THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 319 



ON THE EUDRIIN/E. 



BY A. R. GROTE, A. M. , BREMEN, GERMANY. 



In an original memoir on the Zygaenidce, published by the Essex 

 Institute, Dr. Packard explained the relation of Castnia and allied genera 

 to the European genus Zygaena, and contended for the solidarity of the 

 group as the equivalent of the large family of Bombycidcz in the Latreil- 

 lean sense. The view, advocated by Agassiz, that form was a family 

 criterion, not only form in general, but form of parts underlying 

 form in general, obtained. Of a truth Dr. Packard's " family," 

 Zygaenidce, contained genera more or less evidently related in one or 

 other of their stages, and the agreement which Dr. Packard found in the 

 form of the clypeus authorized their being brought together in a family 

 group. This view has been followed by me in my papers and lists, and 

 any adverse criticism of my particular course with regard to these insects 

 is consequently ill-founded ; while the inherent want of precision which 

 our classifications must present allows of a shifting opinion, within limits, 

 as this or that character appears in turn to be the decisive one, and 

 renders such criticism unnecessary. The tendency of classificators 

 latterly has turned in the direction of a breaking up of these " families" 

 into smaller groups still called " families," but based rather upon ultimate 

 peculiarity than " form." Under the vague term " Bombyces," the 

 various new families of the Spinner moths are still kept together, in 

 recognition of a less tangible relationship which nevertheless is still held 

 to exist; while the view, that the present representation of these families 

 is the modified survival of the roots of the lepidopterous tree, is being 

 seriously considered by students of phylogeny. Classificators of the 

 lepidoptera who seize only upon ultimate peculiarities of a common and 

 essential part of the perfect insect, will, in the nature of things, eventually 

 come to grief. Such modifications we may use to separate species, and, 

 when so evident as to be of practical service, in the more artificial region 

 of generic division ; but, as we ascend higher, they diminish in import- 

 ance and are superseded by characters of development, persistent or 

 evanescent, offered in different stages of growth of the species. By these 

 characters indications as to the truer affinities of the insect are given. 

 The time is perhaps going by when lepidoptera are to be solely classified 

 by final peculiarities of the legs, wings or tails of the perfect insect. 

 Still, there will always be those whose observations in these directions 

 will seem to themselves of prime importance, while, in the end, the value 



