554 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. [October, 



Notes on Some N. A. Geometrina and Pyralidina* 

 By Geo. D. Hulst. 



GEOMETRINA. 



(Continued from p. 531, Vol xi, No. 7.) 



It is a matter of interest that Mr. Aurivilius, of Sweden, has, 

 from a study of the type of Fabricius, ascertained that Phalccna 

 cerata Fabr. is the same as Syjichloi a glaticata Guen. i^rubivora 

 Riley). Fabricius described another N. A. species 2,?, Phalcena 

 hicolorata, which is not yet determined, but may be Cymatopho7'a 

 distriburaria Hubn. But as Fabricius had already described a 

 Phalceyia bicolorata from South Ameria, his name in any event 

 falls for the American insect. 



Mr. Cross wrote me that, at my request, he had made an 

 examination of certain types of Dr. Packard. He considers 

 Asthena brutuieifasciata Pack., as at best, a variety of Asthena 

 albifera Walk, {albogilvaria Morr. ). He also does not consider 

 Boarmia polygratnmaria Pack, a good species, and is also of 

 the opinion that Endropia apidaria Pack, and Endropia pilo- 

 saria are variations of the .same species. 



I would like just here to give my testimony to the character 

 and worth of Mr. Edward Winslow Cross, who, a few months 

 since, came to an untimely end. He was a young man of great 

 refinement and culture, and did his work thoroughly and pati- 

 ently. He had in him, by education and tendency, the making 

 of one of the best of entomologists, as by nature he had in him 

 the making of one of t\ie noblest. The science met with a very 

 great loss in his passing away from us. 



Prof. Forbes' Rept. State Ent., Ills., xiv, 95, 1885, de.'^cribes 

 an in.sect as Biston iipsilon. Not long since my attention was 

 called to this description, and Prof. Forbes very kindly sent 

 me material for .study. I find it is the insect afterwards de- 

 .scrilnrd by mc as Nacophora carlotta. Whether there are any 

 more descriptions of Geometers buried in the myriads of State, 

 personal and Experiment Station Reports, I do not know. If 

 original descriptions are made in such re|X)rts it would seem 

 .some note of the fact ought to be made in .some regularly 

 issued .scientific journal, or better, a duplicate description be 

 given there. This insect does not .seem to be uncommon in 



