igOl] ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. IO9 



is otherwise decidedly different in its whole aspect, lacking the 

 green semicircle on costae of fore wings, having but one black 

 spot on side of abdomen at base, having a brown bar on top 

 abdomen at base of thorax as in pandorus, which is wanting in 

 elisa and having at least two discal spots in each fore wing, 

 besides other differences as a long series of both sexes in my 

 collection well shows. 



P. fusimacida (Felder) is described by Boisduval as Sl Sphinx; 

 presents a very different pattern in the fore wings, has the hind 

 wings yellow-ochre, with a black median band, and the thorax 

 is entirely green, wnth a brown-red abdomen. 



P. pistacina Bdl. is now considered an ambidyx and need not 

 be referred to further ; it is very differently marked and colored 

 from the pandoras group of Philampelus. 



Eacus of Cramer is huffish brown, slightly inclined to olive 

 in fresh examples ; lacks the green semicircle, has but one basal 

 abdominal spot on the brown abdomen and has the discal spot, 

 and usually two, present. 



Comparison has alread}' been made with pajidorus in the de- 

 scription of elisa. 



This leaves only two species, both of Schausfuss. One of 

 these, P. vifii, is mentioned in Kirby's list. I have never heard 

 or seen of it elsewhere. Mr. Butler, who constantly refers to 

 Schaufuss, makes no mention of it. Kirby gives it from the 

 " Nunquam Otiosus," p. 19, but no mention is made of such a 

 species on that page or any other in the copy of " Nunquam 

 Otiosus' ' referred to for me. I know nothing more of it. 



P. cissi of Schaufuss is described on p. 19 of the " Nunquam 

 Otiosus." Of this description Butler says "Probably the S of 

 satellitia, but so imperfectly described that it is impossible to 

 identify it with certaintj'." I can only add that the descrip- 

 tion would apply equally well to almost an 5- one of the pandorus 

 and satellitia group, and should be void through its vagueness. 

 One sentence seems to offer a tangible difference to elisa, i. e., 

 ' ' Capite et thorace utrisque nee non corpore in medio griseo- 

 lineatis " (italics are mine). This certainly differs from elisa 

 as the figure and my description shows. 



I feel confident therefore in the validity of Philampelus elisa 

 as a species, and surely all of Mexico is not known yet. 



