300 Mr. Newman's Characters of Australian Lepidoplera. 



Genus LiTHOCOLLETis, Zeller.* 

 Sp. 1. Lithocolletis Lalagella, Newm. 



Alls anticis niveis, fasciis qualuor (^quarta semialtera) plumbeis 

 marginibus propriis mgerrimis ; jjosticis anguslissimis fuligi- 

 nosis, ciliis longiss'imis concoloribus. (Alarum dilat. •4unc.) 



Head silvery white, with black eyes; fore wings snowy white, 

 with four broad lead-coloured transverse markings, each of which 

 has black margins ; the first of these is basal, the second rather 

 b; fore, the third rather beyond the middle of the wing, the fourth 

 is amorphous, it occupies the apex of the wing, and encloses a snowy 

 white deltoid costal spot; the cilia are whitish, with a slight inter- 

 ruption of brown near the apex ; the hind wings are very narrow 

 and lined with long cilia attached to both margins ; they are of a 

 dingy white, inclining to silvery white along the middle. 



in this pretty insect, of which a single specimen only was taken, 

 tlie dark markings on a white ground immediately remind one of 

 our Lithocolletis liortella and sylvella, i)Ut tiie simple transverse 

 character of the second and third fasciae at once distinguish the 

 Australian from either of the British species. 



Genus Pteropiiorus, Geoffroy. 

 Sp. 1. Pterophorus tinctidactylus, Newm. 



Albus cilreo-tinctus, lunula alarum pallide fusca anlicarum, pos- 

 ticis dilute ochreo-cinereis. (Alarum dilat. '65 unc ) 



White with a very slight tinge of lemon colour; on the fore wings 

 is an indistinct brown mark just at the base of the cleft ; the hind 

 wings are pale ochreous grey. 



A single specimen only was taken ; it a good deal resembles 

 P. osteodactylus, but is readily distinguished by the paler colour of 

 the posterior wings, and by the citron-yellow — not fuscous hue^ — of 

 the antennae. A second species of Pterophorus also forms part of 

 the collection, but is so injured that 1 cannot venture to charac- 

 terize it. 



* As I understand the genus T.iihncolletis of Zeller, it is not equivalent to the 

 lonj)- previously ciiatucterized IJthociilletis of Illibner; it would, therefore, have 

 been less confusing had Zeller given to iiis newly associated group an entirely 

 new name: it is now loo late, since the second Liiho.oUetis has become a classical, 

 the first an obsolete, name. 



