NORTH AMERICAN ACROLOPHIDAE — ^HASBROUCK 493 



the family name, Acrolophidae when, following the description of a 

 new species of Acrolophus, he stated: 



The various genera, erected in the family Acrolophidae on the secondary sexual 

 characters of the labial palpi can not be maintained. 



Busck again used this family name in September 1912 in his title, 

 "Two New Californian Acrolophidae." By this time, it had appar- 

 ently been decided by Busck, Walsingham, Durrant, and probably 

 by others among their co-workers that the various genera referable 

 to the group should all be combined under the original genus Acrolo- 

 phus, which should in turn be given family rank as Acrolophidae. 



A short time later, Meyrick (1913), in a paper describing new 

 species of South American Microlepidoptera, briefly expressed his 

 opinion of the situation by combining the 16 genera of this group 

 known to him under the single genus Acrolophus in the following 

 statement (pp. 191-192): 



Acrolophus, Poey — I unite under this name Anaphora Clem., Bazira Walk., 

 Eddara Walk., Urbara Walk., Eutheca Grote, and Walsingham's genera Atopocera, 

 Ankistrophorus, Caenogenes, Eulepiste, Felderia, Hypoclopus, Neolophus, Oriholo- 

 phus, Pilanaphora, Pseudanaphora, and Thysanoscelis, all of which are in my judg- 

 ment based on characters which are in this genus of specific value only, and indeed 

 in part unreliable even for that. I may add that I treat the generic name as 

 feminine, which is permissible, regarding it as a Greek compound adjective of two 

 terminations, that is, with the masculine and feminine forms identical. I regard 

 the uncus as always double, though the two parts are sometimes closely appressed. 



It should be noted that Bazira, Eddara, Urbara, Caenogenes, 

 Pilanaphora, and Thysanoscelis were not referable to North American 

 species. Apparently, Mejrrick was not aware that the homonymous 

 name Eutheca had been replaced by Sapinella Kirby in 1892, and that 

 the homon3nmous name Ankistrophorus had been replaced by Homony- 

 mus Walsingham in 1887. He apparently was also unaware that the 

 genus Pseud oconchylis Walsingham was referable to this group instead 

 of to the Tortricidae. Although Meyrick's reasons for uniting these 

 genera were sound, his conception of the uncus was quite arbitrary 

 and certainly faulty. In many species this organ is obviously single 

 with no indication whatsoever that it is formed from two parts either 

 closely appressed or even fused. Lastly, Meyrick's grammatical treat- 

 ment of the generic name Acrolophus is open to considerable question. 

 In his lexicon Woods (1924) treats it as masculine; and in the present 

 revision the name is considered to be masculine and singular. 

 In 1913 Barnes and McDunnough described three new species 

 under three of Walsingham's old genera. They also adhered to his 

 subfamily Anaphorinae. And in 1914-1915, Walsingham, Durrant, 

 and Busck saw published their "Tineina of Central America" in 

 the "Biologia Centrali-Americana." This represented Walsingham's 

 last major work on the group in question, and, as the title implied, 



