622 
ZOOLOGICAL LITEHATUIIE. 
Stainton has published (Ent. Ti’ans. 3rd ser. voL i. pp. 637- 
655) a revision of the European species of the genus Cos- 
mopteryx, Hubnei% as restricted by Zeller. He enumerates six 
species, three of which are found in Britain : — 
The species are : C. lienigiella, Zell, ; C. scribaiella, Zell. ; C. eximia^ Haw. 
( = Staint.); C. schmidiella Frey ; C, orichaleea, Staint. j aad C. dniry- 
ella, Zell. The first, third, and fifth are British species. The species described 
by Fabricius under the name of I'inea drurella, and that figured by Iliibner, 
and named T. zieglerella, formerly supposed by Stainton to be identical with 
bis C. drurella^ are regarded as incapable of identification with any of the 
species at present known, and their names are dropped out of the synonymy. 
The larvae of three of the species are known ; they mine the leaves of 
various plants. 
Cohophora. Miihlig (Stett. ent. Zeit. 18G4, p. 160) maintains that Zeller’s 
division of the species of this genus in accordance with the scaling of the base 
of the antennae cannot be adopted, because an injury to this part certainly 
occurs frequently during the escape of the insect from its case. Miihlig holds 
(/. c. p. 101) that it is an impossibility to determine even uninjured specimens 
of this genus without the poisesdon of the case belonging to them I As a contri- 
bution to the knowledge of these cases, and of the species forming them? 
Miihlig describes two species, namely, Coleop \ora asteris, n. sp., and C. artemisice 
(Miihl.), and their larva-cases. Miihlig also indicates (/. c. p. 165) the differ- 
ences in the larva-cases and mode of life of C. annulatella (Teiigstr.) and C. 
Jlavaginella (Zell.). (See Ent. M. Mag. vol. i. p. 77.) 
Miihlig indicates certain differences in the larva-cases of Coleophora oliva- 
Qeella (Staint.) and C. solitanella (Zell.), and also in the general aspect of the 
two insects, which lead him to believe that they are really distinct species. 
Stett. ent. Zeit. 1864, p. 102. 
Fologne describes the larva and pupa of Gelechia rufescens (Haw.). Ann. 
Soc. Ent. Beige, tomevii. pp. 127-128, pi. 3. fig. 7. 
Parasia lap ella. H. Lucas has described the larva of this species as feeding, 
like that of a weevil, in the head of Arctium lappa. Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr. 
4® ssrie, tome iv. p. 34, June 8, 1864. 
Stainton (Ent. Ann. 1864, pp. 163-171) publishes notes on the larvae 
of numerous species of this group, including Gelechia lutatella, G. rufescens 
(the larva figured), G. intamiuatella, Tinagma resplendellum, Gracilaria scala- 
riella, Asgehna profugella^ Lithocolletis leucographella, and Nepticida serico- 
peza, and Nepticula, sp. n. ? The same author (Ent. Ann. 1865, pp, 132- 
142) notices the larvae of Therisfes caudella, Depressaj ia petasitis, Gelechia 
lutatellaj G. rhombella, G. hub icri^ Nothris dejieotivella, Putalis cicadella, Ar- 
gyresthia spiniella, Coleophora niveicostella, C. congeriella, Laverna decorellaj 
Ochromolopis ictella, and Phyllobrostis daphneella. 
C. Healy describes the characters and mode of life of the larva of Mic''o- 
pteryx unimaculella : Ent. M. Mag. vol. i. pp. 19-20. The same author sug- 
gests that Mercurialis perennis may be the fcod-plant of Micropteryx man- 
suetella, as he found the perfect moths pertinaciously flying about that plant: 
1. c. p. 22. 
Healy also describes the larvae of Adela degeerella^ and refers to some points 
