THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 73 



the fold and goes to the tip, its basal half being margined above by a line 

 of brown scales, and its apical part margined similarly towards the fold. 

 The other streak is just witliin the dorsal margin, and goes to the dorsal 

 ciliae. Al. ex. a little over yo inch. 



LAVERNA. 



L. ccnotheneella Cham. 



This is evidently the species which had been previously described as 

 Phyllociiistis magnatella by Prof. Zeller, " Bistrage, &c., 1873," and I 

 confess to feeling some surprise on finding it referred to Phyllocnistis, 

 though after reflection I find the mistake in locating it there not so great 

 as it at first appeared to be. Still I think it is more properly placed for 

 the present in Lai'enia than in Phyllocuistis. I placed it with some 

 hesitation in Laveriia, and admit that it is not a true Lavcnia, and I think 

 a new genus will ultimately be erected for it. Indeed, I at first prepared 

 the diagnosis of such a genus, but finally considering the somewhat 

 heterogenous character of the genus Lavenia, I ultimately concluded not 

 to separate it from that genus at present. It may be that I attribute too 

 much importance to neuration as affording generic characters ; neverthe- 

 less, I think it probable that in the scarcity of specimens Prof. Zeller did 

 not examine the neuration of this species, or he would not have referred it 

 to Fhy/locnistis, and I feel still more confident that he would not have so 

 done had he known the larva and its habits ; while, on the other hand, I 

 perhaps should not have been surprised to see it referred to Phyllocnistis 

 had I not known its neuration, and its larva and larval habits as given by 

 Miss Murtfeldt in Can. Ent., v. 7, p. 31. Like Prof Zeller, I was struck 

 by its resemblance in ornamentation to Lyonetia, so that my MSS. specific 

 name, before I knew its larval habits, was lyonetiella. 



My reasons for venturing to differ from Prof Zeller as to its generic 

 affinities are as follows : ist — Considering the minute size of all other 

 known species of Phyllocnistis, and their close resemblance in ornament- 

 ation, the much greater size (nearly three times the alar ex. and nearly 

 four times the weight) of this species and the difference in ornamentation 

 (which, however, bears some resemblance to that of a Phylloc?nstis), I 

 should have suspected structural differences as great as those of size. 2nd 

 — The characters drawn from the head and its appendages, while very 

 nearly those of Phylloc/iistis, do not differ in any important particular from 

 those of some species of Lavcrna and of some other genera allied thereto ; 



