(E.) 



[From the Stettiner Entomologische Zeitung, 31 Jahrgang, No. 10-12, 1870.] 



ON CUCULLIA INTERMEDIA Nov. SPEC. AND C, LUCI- 



FUGA W.-V. 



BY A. SPEYER, M. D. 



Of the group of Cucullia, of which C. umbratica Linn. [Plate 8, 

 fig. 4] is the most common European representative, Guenee in his 

 well-known writings, mentions only one American species, viz., um 

 bratica, which he represents (Noctuelites II, p. 147) as u commune 

 dans toute 1 Europe et PAmeriqne Septentrionale.&quot; Walker also 

 knows of but one American species of this group, not umbratica^ but 

 chamomillce &quot;W.-V., represented in the British Museum by one speci 

 men from Hudson s Bay and one specimen from the State of New 

 York (List of Spec, of Lepidop. Ins. in the Collec. of the I&amp;gt;r. Mus., 

 XI, p. 650). Through the kindness of my friend Mr. Meske, of Albany, 

 N. Y., I have received specimens of the species which, according to 

 his authority, is generally known in America as umbratica [Plate 8, 

 fig. 5], and this species is neither umbratica nor chamomillce , but is so 

 nearly allied to C. ludfuga W.-V., that I was at iirst disposed to take 

 it for a local variety of the last-named species. The receipt of a greater 

 number of specimens from America, accompanied with a drawing and 

 description of the larva, enable me to place the identity of the species 

 beyond all doubt. I have named it intermedia, it being between luci- 

 fuga and lactucce W.-V., having the coloring of the first-named 

 species with the form and markings of the latter, but, in fact, allied 

 more closely to ludfuga. 



The question now arises, is intermedia, which was formerly known 

 in America as umbratica, also the identical C. umbratica of Guenee ? 

 .Guenee was too well acquainted with the differences between urn- 

 Ijratica and ludfuga and their allied species to confound intermedia 

 with the so dissimilar unibratica^ if he really had intermedia before 

 him. He does not, however, expressly say that his statement as to the 

 occurrence of the species is founded on his own examination, for &quot; com 

 mune &quot; umbratica certainly is not, otherwise it would not have escaped 

 my entomological friends in America. I am led to believe that 

 Guenee s statement is only a reproduction of the error made by 

 American collectors ; he, however, cites no American authority. Nei- 

 [Assem. No. 133.] s 28 



