812 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



before apex. Cilia white, speckled ]>lack. and fiiscou.s. Hiiidwing-s 

 light silver}' fuscous, cilia a shade lighter than wing; male without 

 costal hairpencil. 



Abdomen dark fuscous, anal tuft silvery gray; legs white with 

 black annulations; hairs on posterior tibia silvery white. Alar ex- 

 panse, 12 mm. 



Type.—^o. 6356, U.S.N.M. 



Bred by Dr. William Dietz in Hazleton, Pennsylvania, from CraUegus 

 tomentosus in June, but without an}' notes on the larva or its habit. 



The species is very near the other fuscous species of the genus and 

 easily mixed with cristatella Chambers, but besides minor colorational 

 differences, it differs in the lack of hairpencil at base of hindwings in 

 the male. 



I am, at present, unable to separate this species from a series of 

 authentic European specimens of Recurvaria nanella Hiibner, and I am 

 conscious of the probability of my making a synonym of this species, 

 the life history of which, according to Meyrick's Handbook of British 

 Lepidoptera, is not detinitely known, but which is variously said to 

 feed in ffowers or in shoots of pear or on lichens growing on the 

 trunk. 



As long as definite knowledge of the larva of both species is lacking, 

 I regard it a nmch better policy to treat the American form as a 

 distinct species, instead of running the risk of wrongly recording 

 European species in America, which has already been done, too hastily 

 in my opinion, in other groups of T/neinx. Such records are very 

 difficult to disprove, and, if wrong, not only encumber our lists and 

 tables, })ut give false ideas of geographical distribution. 



RECURVARIA ROBINIELLA Fitch. 



Anacampm rohinielhi Kitcii, Rep. Xox. Benef. Injects N. York, V, ISfii), p. 



835.— Chambers, Can. Eiit., Ill, 1871, pp. 163, 183. 

 (lelechia robinielUi Chambers, Bull. U. S. Geol. Svirv., IV, 1878, j). 146. — Kii.ey, 



Smith's List Lep. Bor. Am., No. 5469, 1891. 

 Sinoe fmcopalUdella Chambers, Can. Ent., V, 1873, p. 231; VII, 1875, pp. 105, 106. 

 Gelechia (Sinoe) fuscopaUidella Chambers, Can. Ent., IX, 1877, p. 24; Rep. TT. S. 



Dept. Agr., 1879, p. 225. 

 GelecMa fusropalUdella Chambers, Bull. V. S. Geol. Surv., 1878, IV, p. 143.— 



Rilev, Smith's List Lep. Bor. Am., No. 5371, 1891. 

 Gelechia rohinhrfol'iella Chambers, Rep. U. S. Dept. Agr., p. 224, 1879. 

 Recurt'xria rohlnlella Busck, Dyar's List Am. I^ep., No. 5601, 1902. 



As already realized ])y Chaml>ers, Fitch evidently made a mistake in 

 associating his moth described as Anaeaitqjx'x rohiniella with the larva 

 and mine described under that name. This is clear, as he could not 

 breed a moth with alar expanse 0.45 inch from a full-grown larva only 

 0.18 inch long. 



Fitch collected his Rohinia leaves in the autumn and in the spring 

 his moth appeared, so it seems reasona]>le that some other larger larva 



