44 
THE WEEKLY ENTOMOLOGIST. 
C. Carduana. 
C. Ceecimaculana. 
I. Tenuicornis. 1 specimen swept 
from Birch. 
,, Tectinea. 
0. Loganella, about a dozen. 
T. Bisttigella 5, 
M. Allionella In plenty. 
„ Seppella, 
,, Mansuetella 1, 
C. Dcauratella 1, 
E, Magnificella, 
,, Ochreella, etc etc, 
J, B, HoDGKiNsoy, Penwortliam 
Mills near Vreston, September 11, 
1862, 
E. Tripunctata and Trisignata . — 
Being pretty certain that these two 
species ought to be found here, I set 
out on the 10th. inst, determined, if 
possible, to find them. After working 
for about two hours I had the satis- 
faction of finding in my larva box 
about twenty five or thirty Trisignata 
and 1 Tripunctata. W. Brest, 6, 
Castlegate, York. September 12. 1862 
Dasypolia Templi bred. — It may 
interest some of your readers to hear 
that this hitherto scarce insect has 
been reared. I found a fine speoimen 
out in one of my breeding cages 
yesterday, and shall, probably, be able 
to describe the larva another year, W 
R. Jeffrey, 2, Muntriss Row 
Scarboro, September 12. 1862. 
OBSERVATIONS. 
Lasiocampa Qucrcus. — Last year I 
received two larvae of Lasiocampa 
quercus from an obliging correspon- 
dent, Mr. S. P. Savill, of Dover 
House, Cambridge, and soon after I 
found one on a hedge, as I was walk- 
ing in a lane near Naffer ton. I fed 
them all together in a breeding cage, 
so that I cannot say from which of 
these localities the moth, of which I 
am about to write, came ; but it was 
from one or the other, for these were 
all I had. When it came out, and I 
set it, I thought that the antennae, — 
it is a male, — were much smaller 
thau usual, and on comparing it with 
others in my cabinet, such proved to 
be the case. I shewed it to that 
excellent Entomologist Mr. F. H. 
Allis, of York, who, I may mention 
has one of the finest collections in 
England, and he said that there wero 
no instances of variation in the 
antennae of insects on record, except 
one in the case of Arctia caja, which, 
I think he said were red instead of 
white. I went about a fortnight 
since to the Rev. George Rudston 
Read, of Sutton-on-Derwent, and 
noticed two others in his collection 
(also a fine one,) which had much 
smaller antennae than the rest. I 
think, moreover, they were not of the 
same size themselves, but those 6f 
one specimen were rather larger than 
those of the other. I should bo glad 
if some of your correspondents would 
bo so kind as to examine their speci- 
mens of this species, and tell us the 
result, as it will be interesting to 
learn whether this species, and 
whether this alone, is subject to this 
variation in the sizo of the antenna*, 
