—45 — 



Zinck. By some slip, PiXif. Grote, in his New Check- List, has put his 

 Crambus goodellianus as a synon\ni of C. Plejadellus, to which it has no 

 resemblance. 



Chilo Plejadellus, Zincken, Germ. INIag. IV, p. 251 (1821). 



Crambus Plejadellus, Zeller, Chil. etCramb. , p. 26 (1863). 



Diphryx prolatella, dole, Bull. U. vS. Geo. Sur. VI, p. 273 (1881). 



Chilo oryz.eellus, Riley, Rept. Dept. Ag-. for 1881-2, p. 135 (1882.?). 



This species belongs to the genus Chilo and should be known by 

 the name of Chilo plejadellus, Zinck. 



The genus Diphryx was established for an imperfect female of this 

 species, but since more perfect examples do not differ structurally from 

 the type of Chilo, the generic name Diphryx cannot be used. Prof Riley 

 was led into the error of redescribing this species, partly by my inability 

 at the time to say positively that it was Grote's species, and partly be- 

 cause Grote expressed the opinion that it was not his species. Prof 

 Riley states concerning this insect : " It is in fact, as we have always felt, 

 congeneric with the larger sugar-cane and corn-borers treated of in the 

 last annual report of the Entomologist under the generic n-^Lvae. Dialrcea.'' 

 In this, Prof. Riley is mistaken, since D. saccharalis, Fab., has no ocelli, 

 and the venation of the wings is quite different from C. oryzLeellus, Riley, 

 which has ocelli. These differences have long been considered of generic 

 value by every worker on the Microlepidoptera. 



Zeller in his Monograph has made many errors on the synonomy of 

 our Cramlndte, and Grote was apparently led by him into some of the 

 same errors. The difficulty was in not being able to determine the spe- 

 cies of Clemens. C. involufellus and pulchellus are not synonyms of 

 leachellus, but o{ prcpfeclcUus. 



Miss Emily L. IMorton, in collecting larv^ of Lepidoptera last year, 

 put a mixed lot in a breeding box. Among others emerging afterwards 

 in the imago form, was Aletia argillacea, Hb., the cotton worm. As 

 beyond a penadventure none of the larvae Avere taken from the cotton 

 plant, it may be considered proved beyond question that the larva? feed, 

 in the North at least, upon one food plant other than cotton. 



* 

 A novel exhibibition has during the last month been given to the 

 people of New York and vicinity. Mr. Neumoegen, of the Brooklyn 

 Society, has, as is well known, an unrivalled collection of Native and 

 Exotic Lepidoptera. This has been on exhibition at the Eden Musee 

 and has excited a very great deal of interest in the city. 



