COLEOPTERA. 75 



(Naples) ; in the month of June of that year we took less than 100 

 Rhopalocera and in July none at all, while in June, 1911, we caught 

 on the same Aurunei mountains more than 5,000 Ehopalocera. 



In the months of May and June, 1918, both in Florence and in the 

 Mainarde mountains (Neapolitan Apennines) the Rhopalocera were 

 scarce, but in compensation the Zygaenae were abundant, whilst this 

 year also they were wanting. 



A sudden cessation of development in the analogous species in 

 which it happened this year in Florence, Calabria, and in Garfagnana, 

 happened to my wife and daughter in Sicily in June, 1918, and 

 another in the Mainarde mountains on June 17th, 1919. My family 

 then left the Mainarde hoping to find better sport in higher mountains 

 and covered great distances on the Maiella (Molise) and on the Gran 

 Sasso d'ltalia (Abruzzi) without finding a trace of Lepidoptera ; on 

 the other hand, in the August of the same year, they were able to 

 make abundant collections in the Sibillini, whilst this year also this 

 locality gave negative results. 



The collections of this year have not furnished any data for exact 

 determination of the number of broods of Rhopalocera, because many 

 species, whilst generally emerging several times in the year, have only 

 had one single period of development, and some have not appeared at all. 

 Thus the question of the number of broods of G. cleopatra, to which 

 Mr. J. A. Simes alludes in the number for November, 1920, of the 

 Ent. Rec, has remained unsolved. I think that Dr. Verity is right in 

 attributing three broods to this species, at least in Tuscany, which is 

 without doubt the region of Italy most favourable for the development 

 of Lepidoptera. I consider that Mr. Simes has been led into error by 

 the phenomenon of the suppression of emergence which is so frequent 

 in the high mountains, in the hills of Southern Italy, and along the 

 shores of the Mediterranean. 



I take this occasion to declare that Mr. Simes is perfectly right 

 when he asserts (Ent. Rec, 1920, p. 191), that the number of females 

 of M. arge is about one-fifth of that of the males. Dr. Verity has not 

 personally collected this species, and he was led into error by the notes 

 which I furnished on my collecting of M. arge made at Formia 

 (Naples) in 1910 and 1911. In those two years the number of females 

 was actually greater than that of males, but the season must have 

 •contributed to produce this abnormal fact. From May 10th to 20th 

 in the years above mentioned, whilst the males of M. arge were 

 emerging, rain fell without interruption and the males could not 

 develop their wings. From May 21st to 30th the weather was 

 excellent and the females were all able to reach development. That 

 this happened is shown by the fact that in 1919, in which the weather 

 in the month of May was always fine, the number of males was at 

 least five times that of the females, and the same proportion occurred 

 this year in Calabria where the M. arge offers the beautiful race turatii, 

 Rostagno ( = cucuzzana, Stauder), and is considerably more scarce 

 than at Formia and Brindisi. 



OfOLEOPTERA. 



Records of Coccinella 11 -punctata, L. — With reference to Mr. 

 Long's note on records of this Coccinellid on p. 34 of the present 



