﻿24 



it was single-brooded at others. Mr. Harcourt Bath, writing 

 on the subject, had stated that in the Midlands (Birmingham) 

 the species was only single-brooded. Mr. Weir added that he 

 had tried a great number of times to obtain specimens of the 

 autumn brood from the Gullivers in the New Forest, and they 

 said they had never seen an example of the species in the 

 autumn. 



In those parts of the New Forest in which holly is abun- 

 dant, L. argiohcs is very common in the spring ; ivy, on the 

 other hand, is generally scarce in the forest. He had himself 

 spent considerable time in the neighbourhood of Brockenhurst, 

 where the insect is most plentiful, trying to find the ivy-feeding 

 larvae. He had found very little ivy, and no Lyc(Bna larvae 

 among that examined. 



It was a singular possibility of this insect having a brood 

 suppressed through the proper pabulum being absent. He 

 could not say himself whether it was so or not, but the 

 Gullivers, old foresters, born in the forest, and keen observers 

 of insect life, ought to know. Was the brood suppressed 

 through want of pabulum ? And if so, he thought it was a 

 new idea and well worthy of the consideration of the Society. 



Weismann certainly had succeeded in suppressing the 

 summer brood of Pieris napi, L., by putting the pupae on ice, 

 when, instead of A producing B, A produced A indefinitely. 

 It was just the same in the Alps, the variety of P. iiapi, 

 bryonies, Hiib. having only time to make one emergence. 



He would ask the members of the Society to capture L. 

 argiolus whenever they saw it, carefully label it with time of 

 year and where taken, whether ivy was there as well as holly, 

 and add any other information or further note which might 

 be of interest. 



Several members made observations on these remarks 

 and it was the feeling of all present that members of the 

 Society would gladly render what assistance they could to 

 Mr. Weir in clearing up this question. 



