286 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



larva is certainly that of Acronycta Alni, much shrunk owing 

 to the exhausting operations of the parasites preying on its 

 vitals. The parasites are a species of Anthomyia, probably 

 that called Musca Larvarum by Linneus. The other insect 

 is Ricinus Canis, the common dog-tick ; of course it has no 

 connection with the Acronycta. — E. Newman. 



Henry J. Slack. — Moth with Perforating MaxillcB. — Last 

 year Mr. Mclntire presented to the Microscopical Society a 

 slide containing the antlia of an unknown moth, with the 

 extremity adapted for perforation. The ' Coraptes Rendus' 

 for August 30th, 1875, gives a paper by M. Kiinckel on 

 " Perforating Lepidoptera," with figures of the auger-like 

 proboscis of Australian Ophideres. The paper refers to an 

 account given in the ' Capricornion,' published at Rock- 

 hampton. I can learn nothing of this magazine, which I 

 suppose from its name is issued in tropical Australia. 1 shall 

 be much obliged if you can tell me whether any English 

 moths have perforating proboscis, or any others you may be 

 acquainted with. 1 fancy that, as many entomologists are 

 not microscopists, such a piece of apparatus may have been 

 overlooked. The mounters of objects usually select insects 

 easily obtained, and we may have some like the Ophideres in 

 the respect mentioned. The Ophideres are reported to attack 

 oranges. — H. J. S. 



[I have not seen the paper in the ' Comptes Rendus' to 

 which my correspondent refers, nor do I know any instance 

 of an English moth possessing perforating maxillae ; still I am 

 by no means disposed to deny or doubt the existence of such 

 a structure. Turning to Westwood's ' Modern Classification,' 

 I cannot find any notice of this peculiarity ; and I think that 

 most industrious and praiseworthy compiler would scarcely 

 have overlooked, or failed to repeat, such a record, had one 

 existed prior to 1840, — the date of his great work. Notwith- 

 standing this apparent absence of record, there is nothing 

 improbable in the statement. I must here call attention to 

 the universal belief, repeated by Westwood (Classification, ii. 

 498), that " the mouth of Diptera is formed only for imbibing 

 fluid matter;" and contrast this with what I have stated to 

 be the truth, as shown by M tiller, Bowerbank, Deane, 

 Bennett, and a host of others, and corroborated by my own 

 observations, that all those Diptera, supposed to frequent 



