1901.] L. de Niceville — Butterflies of the subgenus Tronga. 31 



When describing tliis species, Wallengren gave "China" as its 

 habitat, which is very vague, but as most of the older writers had 

 access to species from Southern China only, T. kinhergl probably came 

 from the Canton district or from the Island of Hongkong, both in 

 Southern China. He compares it with JE. alopia, Godart, whicli is an 

 Isnmia. He does not give the sex of the tjpe specimen. The descrip- 

 tion agrees very well with some of my specimens of the very variable 

 Euplcea (Grastia) lorquinii, Felder { = E. felderi, Butler), the commonest 

 species in Hongkong. Should this species prove to be same as lorquinii, 

 Wallengren's name will stand, being the older. Butler in 1866 

 recorded it from China, and noted that " E. felderi mny be a local form 

 of E. hinhergi, Wallengren," which is probably a correct assumption. 

 Moore in 1883 gave it as a Tronga from China, and said tliat specimens 

 were in the collection of the British Museum, but in 1890 he made no 

 mention of it in " Lep. Ind." amongst the extra-Indian species of 

 Tronga, Fruhstorfer recorded it from Java, which is almost certainly 

 incorrect; as far as I know, no species of J^ /^^pZcea is common to both 

 China and Java, and there is no reason to suspect that E. hinhergi came 

 from anywhere else than China.* 



3. Tronga bremeri, Felder. 



Euploea Iremeri, Felder, Wien. Enfc. Monatsch., vol. iv, p. 398, n. 16 (1860) ; id., 

 Batler, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1866, p. 277, n. 28; idem, id., Trans. Linn. Soc. Loud., 

 Zool., second series, vol. i, pp. 535, 564, n. 6 (1877); id., Druce, Proc. Zool. Soc. 

 Lond., 1873, p. 338, p. 5 ; id., Godmau and Salvin, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1878, p. 638, 

 n. 8; id., Distant, Rhop. Malay., pp. 23, 410, n. 2, pi. ii, fig. 4, male (1882, 1886); 

 id., Marsliall and de Niceville, Butt. India, Burmah and Ceylon, vol. i, p. 78, n. 60 

 (1882); id, Marshall, Proc. A. S. B., 1882, p. 143, n. 60; id, Adamson, Notes 

 Danainse Burmah, p. 10 (1889) ; idem, id.. Cat. Butt. Burmah, p. 5, n. 26 (1889) ; id., 

 Hagen, Tidjsch. van het Kon. Ned. Aard. Genootsch., 1890, p. 191, n. 2; idem, id., 

 Berl. Ent. Zeitsch., vol. xxxvii, p. 143, n. 8 (1892) ; idem, id., Iris, vol. vii, p. 41, 

 n. 104 (1894); id., Pagenstecher, in Kiikenthal's Erg. einer zool. Forsch. Molukken 

 und in Borneo, p. 389, n. 109 (1897) ; Crastiahremeri, Butler, Journ. Linn. Soc. Lond., 

 Zool., vol. xiv, p. 298, n. 9 (1878) ; Tronga hremeri, Moore, Proc. Zool. Soc, Lond., 

 1883, p. 267, n. 4, pi. xxix, fig. 5, male ; idem, id., Journ. Linn. Soc. Lond., Zool., 

 vol. xxi, p. 30 (1886) ; idem, id., Lep. Ind., vol. i, p. 76, pi. xix, figs. 1, la, 1&, male ; 

 Ic, Id, female (1890) ; E. (Tronga) Iremeri, Adamson, Cat. Butt. Burmab, p. 7, n. 15 



* Since the above was written Professor Chr. Aurivillius has sent me a beauti- 

 ful coloured drawing of the type specimen of Euplcea hinhergi, Wallengren, this 

 drawing I hope to reproduce in a later paper. It represents a female example of 

 probably the commonest form of Euploea found in Hongkong and on the opposite 

 mainland of Southern China. The Euplcea lorquinii of Felder and E. felderi of Butler 

 are synonyms of E* hinhergi. It is a Crastia, not a Tronga. 



