186 



INSECTS OF SAMOA. 



ARCTIIDAE. 



NOLINAE. 



1. Celama samoana Hampson. 



Celama samoana Hampson, Cat. Lep. Phal. B. M., Suppl. i, p. 397, pi. 22, fig. 23, Nov., 1914. 

 Celama squalida Staudinger, Hampson, Cat. Lep. Phal. B. M., ii, p. 25, Feb., 1900, non Staudinger : 



part — Tonga specimens. 

 Celama squalida Staudinger, Rebel, 2 Beiheft Jahrb. Hamb. Wiss. Ansta.lt., xxxii, pp. 125, 144, 



1915, non Staudinger. 



Upolu : Apia, only, 5.iv.l924 (Armstrong) ; 27, 30i., 3, lO.ii., 20.iii., 

 31.iv. 5 30.V.1924, 1,000 feet, x.1925 ; 3 (Lister) ; 13, 14.ix.1923, 

 13, 15.ix.1923 (Swezey and Wilder) ; and x.1912, at light (Friederichs), 

 $ (Henniger), recorded by Rebel (1915) as Celama squalida Staudinger. 



Malololelei, 2,000 feet, 22, 23, 25.ii., 17, 20.iv., 25, 30.xi.1924, 21, 

 22.iv.1925 ; 22, 23, 24, 25 ii., 22.iii., 28.iv.1924, 21.iv.1925. 



Tutuila : 1 $ (Kellers). 



Pago Pago, 2 $$, v.1896. (de la Garde.) 



Hampson had placed the two Pago Pago specimens under Celama squalida 

 Staudinger, with the 6 and 1 $ taken in Tonga by G. F. Mathew and presented 

 to the Museum in 1887. Apparently this mistake of Hampson's resulted in 

 Rebel's Samoan record of that species. Staudinger's type of Celama squalida 

 is a specimen taken at Malaga, Spain, and I have not yet seen it matched, though 

 the name has been freely used for all sorts of entirely different species. 



Pago Pago, 13 13 £$, ii.1924 (Steffany). 



I should like to draw attention to the fact that a misidentification, such as 



those occurring under the above species, is frequently cited as follows : — 



Celama squalida Hampson, Cat. Lep. Phal., ii, p. 25, Feb., 1900, non Staudinger. 

 Celama squalida Rebel, 2 Beiheft Jahrb. Hamb. Wiss. Anstalt., xxxii, pp. 125, 144, 1915, non 

 Staudinger. 



Although the chances are against Hampson and Rebel both describing a 

 new species Celama squalida, there is nothing in the above form of citation to 

 differentiate it from a statement of absolute homonymy, and I maintain that 

 it is not a correct statement of fact. In neither of these cases is the Celama 

 squalida a homonym of Celama squalida Staudinger ; my own statement refers 

 to material which Hampson, copied by Rebel, identified, erroneously, as Celama 

 squalida Staudinger. I have placed the author's name in italics, to drawn atten- 

 tion to the fact that a misidentification is being cited. 



