74 TIIIKD ANNUAL REPORT OF 



colored points. L< ,< of the same color, the thoracic with three In-own, or Mack spots outside, the 

 prolegs with purplish dingers. Described from two grape-feeding, two poplar-feeding specii lens 



Pupa.— Highly polished mahogony-brown, rather short and thick, iuipunctate, and with two 

 small short spines and severaJ fine curled bristles at the extremity. 



Imago. — Front Wings, with the costal margin more or less arched and the posterior margin 

 more or less scalloped or dentate : genera] color brown, being variegated with a pale glossy gray, 

 with more or less fulvous, glossy purple-brown and unpolished purple-black; the trans\ ir • ul- 

 terior nearly obsolete or tolerably well defined, in strong zigzag, pale with a dark shade each side; 

 reniform spot entirely obsolete, or well indicated and pale ; orbicular small and illy defined, or 

 large and forming a pale ring with the centre sometimes concolorous, sometimes lighter than me- 

 dian space, and with the basal side sometimes, nol always, extended into a beak or point; trans- 

 verse posterior well relieved inside but nol outside, excepl a1 costa ; itstarts distinctly about the 

 middle or a little outside the middle of costa, runs outwardly at right angles along i ostal nerve, 

 either its own width or twice its width, thence obliquelj mil wan!.- inwards the middle of the wing, 

 with a more or less conspicuous inward jog or curve in discoidal cell ; thence across the wing in 4 

 undulations : in some specimens it makes an obtuse angle, so that the inner half runs parallel with 

 the posterior margin, in others it runs almost straight across the wing-, so as not to be parallel with 

 the margin at an_v point ; in some it traverses the wing- so as to leave u i'ull third, in others so as to 

 leave only a fourth of the wing outside; subterminal line pale and broken, scarcely distinguisha- 

 ble, or well defined, especially at costa, where the apical space is pale and blends with it, or as 

 brown as the rested' wing- and relieves it; a series of 8 more or less distinct pale terminal dots, often 

 relieved by an outer black shade, fringes concolorous : sometimes with a pale middle line often 

 broken and appearing like a second series of dot.-; the posterior median .-pace is the darkest, and 

 the subterminal space the lightest portion of the wing, though the contrast is often ver) slight. 

 In one dark specimen the sagittate spot- and a longitudinal shad • in the discoidal cell an I 

 below the Mili-median nerve— the two dividing- the wing in three equal parts longitudinally —are very 

 conspicuous from their being- very dark and without gloss ; in two specimens these marks are en- 

 tirely obsolete ; under surface smoky-gray, more or less suffused with fulvous, and with a dark 

 shade below transverse posterior. Hind ici'.gs bright glossj cupreous, or with but a very faint tint 

 of this color, and more or less distinctly grayish-brown along the costa to the third superior nerve 

 and the upper posterior border ; fringe scalloped, grayish-brown, with an inner paler hue ; under 

 surface more or less concolorous, with the lunule indicated and with a broad line, half black, half 

 cupreous. Thorax, with the scales large and mixed fulvous and brown. Abdomen, with the ides 

 dark, intercepted by tiie fulvous margins of joints ; anal tuft more or less rufous. Leys with the 

 tibi;c and tarsi alternately fulvous and brown. Expanse 1.65-1.90 inches. 



Described from four bred and four captured specimens. 



Tin- differences between the European [>ij amidea and this species, as given by Guenee, are : First, 

 Inpyramidea the transverse posterior curves outward near the costa, so as to produce an inward sinus 

 in the discoidal cell, while in pyramidoides it runs neai ly straight and obliquely : Secondly, inpyra- 

 midoides this line is said to border a median space almost always darker than the rest of win;.- and 

 absorbing the darker longitudinal lines, while the light lines are given as narrower than in py re midea, 

 and the subterminal more continued to costa, where it borders, or cuts, as Guenee has il, a light 

 apical space. While the difference mentioned in the transverse posterior is tolerably constant in 

 the eight specimens of pyramidoides in my possession, I ha\ e seen two in other collections where this 

 line was almost a lac-simile of the same line in pyramidea : and the other characters, as will be seen 

 from the above description are quite variable, sometimes approaching the tj pical pyramidea and some- 

 times the typical pyramidoides. The same variations doubtless occur in the European species, for if 

 we can rely on Mr. Edward Newman".- figure (British Moil-, p. 457,) the median space is sometimes 

 as much darker than the subterminal in their insect a- <t is said, by Guenee, to be in ours Upon 

 critically examining two European specimens of pyramidea in the collection of my friend, Mr. A. 

 Boll . of Chicago, I find this shade very distinct on the posterior portion of the median space, 

 but instead of closelj bordering and relieving thi i terior it lades somewhat before 



reaching it. The transverse posterior crosses the wing nearer the middle than in our species, leav- 

 ing, in o lecimens, more than one-third of the wing outside. But the distingui hing 

 features which struck me a less subject to variation than those mentioned by Guenee, are the 



somewhat more elongate wings aud the broader, more di tinct, subterminal lii I pyrami ea. 1 



na\ e little doubt, howei er, hut that from a, hundred specimens of each species at leasl on pyrami- 

 dea and one pyramidoides could be found that were undistinguishable in themselves. The under* 

 : -l' the two specii s agree entirely. 



