BY It. .T. TILLYARD. 



115 



Turning next to the older genus Micropteryx (Text-fig. 6), repre- 

 senting a different subfamily from that in which Eriocrania and 



Sc!a 



Text-fig. 6. 

 Wings of Micropteryx aruneella Scop. ( x27). pa, posterior areulus; sc-r, 

 cross-vein from Sc to R^; Sc,, oblique branch of Sc crossing enlarged 

 costal area of forewing. 



Mnemonica are placed, we again find a closely similar type of 

 venation present. The radial sector is, however, dichotomously 

 branched in both wings, and possesses the full number of branches 

 (four). Rj is unbranched; but a strong branch (Sc 2 ) is developed, 

 in the forewing only, from the middle of Sc, running obliquely 

 across an enlarged costal area. A cross-vein (sc-r) is developed 

 distally between Sc and Rj in both wings, but the humeral cross- 

 vein is absent. The posterior areulus (pa) is very prominently 

 shown in the forewing, but is almost obliterated in the hind, the 

 cubital fork being placed exceedingly close to the base of the 

 wing. Vein 3A does not loop up with 2A in the forewing, but 

 remains primitive, the cross-vein sa being apparently absent. 



The wings of Micropteryx are more sharply pointed than those 

 of the Eriocraniince, and show more markedly that secondary 

 tendency towards a symmetrical shape, about a median longi 

 tudinal axis, which is more or less characteristic of the whole 

 family. Tins I regard as a specialisation, probably due to the 



