BARNES AND McDUNNOUGH: CATOCALA 



11 



Apart from Rowley's short note (Ent. News, XX, p. 135) stating that the mature larva is very similar to that 

 of habilis, nothing is known of the life-history of the species. 



The species occurs throughout the same territory as flebilis but is rather more commonly met with. 



Catocala obscura Strecker 



Plate II, fig. 17; PL XVIII, figs. 27 and 28. 



Catocala obscura Strecker, 1873, Lep. Rhop. Het., May, p. 19, PI. in, fig. 4. Kellicott, 1886, Ent. Amer., II, p. 45 (larva). Dodge, 



1904, Can. Ent., XXXVI, p. 115 (larva). Rowley, 1909, Ent. News, XX, p. 134 (larva). 

 Catocala simulatilis Grote, 1873, Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc, V, Sept., p. 94. Strecker, 1874, Lep. Rhop. Het., p. 106. 



This species is, as the name implies, very obscure in the maculation of the primaries; it is generally distinguished 

 from residua by the white fringes of the secondaries, which in the latter species are dusky. There is, however, some doubt 

 in our minds as to whether this feature is of specific value, as the series before us tends to show intergrades. Careful 

 breeding from authoritatively identified specimens will be necessary to settle the point. Holland's figure of obscura 

 (PI. xxxi, fig. 14) should be referred to residua. Three descriptions (as cited above) exist of the mature larva and, 

 while they all agree in stating that neither filaments nor dorsal hump are present, they vary considerably in other respects. 

 Messrs. Dodge, in their article, give points of distinction between the larvse of obscura and residua, claiming that the former 

 has a black acuminate dash extending from the mouth two-thirds of the way to the top of the head, while the latter has 

 merely a small ill-defined blotch at the corners of the mouth; the pattern on the dorsum is also noted as different. These 

 differences, if constant, would constitute specific distinctness. 



We have made several slides of the genitalia of this species and of residua, besides having before us those slides which 

 served as the originals of Beutenmuller's figures, but have been unable to decide by these means anything definite regard- 

 ing the status of the two so-called species. The male claspers of a specimen of obscura from Massachusetts agreed exactly 

 with Beutenmuller's figure, while those of a specimen from Quincy, Illinois, which we should not hesitate a moment in 

 calling obscura, approached very closely to his figure of residua. On the other hand, eastern specimens of residua from 

 New Jersey and Pennsylvania showed more resemblance in the genitalia to the figure of obscura than to that of residua. 

 The formation of the apical portion of the claspers in this group is apparently not entirely constant. As we have remarked 

 above, careful breeding from known females will be necessary to decide the point as to whether the names represent distinct 

 species; for the present we treat them as such. 



The species extends over the same general region as does the preceding species; it has been recorded from as far 

 north as Ottawa, Ontario (Gibson, 1911, Rep. Ent. Soc. Ont. for 1910, p. 111). 



Catocala residua Grote 



Plate II, fig. 18; PI. XIII, fig. 2 (larva); PL XV, fig. 2 (larval head); PI. XV, fig. 29 and PL XVII, fig. 3 (segments); 



PL XVIII, figs. 29 and 30 (claspers). 



Catocala residua Grote, 1874, Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., XVI, p. 242. Dodge, 1901, Can. Ent., XXXIII, p. 225 (larva, as obscura). 

 Barnes and McDunnough, 1918, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXXVIII, p. 152. 



Fresh specimens show more of a blackish tinge on the primaries than does figure 18 of plate II; Holland's figure under 

 obscura (PI. xxxi, fig. 14) gives a good idea of the species. As already noted under the preceding species, the fringes of 

 the secondaries are dusky with a small whitish area near apex; specimens before us from Middle Western States (Illinois 

 and Arkansas) show considerable whitish suffusion throughout the whole fringes, although the primaries with their dis- 

 tinct and contrasted maculation (notably the white s. t. line) point to an association with residua rather than obscura. 

 As is the case with the preceding species, further breeding experiments are much to be desired to establish the range of 

 variation. 



The species occurs throughout the same territory as does obscura. 



