146 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA. 



it was evidently unknown to Zeller, and I am not disposed to accept 

 Scopoli's precise language as proving the existence of such a species, 

 therefore, I should write aruncella, Scopoli = seppella, Fab. An 

 examination of the genitalia supports the view that British M. arun- 

 cella and British M. seppella are the same species, and I am unable to 

 find any evidence to the contrary among the continental forms " (in 

 litt., April 3rd, 1898). We have since examined Constant's collec- 

 tion and are quite unable to separate his M. aruncella from " Burgundy, 

 Wiirtemburg and Prussia," from his J/. seppella, also from "Burgundy," 

 and we are inclined to think not only that all so-called British M. arun- 

 cella are but forms of M. seppella, but that the Carniolian M. aruncella 

 is identical with the British M. seppvlla. We have, however, nothing 

 but negative proof that the unifasciate M. aruncella is the same as the 

 bifasciate M. seppella. 



Another doubtful point connected with these species relates to the 

 possibility of eximiella, Zell., being synonymous with seppella, Fab. 

 Stainton, in 1850, by comparison of actual specimens, states (Monograph, 

 etc., pp. 39-40) that his aruncella of p. 29 ( = seppella) is the eximiella of 

 Zeller (Stctt. Ent. Zeit., 1850, p. 62). Zeller, in 1851, refers (Linn. 

 Entom., v., p. 327) Stainton's seppella of the Monoyraph, pp. 39-40, to his 

 aruncella, allowing eximiella to rank as a distinct species. The original 

 specimens of the latter were taken in Italy by Mann, and are now in Lord 

 Walsingham's possession. The latter writes : " Zeller seems to have been 

 inclined to sink it, but Mann's specimens, on which it was founded, have 

 a very distinct spot beyond the fasciae, which are themselves remark- 

 ably evident ; moreover, the spot seems to be invariably oblique and 

 inverted. I have a male from Rome possessing the same characters, also 

 three males which I collected in Corfu in 1872, and I think that it will 

 be found that the southern form is worthy to retain the special name 

 eximiella, Zell. Zeller had placed his eximiella with a block of speci- 

 mens consisting entirely of M. seppella, sent by Stainton, in close 

 juxtaposition with aruncella, and he labelled one of Stainton's specimens 

 ' seppella = eximiella.' I am, therefore, unable to account for his having 

 referred seppella, Stn., to aruncella (Linn. Entom., v., p. 327), unless 

 it can be interpreted as an admission that he was unable to separate 

 the species, which is more than probable " (in Hit., April 3rd, 1898). 



Snellen works out the species (or forms) as follows : 

 1. Anmcella, Scop. = the type form. 



var. i. Seppella, Fab. With the addition of a silver spot towards 



the apex. 



var. ii. Eximiella, Zell. With the central line curved, and the 

 spot at the base decidedly lengthened. 



It has been considered advisable, after having reviewed the main 

 evidence relative to M. aruncella and M. seppella being the same species, to 

 work out their synonymy, etc., separately, so that further workers may 

 not be confused by our adopting the simple expedient of lumping them. 



MICROPTERYX ARUNCELLA, ScOp. 



SYNONYMY. Species : Aruncella, Scop , "Ent. Carn.," No. G60, p. 254 (1703) ; 

 Zell., "Isis," 1839. 185; " Linn. Ent.," v., p. 325; Sta., " Mon., Trans. Ent. Soc. 

 Lond.," 1850, 39 (nee p. 29 and PI. iii., figs. 5 <? 6 ? ); " Ins. Brit.." 43 ; " Man.," 

 ii., p. 302 ; H.-Sch., " Sys. Bear.," v., p. 391, no. 2; Frey, "Die Tineen," etc., 48; 

 Stdgr. and Wocke, " Cat.," p 340; Heinemann and Wocke, " Schmett. Deutsch.." 

 p. 772 ; Snellen, " Vlinders," etc., p. 1006; Herklots, " Bouwstoffen Fauna Ned.," 

 etc., iii.. p. 216; Meyrick, "Handbook," etc., 806. Concinnella t , Stephs., 

 "Illus.,"iv., p. 361. 



