the ENTOMOLOGIST’S WEEKLY INTELLIGENCEE. 
109 
is a month earlier than they usually ap- 
pear, ami if this warm weather continues 
I should advise the incipient to look for 
things now that are due a mouth hence. 
— Heubert F. Gibbs, 27, Upper Manor 
Street, Chelsea, N. IF. ; March 5. 
Tortrix Larvce. — In No. 26 of the 
‘Manual’ I was rather surprised to see 
that so few larvae of the genus Eupcecilia 
are known. I am inclined to think they 
will all be seed-feeders. I bred last sea- 
son Eupcecilia anr/ustana freel)' from the 
seed-heads of Plantago major, lanceolata 
and marilima ; the larva is of a deep 
pink tinge, and remains in the seed-heads 
through the winter, changing to pupa in 
March and April. The larva of Calosetia 
nigromaculana feeds in the seed-heads of 
the ragwort {Senecio Jacobcea). — T. Wil- 
kinson, 6, Cliff-Bridge Terrace, Scar- 
borough ; March 7. 
PHOTOGKAPHIC PORTRAITS OF 
INSECTS. 
To the Editor of the ‘ Intelligencer.' 
Sir, — As a “ Babe in the Wood ” 
lately suggested something to the effect 
that Photography might be made very 
useful in securing fidelity in representa- 
tions of insects, it may not be intruding 
too much on the space of your valuable 
paper for me to state that, last July, as I 
was looking over a copy of Humphreys 
and Westwood’s ‘ British Moths,’ trying 
to find a resemblance between a Noetua 
before me and what was meant for a 
representation of it in the volume, the 
thought struck me. Why should not 
Photography be called upon to provide 
us with illustrations for our entomological 
works. Everybody is having their like- 
nesses taken. Why should not insects? 
I had, a short time before, commenced 
taking portraits by the collodion-positive 
process, I therefore determined at once 
to try what I could do towards taking 
likenesses of insects, selecting some half- 
dozen large species for the purpose. 
After a few failures I managed to ob- 
tain a very good representation of the 
group, showing all the markings, &c., 
with the greatest exactness. It so hap- 
pened that ill all the species (Lcpi- 
doptera) which I had chosen, the dif- 
ference of intensity in the colour of the 
markings was very great, so that when I 
came to take species in which the reverse 
occurred, the result showed one uniform 
shade all over the wings, without any 
of the markings showing themselves, 
although ill the original they may have 
been very conspicuous. 
The process which I adopted was one 
on glass; if, however, it was thought de- 
sirable to have them on paper, they might 
either be taken by the calotype-process 
or by the negative-collodion and printing 
processes, and afterwards coloured. 
This is an age of improvement. Why 
should we not improve in this as well as 
in other things ? 
J. B. Crawfurd. 
Southampton, Feb. 14. 
LIST OF THE 
BRITISH PLUMES. 
1. 
Adactvla Bennetii 
2. 
Pterophorus 
rhododactyliis 
3. 
ochrodaetylus 
4. 
19 
isodactylus 
5. 
11 
trigonodactylus 
6. 
11 
Zetterstedtii 
7. 
11 
acanthodactylus 
8. 
11 
punctidactylus 
9. 
11 
parvidactylus 
10. 
11 
Hieracii 
11. 
11 
Pilosellai 
12. 
11 
pluEodactylus 
13. 
11 
bipunctidactylus 
14. 
11 
Loewii 
15. 
11 
plagiodactylus 
16. 
11 
fiisctis 
17. 
11 
lithodactylus 
18. 
11 
pterodactylus 
19. 
11 
Lienigianus 
20. 
11 
tephradactylus 
21. 
11 
osteodactylus 
22. 
11 
microdactyl us 
23. 
11 
brachydactylus 
24. 
11 
galactodactylus 
25. 
11 
spilodactylus 
26. 
11 
Baliodaclylus 
27. 
11 
tetradactylus 
28. 
11 
pentadactylus 
29. 
11 
pallidum 
30. 
Alucita polydactyla. 
— H. T. Stainton; March 7. 
