456 MR. A. G. BUTLER ON SPECIES OF LEPIDOPTERA. [Nov. 22, 



itself or a figure of it ; for descriptions of these closely allied forms 

 differ so little from one another that distinctions of outline or pat- 

 tern can scarcely be appreciated. 



Danais phyle. 



Danais phyle, Felder, Wien. ent. Monatschr. p. 105. n. 65 (1863). 



Danais e'rebus, Butler, P. Z. S. 1866, p. 54, 



Hab. Philippine Islands. B.M. 



I have lately seen specimens of D. vitrina, Felder, in Mr. Bates's 

 and Mr. Hewitson's collections ; and it seems to me to differ from my 

 D. cenone (P. Z. S. 1865, p. 433, pi. xxv. f. 6, 1866, p. 56) in being 

 larger and with fewer marginal spots ; there can, however, be no 

 doubt that it is the same species with mine. 



Euplcea philomela of Zinken-Sommer, hitherto placed as a synonym 

 of D. cleona of Cramer, must be kept separate from it. This species, 

 excepting in form, bears a more general resemblance to my D. crocea ; 

 it is intermediate between the two species ; and the male, two speci- 

 mens of which 1 have discovered in the Museum Collection, is of the 

 same form as my D. gloriola, $ . It may be easily distinguished 

 from D. crocea, not only by its different form, but by the male having 

 the entire basal portion of the front wings yellow, and the subapical 

 streaks much broader and shorter. 



Danais philomela. 



Euplcea philomela, $ > Zinken-Sommer, Nova Acta Acad. Nat. 

 Curios, xv. t. 16. f. 17(1831). 



Hab. Java; Nepaul. cJ, B.M. 



The two next are identical : — 



Danais pumila. 



Danais pumila, Boisduval in Ann. Soc. Ent. France, p. 156 (1859). 

 Danais mariana, Butler,Ann.& Mag. Nat. Hist. xvi. p. 397(1865); 

 P. Z. S. 1866, p. 58, PI. IV. f. 7. 



Hab. New Caledonia. B.M. 



The following also prove to be synonymous : — 



Danais chloris. 



Danais chloris, Felder, Wien. ent. Monats. p. 300. n. 11 (1861); 

 Butler, P. Z. S. 1866, p. 58. 



Danais salvini {chloris, Felder?), Butler, P. Z. S. 1866, p. 172 



($%■)• 



Hab. Celebes. $ , B.M. 



VlCTORINA. 



By comparison of the types I find that my Victorina aphrodite, 

 P. Z. S. 1865, p. 483, is identical with Mr. Bates's Amphirene superba, 

 Ent. Month. Mag. (1864); yet, judging from' the description alone, I 

 had concluded that they must be distinct. This shows how necessary 



