two moths emerged in 1903 and nine in 1904. From a similar 

 number of pupae of 1901 one moth came forth in 1902, eight in 

 1903, and one in 1904. These, as in the case of A. nubeculosa, were 

 of Perthshire origin, and it is possible that that fact may have had 

 something to do with the large proportion that remained over to the 

 second year, as from a portion of a brood of Kentish origin fed up 

 from the egg in 1884 twenty-one moths emerged in 1885 and two 

 only in 1886. 



A small brood of Lophopteryx camelina reared from Kentish ova 

 in 1880 produced two moths in the same year, nineteen in 188 1, and 

 two in 1882. From a few Essex pupae of Notodonta dictaa that I 

 had in 1889 I got four moths in 1890 and one in 1891. Some 

 twenty Sussex Pterostoma palpi na pupae of 1902 produced sixteen 

 moths in 1903 and one in 1904. From a small brood of Kentish 

 Dicranura vinula fed up in 1878 twelve moths were reared in 1879 

 and twelve in 1880. On three separate occasions I have reared, 

 with varying success, small broods of Endromis versicolor from, 1 

 need hardly say, Scotch eggs, the emergences being : from the 1880 

 brood, four in 1881 and one in 1882 ; from the 1884 brood, nine in 

 1885 and twelve in 1886; and from the 1888 brood, two in 1889 

 and six in ] 890. From a somewhat extensive brood of Smerinthus 

 populi fed up in 1882 from eggs deposited by a female taken in my 

 garden, forty-nine moths emerged in 1883 and five in 1S84, while 

 from five hybrid .S. populi x ocellatus pupa? of 1901 three moths 

 were produced in 1902 and one in 1903. 



Eriogaster lanestris is a notorious laggard, and such experience as 

 I. have had with the species has by no means belied its reputation. 

 From twenty-four pupae that I had in 1877 the emergences were 

 eight moths in 1878, nine in 1879, and one in 188 1 ; none came out 

 in 1880, and what became of the remaining six cocoons is not 

 recorded. 



Among the Noctuae, the cases that have come under my notice 

 are not numerous, but some of them are, nevertheless, interesting. 

 From some dozen or so Sussex pupae of Acronycta aceris that I had 

 in 1 90 1 six moths emerged in 1902, three in 1903, and one in 1904. 

 Sixty-two pupae of Diatithcecia conspersa received from Shetland in 

 1896 produced thirty-nine moths in 1897 and ten in 1898. From 

 twelve Surrey pupae of Cucullia lycknitis of 1882 only four moths 

 emerged, namely one in 1883 and three in 1884; and from four 

 Kentish pupae of C. chamomilhe of 1885 two moths appeared in 

 18S6 and one in 1887 ; and twenty-two pupae of Brephos notha, 

 received from Wyre Forest in 1902, produced five moths in 1903 

 and fourteen in 1904, by far the larger proportion thus lying over 

 until the second year. 



The Geometrae, too, have furnished some instructive cases, of 

 which that of Emmelesia unifasciata is. perhaps, the most interesting. 

 This species used to be fairly common in the larval stage in many 

 places around London, and I and my friends frequently collected 



