Moths neiv to Japan. 123 



that many of the larva3 oi" Noctuitcs commence hfe as semi- 

 loopers or as true loopers, losing the Geometrid character as they 

 advance towards the pupal stage ; a character of this kind is of 

 far more importance than the mere elevation of the anal 

 claspers. 



Once more I may here remai'k that Mr. Pryer, though an 

 excellent collector, and one to whom I am personally much 

 indebted, is not one in whose breeding experiments I have the 

 greatest confidence ; he is so given to jumping to hasty conclu- 

 clusions that it really is not safe to accept his statements as 

 proved facts; he assumes, from the flight of an insect, that it 

 must belong to such and such a tribe, and then, doubtless, he 

 begins to look for " a full fed larva " ! Fancy recognizing at a 

 glance the larva of a moth which one has never reared ! He 

 says of Seudijra snhflava: "I think if you could see it alive, 

 particularly Avhen at rest, you would not entertain a doubt 

 about its being allied to Plusia. I have, I believe, at last 

 succeeded in finding its larva, which is clearly that of a Plusia, 

 but strangely it has a resemblance to the larva of Cocytodes 

 ?nodesta ! " * 



The extravagance of such a suggestion as the al)ove, is not 

 apparent to a collector; he finds a Noctuiform larva, Avhich, 

 after all, he only conjectures to be that of Scudyra, and he con- 

 cludes that the genera Simdyra and Fliisia are one; whereas 

 any student of the Lepidoptera would assure him that, although 

 the Noctuiform larva? of the Agaristidw may prove them to have 

 some affinity to the Noctuites, their structure in the imago con- 

 dition shows that they are more nearly allied to the Castniidre ; 

 I have long held the opinion that the arrangement of the 

 Heterocera should properly commence thus: — Sphingidce, Cos- 

 sida:, Zenzcrido', Hepialida;, Casiniidce, Agaristidce, Noctnites, 

 &c. 



<N 



In thus publishing and commenting upon extracts from 

 Fryer's letter, I do him no wrong; since he either has pub- 

 lished, or intends to publish, these views of his in his " Catalogue 



* &^ince the above was sent to press, I have received a second letter 

 from Pryer in which he speaks thus of S. nocfi(ina — " I took the larva 

 of this at Ammayama and have also bred Sntdt/ni svbfiara taken near 

 my gardens; there is not the slightest doubt about its being a iVocfva, 

 and I believe it to be a Plusia," he then concludes by proving its 

 relationship to other Atjdrisfidff^ thus — "it feeds exposed and emits 

 a very strong smell, musky, when disturbed." An outline sketch in his 

 letter represents the usual type of larva of the latter family. 



