{ 124 ) 



tlif ii]>ii'iil one is nearly as long as the scgiiK'nt itself; long terminal spar of 

 hindtibia nearly two-thirds the length of the first tarsal segment. Spurs as a 

 rule with one or more spines. Sexual armature resembling that of yeminus. 

 Paronyehium with long lobes, one on each side. 



S . Tenth tergite more gradually narrowed than in tji'minus ; stcrnite as in 

 that species. Harjje rather deeply concave, intermediate in shape between those of 

 yi'minus and ercmitoides, with a simple dorso-distal tooth ; no serration (though 

 Smith, l.c.y describes the harpe as " dentate and serrate "). Penis-sheath 

 (PI. XXIX. f 7) nearly the same as in (/cminus, the tooth not quite apical ; 

 the lobes projecting from the sheath heavily dentate, with the teeth almost 

 arranged in a row. 



?. Vaginal plate closely resembling that oi gcminus, but as mncli wrinkled as 



Larva jieculiar, tlie third thoracic segment being raised anteriorly into a 

 triangular protuberance, and the third and fourth bearing a velvety black dorsal 

 patch. — Food : Mentha, Sulcia, Monarda. 



Pu])a : tongue-case lU mm. long, straight, slightly separated from the breast, 

 end bulbous. 



llah. Canada to (ieorgia, westward to Missouri. (Clemens records it from 

 Texas 1). 



la the Tring Museum 2 birvae and 1 pupa, and Ki cJcJ, 5 ? ? from : Massa- 

 chusetts ; Illinois ; Virginia. 



97. Hyloicus eremitoides (PI. XII. f. 4, $). 



Sphinx eremitoides Strecker, Lcp. Rhop. Ilet. p. !),3 (1874) (Kansas) ; Schaus, Enl. News vi. p. 143 



(1895) (distinct). 

 Sphinx lugens, Grote (n«» Walker, 18:j6), Bull. Buffalo Soc. N. Sci. i. p. 26 (1874) (Texa-s) ; id., 



Camil. Ent. vi. p. 199 (1874) ; id.. Bull. Buffalo Soc. N. Sci. iii. p. 225. n. 65 (1877) (partim) ; 



Snow, Trans. Kiiiin. Ac. Sci. iv. p. 28 (1875) (larva, pupa) ; Gaum., Oh.i. Nat. ii. (1875) (larva); 



Streck., I.e. p. 115. 142. t. 13. f. 12 (1877) (descr. of larva) ; Grote, Papilio ii. p. 7G (1882) ; 



Neum., Ent. Amer. i. p. 92 (1885) ; Grote, ITawk Mnlhs N. Am. p. 45 (188G) ; Smith, Tmm. 



Amcr. Ent. Soc. xv. p. 191 (1888) (syn. partim) ; Edw., Bnll. U. St. N. Mns. xxxv. p. 48 (1889). 

 Agriu.t liujens, Grote, Bidl. BiiffaUi Soe. N. Sci. ii. p. 228. n. 65 (1875) (p.artim ; " Arizona " ; Texas). 

 Lintneria (V) ereniitnidexj Butler, Trans. Zool. Soc. Lnnd. ix. p. 621. n. 3 (1877) (Kansas). 



As said by Schans, I.e., the present species has nothing to do with lugens of 

 1856, nor is it identical with the species described as separatus by Neumoegen. If 

 one has separatus and eremitoides side by side — and does not compare them too 

 superficially— the distinctness of the insects becomes at once evident. //. eremi- 

 toides is the i)aler and smaller of the two ; it diff"ers from the other chiefly in the 

 following points : the lilack abdominal side-marks are smaller, more triangular, 

 the jjrotlioracic tegulae have no obviously yellow marginal spots, the mesial streak 

 of the mesothoracic tegula is very much narrower, l)eing not essentially heavier 

 than the black dorsal border of the tegula, which border is distinct ; the basal and 

 medio-costal areas of the forewing are more white, the apical, oblique, interrupted 

 black streak is much thinner, the subbasal white band of tiie hindwing is more 

 grey, and the distal border of the hindwing narrower. The midtibia is as long ( ? ), 

 or nearly as long (cJ), as the first two tarsal segments together, while in separatus 

 it equals in length the first tarsal segment (c?), or barely surpasses it (?). The 

 foretibia is more densely spinose (PI. LXIV. f. 3) than in separatus (PI. LXIV. 



