THE SYNONYMY OF ZYGAENA, ETC. 25 
The Synonymy of Zygaena, Adscita (Procris), and Amata (Syntomis). 
By G. T. BETHUNE-BAKER, F.L.S., F.Z.S. 
Zyemna, Fab., versus ANTHRocERA, Scop. 
The Record has for many years adopted the genus Anthrocera 
instead of the older Fabricfan genus Zygaena, which had been in 
almost universal use for the Burnets up to the time of Tutt’s first 
volume. The reason of its use in the Record is quite natural and 
obvious, but the reason of Tutt’s adoption of the name is not so obvious. 
He apparently relied on Kirby, whilst Kirby arrived at his opinion by 
the process of elimination, but at the same time by completely ignor- 
ing both the first and second revisers of the group. 
_ The genus Zygaena was created by Fabricius ip his Syst. Hnt., p. 
580, 1775; here the species he placed under it were /ilipendilae, phegea, 
ephialtes, annulata, cerbera, and others, including statices. As will be 
seen, they are a somewhat heterogeneous assemblage. In 1793, Entom. 
System., p. 386, the same author more than doubles the size of his 
genus, enumerating and diagnosing no less than seventy-eight species, 
inserting between filipendulae and phegea, scabiosae, loti (lonacerae), 
lavandulae and sedi, as well as including many heterogeneous species. 
Scopoli instituted his genus Anthrocera for filipendulae, etc., in 1777, 
but I have not been able to trace that any of the authors of his day 
followed him. Schrank, it is true, divided Zyyaena into three sec- 
tions: A, for phegea, B, for the Burnets, and C, for the Foresters, but 
this certainly was no restriction, and I believe that Stephens was the 
first to adopt the name Anthrocera in 1828 (Ill. Brit. Ent., i., p. 105), 
and he did so under a misapprehension. This application, however, 
was ‘ultra vires,” as Fabricius had himself revised his own genus, 
Zygaena, in Liliger’s Magazine, vi., p. 289, 1807, as follows :— 
46. Amata, Fab., for Zygaena passalis, cerbera. 
47. Zygaena, Fab., for Zygaena filipendulae, scabiosae, quercus, etc. 
48. Glaucopis, Fab., for Zygaena argynnis, and sixty-eight other 
species, including infausta. 
49. Procris, Fab., for Zygaena statices and ten others. 
We have here a very definite revision of the genus Zyyaena, Ainata 
being created for what we know as the Syntomidae, the type of the 
genus being passalis, F. Pheyea, Li. (quercts, Fab.), is congeneric with 
passalis and cerbera and falls into that genus. 
Syntomis, Ochs., was created in 1808 for phegea and therefore sinks 
to Amata, Fab. 
It is evident from this that Fabricius wished to restrict his genus 
to the Burnets, recognising as he did that ephialtes was one of that 
family, but mixing up querctis as a close ally, though he saw that 
passalis belonged to another genus; this was of course natural under 
the circumstances. 
Scopoli’s action should now be considered. He proposed the name 
Anthrocera for “ filipendulae, etc.” It is quite evident from the ete. 
that he included other species as well as jilipendulae. What were those 
species? We find them in his earlier work. In his Entom. Carniol. 
are three species, vz., no. 479 filipendulae, 480 phegea, 481 statices, so 
that there is no doubt that he made the genus Anthrocera not only for 
filipendulae, but for phegea and statices, that is to say for almost the 
same ground as Zygaena, Fab. Under these circumstances, and in 
Frsruary 15ru, 1916. 
