30 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



might be Xylophasia Zollikoferi, from M. Guenee's remark 

 that some authors had placed this insect in the genus 

 Nonagria ; and Mr. Harding's moth certainly resembles a 

 female N. TyphoB in colour and markings. A shoit time 

 since 1 sent it to Dr. Staudinger, and he says it is Xylophasia 

 Zollikoferi, var. This species is principally found in Hun- 

 gary and Russia, but is not common anywhere. — Henry 

 Doiihleday ; Jamiary 10, 1870. 



[A description and figure will appear in the ' Insect- 

 Hunler's Year-book.' — E. Newman.'] 



In the matter of Dianthoecia Barrettii. — [In reference to 

 some very beautiful and perfect specimens of a Dianthoecia 

 kindly submitted to me at Peckham, the owner, Mr. Moore, 

 writes to me as follows. — E. N.] On the 10th of June, 

 1861, I found two Dianthoecia larvae feeding in capsules of 

 Silene maritima. Unfortunately they went down before the 

 next morning, or I should have figured them, as I did many 

 others that season. 1 have, however, a distinct recollection 

 of the two larvae, which were a good deal like those of D. 

 capsincola, having the dorsal and subdorsal lines darker 

 than the ground colour, with oblique marks between them, 

 but the general colour was lighter and rather more ochreous 

 than in capsincola. About the same time I took a somewhat 

 worn imago on the wing, in the dusk, on the top of the cliff; 

 and though 1 supposed it to be a Dianlhcecia, I could not 

 refer it to any of the species described in Stainton's * Manual.' 

 This I showed to the Rev. J. Hellins the same autumn, but 

 the insect being somewhat worn, and Barrettii not then being 

 discovered, we supposed it to be a variety of D. conspersa. 

 Next spring my larvae produced images (one unfortunately 

 crippled in the hind wings), which were evidently the same 

 species. I exhibited all three at a meeting of the York 

 Entomological Society in the spring of 1862, and also to Mr. 

 Allis, of York ; but they were still supposed to be only 

 varieties of D. conspersa. I compared my insects with Mr. 

 Doubleday's description of D. Barrettii in the 'Annual' for 

 1864, but failed to see that they were the same species, 

 chiefly, I think, because Mr. D. described the colour as 

 fuscous, whilst my specimens, particularly the bred ones, 

 have ti strong tinge of yellowish olive, and a distinct flush 

 of bluish purple in some of the darker parts, almost 



