( 59 ) 



AGANAIDAR ( = HVr8IDAE). 



We include in this family only the forms allied to Asota Hb. { = Hypsa 

 Hb.) which are characterised especially by the presence of a proboscis and by 

 veins 7 and 8 of the hindwings being connectfd In' a bar near the middle of tlie 

 cell, and differ in the first character from the Lymavtrlidae and in the second 

 from the Arctiidae. With Hampson, Mollis of India I., we have to exclude 

 from the Agnnaidae the following genera of Kirby's Catfdorpie of IlHerocem 1. 

 pp. 383-393 :— 



 I. Sebastia Kirby, I.e. p. 383 (1891) is Arctiid. New synonym : Moorea 

 Hampson, Lc. II. p. 33 (1894). 



2. El'Kjma Hb. is Arctiid. (n./.). 



3. Bajjata Wlk. ,, 



4. Agaposoma Feld. „ 



5. Stenognathn Feld. ,, 

 C. Caryatis Hb. ,, 



7. Godasa Wlk. is Agaristid. 



8. CUdpcnia ;\Ioore is .\rctiid. 

 i). Migoplastis Feld. „ 



10. Zaracha'Wlk. 



11. Bgi/bolis BoUA. 



Meyrick, Proc. Linn. Soc. X. S. Wales 1880. p. 7,58, brings Nydemsra Hb. and 

 Anerila ^^'lk. to the Agnnaidae; we cannot agree with him that these genera are 

 more nearly allied to Asota Hb. than to other Arctioid moths. Digama ^Nloore is 

 regarded by ]Meyrick as an unattached genus differing from Asota " essentially in 

 having vein 8 of the hindwings approximated but not connected to the upper margin 

 of cell." This statement is quite correct as regards Digama hearseyana Moore, the 

 type of the genus, and the only Austi-alian species hitherto known, D. marmorea 

 Butl., liut does not apply to several other species standing at present under Digama, 

 for example D. insidana Feld. and marchali Gu4r., and, therefore, we shall in this 

 ])aper treat Digama as an Hypsid, and give a fuller explanation of the Ilypsoid 

 characters of this genus at the end of the family. 



A revision oi the Agana idae, exclusive of Diga,ma :\Ioore, has been given by Snellen 

 in Tijdschr. v. Ent. XXXI. p. 109 (1888), and we shoidd restrict ourselves to a few 

 notes about some oversights and errors in that excellent paper, if it were not for 

 Kirby's Catalogue of Beterocera and Hampson's .Moths of India, the authors of which 

 works do not seem to ha^e taken any notice of Snellen's classificatory results. . The 

 Indian Aganaidae, exclusi\e of Digama, are divided into three genera by Hampson 

 and into nine hy Kirby, while Snellen enumerates them under five well-characterised 

 genera. As our researches show that Hampson unites under Hypsa a number of very 

 heterogeneous forms, and that several of the genera in Kirby's Catalogue are identical, 

 and also prove that Snellen's division of the family into five genera is not quite 

 correct, we shall dilate a little longer \\\mn this family, the more so as, besides the 

 genera, the species also are in rather a great muddle. K. .F. 



