34 PROCEEDINGS ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY 



competent to undertake. It is not surprising however, con- 

 sidering the magnitude of the undertaking, that a few of our 

 North American species are not properly listed. In the follow- 

 ing pages the genera will be taken up in the order given by Mey- 

 rick and the reasons given for all changes which have been made. 



The list of species under Lithocolletis has not been revised. 

 This group has been so carefully studied by Miss Braun that, 

 in the list of species which follows this paper, the arrangement 

 given in her Revision will be followed. The only exception 

 made is the listing of Cameraria Chapman, and the use of Phyllo- 

 norycter Hb. instead of Lithocolletis Hb. As to Cameraria, it 

 would seem illogical to object to a division based upon larval 

 characters, within a family whose family rank rests mainly upon 

 a characteristic structure in the larval stage. One species only 

 may be noted here, on account of the fact that it has the ab- 

 normal habit of forming its, cocoo,n outside the mine. Upon 

 examining the venation of this species, ostensackenella Fitch, it 

 was found that the venation is abnormal, the two veins nearest 

 the apex of the forewing arising from a short stalk from the tip 

 of the cell. 



Porphnjrosela Braun is retained as a good genus as it is believed 

 that it should not be dropped without further investigation. 



Several species, noted later, were transferred from other genera 

 and placed under Marmara Clemens. Aesyle Chambers, is re- 

 moved from its position, as a synonym of Acrocercops, and made 

 a synonym of Marmara, as fasciella Ch., the type species, belongs 

 to this genus. 



Under Acrocercops Wallengren, the writer has placed only those 

 species which correspond rather closely to the type species brog- 

 niardellum Fabr. It is believed that Meyrick's conception of 

 this genus is much too broad and that the group as listed by 

 him will eventually be broken up. An additional reason for this 

 restriction of the genus is the fact that in albinatella Ch. we have 

 a species which corresponds generically in practically every de- 

 tail with brogniardellum. It may be noted here also that Mey- 

 ricks very broad definition of the genus Acrocercops does not 

 cover the venation of the type species, brogniardellum, which has 

 5 and 6 of the forewings stalked, the other veins remaining sepa- 

 rate. This fact is also recorded by Stainton, 1 in regard to the 

 relation of 5, 6. The following species were removed from under 

 Acrocercops, because they did not fall within the limits of Acrocer- 

 cops, under Meyrick's definition: sebastianella Busck, transferred 

 to Gracilaria, from an examination of mounted wings, forewing 

 not denuded ; fasciella, to Marmara on venation; strigifinitella was 



1 Stainton, Ins. Brit., Vol. Ill, PI. <>, fig. lla, 1854. 



