164 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



THE EUPITHECI^ OF EASTERN NORTH AMERICA. 



BY GEO, W. TAYLOR, WELLINGTON, B. C. 



In the present paper an attempt is made to enumerate the species of 

 Eupithecia occurring in the eastern parts of North America. 



The species of this genus, being very numerous and not very easy to 

 distinguish the one from the other, liave been neglected by most 

 entomologists, and in the maj )rity of collections they are present in short 

 series only, and usually under incorrect names. 



The Monograph of Dr. Packard, which for so many years was our 

 only guide, enumerated but 17 species from the whole of North America. 

 Naturally it was impossible to identify one's captures from that work. 

 Then came Dr. Hulst with 40 or 50 new species, but I am compelled to 

 say that his descriptions are in most instances altogether inadequate, and 

 the fact that in no single case was a description accompanied by a 

 figure, makes the identification of Hulst's species a matter of considerable 

 difficulty. 



But even Hulst left many forms undescribed. Species of Eupithecia 

 will, I believe, be found to be quite as numerous in North America as in 

 Europe. I have already over 100 species in my own cabinet, and I shall 

 not be surprised if in the near future our list attains a total of 150 names. 



Coming from the district covered in the present paper I recognize 

 about 40 apparently distinct species. I have endeavoured to separate first 

 the species described by Guenee, Grote, Packard and Hulst, and have 

 ventured then to characterize the rest as new to science. I have tried to 

 make my descriptions as full as possible, and have taken into considera- 

 tion the under as well as the upper sides. Hulst usually omitted reference 

 to the under sides, but I find that the arrangement of the lines on the fore 

 and hind wings beneath often furnishes reliable and easily-recognized 

 specific characters. 



I have to confess that I have not yet attempted to break up the 

 genus into sections. I have, indeed, neglected so far the study of generic 

 characters, believing it to be of greater importance first to fix with 

 certainty the specific status of the forms already described and to supply 

 the undescribed ones with names. 



The generic nomenclature of ov\x sQeometridcz '\i> \x\ great confusion, 

 and in danger of being made still worse if hasty revision is attempted. I 

 believe that some of the characters (sexual ones) relied on by Dr. Hulst 



May. 1907 



