226 [March, 



Coccinella Idbilis in the Hastings district.— 1 am pleased to record this species 

 from this locality. On May 15th last year I saw a good many of what I took to be 

 at the time large-spotted 7-piinctata, so only saved a single specimen, which has 

 turned out to be the above species. The locality was the Wood at Gruestling, where 

 I worked the nests of Formica rufa. — E. P. Collett, 76, Islip Street, Kentish 

 Town : February \Sth, 188i. 



Observations on Lepidoptera at Cambridge. — Lepidopteea— NOCTTJENI : insects 

 of this group (and it may be said of all others too), were much less abundant last 

 year than usual. I usually find the Sphingida tolerably plentiful, but in 1883 

 Smerinthus ocellatus, S. populi, S. tilioi, Acheroniia Airopos, Sp/iina? convolvuU, S. 

 ligustri, Choerocampa elpenor and C. porcelhis occurred but sparingly. Macroglossa 

 stellatarum, M. bombyliformis, and Sesia tipuliformis, were, as far as my observation 

 went, very scanty in numbers ; whilst Sesia formicceformis, S. bembeciformis and S. 

 apiformis I did not meet with at all. 



Cossus ligniperda larvae were plentiful in 1881 and 1882, and I reared several by 

 putting them under an aquarium-vase together with pieces of willow bark and chips 

 of wood, and tying the glass firmly down to a piece of slate. They spun cocoons at 

 the end of the autumn, and remained in them during the winter. One or two oblig- 

 ingly spun up close to the glass, so I was enabled to observe them, and noticed that 

 they were still in the larval state. They came out of their cocoons as spring 

 approached, and crawled about the vase for a few weeks and, I presume, resumed 

 feeding. They then one by one, either went back into their old cocoons, which they 

 strengthened with tiny chips of wood interwoven into the substance of the exterior, 

 or they constructed fresh and stronger ones ; I am not quite sure which, as I dis- 

 arranged them a good deal by putting in fresh willow bark, but I am of opinion they 

 constructed new cocoons, and in these they underwent their pupal changes — the 

 imagos coming out in June. 



Zcuzera cesculi : I also met with several larvfe of the wood-leopard the year 

 before last, but failed, unfortunately, to rear any of them. 



Of the rest of the Nociurni I have little to say, I can merely enumerate such 

 species as are generally distributed and common everywhere, witli the remark that 

 each and all were less abundant than usual last year. 



Q-EOMETHiifA : the Geometrina were, as regards some species, fairly plentiful, 

 Abraxas grossnlariata, for instance, was in great numbers even for that, often too, com- 

 mon moth. The principal species I have seen here are, in addition to commoner ones, 

 Sclenia illunaria, Crocallis elinguaria, Phigalia pilosaria, Amphydasis betularia, 

 Hemerophila abrvptaria and Hypsipctes elutata. 



NocTUiNA — Acronycta aceris, I always find in some abundance in the neigh- 

 bourhood of Downing College, although, strange to say, I never see it in any other 

 part of the town, but it was much less common last year, as far as my observation 

 went, and the same may be said of A. ligustri and A. rumicis. 1881 was a grand year 

 for the latter species, I have never seen it so plentiful. The only other NoctucB I 

 particularly noticed last year were Miana furuncula, Caradrina blanda, Agrotis puta 

 Noctua C-nigrum (pretty plentiful in September) and Plusia chrysitis. 



Of the remaining gi-oups I have nothing noteworthy to record, and, all things 

 together, 1883 was a very unsatisfactory year to me. I hope I may do better this. — 

 Albert H. Waters, Mill Eoad, Cambridge : February, 1884-. 



