4 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 
be illogically applied than that complicating exceptions should 
be allowed into a simple system; and in any case ochrata, Scop. 
(Stephens’ choice—Curtis’ is ultra vires, for aversata was placed 
in Idea, Tr.), which would have to be accepted under the Code, 
would no better fulfil the evident original intention of Schiffer- 
muller and Treitschke than does strigaria. Therefore, I accept 
strigaria, Hub., as the type of Acidalia, Tr., Dup. restr. Perhaps 
it is a just retribution on Treitschke for creating such a ‘‘ mixed 
genus,” and it saves the name of Operophtera, Hub., for brumata. 
I showed in ‘The Entomologist’ for 1906 (xxxix. 266) 
that on every conceivable ground then known to me ornata, 
Scop., was the type of Schrank’s genus Scopula; and as I believe 
no one had ever previously “‘ selected a type” from Schrank’s 
two species, I claim that this action can stand, in spite of the 
indifference of the Code to generic diagnosis. The genus, if we 
give it Hampson’s scope, will be Scopula = Acidalia = Arrhostia 
= Leptomeris = Craspedia = Emmiltis = Dosithea; but as it is 
possible to make a separate genus, on wing form, for the ornata 
sroup, I would suggest that believers in small genera subdivide 
thus :— 
A. Scopula, Schrank = Craspedia, Hb. = Dosithea, Dup. (type, 
ornata, Scop.). Hind wing with margin more or less scolloped, 
especially between vein 4 and 6. 
B. Acidalia, Tr. = Arrhostia (Hb.), H.-S. = Leptomeris (Hb.), 
Meyr. = Emmiltis (Hb.) Warr., (type, virgulata, Schiff. = strigaria, 
Hb.). Hind wing with margin not scolloped. 
Sterrha, Hb., and Ptychopoda, Stph., abide unmoved amidst 
all these changes. 
December 9th, 1908. 
THE ATHALIA GROUP OF THE GENUS MELITAA. 
By Grorcre WuHeeter, M.A., F.E.S. 
(Continued from vol. xli. p. 307.) 
BeroreE entering upon the general question of variation, and 
especially upon the original descriptions of the named varieties, 
there is one of the latter which seems to me to merit special 
attention on the ground that it is almost certainly a distinct 
species, viz. the Bukowina form generally known as aurelia var. 
dictynnotdes, Horm. This form is described very completely and 
at great length in ‘Iris,’ x., pp. 2 et seq. (1898). Finding that no 
specimen at my disposal really corresponded with this description, 
particularly in the matter of the remarkably elongated wings, on 
which great stress is laid in the description, I wrote to Herr von 
Hormuzaki, who courteously replied, sending me a pair taken on 
Mt. Cecina, near Czernowitz, the same locality from which the 
