50 
of the investigator. Regarding plagiata Wlk. Mr. Wolley Dod, who 
has recently visited the British Museum and has seen the type, sur- 
prised us with the statement that this was nothing but leucostigma A. 
& S. Sir Geo. Hampson, in answer to our inquiries, confirmed Mr. 
Dod’s opinion and further sent us a colored figure and a photograph 
of the type which removes all doubt from the question; we reproduce 
a figure of same (PI. 7, Fig. 1). 
A species described by Walker as Edema plagiata (1865 Cat. Brit. 
Mus. 32, 427) and at present listed by Dyar under Symmerista (No. 
3125. 1) should by rights fall into the genus Olene. As far back as 
1868 Grote & Robinson, in their remarks on Walker’s types, recognized 
this (Tr. Am. Ent. Soc. II, 86), but their statement has been ignored by 
subsequent authors. Neumoegen & Dyar state (Jn. N. Y. Ent. Soc. 
II, 173, 1894) that the type is lost, but this is erroneous as we have 
a colored figure and a photograph of it received through the kindness 
of Sir. Geo. Hampson. It is a pity that the name plagiata will have 
to be introduced into the genus for a different species from that to 
which until now has been applied, as some confusion is liable to occur, 
but the name appears perfectly eligibly, the old plagiata falling into 
a different genus. 
We have examined in the course of our studies the male genitalia 
of nearly every species but find that they are useless as a means of 
differentiation; they are practically identical throughout the whole 
Tig. r. ¢ Genitalia of o. basiflava Pack. 
