GLOSSOTROPHIA. By L. B. Prout. 83 



G. diffinaria nom. nov. (= luridata Stgr. nee Z.) (4 h, as luridata) represents confiriaria in Asia Minor, diffinaria. 

 and also, according to Staudinger, in Syria. Prom certain grey forms of confinaria with a little admixture of 

 yellowish, it appears to be superficially indistinguishable; indeed the resemblance is so exact that Staudinger 

 records diffinaria as occurring among confinaria ab. falsaria in the Tyrol, which is not really the case. The 

 essential distinction of diffinaria lies in the absence of the (J hindtibial spur. Except in size, there does 

 not seem to be much variation; our figure is rather more strongly marked than is usual. I have already, in 

 dealing with the true luridata, explained the necessity for renaming this species. 



G. eurata sf. nov. is very similar to the light sandy forms of confinaria, but differs in the structure eurata. 

 of the (J. The hindtibia in both sexes bears a pair of spurs. The cJ antennal structure is very similar to that 

 of confinaria, although the joints appear to be slightly more angularly projecting and the ciliation perhaps 

 slightly stronger. Whitish sand-colour, the darker dusting fine, but moderately strong. The lines of the 

 forewing start from fuscous or blackish costal spots; the apex of the forewing shows a tendency to become 

 pale, as is more characteristic of rufomixtata and romanaria than of confinaria. The second line of the hind- 

 wing is removed further from the discal spot than in confinaria, arising between the end of the median and 

 the postmedian of the forewing. The latter on the forewing is rather more conspicuously dark-spotted on 

 the veins. The discal spots are more prominent than is usual in confinaria. Described from a ^ and $ in 

 the PiJNGELER collection, the former (the type of the species) from Arwas, near Askhabad, 12 May 1900, 

 the latter from Schahkuh, Persia. The ^ is of about the size and shape of fucata, from which it is easily 

 distinguished by its coloration, scaling and antennal structure. The $ is much larger, about as the larger 

 forms of confinaria, and the forewing appears somewhat broader, but there seems no reason to doubt the spe- 

 cific identity. Similarly coloured examples of romanaria Mill, are easily distinguished by the scaling, as well 

 as the structure. 



G. rufomixtata Rhr. (7 c) was formerly regarded as another variety of diffinaria and confinaria, with rufomix- 

 which it agrees in the extremely long tongue; but apart from differences in the coloration, which is usually ^"'"• 

 strongly mixed with reddish or bright ochreous, the ground-colour remaining at the same time white or bluish 

 white, very strongly powdered with dark grey, it shows a very distinctive character in the nature of the scaling, 

 as has been pointed out by PiJNGELER. The scales in the dark spots which accompany the sub terminal line are 

 arranged in very fine transverse rows, so that when examined with a lens the spots appear iluted; in confinaria, 

 diffinaria and eurata the dark scales are evenly distributed. The forewing shows a more conspicuous pale, 

 usually subquadrate apical spot than in those species. The ^ hindtibia, as in confinaria is furnished with 

 a single spur. The larva was discovered by Graslin, feeding on Dianthus pungens. It is very similar to that 

 of confinaria but with a darker and narrower dorsal band. Graslin was ths first to obs3rve the remarkable 

 conformation of the pupal tongue, described in our generic diagnosis, rufomixtata is distributed in Spain, 

 Portugal, Southern Prance and perhaps N. Africa, and is also recorded from Teneriffe. — ab. dentatolineata dentato- 

 Bbr. is a less variegated, less heavily blackish-dusted form, with the dark lines in consequence standing out more ^ineata. 

 distinctly and showing up their dentate character more prominently, although their course is not in reality 

 essentially different from that shown in the t5rpe form. The ground colour in Ramrur's figure is light brown. 

 Figured without description from Andalusia. Referred to the present species by Staudinger and probably 

 correctly, although the inadequate and even inaccurate way in which he has dealt with this group of species 

 prevents our giving any weight to his decisions. The only specimen which I have seen agreeing with the 

 figure is a $ from the mountains of Cyprus, which I suppose really belongs to rufomixtata although its 

 appearance would suggest yet another species, nearest to romanaria semitata, but rather darker and with the 

 extremely long tongue, the scaling as in rufomixtata. 



G. rufotinctata sp- 'f^''^- Similarly coloured to the reddish forms of rufomixtata, but more uniformly, rufotinctata. 

 no part of the ground-colour (or only the extreme base of the hindwing) remaining white, while the dark 

 dusting is less intense and more reddish. The face appears rather browner (less blackish). The wings are 

 rather longer and narrower, but the shape is somewhat variable, one example more nearly approaching 

 rufomixtata than the other. The first line projects less behind the cell than in rufomixtata. The postmedian 

 line of the forewing, which in all the rufomixtata that I have seen forms a marked proximally-directed tooth 

 on the fourth subcostal, runs in rufotinctata straight until the bend at the first radial. The apex of the fore- 

 wing is less distinctly light than in rufomixtata. The discal spot of the hindwing is small (in rufomixtata larger). 

 The under surface is entirely without markings and shows a tinge of flesh-colour, becoming whiter posteriorly 

 on both wings. But the chief difference is in the structure of the cj antenna; the joints have not the projec- 

 ting edges which are so marked in the preceding species. The tongue is perhaps a little less extremely long, 

 but I have been unable to make any exact measurements. It is certainly elongate. Hindleg and subterminal 

 scaling about as in rufomixtata. Aksu, E. Turkestan, 2 i^(^ in the Pungeler collection. 



