1883.] 41 



funesta, one M. limhata, one Driisilla canaliculata, and one Thiasophila inquilina. 

 In a nest of L.flava, M. limlata has shown itself, and Myrmica rulra (Jcevinodis?) 

 has only yielded me the common DrusiUa. — Edward P. Collett, St. Leonards- 

 on-Sea : June 17th, 1883. 



Further note on Epheslia passulella. — I find my former note on Ephestia 

 passulella (Ent. Mo. Mag., xix, p. 142) was not strictly accurate, as the species is 

 evidently only partially double-brooded. As there stated, the larvse all spun up, 

 and, as at the time, the imagos were continually emerging, I concluded that all 

 would do so. Many of the larvse, however, did not change to pupae, but remained 

 all the winter in their cocoons, and changed to pupae without again feeding at all, 

 this spring. The imagos from them are now emerging every day. — Geo. T. 

 POEEITT, Huddersfield : June Uh, 1883. 



The oldest name for the Phycita hosiilis of Stephens. — Heer P. C. T. Snellen 

 has kindly called my attention to the confusion that has arisen between Nephopteryx 

 rheneUa, Zincken (described in Germar's Magazine, 1818), and Pempelia adelphella, 

 Fischer von Rosterstamm. Both were mixed together by Treitschke under the name 

 of rhenella. . 



The brown larva of rhenella feeds on Populus alba and tremula (I have a speci- 

 men from Zeller "on Populus monilifera"). The ^reere larva of adelphella feeds 

 on willow. The description of hostilis in the Manual was made from a Glogau 

 specimen oi adelphella received from Zeller in 1850. 



Mr. Barrett has already pointed out (Ent. Mo. Mag., xvii, p. 179) that the 

 hostilis of Stephens is not identical with adelphella, for which it had been quoted as 

 a synonym by Zeller in the Isis of 1846. It is, however, really the rhenella of 

 Zincken, which being a much older name, must supersede hostilis, whilst, at the 

 same time, it will be needful to remove the insect from Pempelia to Nephopteryx. 



The difPerences in appearance of the two species are well noted by Zeller in the 

 Isis of 1846, p. 777. He says of P. adelphella, " anterior wings narrower, with the 

 base always of a much brighter red, the first transverse line forming, at the sub- 

 dorsal nervure, a sharper angle, almost a right angle, the central area is pale red 

 instead of grey towards the inner margin, and the costa beyond the first transverse 

 line is blackish ; the hinder transverse line is more faintly toothed, and forms a 

 sharper angle towards the inner margin." 



I think it highly probable that both species may occur in this country, though, 

 so far as we know, adelphella has hitherto escaped observation. — H. T. Stainton, 

 Mountsfield, Lewisham : May 21st, 1883. 



Occurrence of Q<Jcophora grandis near Burton-on- Trent. — On Saturday, June 



2nd, I went' out for the afternoon to a part of the Forest of Needwood, about eight 



miles from here. The place is a very tempting one, but there seemed either to be 



very little to be had, or else, that the place (which is high ground and cold clay) 



was very backward ; almost my only captures being Eupaecilia maculosana and 



Incurvaria CEhlmanniella. About half-past four, from a holly tree I beat out a 



small thing which flew off sharply, but which I fortunately contrived to secure. 



My delight was only equalled by my surprise when I saw what I had got : — a very 



D 



