70 'Mv. V. I. Latliy on tJ/c rastiiiiiipe /// tJie 



C//parixsias dedalus, Cram. 

 Paj>i/io ileddlus, Cram. Pap. Exot. i. p. 1, Hj*?. A, V> (1775). 



'I'liip species appears to be much rarer in French (Jiiiaiia 

 lliau C. <nn/ancnsis, Houlb. 



;} ? ? , Lower Maroni, French Guiana. 



Ci/pa){s.'<ia.<t (h(I(ih(s pnraensis, sul).sp. n. 



This form may easily be distinjiuislied I'rom the ty[)ical 

 (ledalus by tlic hirger and more lunuiate sulunarginal s[)ots 

 of tlie liiud \vin<^; these spots have tiie tendency to bo pro- 

 duced alonp: the nervules by yeHowish scaliiifj, and ^ive the 

 impression of an incomplete oval marking; the pale markinos 

 are also more yellowish than in dedalus. 



7 3" c? > C ? ? , Para, Amazon?. 



Cyparissiaii dedalus conspicua^ Rothsch. 



Castnia {Ci/parissias) dednhis consjncua, Roths. Novit. Zool. x\'\i. p. 2 

 (1919). ' 



1 r^ , Buenavi.'^ta, E. Bolivia. 



Ci/paris$ias gur/anensis, Hoidb. 



Castnia guy ancn sis, Iloulb. Etiidts Lt^p. Couip. xiii. p. 50, pi. i. fip-. 1 

 (1917). 



Considerable confusion has arisen over this species, described 

 by Houlbert (lac. cit.). In his " Revision of the Castniina; " 

 (Eludes Lrp. Comp. xv. p. 92) he treats dedalus, Ciam., as 

 an insect unknown in collections. Jordan (in Novit. Zool. 

 xxiv. p. 59, 1917) described a S})ecies under the name of 

 tDXonlisj and pointed out that the chief difference (apart from 

 the structure of the genitalia) is in tlie ab.'^ence of white sjiots 

 above first radian nervule o£ foro wing and in fore wing not 

 liaving a hairy underside. 



Talbot, in his review of Houlbert's -work (Novit. Zool. 

 xxvi. pp. 28-35), makes no mention of any species of the 

 Ci/pariss'ui:<-gvou\). 



Rothschild, in his Supplementary Notes {loc.cit. pp. 1-27), 

 places gvynnensis, Iloulb., as a synonym of didulus, Cram. 



When I arranged the Castniidse in Madame Fournier's 

 collection I had at first followed Rothschild's view, but on 

 going carefully through it a second time, and coniparing tin- 

 specimens determined as grondis^ Jonl., with the figure of 

 guyantnsisy Huulb., I felt almost certain that I had to deal 

 with the .same species. 



