66 
Owing to the similarity in both genitalia and maculation of prasina 
Sehiff. to the genotype the writer is also including this species under 
Anaplectoides, although there is no spining on the fore tibia. It is another 
of those cases on the border line between “spined” and “unspined” where 
spining can scarcely be satisfactorily used as a means of generic differentia- 
tion. It might also be noted that prasina at times shows odd spines 
belonging to the fourth tarsal row, notably on the hind tarsus. 
Protolampra gen. nov. 
Type, Agrotis rufipectus Morr. 
Eyes naked. Palpi upturned, the third joint rather short and slightly 
porrect; second joint fringed below with rough hair; third joint similarly 
fringed, forming a slight pointed apical tuft. Front smooth. Male 
antennae ciliate. Mid and hind tibiae spined; fore tibia unspined, longer 
than first tarsal joint, and fringed with hair on outer side. Thoracic 
vestiture of mixed hair and scales, rather smooth and with no obvious 
tufting. 
figure 46. Male genitalia of Protolampra rufipectus Morr. 
Male Genitalia. Clasper gradually narrowed apically with rounded 
apex and no corona; sacculus rather strong and projecting slightly 
over costa at base; harpe strong, elbowed basally as in Anaplec- 
toides and reaching nearly to apex of clasper. Clavus absent. Juxta 
narrow and conical. Uncus strongly broadened by two lateral flaps of 
chitin. Aedoeagus unarmed. 
The writer has removed rufipectus from Abagrotis, as the genitalia seem 
to indicate a much closer relationship with Anaplectoides (and through it 
w r ith the typical Agrotids ) than with the placida group. Brunneicollis Grt. 
may be placed here for the present although in several points, notably the 
shape of the uncus, the genitalia do not show any very close agreement. 
