INTRODUCTION. XXV11 



H.-S. and Zethes, Kbr., and as neither of these occur in Britain, being 

 essentially Eastern genera, I do not know them except from the 

 imagines. Staudinger places them with other non-British genera 

 between the Eudididce and Ophiusidce. Grote connects the whole group 

 very closely with the DeUoides. 



Grote says the " NOCTU^E-NONFASCIAT^E of Borkhausen pass almost 

 insensibly into the Catocalince, Packard (= NOOTU^E-FASCIATJS of Bork- 

 hausen) in which the wings widen, the body is more thinly scaled, 

 the antennas more usually filiform, the ornamentation tends to become 

 continuous over both wings and the resemblance to the GEOMETRID^J 

 becomes obvious. In the concluding tribes of the NOCTUIN^E the larvas 

 are also half-loopers, and it may be said that there is an approach 

 to the GEOMETRIC in all stages " (' Kevised Check List of North 

 American Noctuidae,' pp. 44-45). And yet Grote would include the 

 Toxocampidce in the Catocalince, Pack., although there is no doubt that 

 the larvae of the former are practically inseparable, structurally, from 

 those of certain Delto'ides. However, on the whole I quite agree with 

 this author, and although it is impossible to join the GEOMETRY to the 

 NoCTUvE in a linear arrangement, and in fact the total impossibility of 

 such an arrangement may readily be proved, yet the ease with which 

 the NOCTILS: lead through the Delto'ides to the PYEALIDES shows a much 

 nearer connection than with the Geometrid moths which are frequently 

 attached to or follow them in a supposed natural sequence. 



The sub-class Intrusce, Gn. is divided into the three families 

 Amphipyridce, Gn., Toxocampidcv, Gn. and Stilbidce, Gn., all of which 

 have British representatives. It is in this group that there is most 

 question about the natural affinities, and it is here we find great differ- 

 ences of opinion. Staudinger does not even keep the genera placed by 

 Guenee in the Amphipyridce together, for he places Ncenta and Mania 

 next Brotolomia meticulosa in the Hadenidce, Amphipyra between Eusina 

 and Tceniocampa, i.e., between the Caradrinidce and Orthosidce. I do not 

 think that Ncmia and Mania belong to the typical Hadenidce so much 

 as to the Noctuidce, although Amphipyra seems pretty well placed with 

 the Caradrinidce. But the Toxocampidce is a family belonging essentially 

 to this part of the NOCTUJE (FASCIAT^), and its nearness to, if not actual 

 inclusion in the great division DeUoides is without question, and I agree 

 with Staudinger who places it just in front of Zandognatha, Led., 

 although he sandwiches the anomalous species Aventia flexula (larva 

 Catocalia ?) and Boletobia fuliginaria (an admitted Geometer) between 

 them. But the family Stilbidce is another difficult one. Staudinger 

 places it with Caradrina, but I consider that it requires special 

 treatment like Brephides, being very closely allied to no particular 

 genus. However, I am inclined to disagree with Grote who would 

 transfer the Toxocampidce directly into his sub-class Catocalince. 



Guenee's last sub-class Serpentine is divided into four families, of 

 which we have representatives of three in Britain, viz. : Ophiusidoe, Gn., 

 Enclididce, Gn. and Poaphilidce, Gn. These are divided by Staudinger, 

 the Poaphilidce being placed between the Erastridce and Agrophila 

 sulphuralis, which is separated from the rest of the Acontidce. The 

 Eudididce follow this species (sulpharalis), to be followed again by 

 several non-British genera, and these in turn by the Ophiusidoe. 



The Delto'ides were kept essentially distinct as a group equal in 

 value to the whole of the NOCTU^J by Guenee, but I agree with those 

 who classify them as a group of the NOCTU^E. Their relations in the 



