OF WASHINGTON. 181 



is obviously an Epipyrops, though no specific name seems to be 

 mentioned. Mr. Nawa might appropriately name it, as it is 

 probably undescribed. The plate is discussed in three pages of 

 Japanese with explanation of the figures on page 4, and there is 

 a two-page account in English by Mr. U. Nawa at the end of the 

 magazine. The question of the food of the Epipyrops larvae 

 seems to be still not clear. Prof. Westwood conjectured that it 

 was the white secretion of the Fulgorids, but Mr. Nawa's account 

 does not seem to support this view. The latter states that the 

 larvae secrete a white covering and that they even cause the host 

 to be visible at a distance by this when there are several of them 

 on one host. Dr. Dyar thought it did not seem reasonable that 

 larvae should secrete a substance similar to their own food. 

 Besides, there is but very little of this pruinose matter on the 

 Cicada-like host, certainly not enough to support several larvae, 

 it would seem. Mr. Heidemann had shown him specimens of 

 the, host. Might not the Epipyrops larvae be true parasites after 

 all? 



Mr. Simpson exhibited a micro-photograph of sections of 

 the eversible gland of the larva of the lo Moth (Automeris io 

 Fabricius). He stated that, in exceptional specimens, this gland 

 was missing. 



The introduction to the following paper, presented by Mr. 

 Busck, was then read by Dr. Dyar, in the absence of the author : 



NOTES ON BRACKENRIDGE CLEMENS' TYPES OF TINEINA.* 

 By AUGUST BUSCK. 



Although a few stray species of American Tineina were de 

 scribed before 1859, that year really marks the beginning of the 

 study of these insects in this country. During that and the fol 

 lowing four years the late Dr. Brackenridge Clemens, a practising 

 physician of Easton, Pa., published a series of systematic and 

 biological articles, which yet remain the most important contribu 

 tion to our knowledge of American Tineina. These papers con 

 tain descriptions of 31 new genera and of about 200 new specie^ 

 together with notes on larval habits of many of them. 



* The following new names are proposed in this article : Lithocolletis 

 hamameliella, new species (p. 189); Brackenrtdgia, new genus (p. 193); 

 Greya, new genus (p. 194). There are also original descriptions of the 

 following larvae: Stilbosis tesquella Clemens (p. 202); Cryptolechia obs9- 

 letella Zeller (p. 206). 



