MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 57 



C. ?. Pupa with no free segments, appendages adlierent to all abdominal segments. Lijonclia, 



CcmioHlojita, liedelJia. 

 Note. — Eriocepliala (Microptciyx puipurella, (•tc.) appears liy iaiaginal character.s to belong to Adelid.-e. I5nt 

 the pupa is truly incomplete, not semiinconiplete, as all the other Inconii)leta- are; tliat is, the ajipendages are all 

 absolutely distinct and free, and all t\w ab<lominal segments are "free;" moreover, it possesses working jaws. 



Apparently a. few months after the publication of Dr. Chapman's paper Pi'ofessor Comstock's' 

 able and susge.stive paper appeared, in which he uses the venation of the wings as taxononiic 

 characters, and proposes to make the following divisions of the Lepidoptera: 



A. Suboriler .JlGAT.E. 



15. The ilacrojugaiw Family Hepiai.id.E 



Jlicrojugata' Family Mickoptkrygiij.e 



A A. .Suborder Fkexat.e. 

 B. The micro/yenatir. 



C. The Tine'uU .Superfamily Tinei.va 



C C. The Tortricida .Superfamily Tortuicin'a 



C C C. The Pyralidn Superfamily Pyualidixa 



B B. The Macrofrenata: 



Without entering into further details, we only add the succession of the families of this 

 division given by the author in ascending order, beginning with the most generalized: 



Megalopygid;e. Cymatophoridie. Satumiina. 



Zygaenid;e in p.art. Noctuida;. Drepanidir. 



I'sychidie. Liparidse. Lasiocampida". 



C'ossida'. Agaristidse. Hesperidie. 



Limacodid.-e. Arctiid;e. Papilionidie. 



DioptidiB. Sesiidai. Pierid;e. 



Xotodontidie. ThyrididiB. Lycaenida". 



BrephidiB. Zygaenina. Nymphalid.-e. 

 Geometrid;p. 



The objection we should make to this arrangement of the Lepidoptera into two suborders, 

 Jugatii! and Frenata;, is that the characters used are too slight, and do not agree with the more 

 fundamental pupal characters or with important imaginal features. The jugum is of slight if 

 any functional value, and in Micropteryx, as in Trichoptera, occurs both in the hind and front 

 wings,- a point apparently overlooked by Comstock. The HepialidiP, as we shall hope to show, 

 are much less generalized forms than the Eriocephalidte, or even the^VIicropterygida^; the i)upa- of 

 both these groups have free limbs and abdominal segments, belonging to what Speyer calls a group 

 of Pupa libera. The Hepialidse also neither pos.sess maxillary palpi nor vestigial mandibles; they 

 are Ijorers in the larval state, and the pupa has not free limbs, but is a pupa incompleta. They 

 are scarcely ancestral, though very primitive, forms, but have already become modified, having 

 no traces of mandibles and no maxillie, and in our native species the labial palpi have already 

 begun to degenerate. We therefore scarcely see good rea.sons for placing the family at the 

 very foot of the order below Micropteryx, but should regard the family as a side branch of the 

 Pal:eolepido[(tera, which, very soon after the appearsince of the order, became somewhat specialized. 



Comstock's Frenatfe comprises a heterogeneous collection of families, some of which have no 

 frenulum at all; and when present they ofier secondary sexual characters. The absence or 

 presence of a frenulum is hardly, then, a sufficiently fundamental character to be used iu 

 establishing a great primary division. Besides this there is a rather close alliance between the 

 Hepialidie and Cossid.X', the latter having a rudimentary frenulum. Chapman remarks that while 

 Cossus and Ilepialus are quite distinct in pupal characters, there appear to exist in Australia 

 many forms uniting them with Zeuzera into one family. The venation is also quite similar, and 

 while the two families of Cossid;© and Hepialidie are in some most important respects quite far 

 apart, one being, so to speak, tineid an<l the other tortricid in structure, yet it would, we think, 

 be a forced and unsound taxonomy to assign them to different suborders. 



' Evolution and Taxonomy. An essay on the application of the theory of naturiil selection in the classification 

 of animals and plants, illustrated by a study of the wings of insects and by a contribution to the classification of 

 the Le)>idoptera. Ithaca, X. Y., 1893. 



- In his drawing of the wings of Microjiteryx Comstock has not represented the jugum-like flap on the 

 hind wing, which is present in Micropteryx purpundhi, though not apparently in EMocephata calthella. .Since it 

 occurs on the hind as well as fore wings, I doubt that it is of much use in keeping the wings spread. 



