212 THE entomologist's record. 



186) are in Dr. Mason's collection. He further states that " they do 

 not represent this species, and the male is certainly F. bettdina.'" 



Now, sinse Barrett's idea of ? hetuUna {lor. cit.,]). 2GS) did not satisfy 

 the description of Zeller's hi'tuUna (and Bruand's anicanella), and Mit- 

 ford's aalicoleUa equals Barrett's hrtnlina, although Mitford's salicoldla 

 equals Bruand's salicolclla, it is evident that Barrett's 2 bctnlina, Ent.Mo. 

 Ma;/., XXX., p. 267 = Bruand's ? salicolella, and that Barrett's sali- 

 coldla (Ibid., 26S) has no standing except so far as it is copied from 

 Bruand, and hence 2 heUdina, Barrett, Ent. Mo. Ma;/., xxxi., p. 267 = 

 i^alicnleUa, Barrett, Ent. Mo. Mai/., xxxi., p. 268. 



In the I'Jnt. Mo. Ma;/., xxxi., p. 275, is a further note on an insect 

 captured by Mr. W. H, B. Fletcher in the New Forest, and referred to 

 as /''. betti.lina. Here Mr. Barrett makes sundry corrections in his 

 previous description of <? betn'ina{co]i[cd from the authorities, andhenco 

 correct), which appsar to bring it into lino with ths real description of 

 salicoldla. Tha living female is then describsd, and th3 anil tuft of 

 this New Forest betnlina is dsscribad as farming adense circle of long 

 brownish-white scales. Now, in the Ent. Mo. Ma/., xxx., p. 263, 

 Barrett, fallowing Bruand, had d^scribad the anal tuft of the ? sali- 

 coldla as light yellow-brown, and yet it does not appear to have struck 

 him that his New Forest betulina could possibly be the salicoldla of 

 Bruand. Wo have not seen the New Forest imagines or cases, and 

 cannot say that this is so, but unless they represent som9thing quite 

 new and undescribed, it seems to be the only logical conclusion. 



There is no doubt whatever if one vvill read Zeller's original des- 

 cription of betulina, Ms, 1839, p. 183, that the New Forest insect, 

 referred to this species, does not agree therewith. On the other hand, 

 there can be but little doubt (although there is much less certainty 

 since Bruand's collection was destroyed) that the New Forest insect is 

 salicoldla. 



It is further interesting to be able to show that Mitford was per- 

 fectly correct in his differentiation of the two species, and we would 

 here congratulate Mr. Whittle, Avho has found cases of the true 

 betulina this year, and allowed us to complete som3 dubious points in 

 its life-history. 



We may also note that the cases of anicandla in Stephens' coll. at 

 the British Museum appear to be not those of betulina, Zell. (of which 

 anicanella is a synonym), but of salicoldla, Bruand. 



Soms furthsr notes on Zonosoma annulata var. obsoleta. 



By W. S. lUDING, 13.A., M.D., F.E.S. 



Some of the pupa; of the third brood of Zonosoma annulata (1898) 

 described in the Ent. Ilecord, vol. 10, No. 10, began to emerge 

 on April 22nd, 1899, and as I brought them into a warm room, continued 

 to come out till June dlh. Sixteen pupio, apparently healthy, are going 

 over, which is very unusual. All the imagines are destitute of the 

 black ring on the fore-wings, so from these experiments alone, the 

 probability would bo that the form is a true variety and not an aberra- 

 tion, and this is rendered certain by second broods from three dili'erent 

 pairings which have been emerging during June, all breeding true 

 without exception. 



The variety is establishing itself in the locality mentioned in this 



