﻿384 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



Miana strigilis (common), M. arcuosa (2), Grammesia trigrammica (1), 

 Rusina tenebrosa (3), Noctua plecta (1), N. triangulum (I), N. /estiva 

 (several), Mania typica (3), Aplecta nebulosa (1), Hadena dentina (1), 

 H. dissimilis (1), H. oleracea (1); and a few of the usual pests, fairly 

 common. After this I went into Somersetshire for some days, and on ray 

 return (July 20th) found sugaring perfectly useless, not meeting with even 

 a single specimen. This dearth of insects continued, whilst trying at 

 intervals, up till about September 21st, when, after a long spell of dry 

 weather, there came a very wet day, rain falling in torrents the whole day, 

 especially in the evening. I then ventured out upon my favourite experi- 

 ment, and so had the pleasure of seeing insects congregated in some 

 numbers on the trees, which was gratifying to view, though, under the 

 circumstances of the weather, far from comfortable. The following were 

 my captures : — Epunda lutulenta (1), Anchocelis lunosa (vars., 4), 

 A. litura (1), Xanthia cerago (1), Calocampa vetusta (fine, 2), Noctua 

 c-nigrum (4), Gidaria immanata (several), Phlogophora meticulosa (fairly 

 common) ; and a few of the usual pests, only represented by two or three 

 odd specimens. A day or two after this I took two more fine E. lutulenta, 

 and a few each of A. lunosa and N. c-nigrum; but, as the weather became 

 drier, moths got scarcer, as before. I think this experience coincides with 

 that of Mr. A. E. Hall and Mr. R. Adkin (Entom. 321, 322).— 

 J. M. Adye ; Chris tchurch, October 20, 1890. 



The Violet tinge in Heuophobus hispidus. — It may be interesting 

 to note that the violet tinge was almost entirely absent from specimens of 

 Heliophobus hispidus taken by me this year at Portland. From this I 

 should suppose that the species varied in this respect in different years, 

 which may account for the fact that I did not notice any tinge until 1889 

 (Entom. 60). — Nelson M. Richardson; Montevideo, near Weymouth, 

 November 13, 1890. 



Sirex gigas. — Yarmouth. — A specimen of this insect was brought to 

 me, alive, in July. It was taken off a gentleman's back in the market. A 

 friend of mine has one, which he captured in the town about two-years ago. 

 — J. E. Knights ; North Denes, Great Yarmouth. 



Tenby. — A specimen of Sirex gigas was brought to me when at Tenby 

 last August. — T. B. Jefferys ; Clevedon. 



Disparity of size in SiricidjE. — Several specimens of Sirex gigas 

 were taken here and in the neighbourhood during the autumn. The great 

 discrepancy in size in different insects of both sexes in the Siricida? is very 

 striking. A female of Sirex juvencus sent me by Mr. J. E. Robson, 

 captured at Hartlepool on 30th September last, measures only 1£ inch 

 from tip to tip of wings; the length of the body, including head and 

 ovipositor, being f of an inch ; whilst a female of S. juvencus, taken here, 

 measures in wing expanse 2 inches ; the length of body, with head and 

 ovipositor, is 1£ inch. The disparity in S. gigas is equally remarkable. — 

 Joseph Anderson, jun. ; Chichester. 



Information wanted. — If any of your readers can supply me with any 

 facts they may have observed or know as to the life-history of the Siricidse, 

 especially of Sirex gigas, I should be much obliged. I want them to 

 incorporate with a paper in preparation, Please write direct to Dr. Livktt, 

 Wells, Somerset, 



