— 121 — 



Note on Cerathosia tricolor, Sf?i. 

 By a. R. Grote, A. INI. 



Through the kindness of Mr. Graef I have several specimens of 

 Cerathosia t7-icolor, described by Mr. J. V>. Smith, on p. 79, V(,)l. Ill, of 

 this Journal, as a new genus and species of Arctiidce from Texas. The 

 moth is new to me and I do not venture a decideti opinion as to its posi- 

 tion, but I quite decidedly dissent from the position assigned it by Mr. 

 vSmith. In the first place 1 wish to correct the diagnosis of the neuration. 

 INIr. Smith says of hind wings: "5 wanting." Now 5 is distinctly 

 present ; weaker, as in many Noctuidoe, but midway between 4 and 6. 

 In the ArctiidtP 4 and 5 are near together. On the primaries there is a 

 small accessory cell, from the lower and outer angle of which 6 is given 

 ofl". From the upper outer angle vein 7 proceeds, throwing off 8 at a 

 short distance to apex and at a shorter distance 9 to costa. 3, 4 and 5 

 are not "nearly equidistant," as Mr. Smith says, but 4 and 5 are more 

 than twice as near at base to each other than to 3 On hintl wings the 

 cell is closed by a weak vein Having studied the neuration of such 

 Noctuid genera as Spragiieia, Grotella and Acopa, the neuration of CVr^- 

 thosia reminds me of these. The singular insect looks like a Lithosian 

 from the- narrow wings, but the ocelli exclude it. It is not allied to 

 Psecadia and the Micros, because the hind wings have two internal veins. 

 The claw on the tibi^ and especially the embossed front, the tongue, are 

 all much as we find them in the smaller Nocttiidce allied to Grotella. In 

 the neuration of primaries I wish \.o correct also Mr. Smith's statement 

 that " 10 springs from upper angle of accessory cell." Vein 10 springs 

 from the middle of the upper margm of accessorv cell. If we correct 

 these neurational characters on both wings, we shall incline to consider 

 the moth, notwithstanding its Lithosii-form look, a Noctuid. The clypeus 

 with its lower edge projecting like a rim and its sub-central button-like 

 projection is quite unlike the Arctndo'. It is paralleled by genera inbotli 

 Noctuidcp and Pyralidce which I have not by me to compare. The weak 

 vein 5 of secondaries, equidistant between 4 and 6, springing from the 

 middle of the weak cross vein closing the median cell, will not allow us 

 to refer the moth to the Arctiidcr. I am sure that onlv a casual re- 

 semblance would allow us to place the moth, as Mr. Smith desires us to, 

 next to Utetheisa ( Deiopeia). The "wing form" is notj^-I think, identical 

 in these two genera. The outer margin of primaries is somewhat oblique 

 '\n Cerathosia ; the secondaries not so full. While I should rather con- 

 sider the Texan form a Noctuid, I do not certainly refer the insect there 

 from the want of material to compare it with. Yet it belongs more natur- 

 ally to the Xoctuidce from my memory of the structure of manv N. .Am. 

 genera. In my opinion the comparison of the insect with Ocnogyna nn 

 account of the tibial claw is wide of the mark and irrelevant. 



