1889.] 381 



I have examined the male genitalia in some hundreds of Hemiptera, 

 in which dimorphism in the organs of flight exists, chiefly Cicadina it 

 is true, but I have not, in a single instance, found that differences in 

 the form of the styles are in any way correlated to the development 

 of the elytra and wings. 



131, Rupert Street, Norwich : 

 June \5th, 1889. 



[The specimen sent me for examination by Mr. Edwards certainly agrees with 

 S. adjunctus as described by him, but it does not agree with adjunctus, Put. (sec. 

 specimen lent me by that author), as it has the coarsely punctured prosternum of 

 qffinis and punctatus, whereas, in Puton's adjunctus the prosternum is finely 

 punctured as in deroratus, Hahn. Neither, following Mr. Edwards' views, can it be 

 adjunctus, D. & S., as it certainly is not decoratus, Thorns., since it has the much 

 curved front tibiae as in qffinis, Schill, whereas Thomson says of his decoratus " tibiis 

 anticis £ apice leviter incurvo." I must leave it to Mr. Edwards as to whether a 

 seventh species should be created, such specimens only increase my doubts as to the 

 existence in this country of more than one. One word as to punctatus, Edw., and 

 qffinis, Schill. I examined the styles of both of these under a i-inch objective, and 

 could see no difference in the length and size of the hairs on them ; had I submitted 

 both to a one-third (which, unfortunately, I do not pjssess) I should, I fancy, have 

 seen these hairs on both, if not, I could not have seen them on either, so that I do 

 not appreciate how the power of the lens could have influenced the situation. As to 

 the form of the styles all I can say is that I examined them in every position I could 

 with great care, and came to the conclusion that they were alike. Mr. Edwards 

 thinks they are not ; to explain how I thought he had been misled, I suggested that 

 he had viewed them under different aspects, he feels sure he has not, here I suppose 

 we shall not agree. I quite accept his remarks as to correlation of alar development 

 and armature ; if one is not influenced by the other in the Cicadina, it is probable 

 that it would not be so in the Seteroptera. — Edward Saunders, St. Ann's, 

 Woking.] 



Diasemia Eamburialis at Portland. — I am glad to be able to record the capture 

 of one specimen of the above at Portland on July 11th by myself. While collecting 

 in a grassy hollow it buzzed up out of the long grass and alighted in a bramble bush 

 from which, with some difficulty, I extracted it. This is, I believe, the first record 

 of D. Ramburialis occurring in Dorsetshire. — C. R. Digby, Studland Rectory, 

 Dorset : July 22nd, 1889. 



The larva of Coleophora vulnerarice. — Whilst at Walmer, last year (1888), I 

 came across specimens of Coleophora vulnerarice. This was late in July, and they 

 were then in rather poor condition and most of them females, flitting about from 

 flower to flower of Anthyllis vulneraria, doing their last duties of oviposition. It 

 was, no doubt, much too late for the moths in an ordinary season, so that this 

 summer I visited the place at the end of June, expecting to be in good time. It was 

 none too soon, however, for the Coleophora I found had evidently been out some 

 while, and were again chiefly females. A number of these I secured on to potted 



KK 



