113 



never raised a suspicion in my mind of its being Z. filipendulcB, 

 although the specimens I had previously received never raised 

 much doubt as to the accuracy of the suggested relationship. It 

 appears to be a distinct enough species, and from its habits, etc., 

 I have no doubt that if its earlier stages were intimately known, 

 some other details would confirm this view. The difficulty felt by 

 Continental collectors about it is well illustrated by the series in the 

 British Museum, where, although they have been separated ac- 

 curately enough, and this alone in the British Museum is marvel- 

 lously strong evidence of the distinctness of the two, the labels of 

 the collectors who have previously possessed them show them to 

 have been considered as a number of different species by these 

 different collectors through whose hands they have passed, although 

 Z. trifolti var. dubia is probably the most general reference. 



One thing appears to be quite certain to me. The specimens of 

 ochsenheimeri in the British Museum collection are identical with 

 my specimens exhibited to you to-night, and I have no doubt what- 

 ever that it is quite separate specifically from our British Z. fili- 

 pendulcB. The position and character of the sixth spot ; its absolute 

 constancy and the sexual dimorphism are so decided that it can 

 scarcely be confounded with anything else. On the underside the 

 sixth spot is very distinct, Staudinger's diagnosis is simply " var. 

 major, saturatius rubra," true enough as far as it goes, but totally 

 inadequate. It is " major," it is " saturatius rubra," so are many 

 vexitzhle filipotdulce when compared with others ; but these are not 

 the salient points of differentiation. The size varies considerably, 

 and there is an especially great difference between the sexes, and 

 the red colour does not appear to be deeper than that of many 

 filipendulcE. True, one may say that the points I emphasise are 

 only differences of degree, and that we have not yet determined 

 how much difference makes a species. This I readily grant, but 

 at the same time, this moth appears to have undergone sufficient 

 differentiation to be readily discriminated, and to breed true. It 

 presents more constant and decided differences from Z. filipendulcE, 

 for instance, than does Z. lonicer(z from Z. irifolii. 



The breeding true to which I have just adverted is an im- 

 portant point, and I have more than once emphasised its constancy 

 of character and markings. There were no typical Z. filipendul(z 

 where we found the species. Staudinger treats it as a variety, a 

 local race, and gives as its distribution " Italy, Southern Gaul, 

 Southern Alpine Valleys, Greece, and doubtfully from Pontus." 

 I have kept a careful eye on the records in Continental magazines 

 recently, and I find no instance where var. oclisenheimeri is recorded 

 as taken with the type, whilst it is recorded specially by itself over 

 and over again. Everything points to my conclusion being a 

 correct one, and I think Zeller was quite right when, relying on his 

 practical field experience, combined with his wonderful acumen as 

 a student, he Hecided that Z. ochsenheimeri was a separate species. 



