280 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 
NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS. 
British CAaraBip#.—I am making an inquiry as to the variation 
of the wings in Carabide, and so far as I have gone at present the 
results are promising to be of interest. But I cannot hope to make 
it satisfactory without the assistance of other entomologists, and I 
shall be greatly obliged if anyone will send me fresh specimens. I 
prefer them unmounted, and they should not be kept long in laurel. 
One of the points is whether there is local variation. Specimens of 
species, even the commoner, from out-of-the-way localities would be 
very acceptable. Specially glad should I be to receive localised 
species, which we may presume to be isolated from other colonies of 
the same species.—D. SHarp; Brockenhurst, October 11th, 1909. 
ACIDALIA DEGENERARIA IN DEvoNSHIRE.—Last year Mr. J. Walker, 
of Torquay, was good enough to send me a pair of A. degeneraria that 
he had reared, with others, from eggs laid by a female moth captured 
in the Torquay district. Just recently he forwarded two other speci- 
mens that he had netted during the present year; these are a trifle 
larger but not so good in condition as the bred examples. Mr. Walker 
states that he first met with the species in 1897, but did not see it 
again until 1904. ‘Since 1904,” he writes, ““I have taken and bred 
them from wild females every year.’’ He considers that A. degene- 
rarva in Devon is of a different form to that occurring in Portland, 
and thinks that it should have a varietal name. Except that the 
purplish bands are dusky rather than reddish tinged, I do not find 
any particular difference between Torquay specimens and examples 
of a second generation from Portland parents, reared in September, 
1904, by Mr. Hyde, of Weymouth.—RicHArp Sours. 
ZEPHYRUS BETULH, ab.—I should like to record the following :— 
From some larve of Z. betule obtained last June near Peterborough 
I have bred a female imago which has an orange band along the 
entire costal margin, tapering to a point at the tip of the wing, and 
reaching in width to the orange blotch in the middle of the wing. 
The hind wings are rather thickly sprinkled with orange, and the 
specimen is somewhat small, about the size of the male.—J. B. 
Morris; 14, Ranelagh Avenue, Barnes, October 14th, 1909. 
THE GeneRIc NAME LomocrapHa.—There is a serious discrepancy 
in the usage of the name Lomographa, Hiibner (‘ Verzeichniss,’ 
p- 311) by our leading workers. It was originally a mixed genus, 
consisting of bimaculata, Fab. = taminaria, Hib., trimaculata, Vill. 
= permutaria, Hib., and levigata, Scop. = renularia et levigaria, 
Hiib., and was allowed to lie dormant until Meyrick (Trans. Ent. Soe. 
Lond. 1892, p. 110) resuscitated it for tremaculata and its congeners, 
removing the other two. Thus trimaculata ought to be the type of 
the genus, and I beg to “select ”’ it as such, in accordance with the 
requirements of the International Code, unless this be considered to 
have been done already by Meyrick. Warren has been using the 
name erroneously in place of Bapta, Steph., and has a note in Noy. 
Zool. vi. p. 842; he ignores Meyrick’s first work (published March, 
1892), though referring to a later one (June, 1892), and his suggestion 
that bimaculata is “the proper type of Lomographa”’ is untenable. 
