On a new Oenus of North- American Moths. 461 



LI I. — Description of a neio Genus for the reception of the 

 North- American Moths hitherto referred to Telesilla of 

 Herrich-Schafer. Bj A. G. BuTLER, F.L.S., F.Z.S., &c. 



Placodes cineeeola of Guende, the type of the proposed new 

 genus, was associated by its describer with the European P. 

 amethystina ; but as tlie name Placodes had been previously 

 used in Coleoptera, Herricli-SchafFer, in the Index to his- 

 ' Schmetterlinge von Earo])a,' proposed to substitute for it the 

 generic name Telesilla (subsequently duplicated in the class 

 Aves). The date of the publication of this name was 1856. 

 In 1857 Lederer, not having noticed Herrich-Schiiffer's 

 action, pi'oposed for the same genus the new denomination of 

 Eucarta ; he, however, incorrectly stated that Diastema, 

 Guen., was only distinguishable from it by the want of tufts 

 on the abdomen, which was insufficient for generic separation : 

 had tliis been the case the name Diastema would have neces- 

 sarily superseded both Telesilla and Eucarta ; but Herrich- 

 SchiifFcr, who examined two males, states that D. virgo differs 

 so much in character from T. amethystina that it cannot stand 

 in the same genus. In addition to tlie absence of the tufted 

 dorsal crest of the abdomen (which was the only difference 

 discovered by Lederer) he says that the margin of the fore 

 wings is strongly sinuous and quite straight-lined, which 

 seems a somewhat contradictory statement, but the hind wings 

 are deeply indented at vein 5. Antennge extremely shortly 

 ciliated, every joint with two somewhat longer bristles. 



From this I should judge that the ciliatiou of the antennae 

 was much more marked than in T. amethystina, in which, 

 excepting when seen through a lens and in a good light, they 

 appear to be simple. I therefore retain both genera. 



As T. amethystina does not appear to be found in North 

 America, although common to Europe and Japan, it is not 

 surprising that Mr. Grote and others should liave followed 

 M. Guen^e in associating the Placodes cinereola of that author 

 with T. amethystina ; but when I had the two insects before 

 me, in the course of my rearrangement of the Noctuites, I was 

 so struck by their different appearance and the totally dis- 

 similar character of their markings, that I felt convinced that 

 they could not be congeneric; I therefore asked my colleague 

 Mr. Waterhouse to prepare the wings of duplicates of the 

 two forms for com])arison by clearing them of their scales, 

 and the result was that I })roved them to belong to entirely 

 distinct though allied genera. The must important diiFe'rences 

 nevertheless arc not in t!ie wings but in the legs. 



