NO. 3547 NEARCTIC GELECHIIDAE — HODGES 5 



Curtis, are used to exemplify them. I am not certain what status 

 should be assigned to these groups. For example, the Isophrictis 

 group is as distinct from the other four as the timyrids are from the 

 five; in other words, the two are equal in rank. Thus, I am incMned 

 to treat each as a subfamily or tribe of the Gelechiidae. This problem 

 becomes even more complex when other units are studied, e.g., the 

 Xylorictidae, Copromorphidae, Oecophoridae, Momphidae, Sym- 

 mocidae. After studying the venational and genitaUc illustrations in 

 Clarke's (1955, 1963, and 1965) work on the Meyrick types, the 

 interrelationships among these so-called famiUes become apparent — or 

 put in another manner — the means of distinguishing one from another 

 appear to be lacking. Several genera of xylorictids have oecophorid- 

 type genitaUa. The male genitaUa of Isophrictis are more closely 

 related to those of oecophorids than to the Gelechia type, but the wing 

 shape and venation ally them with the gelechiids. In the same manner 

 "Hypatima" zesticopa Meyrick (Gelechiidae) is close to Meleonoma 

 stomata (Meyrick) (Oecophoridae) . The question then must be asked: 

 What criteria are vaUd for estabMshing relationships? Obviously, our 

 present system does not truly reflect a natural system; but at this 

 time I am in no position to rally adequate evidence to form the basis 

 of a sound system. I do feel that we should be very cautious about 

 proposing new taxa of family rank because this practice eventually 

 would lead to a system wherein many small groups would be recognized 

 but no interrelationships shown. 



The Lita group, a member of the larger taxon exemplified by 

 Gelechia, is closely related to Gelechia and Gnorimoschema Busck, and 

 is arbitrarily separated from them by the presence of a terminal row 

 (or rows) of caudally directed, modified setae on the uncus. In Lita, 

 Aria Clarke, Neodactylota Busck, and Eudactylota Walsingham, these 

 setae are scalariform; in Friseria Busck, Srijeria, new genus, Rifseria, 

 new genus, Schizovalva Janse, Parapsectris Meyrick, Araeovalva Janse, 

 and Leuronoma Meyrick, these setae are stout and usually long. 

 Neofriseria Sattler is closely related to the Lita group, particularly in 

 the structure of the valvae; but because the uncus lacks the terminal 

 setae, it is excluded. A feature, apparently common to all of these 

 genera and to Gelechia and Gnorimoschema, is the culcitula (new term 

 proposed for the membranous pillowHke base of the gnathos) ; how- 

 ever, because I know the South African genera only through Janse's 

 (1949-1964) diagnoses and illustrations, I cannot be certain whether 

 this structure is always present. 



The geographic distribution of the Lita group may be summarized 

 as follows: Lita, 1 Holarctic, 1 Palearctic, and 20 Nearctic species; 

 Aria, Neodactylota, Eudactylota, Sriferia, Rifseria, and Friseria are 

 Nearctic; and Parapsectris, Araeovalva, Leuronoma, and Schizovalva are 



