104 VAKIET1ES OF NOCTTLK 



do not now get dissoluta, Tr., but if this and arundineta are, as Dr. 

 Staudinger and others agree, only varieties of the same species, then 

 arundineta and dissoluta are both varieties of Hiibner's neurica, fig. 381. 

 I have no doubt that Dr. Staudinger is wrong in separating these 

 varieties. Certainly Hiibner's neurica and Schmidt's arundineta must 

 be grouped together, and since he himself groups dissoluta with 

 arundineta, it follows that Treitschke was perfectly correct in treating 

 all three forms in his collection as one species, neurica, Hb. 



" I should like to offer a few remarks on the principal points of 

 difference relied on by Schmidt, ' Stettiner Zeitung,' 1858, p. 367. 

 He writes : * The difference . . is less in the markings 



than the different structure of the body and the wings. Neurica, Hb. 

 is the more slender, arundineta the more robust form.' Our British 

 specimens of neurica and its var. arundineta vary very much in the 

 shape of the wings. Some specimens have the wings quite pointed, 

 some very much rounded, and this, of course, makes a great deal of 

 difference in general appearance, and also makes the extreme forms in 

 the one direction appear more robust than the extreme forms in the 

 opposite direction. Schmidt then writes : ' The colour of both, 

 forms varies in the same manner, but arundineta has a dark spot on 

 the underside of each wing, which neurica never has.' This is quite 

 correct ; I find the paler specimens (neurica) of our species have no 

 dots, whilst the darker var. arundineta have them very distinctly. 

 But I find that these spots are directly proportional to the depth of 

 colouring on the upper surface, and that a complete gradation occurs. 

 Schmidt also writes : ' Neurica is on the wing 3 to 4 weeks earlier 

 than arundineta.' This is no proof of distinctness. Mr. W. Warren, 

 F.E.S. writes in the ' Entomologist's Monthly Magazine,' vol. xxii., 

 p. 256 : ' At the beginning of August, Nonagria neurica was abundant ; 

 near Cambridge I have never taken it before August, but in the 

 Norfolk fens, I am told it is out during the second half of July.' 

 This shows that in two adjacent English counties, in localities only a 

 few miles apart, there is a difference of 2 to 3 weeks in the time of 

 appearance. With regard to the statement of Schmidt as to his 

 failure in pairing a neurica with arundineta, it proves nothing, as the 

 $ may have partly lost its vitality. Such a thing often occurs when 

 one breeds lepidoptera on a large scale. The natural history of the 

 species in England entirely upsets Schmidt's theory of distinction, and 

 disposes effectually of all his chief arguments " (' Stett. entomol. Zeit.,' 

 1888). 



In the ' Trans. Ent. Soc. of London,' 1890, p. 664, Mr. Butler 

 treats dissoluta and neurica as distinct species. He at the same time 

 attempts to sub-divide the genus Nonagria, as we now know it, giving 

 as his reason that " the antennae otcannce, lutosa, sparganii amd arundinis, 

 are thicker and more densely ciliated than those in the little dull- 

 coloured species which remain in Nonagria, viz. : N. dissoluta, Tr., 

 punctifinis, Walk, and neurica, Hb." I presume it is to be expected 

 that the antennae of the former (and larger) species would be thicker. 

 Even then, what a character for generic sub-division ! 



Calamia, Hb., lutosa, Hb. 



Vol. i., p. 55. Calamia lutosa var. pilicornis, Haw. Haworth's 

 original description of this variety is as follows: " Noctua. Alis. 



