148 THE entomoi,ogist's record. 



than motlis. Still, one may choose to draw the line above them ; but 

 whoever does so, does not alter the fact, that on the one hand they are 

 much closer to butterflies than are any unquestionable moths, and on 

 the other hand that they possess micro moth-characters that butterflies 

 have no trace of. 



Of these, perhaps the most remarkable affect the larval prolegs. In 

 true butterflies, these have the same structure as in the Macro-Hete- 

 ROCERA, although no doubt this has been quite independently acquired. 

 The row of hooks exists only along the inner margin of the originally 

 circular pad, and its derivation from a complete circle or crown of hooks 

 is much more frequently recorded here, by means of its persistence in 

 the earlier stages of larval growth, than is the case among the Maoro- 

 IIeteroceka. In the Skippers, the circle of hooks usually remains in 

 the adult larva* as in the Micko-Heterocera. In a few sj^ecies (C. 

 pnlaemon for example) there is a simple circle, or rather an oval, with 

 a gap at the inner side, a condition almost identical with that found in 

 Se>iia ; but in many of the species (or chiefly among the Paiiiphilidi?) 

 there is a complete circle, repeated in three rows, the outer row having 

 the smallest hooks ; this latter form is met with elsewhere only in 

 Hepialus, and is, therefore, a very archaic form of pro-leg. 



In the pupa there is one " Mici'O " character to which I find that 

 Scudder calls attention, thougli he does not appear to be aware of its 

 significance — the persistence of the dorsal head-plate (cephalo-thoracic 

 piece). In addition to this feature, the pupa presents sevei'al others 

 that point to its still strong affinities witli the Micro-Heteroceka. I 

 have only possessed a few Hesperid pupa3, and those which I have 

 examined from other collections had of course to be respected, so that 

 I am still in some doubt upon some of the points connected therewith. 



I think it is the case, that the species belonging to Scudder's tribe 

 Pamphilidi, which includes our si/lvauus, linea, &G., possess in a more 

 marked degree the features of the Micros than do those belonging to 

 his Hesperidi. I will, however, only say that some, and I think pro- 

 bably a majority of, species present most of the " Micro " characters 

 which I am about to enumei'ate. I need merely refer to such well- 

 known characters as the making of a cocoon, and hybernation as a full 

 or nearly full-grown larva ; both of these are distinctly moth characters, 

 and the latter is a " Micro " habit and does not, I think, occur in any 

 true butterfly. The possession by the pupa of a dorsal head-plate, as 

 noted by Scudder, is also a " Micro " character, and is associated with a 

 still more notable one which appears to have escaped his attention — 

 the separation of the eye-plates (which are dorsal), on dehiscence, from 

 the ventral head parts, and their continued attachment to the dorsal 

 head-plate. Another most remarkable " Micro " character, for which 

 I was not at all prepared, is the persistence in the pupa3 of some species 

 of the terminal joints of the maxillary palpus as a minute " eye-collar." 

 This, and tlie following, however, do not occur in any species of which 

 I have liad sjjecimens in my own possession, and I therefore mention 

 them with reserve. 



Another cliaracter is the persistence of the 7th al)dominal segment 

 as a free one in the male pupa : this appears to be the case in some 

 species oi Pamphilidi, but I do not like to be too positive, as one cannot 

 be quite sure on the point with an empty case, unless one is at liberty 

 to dissect and mount it. It is at least certain that the incision appears 



