79 
spinigera, Gwenee. 
New York; Pennsylvania. 
connecta, Grote.® 
New York. 
8 
funeralis, Grote and Robinson. 
Canada; Ohio. 
S 
innotata, Guenée. 
Diphthera Graefii, Grote. ¢ 
New York; Pennsylvania. 
§ Acronycta, /Zitdner, restr. (1816). 
Type: Noctua leporina, Linnaeus. 
Lupini,® Behr. 
California. 
lepusculina, Guenée. 
Acronyctau populi, 2d Missouri Report. 
Pennsylvania; Missouri. 
insita, Walker. 
New York. Spec. distinct. ? 
§ Megacronycta,’ Grote (1873). 
Type: Acronycta hastulifera, Guenée. 
hastulifera, Guence. 
Phalaena hastulifera, Abbot and Smith. 
Apateta americana, Harris. 
Canada; Pennsylvania; Massachusetts ; Southern States. 

5 Acronycta connecta, n. 8., 2, is the narrowest winged species known to me. The body is 
rather long and stout. Hoary gray, with a testaceous tinge, the markings indistinct. The 
wing is darker clouded centrally and above internal margin between the basal and internal 
black dashes. The costal marks are very faint. The orbicular is a yoid, rather small annulet, 
and its more whitish hue contrasts. The reniform is also rather small, distinctly ringed 
inwardly where it is stained, incompletely margined outwardly where it is whitish. The t. p. 
line is well removed to the external margin superiorly. A dark shade, not a streak, opposite 
the cell. Terminal elongate interspaceal black streaks. Hind wings whitish with darker 
clouded borders. Beneath dusted, with faint dot and line. 
Fapanse, 1.2%5inch. Sharon Springs, from O. Meske. 
6 I have a single specimen of this species that I refer to this section. Compact, stout-bodied, 
and thickly scaled; primaries narrow without saggitate marks, median shade distinct, t. p. line 
continuous with succeeding gray shade, fringes minutely black dotted; secondaries with 
immaculate fringes. The specimen is obscurely colored, perhaps stained; size of leporina. 
1 Gr: péyac et Acronycta. In this section vein 5, is hardly weaker, and the cell is in part 
closed by a veinlet as strong as vein5. The fore tibiae are somewhat thickened. I do not 
think the species belongs to Stephens’ genus Apatela, of which we appear to have a wrong idea 
