356 
INSECTA, LEPIDOPTERA. 
82; ^^The Coleophora [see], or Tent-makers,” pp. 83-38; " Mimetic Analogy, 
illustrated by South- American Butterflies,” pp. 44-50 ; " Insect Disguises,” 
pp. 61-64; "The Oak-feeding Silkworm of China” [^Anther^a pernii], 
pp. 55-69 ; " Insects’ Eggs,” pp. 60-63. 
Staudinger & WocKE have issued a new edition of their ‘ Catalog der 
Lepidopteren des eiiropaeischen Faimengebiets ’ (roy. 8vo, Dresden: 1871, 
pp. xxxviii, 426), in which localities are added. Many new varieties are named 
(too numerous to be here enumerated) and a few new genera and species named 
and characterized {cf. Pet. Nouv. iii. p. 167). It is reviewed at length, with 
many interesting observations on geographical distribution, by A. Breyer and 
P. de Borre, Ann. Ent. Belg. xiv. c.-r. pp. 125-135. 
IIerrich-Schaffer has commenced a 4th edition of his ‘ Systematisches 
Verzeichniss der Schmetterlinge von Europa,’ the first sheet of which only, 
issued with CB. Ver. Begensb. xxv., has come to the Recorder’s hands. 
E. B. Reed continues his accentuated list of Canadian Lepidoptera^ Canad. 
Ent. iii. pp. 95 &,96. 
W. A. Lewis, in a paper entitled "An examination of the arrangement of 
Macrolepidoptera introduced into England by Mr. Doubleday, with a sugges- 
tion as to its origin, with some strictures upon synonymic lists,” severely 
criticizes the received arrangements of British Lepidoptera, and the lists and 
other works of Doubleday, Knaggs, and Newman. He maintains that no 
changes in nomenclature should be made in synonymic lists, and that no 
current name, whether it has the right of priority or not, should be super- 
seded by an obsolete one. Tr. E. Soc. 1871, pp. 317-362 ; Pr. E. Soc. 1871, 
pp. xv-xviii. [See also the "General Subject.”] 
Zeller publishes a series of notes on various Ileterocei’a in a criticism of 
Taschenberg’s ‘ Entomologie fiir Gartner und Gartenfreimde,’ S. E. Z. xxxii. 
pp. 166-175. He also (/. c. pp. 175-179) notices Rep. Ins. Miss. i. 
Grote (Tr. Am. Ent. Soc. iii. pp. 173-176), in " Remarks on Dr. Bois- 
duval’s L^pidopteres de la Californie,” gives some critical notes also on Ile- 
terocera. 
Bremen’s ‘ Lepidopteren Ostsibiriens ’ is reviewed, and the plates are se- 
verely criticized, in S. E. Z. xxxii. pp. 162-164. 
The new species described by Staudinger in B. E. Z. xiv. are enumerated, 
with notes on their affinities, in Bull. Ent. Ital. iii. pp. 206-210. 
On the dates of publication of Felder’s ‘ Reise der Fregatten Novara’s: 
Lepidopteren,’ see Butler, Ann. N. II. (4) viii. pp. 290 & 291 ; and of Cramer 
and Stoll’s ‘ Papillons Exotiques,’ see W. F. Kirby, Pr. E. Soc. 1871, pp. xliv 
& xiv. 
Koch argues, on somewhat unsatisfactory grounds, that Cramer was not 
acquainted with any Australian Lepidoptera : S. E. Z. xxxii. pp. 239-241. 
A. R. Wallace protests against the revival of Hiibner’s generic names: 
Pr. E. S. 1871, pp. Ixv-lxvii [cf. Zool. Rec. vii. p. 376]. 
Goedartiiis. G. Roberts publishes extracts from Lister’s edition : Zool. s. s. 
1871, pp. 2787-2790. 
Rhopalocera. 
Of W. H. Edwards’s ‘ Butterflies of North America ’ parts 7-9 have now 
appeared (Philadelphia : 4to, Jan., Aug., and Dec. 1871), the appended synopsis 
extending to the genus Lwmceus. 
G. Ramum has commenced a popular work, entitled ‘ Die Schmetterlinge 
