The type of brunneipennis is an extreme, form, and Mr. Grote's descrip- 

 tion may therefore be reproduced: 



"Allied to cupida but smaller; fore-tibiae unarmed; thorax and fore- 

 wings of a glossy chestnut brown, somewhat reddish; none of the usual 

 markings are noticeable. The sub-terminal space is stained with blackish 

 Following the s.t. line is a series of faint, pale, interspaceal fleckings: 

 ordinary lines indicated on costal region. Hind wings blackish fuscous 

 abdomen beneath stained with reddish brown, as is the costal region of 

 primaries, else the blackish wings beneath show only a common black 

 transverse line, which fades out toward the internal margins." 



Lintner, in the Ent. Cont., lY, 124., rather doubts the identity of the 

 forms referred by Mr. Grote to this species, and describes the larval habits 

 of the species without describing the larva itself. According to him it is 

 sometimes quite injurious to grape, feeding on the buds. 



The species is the most common eastern representative of its group. 



Mr. Butler's reference of Graphiphora velata Wlk. as a synonym of 

 this species, is accepted as an easy way of getting rid of Walker's name, 

 and because the reference is probably correct. 



Type Locality: Texas (Belfrage). 



Number and Sexes of Types: 



Types in : National Museum, 1 ^ , 3 $ . 



Specimens Examined: 2 $,2 $5 Texas, (Presumably all Topotypes 

 from the Type Lot) (1 ? compared with type by Dr. William Barnes). 



Genitalic Slides: 1, Texas, (see above). 



Thru some misapprehension Dr. Smith removed the form men- 

 tioned by Mr. Grote from its relatives in the "Cupida GrouiD" and 

 placed it in the "Alternata Group." In reality, it appears to be 

 mererly a form of the true anchocelioides which has produced a 

 genitalia identical with that of cupida. It is not unlikely that Grote 

 looked at its genitalia and that Smith did not, for in size . and 

 maculation it is almost identical with smooth-looking alternata, 

 except for the course of the s.t. line, but the orbicular is smaller 

 and rounder than is typical in that species. It also has a little more 

 of a silky luster to its wings ; in that way resembling cupida. Until 

 complete life history notes are obtained for both belfragei and 

 anchocelioides it seems best to keep the two forms as separate 

 species. Like anchocelioides, belfragei is rare in collections, and 

 the author knows of no specimens outside of the original type lot 

 from Mr. Belfrage. 



LAMPRA ANCHOCELIOIDES, Gn. 



1852. Gn., Sp. Gen., Noct., I, 384, Cerastis. 



1857. Wlk., C. B. Mus., Het., X, 452, Cerastis. 



1874. Grt., Bull. Buff. Soc. Nat. Sci., II, 26, Glaea. 



1893. Sm., Bull. U. S. N. M., XLIV, 52, = cupida, {Rhynchagrotis) . 



1895. Grt., Abh. Nat. Ver., Bremen, XIV, 17, anchocelioides, Sm., nee. Gn. 



(in error). 

 1903. Hamp., Cat. Lep. Phal. B. M., W, 638, = velata, cupida plated in 



error. {Triphaena). 

 1903. Holl., Moth Book, p. 178, pi. XXI, f. 19, Rhynchagrotis, probably 



cupida in error. 

 1908. Sm., Can. P^nt., XL, 286, Rhynchagrotis, probably cupida in error. 



129 



