conclusion, namely, that dichrodactylus seems to be 

 exclusively confined to tansy.* In the Saltburn ravine, and also all over the district, 

 yarrow was in full bloom, and in equal luxuriance with the tansy, yet not a single 

 specimen of dichrodactylus was ever seen frequenting it, or any other plant but tansy. 

 Bertrami evidently did not occur in the district at all, or we think we must have 

 seen it during our fortnight's stay. Heinemann records it as feeding on Tanacetum 

 as well as Achillea, but probably Mr. Barrett is right in believing that to be an error. 

 Many of the dichrodactylus we took were very worn, quite white indeed, but we 

 each easily secured a good series of fresh and perfect specimens, which show the 

 distinctions between it and the yarrow-feeding species — especially in the longer and 

 finer pointed wing tips, and the yellower colour — most clearly. Any one having ex- 

 perience with both species alive, can scarcely help noticing the differences at once. — 

 Q-EO. T. POEEITT, Huddersfield : November 4th, 1886. 



Eudorea ulmella. Dale, and E. conspicualis, HodgJcinson. — I have, for a long 

 time past, thought it possible that these two names referred to the same species, and 



this suspicion has been confirmed by the 

 inspection of the original specimens of E. 

 ulmella, which Mr. C. W. Dale has kindly 

 allowed me to see. There were originally 

 three specimens taken in Hampshire, one 

 of these is now in Australia, and the others 

 are in Mr. Dale's collection. The specimen 

 figured by Mr. Rye in Ent. Mo. Mag. for 

 March, 1867, gives the idea of a narrow- 

 winged insect, with a straight costa, but 

 this is due to the fact that the edge and end of the wing are somewhat turned up in 

 the specimen, and there is no difference perceptible in the costa when it is compared 

 with ordinary small specimens of E. conspicualis. In marking also they are 

 identical. Both specimens of ulmella are smaller than the usual run of conspicualis, 

 but I have smaller specimens of conspicualis. It may be that the home of conspi- 

 cualis is more northern, and that southern specimens are smaller ; the figure is 

 from one of Mr. Dale's examples, drawn by Mr. Sang. — Philip B. Mason, Burton- 

 on- Trent ; Novemher, 1886. 



* Mr. Sang says [I. c) the larva feeds with us invariably in tansy ; Mr. Barrett and Mr Stain- 

 ton both state that the larva feeds on tansy, and do not mention or suggest any other food-plant. 

 --Eds. 



O 2 



