278 REVIEW—VARIATION IN BRITISH NOCTUZ. 
together with an exclusion of the sun’s rays—as propounded by 
Lord Walsingham in his presidential address to the members of our 
Union in 1885—combined with natural selection, is fully borne out 
in our West Riding districts, and is the theory which has for some 
time, as the result of a careful study of these melanic forms and their 
habitats, most commended itself to ourselves. The primary object 
of the book, the describing and differentiating of all the known forms 
of the British Noctuz, is well and exhaustively done (in this volume. 
to the end of the genus Caradrina), and the labour involved in it 
must have been enormous. But that the author has seen fit to 
bestow separate names on nearly all the forms he has described, we 
think is a mistake, the mistake of the book. We should not ourselves 
have used the new (as it is called, though in reality it professes to be 
the oldest!) nomenclature, but that is simply a matter of opinion. 
The absurdity of it, however, reaches its climax when our old friend 
Apamea oculea has no less than thirty names given to its various 
forms, and one has to study the nomenclature for some time before 
discovering that ocu/ea is really the species treated of at all! We had 
stigmata, or a spot, and especially from a single specimen, is 
altogether unwarrantable. For example, Xy/ophasia rurea has nine 
named forms given to it, whereas two variety names in addition to 
the type name would, we think, be amply sufficient. The autho 
describes Miana strigilis and M. fasciuncula as separate species, but 
yet goes on to say that ‘AL. fesciuncula is so exactly like MZ. strigilis 
in shape and markings, that besides colour there appears to be no 
distinguishing mark in the imago state by which it can be separated.’ 
is statement we entirely deny, as there are no two more 
sorerenintiad "separated species in the list of British Lepidoptera ! 
pman’s recently proposed division of the genus Acronycta is 
ead os if the genus is to be divided at all we hope it will 
stand, as it is the result of a very painstaking and careful study © 
the group on Dr. Chapman’s part, and as it seems to us superior to 
any division which had previously been suggested. To all lepidop- 
terists who take interest in the study of varieties (and where now is 
one who does not ?), the book, when complete, will be invaluable as 
a successful attempt at a description of the known forms; but that 
they will use all the names in the labelling of their cabinets, or in 
conversation or correspondence, is probably more than the author 
expects.—G.T.P. 
Naturalist, 
