292 
THE entomologist’s RECORD. 
Record^ vol. ii., p. 176. A good deal of my own attention was of course 
also devoted to the Le|)idoptera, but as Mr. Tutt has sufficiently treated 
of them, I need not add more to his notes. Mr. R. McLachlan joined 
me on August nth, and we worked together until the 15th, our chief 
object being if possible to turn up the local Erotesis baltica, of which 
only some half-dozen specimens have as yet been taken in Britain, and 
all, except one in the Norfolk Fens, at Wicken Fen. When Mr. 
McLachlan arrived I had one fine specimen on my setting boards, taken 
within a day or two of my arrival at Wicken, but unfortunately all our 
efforts failed to turn up another. Perhaps we were too late for the 
species, but quite as likely the very unfavourable weather we experienced 
accounted for our non-success. It is a very delicate species, and no 
doubt its habit, like that of its allied genera, is to fly gently over the 
ditches at sunset in the calmest weather. As it was, all the time we 
were there it was either wet, or a much too strong wind was blowing on 
the Fen, to allow any of this group of insects to fly freely. Even 
Leptocerus ate? rimus \\2i^ only very occasionally seen on the wing, though 
plenty of specimens could be swept out of the herbage. Next to E. 
baltica^ perhaps the most interesting species was Pyrrhosoma tenellum^ 
which was found commonly on the ditches on Chippenham Fen on the 
only visit we made there, on the 13th. Curiously, it was not seen on 
Wicken Fen at all, though I had found it there in June the previous 
year, uj) to which time it had only occurred in Britain on heaths near 
Weybridge, and one or two other similar south of England localities. 
Its usually common relative, P. minium, was not seen at all. The 
district altogether proved very unsatisfactory for Neuroptera and 
Trichoptera ; indeed the paucity of species in a locality so exceedingly 
promising in appearance was most extraordinary, and although the 
weather was certainly much against us, we were reluctantly forced to the 
conclusion that many of the species we naturally expected in such a 
locality were not there at all. The few species for which Tuddenham 
is given were taken on the 14th, the only occasion of our visit there. 
When the locality is not stated, the record refers in all cases to Wicken. 
Neuroptera. — Sympetruin striolatum) S. sanguineum, not uncom- 
mon, but not nearly so abundant as I found it on Wicken Fen in 
August two years ago; yEschna grandis, common, and often seen 
“ hawking ” for insects at dusk, a habit, I believe, not indulged in by 
any other dragon-fly. Several specimens of another ^schna (probably 
cyaned) were seen, but not captured. Lesies sponsa, common on both 
Wicken and Chippenham Fens; Ischnura elegans, common; Agrion 
pulchellum, common on both Wicken and Chippenham Fens ; one or 
two others of the common Agrions, I think, also occurred, but as none 
were set, cannot say with certainty which they were ; Pyrrhosoma 
temllum, common on Chippenham Fen. Nemoura (species ?), one 
species common at Chippenham, but I am a little doubtful as to which 
it is ; Raphidia xanihostigma, Chippenham Fen ; Hemerobius margi- 
natus, and one or two other commoner species of the genus occurred at 
Chippenham ; Chrysopa flava, C. viitata, C. alba, C. ienella and C. 
aspersa, all at Chippenham ; C. flavifrons, not uncommon at Wicken. 
Trichoptera. — Phryganea abundant and variable; Agrypnia 
pagetana, common; Colpotaulius incisus, common; Grammttaulius 
nitidus, not uncommon on Wicken Fen; Glyphotalius pellucidus ; 
