736 ON CADDIS-FLIES DESCEIBED BY LI}fN^US. 



Phrtganea ri/AViLATEEA (No. 1488). — Notwithstanding his 

 elaborate argument, I scarcely think Pastor Walleugren would 

 adopt this name as replacing {Hydropsyclie) instahllis, and I confess 

 myself unable to entirely follow him. It has been repeatedly sug- 

 gested that Linne had Sialis lutaria auct. before him ; and liis refer- 

 ence in the 'Systema ' to " Geoffrey, Paris., 2, p. 255, Hemerohius, 

 3," would bear this out ; for Geoffrey clearly indicates the Sialis, 

 and the dilatation of the margin of the wings so strongly indi- 

 cated by him refers to the costal margin ; the strong fuscous reti- 

 culation also, to my mind, refers to the neuration, and is very 

 applicable to the Sialis, as also are the words " ubi sedet trau- 

 quilla," and " Sedet alis deflexis uti Phalsena." But there remains 

 the difficulty that Hemerohius lutarius, Linne (No. 1513), is 

 represented in his collection by the Sialis, that some of his 

 citations for the latter in the 'Systema 'equally refer thereto (but 

 not " Schaff. Elem. t. 97," which represents a Perla), and that he 

 has added in MS. (to lutarius), " De Geer, 2, t. 22. f. 14-15," and 

 " Schaf. Icon. 37. figs. 9-10," which do the same. The confusion 

 appears inextricable, and the suggested relationship oi flavilatera 

 with the HydropsycJie far-fetched. 



Tiii^EA EoBEBTELLA (No. 1394). — That Linne may have de- 

 scribed something allied to Leptocerus under this name is quite 

 possible, considering the great resemblance many of the species 

 bear to the long-horned Moths ; but I would not go so far as to 

 identify Bohertella wdth any particular species. The words " an- 

 tennis albis " apjDear to be an insuperable objection to its identity 

 wuth L. dissimilis, and almost to its connexion with any true spe- 

 cies of Leptocerus, although they would apply to species of allied 

 genera. 



Having thus fairly stated my objections to some of the results 

 arrived at by Pastor "Wallengren, I conclude by remarking that, 

 although I do not feel justified in accepting some of his proposed 

 changes at present, it is but right that his views should be cir- 

 culated. No more appropriate medium for this purpose could 

 possibly exist than the Journal of the Linnean Society. 



vr 

 c 

 bt 



