THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 283 



specimens of the perfect insect have been fonnd in rotten 

 wood, and sent home in it to this country, which they have 

 reached alive. One would think, from analogy with the glow- 

 worm, that, if the larva of the firefly had been observed, it 

 would readily have been recognized from being phosphorescent ; 

 for not only is the female of the glowworm luminous, but also 

 the male ; and the larva3, and even the eggs, are said to be 

 faintly phosphorescent. But supposing the larva of the fire- 

 fly to be phosphorescent and to live in the trunks of rotten 

 trees, it may very well be that they have been often seen in 

 the day-time, and their phosphorescence not observed. En- 

 tomologists may go into the woods at night with nets and 

 lamps to catch nocturnal moths; but we doubt if any one 

 ever went to break up rotten trees. That could be as well 

 done and the captures as well made in the day-time, and 

 would consequently only be done with a purpose, and that 

 the purpose of settling this very question, an idea which, so 

 far as 1 know, has not yet occurred to any one possessed of 

 the requisite facilities — that is, living in the American tro- 

 pical countries. 



One important means which probably exists of determining 

 its larva has thus never been put to use ; for I can find no 

 mention anywhere of a phosphorescent larva belonging to or 

 resembling those of the Elateridaj, or any other than the 

 glowworm. There has, indeed, been described a supposed 

 larva of the firefly. Erichson describes in a few words a 

 larva which he thinks may be referred with doubt to the Py- 

 rophorus noctilucus, but he says nothing of phosphorescence ; 

 indeed his specimen would be dead, and either pinned or 

 preserved in spirits, and consequently could not show it. 

 Moreover the description, according to Candeze and Cha- 

 puis, comes nearest to the larva of Alaus aculatus ; and this 

 is widely separated from the present larva. So far as our 

 materials go, therefore, the inference to be drawn from them 

 is opposed to this species belonging either to the fireflies or 

 the glowworms, I am bound to say, however, that I do not 

 think Erichson's reference can be taken as of much weight. 

 It was obviously a mere guess as to the relationship of an 

 unknown larva ; and if we put it aside we shall immediately 

 see that, while there are some points in the present larva 

 which may be used as arguments in favour of its being 



