ORTALID^E RIVELLIA. 93 



somewhat narrower crossbands. Nevertheless, I consider it only 

 as a variety of E. Jlavimana, which seems to be very variable m 

 the coloring of the feet. 



Observation 2. Eivellia Boscii R. Desv. cannot very well be 

 identified with E. Jlavimana, as it is described as considerably 

 larger than E. viridulans, whereas E. Jlavimana is distinctly 

 smaller. I did not succeed in identifying this species of Rob. 

 Desvoidy ; his data concerning the coloring do not agree with 

 E. quadrifasciata and variabilis, and E. pallida is still less to 

 be taken into account. 



Observation 3. At first, while in possession of insufficient 

 materials, I took E. viridulans, quadrifasciata, variabilis, and 

 Jlavimana for varieties of the same species, and it is only later 

 that more abundant materials convinced me that they are actually 

 different, although closely allied, species. It is in conformity 

 with my former view that I have identified with E. viridulans the 

 Eerina metallica described and figured by v. d. Wulp in the 

 Tijdschrift voor Entomologie, x, p. 154, Tab. Y, f. 10. If my 

 present separation of these species be correct, the only ones 

 which can be taken into consideration in interpreting Mr. v. d- 

 Wulp's species are E. Boscii, Jlavimana, and perhaps E. micans. 

 E. Boscii is so inaccurately described by R. Desvoidy that its 

 identification is very difficult anyhow ; but as this species is 3 

 lines long, that of v. d. Wulp only If, I consider their identity 

 as not probable. The assumption that my E micans is the 

 Herina metallica of v. d. Wulp is contradicted by the very bril- 

 liant metallic-green coloring of the former. Moreover, v. d. 

 Wulp's figure does not show, at the basis of the first basal cell, the 

 dark coloring existing in E. micans, which coloring has the same 

 extent, although not the same intensity, as in E. viridulans. 

 If the correctness of the figure of the wing of Herina metallica 

 could be implicitly relied upon, its specific diversity from E. 

 micans would be a matter of certainty. But in this case I 

 would have also to admit that H. metallica does not coincide 

 with any of the species of Eivellia known to me, as the said 

 figure differs from those species, especially in the broad interval 

 between the first and second crossbands, which does not occur to 

 that extent in any of them. We are forced to assume, therefore, 

 that the figure of the wing is only of an average correctness, and 

 to pay attention, in its interpretation, to the principal features 



