
aw Dis el 
ee ee a 
AF ms See COE OO he ete + ee ye on 6 a we tt wets te 
mer oene wen Seesgejne yen lak sobs 
+4 BRITISH MOTHS 
DESCRIPTION OF PLATE VIII. 
Insects. —Fig. 1. Hepialus Hectus (the golden swift). 2. The Female. 
= Fig. 3. Hepialus Lupulinus (the small common swift). 4. The Female. 9. A Variety. 
sh Fig. 7. Hepialus Humuli (the Ghost Moth). 8, The Female. 9. The Caterpillar. 
s Fig. 10. Hepialus Velleda (the map-winged swift). 11. The Female. 
} ~ Fig. 12. Hepialus Sylvinus (the orange swift). 13. The Female. 
| i J Fig. 14. Hepialus Carnus. 
| oy Fig. 15. Anthrocera Trifolii. 
& Fig. 16. Anthrocera Meliloti. 
Prants.—Fig. 17. Humulus lupulus (the common Hop). 
H. Hectus varies considerably in the distinctness of its markings, and I have selected one of the most distinct, both for the male and female. 
H. Lunulinus varies so very much in its markings, that without examining intermediate specimens, one might be tempted to consider many of 
Wf 5"? ° ’ 5 4 
them different species ; but the intermediate gradations easily convince of their identity. There is one variety, however, of a pale grey brown 
entirely without marks, of which there are several specimens in the British Museum, that appears sufficiently distinct to form a separate species, 
variety at No. 5. For the female of H. Humuli I have selected a strongly-marked female, but this does not vary so much as other species. 
H. Velleda varies very considerably, but I have selected specimens in which the markings appear most true and perfect ; it does not, however, 
vary so much as H. Lupulinus. H. Sylvinus varies more in size than in the character of the markings, which all preserve pretty perfectly the 
crescent in the anterior wings; but some of the females are even smaller than the male represented in this plate, though their general character 
is to be much larger than the males. 
The whole of the above are drawn from the very fine series of specimens in the British Museum, except H. Carnus, which is from 
Mr. Stephens’s plate. The caterpillars are from Htibner and Harris. 
not only from its colouring, but also from a slight though constant and well-defined difference in the form of the wings. I have figured this 
' 
| 
| 
) 
| 
| The two Anthrocere (omitted in plate vi.) are from the collection of Mr. Stephens. H. N. H. 
i HEPIALUS, Fasrictus *. 

} Mt The species of this genus, which from the rapidity of their flight are known by the name of Swifts, are 
iil at once distinguished from the other genera not only of this, but of nearly all other families of moths, by the 
extremely short antenne, which are generally simple or slightly pectinated in the males of some of the species. 
The mouth is obsolete, the tibiz are destitute of spurs, the wings long and somewhat lanceolate, with the veins 
singularly arranged (as represented, for the first time, in my “ Modern Classification of Insects,” vol. ii. p. 374, 
fig. 104—16), the hinder wings being of large size, and the body is long and slender. The larva feed upon the 
roots of grasses and other vegetables ; they are long, fleshy, naked, and colourless, with sixteen feet. The 
pupe have the abdominal segments furnished with transverse rows of reflexed points, whereby they push 
themselves to the surface of the earth, out of which they may occasionally be found with the anterior part 
| | of the body sticking above the surface. 


* Fabricius (Phil. Ent., p. 112) gives #mlados, febris lenta, as the derivation of this name, which he places in the list of those names which 
express some peculiarity in the habit of the species included in the genus; evidently alluding to the remarkable alternating flight of the ghost- 
! moth. TIlliger and Ochsenheimer consequently erred when they (followed by Sodoffsky in the Moscow Transactions for 1837) changed the 
| generic name to Hepiolus, supposing it derived from 7foAos, Licht-motte, a moth which flies to the candle-light, which it is not the habit of 
these insects to do. 


