Mr. A. G. Butler on the Genus Acronycta. 399 



*6. A. distans., Grote. United States. 



7. A. megaceijliala^ SchifF. Zurlclij Frankfort, &c. 



8. A, noctivaga^ Grote. New York and Canada. 



9. A. superans, Guen. New York and Canada. 



*10. ^ . A. hrumosa, Guen. 



S ' A. longa?, Guen. 

 * $ . A. persuasa, Harv. Florida and Yoko- 

 hama. 



■'^ll. A. perdita^ GroiQ. Sanzalito. 



12. A. affiicta, Grote. 



A. brumosa, var., Guen. Florida. 



13. A. xylmiformis, Guen. Rhode Island, Florida, &c. 



*14. A. extricataj Grote. Texas? (locality not on 

 labels). 



15. A. ohlinita^ Sm. Abb. New York, Ohio, Nova 

 Scotia, Canada, &c. 



Section Lepitoeeuma, Grote. 



1. A. rumicis, Linn. 



A. diffusa, Walk. Zurich, Brussa, Turkey, 

 Ichang, Japan. 



2. A. leucoptera^ Butl. Yokohama. 



3. A. impleta, Walk. 



A. subochrea, Grote (on label and in Check- 

 List, p. 23. n. 66). New York. 



In Grote's Revised Check-List the author (p. 4) states that 

 there is no such species as A. subochrea. If this is the case, 

 how did he come to label one specimen as his type of that 

 species, a second specimen as also '"'■Apatela subochrea, Grote," 

 and to include it in his Check-List of 1882 ? It may not be 

 a distinct species from the following, but it is certain that at 

 one time it was so regarded by Grote. 



•^4. A. hamamelis, Guen. United States. 



Our example is evidently a co-type, though not mentioned 

 by Guenee, since it still bears his label ; probably as it has 

 no abdomen he thought it not worth recording under the 

 description. 



■^5. A. hcesitatUj Grote. United States. 



