| OCR Text |
Show 846 DR. A. G. BUTLER ON [Nov. 16 upper surface, the white spots on the fringe appear more conspicuously : the primaries below have larger but less sharply defined white spots on the outer border; the secondaries have narrower bands, that from the middle of the cell to the abdominal margin being more interrupted but grey and indistinct (so that the wing appears to be crossed by a broad belt of greyish white), the dark discal band curves upwards at its abdominal extremity, the last spot composing it being small and heart-shaped ; the anal area is filled with a quadrate patch of pale sandy brown, forming the outer part of the usual whitish irregular blotch, which is more acutely indented on its outer margin ; lastly, the two usual black spots show little (often no) metallic green scaling. Expanse of wings 20-28 millimetres. Estcourt, 4000 feet, 2nd, 14th, 15th, and 18th October, 22nd, 23rd, 28th, and 29th November, and 13th December ; Frere, 3800 feet, 2nd and 4th December, 1896. Two other examples previously in. the Museum bring our present series up to seventeen examples: none of these are in the least degree intermediate. 64. CYCLYRIUS NOQUASA, Trimen. (Plate L. fig. 6.) Ulundi, 5000 feet, 19th September, 1896. " A local species, apparently confined to the upper districts of this Colony ; when met with, it is generally abundant, frequenting damp low-lying places." 65. LACHNOCNEMA BIBULUS, Fabr. Malvern, 16th August; Tugela Biver, near Weenen, 30th October, 2nd, 13th, and 14th November, 1896. 66. LACHNOCNEMA DURBANI, Trimen. Estcourt, 6th, 27th, 28th, and 30th September, 1st, 2nd, and 8th October, 24th November and 12th December, Tugela Biver, 12th November, 1896. In his letter of October 20th Mr. Marshall says :-" I believe you are right in regarding this as conspecific with L. bibulus; but I have not sufficient data to enable m e to speak definitely, chiefly owing to the fact that in Mashonaland I never distinguished between the two and recorded them all as L. bibulus in m y notebook." O n the 14th December, however, he writes:-"With regard to my suggestion that Lachnocnema durbani was probably only the dry-season form of L. bibulus, I have now not the least hesitation in saying that it is incorrect. The former insect is still on the wing and in good condition, and therefore cannot be a dry-season form of anything else. Moreover, I am convinced that it is not a variety of L. bibulus. In your note on the subject you appear to ignore the fact that there is a decided and constant difference between the males of the two forms, which you will perceive from the specimens I have sent you. |
