154 
THE ENTOMOLOGISTS RECORD. 
“ In the meantime the hind wing had not yet doubled its original 
size, with the part from which the tail was to come showing as a slight 
break on an otherwise even edge ; the same routine was followed in 
the development of the hind wing as in that of the front, and by the 
time the broad part of the wing had attained its full size, the tail was a 
little more than half an inch long and very much crumpled. This was 
the last part to expand, but as the fluid passed into it, it also took size 
and form. The whole time occupied in the operation, from first seeing 
it until it was completed, was about one hour and three-quarters.” — 
J. Alston Moefat, Victoria Hall, London. Ont. July 1891. 
Towards the end of June I had a numbv^r of Arctia villica pupae 
emerging, and what struck me as being rather peculiar was the difference 
in time which the wings took to attain their maximum expansion. I will 
quote two instances. A female which emerged while I was looking at 
it, and which I helped out of the cocoon, had its wings fully expanded 
in a minute or two from the time it left the cocoon, an unusually 
quick operation I should think ! Another specimen, this time a male, 
took at least twenty minutes to develop. This species, as far as I know, 
never “ flutters ” while the wings are developing, the only movement 
perceptible being a slight raising and lowering of the wings. 
I am inclined to agree with Dr. Buckell’s idea that the process is one 
of coagulation and evaporation, and I think the reason why the insect 
climbs to the top of the cage is to prevent the wings from adhering to 
the body during the process. 
I have frequently found bred specimens with the two main joints of 
the fore legs adhering together almost in a straight line and rendered 
quite incapable of grasping anything, their incessant and vain efforts to 
do so making the movements of the insect appear pitifully ridiculous. 
— D. H.S. Steuart, Royal School of Science, Kensington, W. 
Disuse of Wings = Apterous Females (?) — Mr. Trout’s footnote 
{Record^ vol. ii., p. 113) is very interesting. But, can the suggestion 
it contains be supported by such examples as Endromis versicolor^ 
Saturnia carpini^ Bombyx nenstria, B. quercus, etc. ? I believe, 
amongst lepidoptera, males use their wings more than females. Why 
should not the converse to the suggestion be true, viz., that the 
greater use of wings should produce greater wing development? But 
this is not so. As a rule the females have the larger wings. — J. Arkle, 
Chester. July 22nd, 1891. ’ [The species mentioned here by Mr. 
Arkle are not at all parallel cases with that of Biston hirtaria mentioned 
by Mr. Trout. The latter is a remarkably well-known instance of a 
female with a considerable wing area, but weak, given to malformation 
and ill-development of the scales. The species Mr. Arkle mentions, 
have also a larger wing area, but here the reseniblance ends. The 
wings of the females of these species are as thickly scaled and strong, 
muscularly, as those of the males. The dimorphic condition, which in 
these species happens to be correlated with a pale coloration, is not 
necessarily a sign of weakness or strength, and the wings are equally 
well-developed, though not of the same area in either sex. The 
assumption that “amongst lepidoptera, males use their wings more than 
females ” may have an apparent tinge of truth in it, from the fact, that, 
when they are in search of the females either during the day or at dusk 
we see more of them, but long after the flight of the males is over the 
