263 
Geometridac of the Argentine Me-piiblic. 
America, though I cannot speak positivel}’’ of this. I have a 
specimen from Jamaica, and the British Museum another. 
I published a note on the synonymy of this species a 
couple of years ago (Entom., xli, 77), but bad not at 
that time discovered that rnediata. Walk., belonged here. 
Schaus, Proc. Zool. Soc., 1896, 646, refers it to jiuviata 
but this is explained by the fact, which I learned from 
Mr. E. Dukinfield Jones’ collection, that Mr. Schaus 
formerly confoumied centrostrigaria and fturiata as sexes 
of a single species.* I have now examined Walker’s type 
of mediata. 
99. Orthonama vittulata (Schaus). 
Phihalapteryx vittulata, Schaus, Tr. Amer. Ent. Soc. 
xxvii, 272 (1901). 
? Orthonama dendlineata, Warren, Nov. Zool., xiv, 228 
(1907). 
Tucuman, in coll. Dognin. 
Schaus’ type was from Bolivia. I have not seen it, but 
I believe that Warren’s densilineata, from Peru, will prove 
a synonym, or an aberration or variety, of the same. 
100. Orthonama superjecta (Prout), nov. sp. 
(Plate XLVIII, fig. 40.) 
^. .30 mm. Antenna nearly simple, minutely ciliated. Wings 
with margins gently waved (in hindwing suhcrenulate), the terminal 
line almost continuous (not broken at all into spots), only slightly 
thickened between the veins and interrupted at the vein-ends. 
Forewing grey, finely irrorated with brown, crossed by numerous 
dark lines (mostly straight), and shaded with brown basally, and 
in the median area with the exception of its central part; edge of 
basal area angled on SC, inner brown band of median area slightly 
constricted on SC ; subterminal line nearly straight, very faintly 
waved, dark shaded proximally ; discal spot distinct, black ; fringe 
narrowly pale proximally and distally, more broadly dark medially. 
Hind wing similarly, but weakly marked, slightly darkened distally 
(especially at inner margin), with rather conspicuous pale sub¬ 
terminal line. Underside marked nearly like the upper, but much 
more weakly. 
* When this was written, I had overlooked Dr. Dyar’s note in 
Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash., x, 34 (sub Hydriomena latir\tpta), which 
confirms, from Mr. Schaus’ own collection, the deduction which I 
made from Mr. Jones’. 
