298 Dr. A. G. Butler on Abnormal Variahility in the 



EXPLANATION OF THE PLATES. 

 Plate VII. 



Fi(/. 1. Tarantula Icevifrons, sp. u. Carapace and chela, X 1|. 



Fuj. 1 a. Ditto. External view of upper edge of tarsus. 



Fi(j. 2. Tarantula azteca, sp. n. Carapace and chela, X \\. 



Fiff. 3. Tarantula macrops, sp. n. Carapace and chela, X 1^. 



Fu/. 3 a. Ditto. Lateral view of anterior end of carapace. 



Fuj. 4. Tarantula Whitel (Gerv.). Carapace and chela, X I|. 



Fig. 4 a. Ditto. External aspect of tarsus. 



Fig. 5. Tarantula Gervaisii, sp. n. Carapace and chela, X Ih 



Fig. 5 a. Ditto. External aspect of tarsus. 



Fig. G. Tarantula pulchripes, &^. Ti. Carapace and chela, X l^. 



Fig. 6 a. Ditto. External aspect of tarsus. 



Fig. 7. Tarantula Thorellii, sp. n. Carapace and chela, X li. 



Fig. 8. Tarantula tessellata, Pocock. Penes of male protruding between 



genital operculum and second sternite. 

 Fig, 8 a. Ditto. Lower side of genital operculum of female. 



Plate VIII. 



Ft(/. 1. Heterophrynus cervinus, sp. n. Right chela, nat. size. 



Ftq. 2. Tifatiodamoji Johnstorni, sp. n. Nat. size. 



Fig. 2 a. Ditto. Genital operculum and second sternite, to show bud-like 



appendages. 

 Fig. 2 6. Ditto. Anterior half of carapace from above, to show frontal 



process. 

 Fig. 3. Phrynichus Jayakari, sp. n. Carapace and chela, X 1^. 

 Fig. 4. Phrynichus Phipsoni, sp. n. Carapace and chela, X 1^. 



XXXVIII. — Ahnormal Varialility in the Antennal Characters 

 of Cosmophila erosa, Eiihn. By ARTHUR G. Butler, 

 Ph.D. &c. 



The structure of the male antennge in moths has very fre- 

 quently been used as the sole character for distinguishing- 

 genera. Mr. Hampson, however, has decided to regard all 

 chai'acters found only in one sex as of secondary importance, 

 and consequently has degraded all genera which can only be 

 separated when both sexes are known, or by the male sex 

 apart from the female, to the rank of sections (or subgenera). 



Antennal structure frequently differs widely in species 

 which unquestionably are very nearly related, as, for instance, 

 in Bomhycia^ the males of B. viminalis having the antenucXi 

 strongly pectinated, whereas in B. j^ersimilis, which has the 

 same pattern and coloration, they are serrate-fasciculated. 



The genus Cosmophila, according to Guenee, has the 



