_ been obtained sufficiently perfect to decide 
_ the question. Dr. Riley, however, informs 
me that the study of a specimen bred, in 
1875, from the blossom of the buckeye, 
Bey which specimen he finds specifically identi- 
pe eal with mine, renders it certain that the 
- insect is not Proteoteras aesculanum. 
Dr. Riley has very kindly allowed me to 
see his notes on, and figures of P. aescu- 
lanum. which show several points in which 
oe aa that species markedly differs from the spe- 
cies which I reared. 
These points are as 
follows — 
; 1. The larva here described bores the 
leaf-stalk of the buckeye and only once 
have I found a specimen in the terminal 
twig. P. aesculanum bores the terminal 
twig as well as the leaf-stalk. 
2. P.aesculanum bores the terminal 
twigs of maple (Acer dasycarpum). I have 
never seen a specimen of the insect here des- 
cribed on a maple nor have I seen a maple 
twig or leaf showing indications of its pres- 
Pee ence. 
3. P. aesculanum often forms a swell- 
ing or pseudogall on the stem. The species 
here alluded to never forms a gall. 
4. P. aesculanum lives in the gall ap- 
parently through almost its whole larval 
stage. The insect here described, however, 
quits the leaf-stalk at the end of two or 
 Deilephila lineata is the most common 
of all the sphingidae here. I have never 
found the larvae on anything but purslane, 
Portulaca oleracea, one of the worst of our 
a b weeds, and on the cultivated species, P. 
an ; grandiflora ; and on these they are found, 
7 , 
PSYCHE. 
367 
three days and lives in a rolled-up leaf. 
5. P. aesculanum bores the stem to a 
depth of from 13 to50 mm. The insect 
here alluded to seldom or never exceeds 
13 mm. in its boring. 
I may add here a few words from a re- 
cent letter from Dr. Riley. 
‘* You are safe in changing the determi- 
nation of your species, for it certainly is 
not Sericoris instrutana, Clem. You are 
safe in saying the species is close to P. aes- 
culana but nevertheless different. not only 
in structure and in some of the details 
of its markings but more particularly in 
having shorter and more acuminate front- 
wings. But it is impossible to characterize 
it either generically or specifically until you 
get absolutely perfect specimens.” 
He writes: 
In conclusion I must express my indebt- 
edness to Prof. Fernald and Dr. Riley for 
the trouble they have taken and the help 
they have given me. Itis only right, also, 
to add, as an excuse for the imperfect state 
of this paper, that the doubt concerning 
the identity of the insect did not arise until 
the greater part of the paper was in type. 
This doubt cannot be removed until the 
brood for 1883 is obtained. In the mean- 
while Prof. Fernald has referred the insect, 
provisionally, to the genus Steganoptycha, 
Stephens (1834), under the name S. clay- 
poleana. 
NOTES ON SPHINGIDAE. 
BY LAFAYETTE WASHINGTON GOODELL, AMHERST, MASS. 
November. I have seen the half-grown 
larvae crawling about on the ground as 
late as 10 Nov., in search of their food- 
plant which had been destroyed by early 
frosts. It is not uncommon to see the 
moths on wing in midday, and often in the 
full sunshine. ‘The moths are particularly 
