238 
ADDENDA AD LITHOSTEGE. By L. B. Prout. 
inadvertent misuse of the name stepfiaria by Glenee (see below, under bosporaria ) led me to inquire whether 
the rest of Boisduval's Lithostege were still in existence; and extremely valuable communications from my 
good friend Wehrli have necessitated some other additions and modifications. The material from farinata to 
coassata has therefore been virtually recast (fissurala and bifissana should not. 1 think, have been interposed 
among them). 
L. infuscata. Staudlnger. by some unaccountable mistake, has sunk this name to griseata, merely 
with the comment “non separanda"; and in this he has since been uncritically followed. In re-examining the 
group, with the literature, 1 was struck by the complete inapplicability of Eversmann's descriptions to that 
species, and the darkening of the borders, besides the “pale lutescent-fuscescent forewing”, at once called to mind 
flavicornata. Seeking for material from Sarepta (the type locality), 1 found 3 9$ in the British Museum, one 
of them (ex coll. Zeller) actually labelled infuscata: This is rather light, the other 2 and, as Dr. Wehrli in¬ 
forms me, 2 and 1 9 ' u his collection (all 5 labelled subfuscata Stgr.) smaller and somewhat darker. None 
are so large as the forms from Amasia, Tokat, Angora, Akshehir, etc., which have of recent years been distri¬ 
buted as flavicornata: but Zeller's originals of the latter, a pair from Makri, S. W. coast of Asia Minor, are 
also small (length of a forewing 14 mm), of a decidedly ochreous brownish, and might well be classed as “ sub¬ 
fuscata " by present-day lepidopterists! Certainly not the following species, however, by genitalia, face, antenna 
and underside. Much more material will have to be analysed before the interrelations of the forms can be 
entirely straightened out; there can, however, be no reasonable doubt that we have now the essential basis of 
infuscata. a correct classification. infuscata Ev. ( ? Vol. 4, pi. 6 e, as flavicornuta). Unfortunately this is the oldest 
name for the collective species and is not preoccupied. To judge from the description it represents the lighter 
forms, though it is not unlikely that those from N. and Central Asia Minor may prove racially separable. — ab. 
flavicornata. ( ? subsp.) flavicornata Z. is smaller and darker (see above). Having been erected as a species, its name will 
be applicable to the entire “ infuscata " population of Asia Minor if this is found to constitute a single subspecies. 
Dr. Wehrli writes me that he has a short series from Erivan of what he supposes to be the true subfuscata 
Stgr. (male condita!). small and usually with somewhat darker terminal area than the preceding but with the 
hindwing conspicuously whiter, the ground-colour of the forewing, for the more part, scarcely darker than the 
Amasia-Tokat “ flavicornata " (therefore not darker in any case than flavicornata type). I think, however, that 
the true subf uscata must be a form of the following species. 
odessaria. L. odessaria Bsd. (18 1). The originals of this wrongly sunk species are extant in the Wehrli collec¬ 
tion. “In both examples the hindwing is exactly as dark as the forewing, on both wings the terminal part 
darker yellow-grey, the fringes light; both specimens have characteristic black-gre y anten¬ 
nae. The Stgr.-Rbl. Catalog lacks the reference to H.-Sch., Vol. 6, p. 80, where H.-S. mentions the peculiar 
yellow-grey colour, and the interiorly black antenna. Underside characteristic, the forewing strongly 
blackened, at the costa and termen narrowly whitish, the hindwing whiter than above. The two are nearly 
alike and give the impression of a separate species. No trace of lines, nor of the apical streak which is always 
present in griseata." (Wehrli, in lit., 1 December 1937). ? Odessa, 1 <$, 1 9 (Boisduval. ex Kindermann). 
subfuscata. Much of this collection was made in the Caucasus, which I suspect was the true locality. - ab. ( l) subfuscata 
Stgr. differs in having the hindwing whitish but is otherwise very similar. My single example from Erivan 
(M. Korb) is a rather light A, but has the dark-mixed face and dark antenna which always puzzled me in the 
Armenian forms and also the characteristic underside, which I had not noticed until my attention was called 
to it by Wehrli. A “Caucasus” 9 (Dresser) and a $ without locality are as dark as typical odessaria , but the 
more exactly localized specimens which 1 have examined (Ordubad, Grusia, Kulp, Kasikoporan; also Keredj, 
N. Persia) furnish transitions. The genitalia are certainly distinct from those of infuscata (= flavicornata). 
farinata. L. farinata Hufn. (= illibata Schiff., nivearia Hbn., err. det., niveata Tr., err. det.) (Vol. 4, pi. 6 d). 
As Amsel s figure and description of the, S genitalia show, this is well removed from the others which have 
been associated with it. the increased armature of the valve being particularly noteworthy; the distinctions, 
however, are certainly not sufficient to justify Gumppenbbrg, who erected for it a new genus (under the pre¬ 
occupied name Agrapha) solely on the less rounded tornus of the forewing, more undulate distal margins and 
absence of markings. It was implied on p. 83 of the present volume, although not explicitly stated, that the 
geographical distribution given in Vol. 4 (p. 72) is quite incorrect. Actually, so far as I know, it belongs chiefly 
to eastern and eastern-central Europe: rather well distributed in the Balkans, Hungary, Austria, Poland and 
the eastern half of Germany (as far south as Saxony) and reaching the south of Denmark and of Sweden. 
Latvia has a few records, western Germany a few, Switzerland, according to Vorbrodt, only a doubtfully 
authenticated one. From Bucovina and southward we have some reports of a second brood, in late July and 
apatela. August, probably a very incomplete one. — ab. apatela nov. has the forewing considerably darkened, so as 
to give it a close superficial resemblance to infuscata. Mentioned for the Dobrudscha by Mann and others, 
