92 THE ENTOMOLOGIST’S RECORD. 
Fumeid it belongs to the short-spurred group with “ cellula intrusa”’ 
(i.e., reticulatella, &e.).  Norvegica is similarly conditioned. I have 
not seen specimens of either of these or of raiblensis. 
(2? Bruandia) raiblensis—I have not met with any account of B. 
raiblensis, except the original description by Mann made from three 
specimens. ‘The account he gives of it would lead one to suspect it to 
be a very large pale form of B. reticulatella. My Riviera specimens 
show that that species varies much in size and also in tint, and may 
very well have a large pale form as well as large and small dark ones. 
(To be continued.) 
Notes on Prats IV. 
The figures are all from camera sketches. The neurations are not 
to a uniform scale of enlargement, but the well-known expanse of each 
species shows easily what this is. The tibie are enlarged 23 diameters, 
i.e., figs. 19-49 ; 50 and 51 are only enlarged 8 diameters. 
The neurations illustrate the great variability of this character in 
the Psychides, although this feature is, perhaps, less prominent in these 
lower divisions. Figs. 1 and 2 are the wings of one specimen of Luffia 
lapidella, nervure 8 present in one, absent in the other. Figs. 7 and 8, 
Bacotia sepium: 8 is fairly typical, 7, the other forewing from same 
specimen, shows the areolar cell nearly evanescent and a small branch 
present, probably representing nervure 10 (Meyrick’s notation) ; 
similarly fig. 10 shows a nervure absent in fig. 9 (which is the more 
normal), thus illustrating a similar variability in the hind-wings of B. 
sepium. Figs. 13 and 15, Proutia betulina and P. eppingella (salicolella ?), 
the connate nervures figured in 15 often occur in P. betulina; it is 
doubtful if the form of hind-margin shown in 15 is more than an 
individual variation. 
The small figures against the tibiee represent the percentage lengths 
of the tibia from the point of origin of the spine to end of tibia, taken 
as being the length of the spine. The lengths of the tibiee vary with 
the sizes of the specimens, ¢.7., fig. 87, M. edwardsella, and fig. 88, IM. 
hibernicella, are approximately proportional to the sizes of the species. 
In figs. 24, 25, 26, on the other hand, P. betulina spur is much longer 
than that of P. eppingella, though the insects are only slightly different 
in size. In figs. 25 and 26 the different length of spur is individual, 
the French specimen haying one short spur and one long one, like 
that figured from Epping. I am sorry to add that though the different 
thicknesses and curvatures of the various tibie are sometimes due to 
specific distinctions, they are more often due to the aspect they are 
viewed in and their method of preparation and mounting ; but I must 
add that I am rarely able to say which element is most potent in any 
individual case. I think, however, that figs. 48 and 45 probably have 
really the same form of tibia. Again, fig. 89 is obviously viewed 
more from below. English J. crassiorella are not so abundant as to 
enable one to say anything as to why fig. 81 shows such a curvature, 
but it is probably due to an individual variation or twist in setting, or 
some non-essential cause. 
What these sketches show is the relative signs of tibie in different 
species, and especially the point in the length of the tibia from which 
the spur arises. In this respect the figures may be relied on. The 
calculated percentages are probably correct to two, or at most three, 
points, the chief source of error here being the difficulty of always 
