396 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA. 



none of the moths of this crossing were distinguishable from A. 

 populi. I was not able to learn from Staudinger whence he obtained 

 the moths ; I further received, as from this crossing, a 2 from 

 a Herr Rosenhagen of Posen, which I still possess, and which I 

 am also unable to distinguish from A. populi. During 1900 and 

 1 90 1, I obtained a large number of pairings of populi $ X 

 ocellata 2 ; those of 1900 all failed, in 1901 one out of many pair- 

 ings gave a few eggs which produced larvae ; most of these died 

 without feeding, but I obtained from the others a few pupae which 

 are going over the winter, and I hope at last to breed it my- 

 self. The pupae lead me to expect a moth that will be quite distin- 

 guishable from A. populi''' (March 3rd, 1902). It is to be observed 

 that Austaut's hybr. metis is from austauti $ X atlatiticus 2 

 (—populi $ X ocellata 2 ), whilst Standfuss' hybr. fringsi is from 

 atlanticus $ X populi 2 {^ocellata $ X populi ? ), that is, in the 

 first case, the parentage of *S. hybr. inversa, and, in the second 

 case, the parentage of S. hybr. hybridus. It is further to be noticed that, 

 in crossing austauti $ X atlanticus 2 (=populi $ X ocellata 2 ), 

 Austaut really has obtained the reciprocal cross to S. hybr. hybridus 

 in these local races, although, at present, detailed evidence is wanted 

 as to the actual breeding of the cross of populi $ X ocellata 2 , from 

 typical forms, to the imaginal stage. In 1901, in his account of 6". hybr. 

 fringsi (an ted, p. 393), Standfuss misquotes -S. hybr. hybridus as populi 

 $ X ocellata 2 , although he had, in 1896, quite correctly given it 

 ( Handbuch, p. 54) as being ocellata $ X populi 2 . Frings notes (Soc. 

 Ent., xv., p. 164) that he, himself, had never succeeded in obtaining 

 a single larva from the eggs of the cross populi $ X ocellata 2 • 



Of the habits of the British species, Bacot says : "Mimas tiliae 

 emerges in the afternoon, in which respect it is very constant. 

 Beales states (Ent. Rec, vol. xiv., p. 165) that his specimens, 

 whether forced or not, almost invariably emerged between twelve 

 and two. The other two species usually emerge about midnight, 

 although I have had some out as early as 9.30 p.m., and others 

 as late as 8 a.m. Prout tells me that, when forced, they usually 

 emerge between 5 p.m. and 7 p.m. M. tiliae is out during May and 

 June. Barrett says there is no second brood, but Bellamy stated at one 

 of the meetings of City of London Entomological Society, that he 

 had seen a specimen as late as November 22nd. The other two species 

 are also out during the same months. Smerinthus ocellata is partially 

 double-brooded, and occurs again in August or September. Amorpha 

 populi is said to be regularly double-brooded, the second brood 

 coming out at the end of July and in August, and the rearing 

 of three broods in one year has been recorded. The second brood 

 of A. populi is, however, I fancy, only a partial one, the greater 

 portion of the early pupae going over the winter before emerging. 

 Out of about forty larvae that went down at the end of June, 

 1892, only five or six yielded imagines the same year; one of 

 these was crippled, and the others rather undersized. I have 

 frequently raised broods, no members of which emerged before 

 the winter. The emergence of the first brood would seem to 

 be spread over a considerable space of time ; in 1894 I ' assembled ' 

 a perfectly fresh male on June 22nd, and a specimen is recorded 

 (Ent. Rec, vol. i., p. 180), as having been taken in a moth trap 



