80 Dn. w. J. noLiANj) on thm African [Jan. 14, 



This division oi: the genua contains C. henga and possibly others. 

 The fourth group is composed of species in which both secondaries 

 and primaries are without sexual brands or marks of a conspicuous 

 and easily discernible character, the brands and patches of raised 

 scales being revealed in some of the forms only after bleaching and 

 microscopic examination, and then as merely obsolescent. 



Tfeurution of Canidcs dacela, Hew. f . 



In the species of all these four groups the antennae, the palpi, 

 the neuration, and the outline of the wings are the .same. They 

 are differentiated into groups by the sexual markings of the male 

 sex, so far as my studies have informed me. Most of the species 

 have been hitherto referred by writers to the genus Proteides, to 

 which they manifestly do not belong. 



287. C. DACELA, Hew. (Plate II. fig. 2, d ; Plate V. fig. 18, $ .) 



Ilesperia dacela. Hew. Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. (4) vol. xviii. 

 p. 451 (1876). 



Hesperia m/dla, Ploetz, S. E. Z. vol. xl. p.,3,53 (1879), vol. xliii. 

 p. 32G (1882). 



2 . Phistinijia podora, Ploetz, 8. E. Z. vol. xlv. p. 150 (1884). 



As to the identification of the male of this species with the insect 

 described by Ploetz as Hesperia nydia, there is not a shadow of 

 doubt in my mind. The insect described by Ploetz as Plastingia 

 podora was contained in the Berlin Museum. The insect labelled 

 as such was examined for me both by Dr. Karsch and Dr. Scudder, 

 and is represented in the plates accompanying this article, being 

 reproduced after a careful draAving by Von Prillwitz. It is unmis- 

 lakftbly the female of 0. dacela. Unfortunately, however, the 

 description given by Ploetz of his P. podora does not tally with the 



