8294 Insects. 



8. LiTHOsiA MOLYBDEOLA, Douhleday in litt. 

 Occurring in the North of England, in boggy moors ; hence Mr. 

 Doubleday supposes the hirvae feed on the lichens growing amongst 

 the heather. It comes very near L. complana, but has somewhat nar- 

 rower wings ; the costal border of the fore wings is straighter, less 

 convex and somewhat more narrowly yellow ; the hind wings are 

 plumbeous from the costal border to the middle, even almost as far as 

 the inner margin, narrowly slightly yellow near the base, more broadly 

 so near the hind margin. This plumbeous colour of the hind wings 

 is on the upper side but little paler than that of the fore wings, on the 

 under side not at all paler, and occupies two-thirds of the length of 

 the wing from the base ; in the female, with which I am not 

 acquainted, it should be entirely gray. The legs are more strongly 

 irrorated with fuscous. This is scarcely more than a local variety of 

 L. complana. 



9. LiTHOsiA PYGM.EOLA, DouUeday. 

 Specimens sent by English entomologists as Lithosia pygmseola, 

 and more recently by Mr, Doubleday as L. vitellina, can hardly 

 be distinguished from L. pallifrons of Zeller. The size and form 

 are the same, but the colouring much more uniform, hardly yel- 

 low, more yellowish gray, more decidedly paler towards the costa, 

 more decidedly yellow on the hind wings, blacker towards the costa 

 to the same extent as in L. pallifrons, black-gray on the under side as 

 far as the anal angle, the cilia whiter by contrast. The female is 

 entirely grayish 'above, only the costal line being whitish yellow. 

 L. luteola appears not to occur in England. 



] 0. Lithosia stramineola, Douhleday. 

 This species was first cited by Stephens, page 95, as L. flava of 

 Fabricius ; the latter author has it in his ' Supplement,' p. 461, from 

 Italy, and says, " Media quasi inter convolutam et luteam, magnitudo 

 et longitude prioris, at color posterioris." As the former is Chilo gigan- 

 tellus, and the latter Lithosia luteola, the comparison but ill applies 

 lo our species, and Doubleday's name is rightly cited. Stephens's 

 description agrees. The statement of the size — namely, 1" 4 — 6'" — 

 is especially distinctive, thus considerably larger than L. aureola 

 and L. helvola. Guenee seems to pronounce it a variety of L. 

 griseola j it of course approaches it very nearly in form : it is, how- 

 ever, still larger ; the wings are broader, the costa of the fore wing not 



