12 BULLETIN OF THE BROOKLYN ENT. SOO. 



d. IIixd Wings Bright Rose Red. 



59. Amatrix, ffubn. 



Selecta, Walk. 



Sub-variety Hums, Walk. 

 Editha, Edw. 



60. Cara, Guen. 



Variety a. Carissima, Hulst. Bull. B'klyn Ento. Soc., Vol. 11. No. 12. 



61. Concunibens, Walk. 



e. Htnd Wings Dull Brick Red. 



62. Luciana, Hy. Edw. 



63. Nebrascae, Dodge. 



64. Aspasia, Streck. 



65. Walshii, J5Ww. 



Arizonss, Gfrt. 



Q. Specie* with White Band on Hind Wings. 



66. Relicta, Walk. 



Q. Species with Blind Winr/x Black. 

 a. Fringe Ltght Colored, or White. 



67. Tristis, Edw. 



68. Judith, Street 



Levettei, Grt. 



69. Epione, Drii. 



70. Robinsonii, Grt. 



71. Retecta, Grt. 



72. Flebilis, 0rf. 



73. Vidua, Ab. and $»n. 

 Desperata, Gum. 



74. Viduata, Gw?/?. 



We have been perplexed as to what to do with regard to tlie 

 names of these last two species. The insect figured in the work of 

 Abbott and Smith, to which was given the name Vidua, is now gen- 

 erally, if not universally, recognized as being identical with the spe- 

 cies called Desperata by Guenee. Why the name Vidua has been 

 dropped, unless because it is similar to Viduata, we can not find out; 

 and that is no reason at all, for, then, Viduata ought to be the one to 

 go. Certainly, if the name Vidua be not retained, great injustice 

 will be done Abbott and Smith, who were pioneers in the science, and 

 who were more thorough in their work than the vastly greater por- 

 tion of Lepidopterists are now, since they gave colored illustrations 

 of imago, larva, pupa, and food plant. There is no doubt that the 

 names Vidua and Viduata are nearer each other than is to be desired. 



