ON HYDROECIA JBUKKOWSl, N. SP. 109 



On Hydroecia burrows!, n. sp. {With Plate.) 



By T. A. CHAPMAN, M.D. 



Mr. Burrows has recently given us, in the Tramactiom of the 

 Entomological Society/'- a complete account of his researches so far in 

 the nictitanst group of the genus Hi/ilmrrio. He had at various times 

 told us something about them before, but now we have the results of 

 his work clearly set forth. 



I had the pleasure of supplying him with various examples of this 

 group from a good many localities, and amongst some Asiatic examples 

 he found a species he had not previously met with, and which he has 

 named asiatica : of this he only found one example. I have since 

 obtained Asiatic material from Staudinger and others, and amongst 

 these some eight or ten more asiatica tiirned up, all of them labelled 

 Juldus Kuldscha, a locality different from that of the first specimen, 

 but no example was found amongst " nictitans" from any other 

 locality. The great mass of the specimens belonged to one species 

 which I will call palndis, though Mr. Burrows has not yet condescen- 

 ded to name it. I thus obviously run the risks that befal those that 

 " rush in where, etc." I have no authority to quote Mr. Burrows on 

 this matter, but I believe he is still investigating the relations (if any) 

 between lucens and palialis in Britain, and till he has satisfied himself 

 on various points, will not commit himself as to non-British forms. 

 My own opinion, which must be taken as very provisional, is that 

 these two forms are distinct species in Britain, but that these Asiatic 

 specimens are not too distinctly the one or the other. However, I do 

 not profess to have, nor desire to express, any decided opinion as to 

 these being palndis, I only want provisionally to use a name for these 

 forms, my only present concern is with //. hnrroivsi. 



The genitalia of all the forms dilierentiated by Mr. Burrows are 

 most abundantly distinct, asiatica might indeed belong to a different 

 genus, and only litcciis and palndis at all closely resemble each other. 



Amongst those paludis received from Staudinger was one very 

 large specimen from Vladivostock, which, on examination of the 

 appendages, turns out to be a new and very distinct form. Not only 

 is the specimen itself large, but the appendages also are very large and 

 bold. Unfortunately there is only the one specimen. Another, 

 looking very like it and about as large, from Manchuria, is only 

 paludis. 



I propose to gratify my regard for Mr. Burrows and to honour him 

 for his work on this group by naming this fine form burrowsi. 



Hydroecia burronsi, n.sp. The specimen is very large, 39mm. 

 amongst all the Asiatic specimens Qialndis) few approach it, one from 

 Manchuria 37mm., and one or two labelled Amur nearly the same, 

 but the majority are only 32-34 mm. in expanse. In colour it is a 

 deep rich red-brown, with brighter red stigmata, a coloration quite 

 the same as several of the paludis. We may expect that a series would 

 shew variations of colour similar to those in the other species of this 

 group of the genus Hydnccia. 



In markings there is one difference from the paludis. Beyond the 

 stigmata are two nearly parallel lines, and the space between the outer 

 one and the margin is divided into two by an angulated line. In 



ngii, p. 738. 

 May 15th, 1912. 



