IIESPERID^E. 347 



tinctly liaiiy and scaly ; antcnncv as in Abanlis, but comparatively 

 shorter, and with the club rather more abruptly formed and more 

 rounded at tip. 



Thorax moderately robust, about as lonj^ as abdomen, with rather 

 sparse long hair above laterally and posteriorly. Forc-ivings with costa 

 as in Ahantis ; apex acute but not produced; hind-margin moderately 

 dentate, slightly hollowed just below apex, and again between first 

 median nervule and submedian nervure, the intervening space being 

 convexly prominent ; posterior angle prominent ; these hind-marginal 

 characters more pronounced in the $ ; inner margin concave mesially 

 (more so in PiUaana than in Canopns) ; neuration mainly as in Ahan- 

 tis, but disco-cellular nervules less oblique (the lower one considerably 

 longer and curved inwardly), and discoidal cell longer. Ilind-wings 

 i-ather short, except inner-marginally ; costa short and straight after 

 prominent basal lobe ; hind-margin angulated between first and second 

 subcostal, and more prominently between second and third median 

 nervules ; anal angle moderately lobed ; inner-marginal border clothed 

 with long hair ; cilia very long on anal-angular lobe ; neuration as in 

 Ahantis. Lcgs^ with femora all thinly hairy inferiorly ; middle and 

 liind tibiae with long sparse hair superiorly ; spur-like appendage on 

 fore-tibite well developed, as well as second pair of spurs on liind-tibia3. 



Abdomen shaped as in Ahantis, but bearing dorsally, on posterior 

 part of segments one to three, long, sparsely-set, radiating, erect 

 hairs. 



The shape of the wings, which is unlike that of any other South- 

 African genus of Hespcrida:, best distinguishes Caprona from Ahantis, 

 and at the same time exhibits considerable resemblance to that found 

 in the South- American genus Hdias ; indeed, one species of the latter, 

 H. Laccena, Hewits. (as remarked by Mr. Butler in JEnt. 31. Mag., 1870, 

 p. 98), strikingly resembles C. Canopus both in outline and colouring 

 of the wings, the pattern also nearly agreeing, except in the siiialler 

 size of the transparent spots in H. Lacmna. The exceedingly blunt, 

 evenly-thick club of the antennas, however, well distinguishes Caprona 

 not only from Hdias, but — ^judging from the figure and description — 

 also from the Indian genus Darya, Moore," in which the dentation of 

 the hind-margins is more pronounced. 



The only known species are the type PiUaana, Wallengr., in which 

 the gi-ound-colour is greyish-brown with paler markings, and Canopus, 

 mihi, which is white with ferruginous and blackish markings, — both 

 species bearing also transparent spots. PiUaana is much the rarer, 

 being known only by a very few specimens, respectively obtained in 

 Natal, Bechuanaland, Damaraland, and Matabeleland ; while Cano- 

 pies, with a less extended range (not being known to me to occur in 



1 The fore-coxffi in the S PiUaana (but not in Canopus) have a tuft of long black hairs 

 situated and directed exactly as in Ahantis Levubu, Wallengr. 



- Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1865, p. 781, pi. xlii. fig. 2. The type, D. Hanria, Moore, is 

 described as having " the usual second pair of spurs on the hind-tibise invisible." 



