45 
Staudinger says of P. taeniata “ sp. valde aberrans.” I have seen 
so comparatively little material in really first-class order that I do not 
at present feel competent to work out the variation, of which the 
British Museum material certainly shows a fair range. Stephens’ 
original figure (111. Haunt., iii., pi. 32, fig. 2—not fig. 3, as cited in the 
text) shows a good representative British example, with fairly broad 
band. Herrich-Schaeffer’s arctaria (Syst. Bearb., iii., fig. 416) has a 
much narrower band ; I fancy the specimen he figures may be one of 
Zeller’s—he seems, on p. 149, to differentiate ins own specimen. 
Freyer’s of albimacularia (Xeu. Beitr., vi., pi. 534-5) has more brown 
in the ground colour, the central band dark grey, of medium width, 
and hardly bulging posteriorly. Wood’s of taeniata (Ind. Ent., fig. 700) 
is dull, and none too well done, but represents much the same form as 
Freyer’s. Recently (in 1903) Strand has named two aberrations 
according to the extremes of width of the band—ab. latefasciata and ab. 
angustifasciata (Arch. Math, og Nat., xxv., no. 9, p. 17). A further 
“ ab.,” or “ var.,” paler and with more indistinct or almost obliterated 
markings, is described by Alpheraky from Kamtchatka (Rom. Mem., ix., 
p. 342), but he forbears to give it a name, as he has only seen a single 
specimen ; of course it may well be some closely allied species, though 
I understand the true taeniata does extend away to Amur, even if my 
suspicion of some of the other far eastern forms is well grounded. Britain, 
Scandinavia, parts of the Alps, and parts of eastern Europe furnish its 
best known localities, but it always seems to be very local. In Britain 
it is certainly so, and is confined to certain rocky localities in the north 
and west—Ireland being apparently more favoured than the rest of the 
United Kingdom. Barrett (hep. Brit., viii , p. 239) gives a fair list of 
localities, but was unacquainted with the only one where I have myself 
taken it—a few miles from Lynton, N. Devon. It is there extremely 
localised, and I did not find it common ; in 1901 I took several, in 
1903 two only. 
The habits of P. taeniata seem fairly uniform in all localities where 
it has been specially observed. It is out about midsummer and on 
through July, but very soon gets almost hopelessly wasted ; if it is 
taken on the wing at dusk, or beaten out of hedges or trees by day, it 
is seldom in a condition worth having. Of course, it may occasionally 
be picked up freshly emerged, if one is working in the spots where it 
breeds; but these are generally somewhat dark and inaccessible. Eggs 
are easy to obtain, although the rearing of the resultant larvae is quite 
another matter, unless one is in a favourable locality for getting moss 
to feed them on ; I have tried substitute plants, but have failed igno- 
miniously. Unlike nearly all other British Geometrides, taeniata 
nearly always lays her eggs unattached; without doubt, they would, in 
nature, be simply dropped into the moss, and be quite secure there. 
We owe our knowledge of the lifehistory mainly to Buckler (Larva’, 
viii., p. 7), Hodgkinson (Ent-om., xi., p. 231; xiv., p. 257; xv., p. 285; 
xxviii., p. 141), and Gross (Stett. Ent. Zeit., xlvi., p. 375). The 
British references are readily accessible to our members, and show that 
the larvae can occasionally adapt themselves partially to a leaf- or 
flower-feeding habit (“ phanerogamophagous ”—shall I say?), such 
unlikely pabulum as Hypericum (flowers and seeds) and J'ropaeolum 
(leaves) having been casually accepted. To Hodgkinson, and again 
quite independently to Gross, we owe the discovery of the moss-feeding, 
