Calathus mollis, and the débris of Leucanus cervus at the base of an oak.

February, up to about the 24th, was very wet and dull; however, I stuck to pupa digging, and was rewarded by the following result :-Almost any number of Taniocampa incerta, T. stabilis, T. gothica, and Spilosoma menthastri from various trees; Smerinthus populi and S. tilia from their respective trees; Amphydasis betularia, and Biston hirtaria, which I thought was rare everywhere excepting in the squares of London, but which has turned up here at the roots of almost every description of tree, and also on gas lamps; a solitary specimen of Hybernia marginaria, which I turned up at the base of a poplar-I have often taken them from aspens-completes the list. The larvæ of Apamea unanimis were, curiously enough, hibernating at the roots of aspens, just below the surface in little earthen cocoons in damp sods, instead of, as is their general wont, under the bark. I took a dozen in such a situation. February was somewhat rich in Coleoptera, which turned up at the base of trees galore. I took, amongst others, the following: Carabus granulatus, Clavina fossor, Pristonychus terricola, Pterostichus vulgaris, P. subcyaneus, Calathus mollis, Amara attenuatus, A. curta, Pterostichus inæqualis, Bembidium doris, Ocypus olens, Creophilus maxilosus, Hydroporus palustris, Gyrinus natator, Silpha atrata, Aphodius contaminatus from a dead heron, and A. fessor, Balaninus rubidus, Apion vorax and Erirhinus tremula, both of which were exceedingly plentiful under bark on poplars and willows, Lema cyanella, and Coccinella 14punctata.

March, at any rate the latter half, was, as everyone knows, phenomenally fine and hot, the total rainfall here for the month being only 33 inch, and the thermometer upon several days reaching a height of 68°, and once 70° F. Snow fell for about a quarter of an hour on the 17th, about 9 a.m. But from the 20th to the close of the month no rain fell-scarcely indeed was there a cloud in the sky; easterly winds held sway, however, during the 25th to 30th, when it came round south west. Frosts continued during the east winds. Alder was in leaf on the 8th, and rose on the 20th; at the end of the month aspens were budding; sallows were, for the most part, in leaf; elm, Populus niger and P. balsamifera were budding; weeping willow was a beautiful pale green; whitethorn was, in places, quite out, making the hedges look green; violets were on the wane and primroses going off. Moths now began to emerge, and beetles became an everyday sight, running across paths and on hedges. Lepidopterous larvæ also were to be taken at dusk by the aid of a lantern. On the second of the month I took Odonestis potatoria, Triphæna pronuba, and several others in this way. Hybernia marginaria and H. rupicapraria, the latter nearly over, were to be seen on the lamps every evening; Taniocampa stabilis emerged on the 4th, and T.

gothica on the 5th; on the 8th I again took Hybernia leucophæaria, this time from water, and Cerastis vaccinii from a fence. On the 10th I took the first Taniocampa incerta "at large," having bred it as early as the 12th and 22nd of February. The three common Taniocampa continued to emerge up to the end of the month. On the 5th I took Carabus nemoralis, Geotrupes mutator, and G. stercorarius ; on the 8th I saw the first Anisopteryx æscularia, as against March 27th last year. Vanessa urtica was seen on the wing on the 14th. The 31st of March gave me a very sure sign of the forwardness of the season by the appearance of Pieris rape, gamboling about as if it were the hottest day in May. Besides the above-mentioned species, March also gave me another example of Clivina fossor, which is considered rather a rare beetle about here; Stenolophus dorsalis, and two members of the genus Achomenus, one bright blue, the other scarlet with blue elytra, which I have not yet identified-if anyone will be so good as to send me their respective cognomens I shall feel much obliged. I also took Amara plebia, A. bifrons, A. tribialis, Nebria brevicollis, Calathus melanocephalus, Pterostichus niger, Ocypus similis, and Philonthus politus, Ammæcus brevis, Athous parvulus, A. vittalis, and a member of the genus Chrysomela.

April is a month the memory of which lies deeply embedded in the mind of every lover of nature. Not only did the thermometer stand almost permanently at summer-heat, not only did the barometer point to an abnormally high degree, not only was there barely any wind throughout the month, but, during the daytime, the sun rarely went in, and the clouds in the sky could almost invariably be counted on the fingers of one hand. It was truly a glorious month-this usually gusty, frivolous, uncertain month of April. Insects ran riot, Insects which in ordinary years do not put in an appearance until the middle of May-in some years the end of May, were abroad on the 4th of April: such, for instance, as Lycana argiolus, which I took together with Vanessa urtica and V. Io, old enough to be its grandfathers!

I was greeted on the 1st of April, not by some wag with a so-called witty catch, but by the first Biston hirtaria; later I took Coccinella septempunctata, and Meloë violaceus, Choleva, and Silpha sinuata from a dead mole [Talpa vulgaris]. On the 3rd I took Amara similata, various other small Adephaga and a specimen of the water-scorpion [Nepa cinerea], apparently "basking" in the sun, quite out of the water, on a piece of board. I also took Bombylius major, which appears very common here. P. rape now begins to become numerous. On the 4th of April the first specimen of Trichiosoma lucornum-a large number of which I breed every year, more for the pleasure of seeing them cut their way out than from any "collective" reasonemerged. Silpha rugosa, S. thoracica and Necrophorus humator were common in dead rabbits, etc.,

and the afore-mentioned Choleva, and Hister bimaculatus in moles, etc. Water was now teeming with insect life; H. fucipes, P. melanocephalus, small water-beetles and small water-boatmen [Corixa Linnai] being met with in every piece of pond-weed in every pond and ditch, together with the larvæ of both the Agrionida and Libellulida. Melanippe fluctuata, that garden pest, emerged from its pupæ on the 6th. On the 8th of April the first Smerinthus populi underwent its ecdysis together with Taniocampa incerta, which were pretty well over, and Spilosoma menthastri. Both Bombus terrestris and B. lapidarius were now very common, with a sprinkling of B. Harristellus and B. muscorum, Colletes cunicularia, Andrena thoracica and A. cineraria, and an occasional Anthophora retusa. By the 9th the larvæ of A. caja were getting quite large and very plentiful, together with A. grossulariata, which seems scarcer here than in most towns. I also took a specimen of Silpha atrata which appeared to have hardly developed properly, the usual black elytra being of quite a brown tinge. I have taken several in this apparently imperfectly coloured condition, the tinge being nearly always unicolorous and semi-transparent; I have also taken this variety, if variety it be, at Beccles, in North Suffolk. About the 10th of April Pieris brassica became common, and ten days later was flying about in hundreds together with P. rapa and, in a lesser degree, P. napi. On the 12th, Odontopera bidentata emerged from pupa; the larvæ of this and the second, which put in an appearance on the 15th, I took from ivy on the Belstead Road last autumn. On April 14th I took a Coccinella 22punctata. On the 15th I took Nebria brevicollis, Amara similata, A. familiaris, Harpalus ruficornis, Calathus mollis, Loricera pilicornis, Clavina fossor, and a large, long Adephaga, which is new to me. The 16th, although it was Sunday, was productive of Amphydasis strataria, a very fine specimen of which I took from a lamp about 9 p.m. The following morning, being stimulated by some stern entomodogical impulse, I turned out at 5 a.m., and found on lamps, despite a biting east wind and rain, a fine male Biston hirtaria, Taniocampa stabilis, and Coremia unidentaria. Later the same day I took Acilius sulcatus and Hyphydrus ovatus, together with two new Hydradephaga in cop. On the 18th Anisopteryx æscularia was still on the lamps, and the 19th brought out Smerinthus tilia and Amara acuminata running on a path, also Notonecta glauca and various Corixa from ponds. April 19th is a day that will have an abiding spot in my heart as being the first on which I ever took Asphalia ridens, two specimens of which I boxed from lamps, together with Taniocampa incerta and T. stabilis (the very last), Hemerophila abruptaria, which seems fairly plentiful here, Anticlea kadiata and A. nigrofasciaria, Selenia bilunaria and the last Hybernia marginaria. It was a wonderfully warm night, the thermometer at 2 a.m. the following

morning registering 48° F. At dusk I took Cidaria suffumata, Cilix glaucata, and Coremia ferrugata. This is a very early appearance of C. glaucata, is it not? On the 20th Amphydasis betularia, Phalera bucephala and Smerinthus tilia emerged. A friend kindly gave me five fine Blaps mucronata from his cellar. I walked over to Sproughton, a village some three miles out, in the afternoon, and took the first Ceononympha pamphilus and Strenia clathrata, also Patrobius excavatus, Amara plebia, and Liophilorus cadavarinus. On April 23rd I bred one of the very dark varieties of A. betularia, about which there have lately been discussions in the pages of "The Entomologist." The 24th was certainly one of the most enjoyable, and probably one of the most productive, days up to the present time this year. Argynnis euphrosyne was flying about galore, making a strikingly pretty picture, their fuscus and black markings mingling beautifully with the bleached blossoms of Viola canina, which in places gave the ground quite a light blue tinge. The insects were very sluggish and easily taken, two pretty varieties being obtained; one, the usual one, in which the whole of the upper and lower surface is much paler than in the type, the other had all the black markings run together in a most curious fashion. Besides A. euphrosyne, of which I could have taken fifty or a hundred, I took one 9 and three Euchloë carda

mines, two Lycana argiolus, three Thecla rubi and one Bupalus piniaria, and saw several others, together with Selenia bilunaria, Larentia multistrigaria and C. dubitata on water, and Satyrus mægera, Polyommatus phlæas, G. rhamni, and Vanessa Io and V. urtica on the wing. On the 26th I took Chrysomela polita. The 28th was productive of Euplexia lucipara, which I consider another very early appearance, taken in an upper room, doubtless attracted by light.

May, after "playing around" and spoiling our drought record, which is a very good thing for the farmers and gardeners, has now settled down to what we may almost call our normal 1893 weather-hot sun, high thermometer, high barometer, with a breeze from the N.E. What if this weather continue, contrary to the predictions of the old German meteorologist of Berlin, Dr. Rudolf Falb, who holds that May is going to be an exceptionally dry month, but then our "1893 weather" is going to leave us? See what he says: "June less dry, and heavy rainfall throughout July, August, and September. But, of all the rainy months of the year, September will stand out as the month that has beaten the record." A cheerful prospect certainly. However, whether this be so or not, time will show; meanwhile, granting always that this weather holds, will it be too much to expect Lucina in the middle of May, Sibylla the end of May, and the large fritillaries in June? I think

not.

The Museum, Ipswich.

A DOUBTFUL SPECIES OF THE GENUS CECISTES.

something else. In habit they are quiet, extremely timid, contracting at the slightest tap, but equally

Sp. Ch.-Corona small reniform, with a wide dorsal gap; body long and slender; foot long, extensile, tapering, and markedly wrinkled; ventral antenna a small setigerous tubercule; hooks, two dorsal, prominent, adnate at the base; tube floccose inconspicuous, or absent.

THE

HE corona is small, slightly larger than the widest diameter of the body, and although in a side view apparently circular, is really reniform by the inbending of a wide dorsal gap. This latter is occupied when the corona is expanded by the tips of two large hooks, adnate at the base, which are prominent features when the Rotiferon is contracted. The body is slender and cylindrical, with patches of minute yellow granules at and near the junction with the foot. The ventral antenna is a setigerous pimple seated upon a small prominence, the upper surface of which is ciliated. The buccal orifice is lateral and strongly ciliated, sloping downward, but slightly in a dorsal direction, at the bottom two lip-like projections constantly open and shut, as if in the act of biting, but occasionally with a quick, upward jerk throw away some undesired morsel. The mastax in dorsal view is trilobate, enveloping the semi-globular trophi, whose teeth are three in number, and seemingly parallel. A long slender oesophagus, which is thrown into waves when the creature is feeding, leads to a thick walled, capacious stomach, filling the larger part of the body cavity; a marked constriction divides it from the intestine; gradually narrowing into a long rectum, it bends in an upward direction to the cloaca. The latter is bounded on either side by wart-like projections which become greatly distended in the act of passing fæces. The ovary frequently contains a large egg, more or less fully formed, while others are embedded in the flocculent mass that does duty for a case. The foot is tapering, deeply transversely wrinkled, and very extensile; although not usually much longer than the body, occasionally it is stretched to fully two and a half times its length, and even then its corrugations are not appreciably smoothed out. Two muscular threads run from one end to the other, and near the junction with the trunk appear to pass through two thick swellings that may be the foot-glands. The case as a rule consists of an irregular accumulation of débris, hiding the base of the foot and quite inadequate as a protection; but even this is sometimes entirely dispensed with. In one instance, however, a pair were inhabiting a transparent gelatinous case only rendered visible by the particles of dirt adhering to it, and into which they retreated on alarm. It was more like the case that one sees occasionally investing a stentor, and I am not at all sure that they had not taken advantage of the empty dwelling of

Fig. 77.-Ecistes, extended.

ready to expand again. Their favourite position is in the axils of the leaves and stems.

I first came across this Rotifer on the 19th of April,

viz., in the corona being reniform, the foot shorter, tapering, more deeply and less regularly wrinkled, and in its quiet habits. Neither does it agree with the same author's meagre account of E. ptygura, as it certainly has a ventral antenna. It must come very close to these two, but not being able to satisfactorily determine which it is, I am induced to send my drawing and notes to this widely read paper, in the hope that some gentleman better versed in the subject will be able to name it, or decide if it is a new species.

paper anent the development of the colours of flowers theory.

Certain it is that, although he might fail to bring conviction to my mind, if the establishment of the theory depended upon his staunch and able advocacy, he would, at least, win many to concurrence in his views. Without going seriatim into these comments, let me observe that, stripped of the verbiage and technical phrases which too often encumber the argument, it may manifestly be reduced to the simple proposition that primitive flowers were colourless, but that, through the selection of insects, they have gradually acquired their present brilliant colours. On the other hand, those not of this way of thinking say, Not so, when we look around us we see that from the germination of the seed, through every stage of the plant's growth-through its period of flowering-and on to its production of mature seed colour is secreted. Sometimes either the upper or the under side of the leaves, sometimes both, are richly and permanently coloured, these colours being often symmetrically disposed, as in the case of flowers; nor can it be said that these bright colours are the attributes of a period of decay. Often it is the young leaves or shoots alone, these latter colours being more or less evanescent, and ultimately assuming the tints of the parent stem and branch. Then, again, we see the flowers of every attractive hue, and, further on, the seeds often not a whit less beautiful, sometimes even more so than the petals of the flowers which produced them. Nor does the secretion of pigments cease with growthreproduction, for it is seen also in the "red leaf." Both in life and in death.

Now whether we consider the whole period from the germination of the old seed to the perfecting of the new, a single process or a series of connected processes, matters not; 'tis throughout continuous, nor can we say that at any particular point the process is interrupted.

Why then, it may be asked, why when the secretion of pigments by plants is so universal should the coloration from the beginning of the plant's life up to its floral stage, and its further progress from fertilization be recognised as chemical, or what not, and yet the intermediate period-that of floweringbe so arbitrarily excluded and, notwithstanding the continuity of the process, be regarded as a period entirely independent of that which precedes and also of that which succeeds it?

The answer is given by the selectionist who has discovered, or who thinks that he has discovered the use of these flower colours, and who argues that, assuming the benefits of cross-fertilization, which is brought about mainly by the aid of insects, these pigments "have a physiological significance of their own,' "because their function is to attract these insects, and although both plants and seeds too have their functions these do not need colours, that is to

say, we have not yet discovered their use, and, therefore, they must be incidental, &c.*

Now herein lies the pith of the whole argument. My contention is, that it is not the function, i.e. not the sole function of the colours of flowers to attract insects; to my mind they have a higher function than this, 'tis that of ministering to the happiness of man, by gratifying that sense of beauty with which he has been endowed.

I readily, however, admit that they may be useful in thus attracting insects; "these creatures incidentally performing an office in the reproductive economy." Nay, I may even go further and say that, for aught we know, in many instances bright-hued flowers may be a source of pleasure to the animated atoms frequenting them. Specialised or not, however, it in no wise proves that all primitive flowers were of necessity colourless; on the contrary it will, I venture to think, be more reasonable to conclude that, seeing the advantage derived by them from their bright hues, they were, many of them, originally brightly coloured, and not, as the selectionists assume, colourless.

Now if all, or a large proportion of flowers were now beautifully coloured, if all were monoecious, and if all were insect-loved, then it might most reasonably be assumed that their sole function was to attract insects. But it is far otherwise, for innumerable flowers visited by insects are not conspicuous for their bright colours, do not occur sexually distinct; and a vast proportion being self-fertilizing or anemophilous, need not the services of insects at all, many of these latter yet being brilliantly coloured, so that, indeed, there seems to be no rule as to colour. The fact that "insects visit numbers of flowers solely for the sake of the pollen," of which fact I am not, of course, ignorant, in no wise helps the selection theory, inasmuch as that although such plants are visited by pollen-gatherers, they may yet be, and very generally are fertilized by other means; that is to say, they are not dependent upon insects for fertilization.

Mr. Tansley himself admits that originally the pigments of flowers, which are elsewhere asserted to have been non-existent, were merely "incidental products of physiological processes," but in effect says that these have now become essential. If not essential once, why should they be so now? (An answer from the selectionist's point of view appears elsewhere.)

Mr. Tansley says that "the colours of flowers could have no function before entomophily became

Speaking of the general colour relations of plants, Mr. Wallace says that "These all belong to the class of intrinsic or normal colours, due to the chemical constitution of the organism; as colours they are unadaptive, and appear to have no more relation to the well-being of the plants themselves than do the colours of gems and minerals," adding, further on, page 304, "It is when we come to the essential parts of plants on which their perpetuation and distribution depend that we find colour largely utilised for a distinct purpose in flowers and fruit." "Darwinism," Macmillan, 1889.

general," and that, therefore, their existence was an "evolutionary impossibility." What then of the colours of plants and seeds? 'Tis not contended that they were once non-existent.

I cannot help thinking that here, in speaking of colour, Mr. Tansley falls into the error of speaking rather of the quality or property of a thing, as apart from the thing itself. 'Tis not a single quality, 'tis the several qualities or properties pertaining to the thing that constitute its real significance.

As regards flowers, it is very questionable whether if they were never so brilliantly coloured they would' be visited by insects, which are attracted not by the colours alone, but also by sweet odours, pollen and honey-mostly by the last; consequently we find that where honey is absent even beautiful-hued flowers are comparatively neglected—if we except those visited by pollen-gatherers, a mere handful compared with those attracted either by honey alone or associated with pollen. Take, for instance, the host of lepidoptera, many of the hymenoptera and diptera that visit flowers solely for their honey. No, 'tis one of the functions of flowers to attract insects, not the sole function of their colours. Could we penetrate more deeply into nature's secrets we should probably discover that the colours of plants and seedsare just as much concerned in physiological processes as are the colours of flowers. Both plant and seed, too, have their function. Is it not as much the function of the plant to begin the process of reproduction as it is for the flower to carry it on? Within the unfolded flower-bud is there not stored up the as yet unfertilized seed? Are not physiological processes. involved in the production of the flower from the plant, and of the fruit and seed from the flower, and have they not equally "a physiological significance of their own"?

Perfectly aware am I of the fact that at one time phanerogamous plants did not exist. I am also aware that it is asserted that "among plants there are numerous cases in which flowers once specially adapted to be fertilized by insects have lost their gay corolla and their special adaptations, and have become degraded into wind-fertilized forms." Now, whether produced by a special creative fiat, as once believed, or whether, as is more in accord with evolutionary views, by a gradual process of evolution from humble cryptogams, is not material to our argument. Thus much we do know-that at near the close of the tertiary period not only dicotyledonous trees formed extensive forests, but that plants belonging to the Primulacea, Scrophulariacea, Crassulacea, and other existing orders abounded, and that azaleas, ericas, honeysuckles, rhododendrons, &c., garnished the earth with beauty as at the present day. Now as these plants were many of them specifically allied to existing forms, the colours were presumably as varied.

Even allowing that phanerogams were evolved from