548 A CENTURY OF PROGRESS IN THE NATURAL SCIENCES 



TOBTRiciDAE (s. str.) Lep. Cat., 10, 1912; Gen. Ins., 149, 1913. 



OLETHEEUTIDAE Heinrich, U. S. Nat. Mus. Bulls. 123, 132, 1923, 



1926. 

 PHALONiiDAE Busck, Joum. N. Y. Entom. Soc, 15:19, 1907 



(omitting species of Phalonia). 



CARPOsiNiDAE Lep. Cat., 13, 1913; Gen. Ins., 179, 1923. 



ypoNOMEUTiDAE (and PlutelUdae) Lep. Cat., 19, 1914. 



GLYPHiPTERYGiDAE Lep. Cat., 13, 1913; Gen. Ins., 164, 1914. 



HELiODiNiDAE Lep. Cat., 13, 1913; Gen. Ins., 165, 1914. 



GELECHiiDAE Busck, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 25, 770-930, 1903 



(to species) ; Meyrick, Gen. Ins., 184, 1925. 

 CECOPHORiDAE Busck, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., 35, 189, 1909 (to 



genus only); Meyrick, Gen. Ins., 180, 1923. 



BLASTOBAsiDAE Dietz, Traus. Amer. Entom. Soc, 27, 100 ff ; 1910. 



STENOMiDAE Busck, Lep. Cat., 67, 1935. 



COLEOPHORIDAE (NE. U. S.) Heini'ich, in Lep. N. Y., 202-217, 



1924. 

 GRACiLARiiDAE Lep. Cat., 6, 1912; Gen. Ins., 128, 1912; Ely, 



Proc. Entom. Soc. Wash., 19:29-77, 1917 



(U. S. genera and catalogue of species). 



TiNEiDAE Dietz, Trans. Amer. Entom. Soc, 31:1-96, 1905. 



ADELiDAE (long-horns only) Lep. Cat., 6, 1912; Gen. Ins., 133, 1912. 



MiCROPTERYGiDAE (and Eriocrauiidae) .. Lep. Cat., 6, 1912; Gen. Ins., 132, 1912. 



Major Classification 



The major classification and pliylogeny of the order together have had rather a 

 separate liistory. At the beginning of the century ideas of evolution had not be- 

 come general, and most people were satisfied with approximations to the Linnaean 

 system, supplemented by suggested cross-resemblances between the various groups, 

 such as are represented in the diagrams in Herrich-Schaeffer by a web of lines 

 and circles (e.g., vol. 6, pis. 1, 7, 15). Even in lierrich-Schaeffer's time it was 

 realized that the "Bombyces" and "Tineina" were congeries of perhaps unre- 

 lated forms; yet the groupings are such a convenience that they are used even 

 now to some extent. 



After the Darwinian theory was digested, weblike classifications were recog- 

 nized as artificial and there was a serious search for characters marking primi- 

 tive or specialized forms, and indicating the lines of development. The most 

 important early American work was by Packard, most fully published in the 

 introduction to the Monograph of the Bomhycine Moths (1895). In the same 

 year Comstock published the Manual for the Study of Insects, with a key to the 

 families defined on modern lines, and also a phylogenetic arrangement, notably 

 breaking up the bombycine families and distributing them according to their 

 true relationships. In the same period in Europe Spuler (from 1892) was work- 

 ing on adult, and Chapman (from 1893) largely on pupal, characters. Dyar 

 came along immediately afterward with a more complete study of the larvae in 

 a series of papers, starting with his "Classification of Lepidopterous Larvae" 

 in 1894. The most productive point in Packard's study was the recognition of 

 the very deep character of the differences between a few primitive families, in 

 contrast to most of the order. Comstock became best known for his emphasis 

 on the marked change of structure of the hind wing which set off the earlier 

 "Jugatae" from higher types; but his distinction of "frenulum-losers" and 



