1866.] MR. A. G. BUTLER ON SPECIES OF LEPIDOPTERA. 453 



Eupl(ea esperi (E. crameri, Lucas, local var.). 



Euplcea esperi, Felder, Cat. Nov. Voy., Verhandl. zool.-botan. 

 Vereins in Wien, xii. p. 482. n. 109 (1863). 



Hab. Nicobar Islands. 



The former of these may be identical with some species in the 

 National Collection ; but I cannot find anything to suit the descrip- 

 tion to my satisfaction. 



E. crassa may be a local form of E. klugii, Moore. 



EUPLCEA SCHERZERI. 



Euplcea scherzeri, Felder, Cat. Nov. Voy., Verhandl. zool.-botan. 

 Vereins in Wien, xii. p. 479. n. 88 (1863). 



Hab. Ceylon. 



Dr. Felder describes this insect as being, at first sight, like E. 

 climena of Cramer, but larger ; underneath like E. tnelina of Godart, 

 but with two discal streaks. It may be my E. picina ; but the loca- 

 lities are different ; and as no figure is given, it is impossible to be 

 sure of the identity of the two insects. 



Euplcea frauenfeldi (E. crameri, Lucas, local form). 



Euplcea frauenfeldi, Felder, Cat. Nov. Voy., Verhandl. zool.-botan. 

 Vereins in Wien, xii. p. 479. n. 87 (1863). 

 Hab. Ceylon. 



Very near E. bremeri, Felder. 

 E. felderi may be a local form of E. kinbergi, Wallengren. 



Euplcea adyte. 



Euplcea adyte, Boisduval, Bull. Ent. p. clvi. n. 8 (1859). 



Hab. New Caledonia. 



Must be placed next toE. eleusine, Cramer. Dr. Boisduval seems 

 to consider the locality of E. eleusine to be Amboyna ; we have 

 several specimens of it from Java, but none from that locality. 



Cramer's figure is certainly meant to represent the insect subse- 

 quently figured by Hiibner, and not the c? mniszechii of Felder. 

 Judging by the description, I should think E. adyte must more 

 nearly approach E. eleusine than E. saundersii (tidliolus, var.). 



E. Icetifica is probably only the E. dufresnii of Godart. 



E. corinna, M'Leay (King's Survey of Australia, ii. App. p. 462 

 (1827), is most likely only a local variety of E. core. 



Euplcea helcita (E. eleutho, var.?). 



Euplcea helcita, Boisduval, Bull. Ent. p. clvi. n. 7 (1859). 



Hab. New Caledonia. 



I do not think this can be more than a local variety of E. eleutho ; 

 I have regarded it as such in my ■ Monograph.' E. eleutho varies 

 very much in form, and in the shape and position of the spots upon 

 the wings, in specimens from the same locality ; and therefore it is 

 but natural to suppose that some more definite alteration in the size 

 and position of the spots would occur in a different habitat. 



