Introduction 



This study began as a revision of the North American Anerastiinae, 

 largely in the sense of the McDunnough (1939) checklist. In keeping 

 with the original goals of the investigation, this paper treats all species 

 formerly placed under that subfamily name, although Anerastia and 

 several other genera are herein transferred to the Phycitinae, and 

 Peoria is taken as the nominal genus of the subfamily. The transferred 

 genera have not previously been treated in detail and so are discussed 

 in this paper. The following introductory sections deal with the litera- 

 tm-e and history of the classification of all the genera formerly placed 

 in the Anerastiinae. 



The species of moths which previously constituted the subfamily 

 Anerastiinae are a mixture of various pyralid elements. Members of 

 this worldwide group are generally uncommon, rather inconspicuous 

 insects of little or no economic importance, and perhaps largely for 

 these reasons have received relatively little attention from taxonomists. 



Much of the work which has been done on the North American 

 Anerastiinae appeared during the last 15 years of the 19th centmy 

 and is superficial by current standards. The only world monograph of 

 the group is that of Ragonot (1901). Because existing works on the 

 anerastiines have not been based on the detailed examination of 

 species which is so necessary to a natiu^al taxonomic system, a number 

 of areas remain as major problems. 



Identification of species has been difiicult, even for specialists, be- 

 cause the descriptions and illustrations are inadequate. Most of the 

 original descriptions occupy but a few lines of text and are almost 

 useless for identifying the species. Illustrations of the adults are nearly 

 absent from the literature with the exception of the Ragonot revision, 

 a rare publication not easily available to most workers. The genitalia, 

 one of the most taxonomically useful structures, are nowhere illus- 

 trated for North American species and are described in only a few 

 instances. In addition most past studies were made from only one or a 

 few specimens so that no account of individual and geographic varia- 

 tion was possible. Thus, reliable identifications can be made only by 

 comparison with the type specimens. This is difficult because the 

 types are scattered in various museums throughout the United States 

 and Europe. 



Placement of species into genera has been on the basis of usually 

 one or a few superficial characters of wings, antennae, and palpi, 



1 



