96 GEO. D. HULST. 



"Myelols (Cat. p. 371). The only species given by Hiibner is me- 

 dullalis Hiib. = cribrella Hiib. This genus has become the general 

 refuge of all uncertain species, but as there cannot be any doubt as 

 to the species which forms the type, I restrict the genus to those spe- 

 cies alone, which, like cribrella, have simple antennae in the male, 

 eight veins to the hind wings, with veins 4 and 5 in the forewings 

 forked. 



" Selagia (Cat. p. 371), comprising two Crambi and argyralis Hiib. 

 {argyrella Fab.) This genus has been described by Zeller dsis 1848), 

 and is composed of two species: argyrella Fab. and janthinel la Hiib., 

 which have wrongly been placed since in the genus Nephopteryx 

 proper. 



"Etirhodope (Cat. p. 371), formed for pudoralis S. V. (rosella Sc.) 

 and carnealis (carnella L.). The type of the genus is rosella Sc, 

 which has since been placed in Myelois Auct., but as the type of 

 Myelois is cribella Hiib., the neuratiou of which is different from that 

 of rosella Sc, I adopt Eurhodope Hiib. for ro.^ella, cruentella Dup., 

 etc, as well as for legatella Hiib., suavella Zinck., advenella Zinck., 

 etc, as they cannot be distinguished structurally from one another ; 

 vet, as the legatella group appears so different from the rosella group, 

 1 establish a subgenus for the former under the name of Bhodopheea 

 Guenee. 



" Catastia (Cat. p. 372). This is a good genus, and has been adopted 

 by Zeller (Isis 1839 and 1848) and von Heinemann." 



The laws of modern Zoology determine that when an author places 

 under a genus two or more species not properly congeneric, and in- 

 dicates no type, the one who afterwards properly subdivides this 

 genus, can restrict the original name to any of the species formerly 

 included under it. The older name, however, must be retained for 

 one of the new divisions. On this basis I am ready to accept the 

 restrictions of Hiibner's genera as made by Zeller, von Heinemann 

 and Ragonot. I differ from Mr. Ragonot's conclusions given above 

 on two points only : first, on the basis of the laws of modern zoology 

 and the reasoning employed with regard to Anerastia, Epischnia and 

 Selagia above, the name Gesneria must stand in the place of Gyrn- 

 nacycla Zeller; second, I differ in my valuation of raised scale ridges 

 as a generic characteristic. 



Curtis (Brit. Ent. 1828j puts Phycita in place of Phycis Fab., as 

 noted above. He also describes Homoeosoma for gemina Haw. := 

 siniiella Fab., which thus becomes the type of the genus. 



