﻿March 1895.] PACKARD. OrIOIN OF Gf.OM1;tRID MoTHS. 31 



genera. It is naked and suspended by a remarkably long cremaster; 

 the end of the abdomen is otherwise peculiar. The head presents 

 no vestigial characters ; there being no trace of maxillary palpi, of 

 paraclypeal pieces, or apparently of labial palpi. With a complete 

 knowledge of all its stages, it is still difficult to assign it a definite 

 position. When we know more about the Dioptidie, where it 

 probably belongs, the problem may approach a solution, but that 

 its affinities are closely with the GeometridcX is shown by compar- 

 ing the pupa with that of CIcora. In the general shape of the 

 head, of the eyes, of the front, and especially of the abdomen, the 

 resemblance is close ; the peculiar shape and markings of the last 

 three abdominal segments are nearly identical in both genera, 

 though the cremaster of Cleora is much shorter. 



In this connection reference should be made to the striking 

 resemblance between the pupce oiOeta aurca and Cleora pulcJiraria. 

 To my great astonishment I find the pupa of Cleora has the same 

 vestigial head-characters as Oeta ; the general shape of th.e pupa is 

 the same ; the mode of dehiscence the same, the shape of the 

 vertex and its mode of separating when the moth issues from the 

 pupa case ; also the shape of the eyes, of the peculiar clypeusand 

 labrum, while the more pronounced vestigial characters are the 

 labial palpi, forming a triangular area, and the large semi-detached 

 paraclypeal pieces. Cleora shows that it is a more modern form in 

 having no traces of a vestigial eye-collar (maxillary palpi) such as 

 occur (though very slightly developed) in Oeta. The shape of the 

 end of the body, with the cremaster, is much the same, the shorter 

 cremaster of Cleora being an adaptation to its life in a slight open- 

 work cocoon. In the peculiar markings of the 8th and 9th abdominal 

 segments Cleora is more like Phryganidia. 



Judging by the pupal characters, then, the Geometrids have 

 directly descended from the Lithosiidas, the latter, as I have satis- 

 fied myself, having directly orginated from the generalized Tineina. 



The imago of PJirygauiJia appear not to differ much from 

 those of the Dioptida^ to which it has been referred by Butler. I 

 am unable to see any important differences between the Dioptidae 

 and CyllopodidK, though my material is scanty. In the slender 

 body, shape of the head, and proportions of the clypeus, shape of 

 antennce and palpi, both of these families do not essential differ 

 from Melauchroia which is now knowm to be a Geometrid, nor 

 from the Geometrids themselves. 



In its venation FJirygaiiiJia is nearly identical with that of a 



