240 
ADDENDA AD LITHOSTEGE. By L. B. Protjt. 
apicata . 
griseata . 
bmnnescens . 
obscurata. 
gigantea. 
transversa- 
ria. 
cycnaria. 
coasm ta . 
but SS collected in Oran in May (Sebdou and Mecheria) have been tested on the genitalia; and it is highly 
probable that Chretien's record of farinata for Biskra and Gafsa (March and April) and Oberthur's of “m- 
vearia S. TV for Nemours in April also refer to the present species. It is somewhat remarkable that this has 
the dark suffusion of the forewing beneath less pronounced and less sharply defined than apicata — in fact 
this is its most obvious superficial distinction from palaestinensis, or at least from the less bluish grey forms 
of the latter; whereas the typical form (Cyrenaica) has the “disc beneath broadly blackish”. Faint indications 
of an apical dash on the upperside appear occasionally, but are not so manifest as in apicata; and until material 
from Cyrenaica is available for dissection I cannot feel absolutely certain whether Amsel and I have correctly 
determined the original cinerata or even whether (as at Mecheria) two allies occur together in the Bengasi 
district. If it can be demonstrated that either a palaestinensis form or the following is the true cinerata, the 
present species should be called algirica. 
L. apicata sp. n. ( ? sequ. subsp .) (18 1). Dr. Wehrli informs me that Oberthur (in coll.) has attached 
the name apicata to the specimen from Sidi-bel-Abbes which he had recorded (Et. Ent., Vol. 6, p. 85) as differ¬ 
ing “from the type from Hungary in that the blackish line from apex is a little more accentuated and appears*' 
a little more oblique”. I understand that the specimen in question has a very light ground-colour and there 
can be no possible doubt that it is the species to which — unless it should prove to be the true cinerata — I 
propose to apply Oberthur's name. —I have seen it from Morocco (Imintanut and El Hadjeb, the latter re¬ 
corded by Rothschild as cinerata) and Oran (Lalla Marnia, Les Trembles. Sidi-bel-Abbes. Mecheria. Littre 
and Lavarande). but not, I think, eastward. The genitalia so closely resemble those of griseata that a decisive 
differentiation is not easy, but Mr. A. H. Stringer, who has examined a number of preparations, is convinced 
that the juxta is consistently larger, and somewhat longer in proportion to its breadth, the valves also broader 
and longer; definitely smaller, however, than the genitalia of the preceding, which (as already indicated) ap¬ 
proach palaestinensis rather than griseata. The wings are on the whole paler and in general weakly marked, 
but the forewing of the <$ beneath (as already noted in comparing cinerata) has a well defined dark proximal 
area, though the pale border beyond is much less unequal in width than in duponcheli; it lacks the cell-dot, 
but on the contrary shows a tendency to produce a whitish streak along the discocellulars. The wing-shape 
as a rule favours that of griseata rather than of palaestinensis and probably with sufficient experience the eye 
can be trained to separate readily the two N. African allies. A third species, however, has been discovered, 
only in a single specimen from “Algeria” (Mrs. Nicholl), not exactly localized but hardly possibly a morpho¬ 
logical aberration of either of the others. Pending further investigation, I do not venture to deal with it here, 
beyond calling attention to its existence: build of genitalia more as in palaestinensis , but with the valve (viewed 
laterally) more pointed, the central process different and asymmetrical, that of the right valve with 
two hooks, that of the left with one (contrast duponcheli, supra); juxta about twice as long as broad. 
L. griseata Schiff. (= incanata Hufn.. nom. praeocc., asinata F., nivearia Staint., err. det.). The cor¬ 
rection of some former determinations in connection with this species will be found under those to which they 
rightly refer. As regards the genitalia, a good differentiation from farinata was given by Dr. Gotthardt, of 
Friedland. in the Int. Ent. Zeitschr., Vol. 29, p. 430, but it must surely be by a laps. cal. that he says 
larger than in farinata” ; actually griseata has the smallest genitalia in the group. - ab. brunnescens 
Skala. As infuscata Ev. has nothing to do with griseata , Skala’s name will stand for the brownest aberration 
of the latter; see p. 84 above. obscurata Stgr. is said to form a constant local race at Angora. gigantea 
Byt.-Salz d- Brandt. Decidedly larger than most of the forms from Europe and Asia Minor (the $ as large as 
the largest typical <$$, the $ about 3 mm larger). Ground-colour about as in g. griseata. perhaps even a little 
lighter; the forewing shows a tendency to develop transverse bands, the distal one always indicated in the 
well developed in the $£. Keredj, Elburs Mountains. — ab. transversaria Byt.-Salz dc Brandt. All 3 bands well 
developed, antemedian single, median broad, double, with uninterrupted light interspace, distal very broad. 
Keredj. 1 $. — cycnaria Guen. (= zernyi Front, duplicaria Zerny, nec Hbn.) (8 f, as zernvi). It is no small 
satisfaction to have been able at last to fix the identity of this hitherto unrecognized “species”. Dr. Wehrli 
recently wrote me that not only the Boisduval types about which I inquired were extant in his collection 
but also “A. cycnaria Guen., 1 pair without abdomen, both labelled as types and ex coll. Bsd., without locality. 
In good preservation though discoloured, through age, to dirty brownish. The slender lines weak, but recogni¬ 
zable. as Guenee pictures them. Almost certainly from Spain, whence I received 7 very fresh examples from 
the Vasquez collection and 4 good ones from Albarracin. ” The British Museum has also a series from Vasquez 
and I have found an old $ from the Bellier collection labelled “Espagne”. Variable, but always recogni¬ 
zable. In the genitalia it agrees with griseata. 
L. coassata Him. ( duplicata Him. err. det.. coassaria Bsd.) (Vol. 4. pi. be, as duplicata). Hubner 
renamed this in his “Verzeichnis ", having evidently found that he had misidentified his own species; his fig. 
491 remains, therefore, the type figure. Unfortunately the type locality has not vet been ascertained, but it 
