NOTES ON COLLECTING, 13 
mention this now merely to show that I had come to the same con- 
clusion as he had from an independent and unbiassed standpoint. But 
to reply to Dr. McDunnough. Why does he insert the word “ stirpes ” 
in his question, this confuses the issue, “stirpes”’ and “coiti””’ have 
nothing to do with the issue, the Tentamen does not refer to them at 
all. It uses “ Phalanx ”’ and “Tribus” and it then splits up the latter 
into sections, and in my judgment the use of the singular name with 
the specific name definitely creates what we now call a genus or a 
generic name. Let me give a few examples. 
The Tentamen in Phalanx I., Tribus I., says ‘“ Neréides—Neréis 
Polymnia.” 
The Verzeichniss divides Neréides up into four families, Familia 
A. B. C. D. Familia A., “ Vitrex,’ is divided into six genera, 
“coiti.” Familia’ B., ‘‘ Fulve,’’ is divided into five genera of 
which the third is ‘‘ Mechaniten—Mechanite”’ with three species 
“ Mechanitis eucrate, Mech. lysimnia, Mech. polymnia,’ but Nereis 
polymnia of the Tentamen has priority, and Mechanitis theretore falls as 
a synonym to Neréis. 
In all cases the author gives the vernacular equivalent of the Latin 
name, in all cases he gives the plural in the first instance and the 
singular with the specific names. Let us consider a couple more 
examples. In Tribus II. the Tentamen gives ‘‘I. Rustici—Rusticus 
argus” ; the Verzeichniss drops the use ‘ Rustici’’ and adopts that of 
“« Adolescentes,” which it divides up into eleven genera or “ coiti,” the 
fifth of these is ‘“ Lyceide,” the first species of this genus being 
* No 670 Lycaetdes argus, Linn.” It is quite evident that the name 
Lycaeides must sink as a synonym to the earlier Rusticus whilst 
“«Adolescentes’”’ should also fall to “ Rustici’’ should such a super group 
name be necessary. 
Again in Phalanx II of the Tentamen, the first citation is 
“T Zygaene—Zygaena filipendulae.”’ The Verzeichniss divides Zygene 
into Familia A and Familia B. A is subdivided into two genera 
and B is subdivided into six genera (coiti) of which the fourth is 
*« Thermophile,” No. 1273 being Thermophila filipendulae. Here again 
as was the case with Rusticus, the name Zyyaena aS a genus or 
“ Coitus’ is dropped in favour of Thermophila by the Verzeichniss ; 
this, however, is inadmissible, and the genus Thermophila must sink as 
a synonym of the earlier Zygaena. 
Throughout both works the plural is first used and the singular 
then follows with the citation of the specific name, so that if common 
sense says ‘“no’’ to the adoption of the singular use in the Tentamen it 
must without any question do the same with the Verzeichniss as well. 
Taking into consideration all these facts it seems to me quite clear 
that in the Tentamen Hubner was dealing with what we now call 
genera quite as much as in his later work, only in the latter he had 
had time to develop his terminology to a greater extent. 
The more healthy criticism we get (like this of my kind friend) the 
better, for it is only thus that we shall arrive at the correct solution 
of the matter.—G.T.B-B.| 
YOTES ON COLLECTING, Ete. 
MarRIaGE FLIGHT OF A RARE Ant In Lonpon.—The ant, Myrmecina 
graminicola, Litr., is one of the rarest of our British species, and there- 
