BRITISH SPECIES OF BUTTERFLIES AT WEI-HAI-WEI. 37 



it is at home. It varies much according to the time of the year. Many 

 examples are large and comparatively light-coloured ; I should think 

 they could hardly be separated from a series of large British specimens. 

 Those taken in .June are small and much suffused witli black, whilst 

 those captured in September are large and dark. These two latter 

 emergences both come under the head of var. elcHi^, Fab. Though, 

 perhaps, it ought scarcely to be included amongst Wei-hai-wei butter- 

 flies, I must mention one strange aberration, taken on the Great Wall 

 at Shan-hai-kwan on September 19th, 1898, Avhich I believe must be 

 referred to this species, as the markings seem quite typical. The 

 ground-colour is of a very pale golden -yellow, and the usual black 

 markings are irrorated with golden scales. The black spots on the 

 forewings are very small, and the marginal band on the hindwings is 

 much enlarged. Perhaps it is an intermediate form between the type 

 and var. srhjiiidtii, Gerh. Krcrcs artiiaden, — Common all the summer. 

 The usual form seems referable to var. caino-emis, Kiihl, though the size 

 varies greatly. This variety is characterised by a "very uniform 

 whitish-grey underside. The pale red spots form a very distinct band 

 on the hind wings of both sexes. . . ." Vernal examples have 

 these spots paler than in those disclosed later in the season, i'ljaniris, 

 sp. — -One female, taken on the mainland on June l8th, is a close ally of 

 our C. arr/inliifi. H}irichtJiH>>, sp. — I found this fairly common, though 

 very local, amongst long grass on Leu-kung-tao in July. Superficially 

 it resembles S. nialrae {alr('olii.«:), but the white spots on the upper sur- 

 face are fewer in number. 



The foregoing must not be taken as a list of all the Wei-hai-wei 

 butterflies; indeed, it only professes to treat of those which have repre- 

 sentative forms at home, and takes no note of many species (such as 

 ,]asi)niail('H .rnthiis, Xiphanda fiixca, &c.) Avhich would be unfamiliar to 

 most British entomologists. Further, these are only the results of 

 five months' collecting, so that next summer, if we are here, I shall 

 probably be able to add still more species to this list, which even now 

 comprises one-fifth of our British butterflies. 



H.M.S. Centurion, at Wei-hai-wei, November 22nd, 1898. 



Argyresthia conjugella, Zell., a new enemy to the apple fruit. 



By ENZIO EEUTEE, Ph.D., F.E.S. 



The damage caused to the apple crop by the larva of the common 

 Codling-moth fTri/jicta potiumdla ) is everyv«'here serious enough. 

 Lately, however, another lepidopterous insect has a])peared, which 

 promises to be a still more formidable destroyer of this generally- 

 cultivated fruit. 



In the annual reports on the " Central Experimental Farms " for 

 the years 189G and 1897, the Canadian state entomologist, Mr. J. 

 Fletcher, mentions a neAV apple pest, not previously noticed in 

 America. The damage is caused by the attacks of a little caterpillar, 

 somewhat resembling the true Codling- worm, but easily distinguish- 

 able from this by its much smaller size — only measuring a little 

 over a quarter of an inch in length when full grown — and by the 

 general form of its body, which is much more tapering towards each end. 

 The habits of this larva, called by Mr. Fletcher " the apple fruit- 

 miner," differ in some respects from those of T. jiomtDnUa. 



