22 THE entomologist's eecord. 



moults, and passes per saltiim from an immature to the well-known' 

 mature plumage, varies into having a fifth moult, and so adds an 

 intermediate instar, in which it agrees exactly with neither the 

 immature (" bird dirt ") stage or the adult larva, but is more or less 

 intermediate, with some features wanting in both. I have just 

 happened to notice the account of A. alni given by Costa in The 

 Fauna of the Kingdom of Naples. He had a larva which he took on 

 chestnut, in 1848, and which he says was in the first instar. He 

 notes it as having five moults, and describes each instar. This 

 specimen then, possessed the extra moult and had the added fifth 

 instar. This he both describes and figures. It agrees to a much 

 greater degree with the fourth instar as I observed it, than with the 

 extra fifth instar I met with, except in one particular, viz., that the 

 clavate hairs are nearly as well developed as in the last instar. Now 

 in the normal fourth instar they are very poorly developed, and in the 

 fifth I found them smaller than they are shown in Costa's figure. 

 Costa had only the one larva, was it accidentally a five-moulter, the 

 four-moult form being normal at Naples as here, or does A. alni always 

 moult five times at Naples ? I met with two distinct forms in the 

 extra fifth instar, Costa's larva would appear to present a third form. 

 Is this normal for Naples, or was it an aberration there as it would be 

 here? These are interesting questions to which we may hope one day 

 to have an answer. At present I can only surmise that, like the larvae 

 of a good many species now known to do so, the larva of A. alni 

 presents considerable geographical variation. — T. A. Chapman, M.D., 

 Betula, Reigate. December Vlth, 1905. 



Notes on the pup^ of Smerinthus ocellata x populi hybrids. — 

 Mr. L. W. Newman has very kindly given me for examination nineteen 

 specimens of Smerinthus ocellata x pop ulihjhvidi'&th.sX have died in the 

 pupal stage. They are on the whole a quite normal-looking lot of 

 pupae, two only being slightly malformed, one by having two deep 

 depressions on the ventral area of the 7th abdominal segment, probably 

 only an extra deep scar of the larval prolegs. The other is malformed 

 as regards the cover to the second pair of legs, the fusion of these with 

 the antenna-cases has completely failed, leaving a deep open seam. 

 Both in shape, colour, as well as rugosity of surface, they are far nearer 

 to Amorpha populi than Smerinthus ocellata, although there are three 

 that show a partial smoothing and polishing of surface in the direction 

 of the male parent, but this tendency is confined to the wing-cases and 

 central appendage shield ; there are also some signs of the male 

 parentage in the shape of a few specimens, but, taken as a whole, they 

 would easily pass with the uncritical as pupae of A. populi. Probably 

 the point of greatest interest is the fact that the whole nineteen have 

 male genital scars, and these are quite normal, with one exception, 

 but in this the malformation is no greater than in a male pupa-case of 

 A. populi that I happen to have by me. — A. Bacot, F.E.S., 154, Lower 

 Clapton Road, N.E. November 23rd, 1905. 



Remarks on " Practical Hints," Part hi. — Mr. Tutt will, I am 

 sure, pardon me for drawing attention, in the interests of science, to 

 the following inaccuracies that occur in the third part of his Practical 

 ffiwts, published in January last: (1) On p. 89, " Bucculatrix cicadella" 

 should be "■ Bucculatrix cidarella," as shown by the mention of the 

 foodplant, etc. '^ Cicadella" is a Galanthia (Butalis), not a Buccu- 



