27 
Sc h rank {—virgularia, Hub.), straminata, Tr. ( = circellat.a, Guen.), 
subsericeata, Haw. ( — mancuniata , Knaggs), aversata, Linn., ornata, 
Haw., degeneraria, Hiib., and emarginata, Linn. Those with four- 
spurred 2 hind tibia ( Acidalia ) are: rubiginata, Hufn., ornata, Scop., 
mcoginepuncta, Goeze, virgulata, Schiff. ( = strigaria , Hiib.), floslactata, 
Haw. ( = remutaria , Hiib.), ternata, Schrank (—fuuiata, Steph.), 
st) igilana, Hiib., imitaria, Hiib., emutaria, Hiib., and immorata , Linn. 
Although, as I have already said, this latter forms a very natural 
“ genus (or group), and this fact had already been recognised before 
Guenee wrote, the naturalness so little appealed to him that we find 
them scattered among the other section in a somewhat embarrassing 
manner. Taking the body of the “ Acidalia ” genus as it appears on 
p. 13 of the Entomologist Synonymic List ( i.e ., without appendix or 
subsequent additions), we find Nos. 3, 13, 14, and 17-23 belong here, 
Nos. 1-2, 4-12, 15, lt>, and 24-27 to the other group. Immorata, in 
Guenee, did not appear in the Acidaliids at all, but far away among his 
Fidoniids ; Mr. Burrows, in one of his letters, expresses his doubt as 
to the closeness of the relationship of this species to the rest, but at 
any rate, it belongs more or less in the company with which it is here 
placed. Calothysanis ( —Timandra ), Mr. Burrqws informs me, “is 
quite out of it” as regards the structure of the genitalia; on other 
grounds, also, it is very usually accorded generic value, though one or 
two second-rate classifications have united it with imitaria, etc., 
because in both cases there is an angle in the margin of the hind 
wing. 
The addition of the male hindtibial armature as an element in 
classification, gives some very curious results. Of our British species, 
ternata ( =fumata) comes out of Acidalia to form the genus Pylarge, 
its $ being furnished with terminal spurs; whereas its apparent 
neighbour [floslactata = rem ularia) is wholly spurless. But a non- 
British relative of marginepunctata, namely luridata, Zell., is still more 
remarkable; the $ of the typical form (from Asia Minor, etc.), is an 
orthodox “ Acidalia ” in being without spurs, but that of “ var. 
confinaria” (from S.E. Europe), has a single terminal spur (not a pair, 
as Herrich-Schaeffer erroneously gives). The genus Sterrha, formed 
for the reception of species of Ptychopoda, in which the A terminal 
spurs are present, seems equally unsatisfactory; ochrata has spurs, 
serpentata ( = perochraria) none ; trilineata, Scop., has spurs, ftaveolaria, 
Hiib. (which is so close to it, that Dr. Chapman thought he was 
taking two forms of the same species), has none ; while our pretty little 
friend rusticata was the cause of some bitterness and recriminations 
among the Herrich-Schiieffer group of systematises—the truth being 
that one race (including our British form), has the spurs, and another 
is without them, so that one would be a Sterrha and the other a 
Ptychopoda ! My friend Herr R. Pungeler has called my attention to 
one or two other cases of variation in armature between eastern and 
western forms, of what seem in every other respect the same species. 
On the other hand, I do not at present know of any example of 
individual, as opposed to racial, variation ; as, for instance, of any 
British aberration of rusticata with the spurs undeveloped. 
The satisfactory character of the genus Acidalia, as here under¬ 
stood ( = Leptomeris + Pylarge), is brought out, apart from the 2 hind- 
xx. 
