130 NATURAL SCIENCE [February 



to Dobson, and not to Miller, that the changes from Vespcrtilio to 

 Myotis, from Vesperus to Ve&pertilio, and from Vespencgo to Pipis- 

 tcTullus will come as such a shock to older workers ; for, like those 

 since introduced by Blanford and others, they ought all to have been 

 made twenty years ago, and we should then have had something 

 approaching stability in bat nomenclature. 



As usual in this series of publications, the get-up and illustrations 

 are excellent, and the only criticism we have to make is that in the 

 index some typographical indications might have been given to show 

 which of the references is the main one, as when one wants the 

 general account of a species, it is annoying to be referred first to the 

 historical list of names, then to the general list of North American 

 species, then to the synoptical tables, and perhaps last of all to that 

 which one most often wants, the main account of the species. 



0. T. 



British Butterflies and Moths 



The Lepidoptera of the British Islands. By Charles G. Barrett, F.E.S. 

 Vol. iv. Heterocera, Noctuae. 8vo, pp. 404. London: L. Reeve & Co., 1897. 

 Price, 12s. (large jjaper edition, with 48 coloured plates, £3, 3s.) 



It is satisfactory to note that the successive volumes of Mr Barrett's 

 work appear at ever-decreasing intervals. The publication of the fourth 

 volume less than a year after the third is highly creditable, and raises 

 hopes that the entire work may be issued within a reasonable time, 

 though the maunitude of the task which Mr Barrett has set himself 

 would daunt a less industrious and painstaking worker. It is impos- 

 sible to help regretting the space devoted to the long detailed descrip- 

 tions of species so well known and so often described before. Could 

 these have been curtailed, the work would have gained in portability, 

 cheapness and rapidity of publication. 



The present volume gives us an account of ninety-live species of 

 owl-moths classed liy Mr Barrett in thirty genera. The agrotid 

 section is concluded with Axylia (doubtless rightly placed here), 

 Triphaena and Noctua ; after which Eurois (comprising the species 

 adusta, herhida, occulta and saturci) leads on to those genera which 

 in the old Gueneean classification were placed in the two separated 

 " families " Apameidae and Hadenidae. For adopting a new arrange- 

 ment of the noctuid genera, Mr Barrett deserves the warmest thanks 

 of all progressive entomologists, even though some of his generic 

 associations may not stand the test of further research. If the 

 great genus Ayrotis, as understood l)y Lederer and Hampson, is to 

 be subdivided, our " yellow-underwings " should surely be distri- 

 buted into two genera, since the front tibiae are unarmed in the 

 broad-bordered, and spincd in the narrow-l3ordered group. Mr 

 Barrett's genus Mamcstra includes only the species hrassicac, 

 alhicolon and pcrsicccriae. This last-named moth is, however, held 

 by most authorities to be congeneric with the species for which 

 Mr Barrett retains the name Hadcna, while hrassicac with its 

 hooked fore-tibiae is well wortliy of generic separation. No one 

 will object to Mr Barrett's division of the old genus Aplecta of 

 British entomologists into one germs {Eurois) with the naked-eyed 

 species, and another {Aplecta) not very nearly allied including the 



