20 U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 2 89 



more serious pest in the apple and peach growing regions of North 

 America than in Japan since it would, more than likely, be largely 

 devoid of natural enemies. Of course, it is possible that a reverse 

 situation occurred (i.e., with North America being the point of origin) 

 although the early, widespread distribution of the oriental species does 

 not suggest this. Furthermore, C. n. niponensis clearly belongs to a 

 Palearctic species group which also includes C. berberidella Herrich- 

 ShaflFer and C. scirrhosella Herrich-Shiiffer. Thus, the avilable evidence 

 seems to suggest that the two subspecies actually are distinct, and 

 that they may differ significantly in their biology. Largely for this 

 reason, I have not synonymized C. n. ottawana, but prefer to recognize 

 it as a separate subspecies even though present morphological evidence 

 does not fully support such a division. 



Another question exists concerning the correct name for the species. 

 The original accounts of both C. niponensis Walsingham and C. 

 sasakii Matsumura were published July 1900 in different journals, 

 and it now seems impossible to determine which name actually ap- 

 peared first. Consequently, it is more than likely that article 24a of 

 the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature will need to be 

 consulted in order to determine the proper name. Esaki et al. (1957) 

 briefly discuss this problem, stating their belief that Matsumura's 

 name actually appeared first, but use C. niponensis as the correct 

 name for the taxon. Their treatment of these two names perhaps 

 cannot be construed as the action of a "first revisor," but it is possible 

 that an earlier synonymy can be. A majority of the more recent refer- 

 ences to this species use Walsingham's name; Lyubarskaya (1964), 

 nevertheless, synonymized C. niponensis under C. sasakii. There 

 presently seems no doubt that these two names, as well as that of C 

 persicana Matsumura, are synonymous; these problems, however, 

 have not been pursued further by me, in part because of the scope of 

 the present study and particularly in view of Dr. A. Diakonoff's 

 impending revision of the Paleartic Carposinidae. 



A third problem encountered involving this species concerns the 

 original publication and subsequent type designation of C. nicholsana. 

 Apparently, the first use of this name was by Forbes (1923) in the 

 first part of his "Lepidoptera of New York and Neighboring States." 

 Forbes (p. 515) attributed the name to Kearfott and presented a 

 brief but concise description of the species, listing the locality as 

 Nicholson, Pennsylvania. Since Kearfott's name, however, evidently 

 was only a manuscript one, the authorship of the species should be 

 accredited to Forbes, as was listed by McDunnough (1939). Un- 

 fortunately, a search for original material bearing determination 

 labels written by Forbes proved futile. Also, no material from Nichol- 



