Sept., J9I3.] Pearsall: The Genus Philobia. 187 



tibia is long, greatly swollen and contains within its sheath a heavy 

 brush of hairs, while the tarsi are so short as to equal little more than 

 one third its length. Both these genera appear to me to be well 

 founded, but European authorities, I believe, group both notata and 

 iittirafa under the genus Macaria. I have considered it proper, in 

 view of the facts presented, to recognize Philobia as the genus under 

 which our species should be marshalled. The names notata Linn, 

 and cnotafa Guen. have been applied indefinitely to our species. Dr. 

 Packard (Mons. Geom. Moths, 1876) placed both under Semiothisa, 

 a composite Hubnerian genus, and later Dr. Hulst (Classif. Geom. of 

 N. A., 1896) endeavored to correct this by using the genus Philobia, 

 but he was clearly unable to distinguish one species from the other, 

 as he confesses. We must discard both these names, for neither of 

 them has a place in our fauna. The former certainly has not ; the 

 latter, the type of which came from Brazil, may, by chance, enter our 

 southern boundary, but has not as yet been taken, so far as I can ascer- 

 tain. For others of this group he erected the genus Sciagraphia, but 

 its type, granitata Guen., is a Macaria in my opinion, and if so, 

 Sciagraphia must fall as a synonym. We are left, then, with a small 

 group oi Philobia species, all, with one exception, being without names. 

 3o far as my material permits, I have separated them, using the geni- 

 talia largely to confirm my species. In general appearance and mark- 

 ings they resemble one another closely and yet when massed in series 

 as I have them, it is rather obvious that they are distinct forms. 

 Authors heretofore have stated that the male in Philobia is without 

 hair pencil on the hind tibiae, and in flown examples this appears to be 

 so, only because it has been removed by abrasion, probably wdien 

 copulation takes place. I have already noted a like occurrence in the 

 genus Epimecis Hub. (Can. Ent., Vol. 38, p. 179), my specimens in 

 that instance having been reared from larvae, yet in all flown males 

 of it that I have since examined, and they are many, no trace is left 

 of this appendage except the cicatrix, or scar, where it was attached. 

 In the case of notata my attention was first directed to it, when I 

 received, through the kindness of Mr. Prout, a male from Budapest. 

 This fine specimen had short hair pencils attached to the inside of 

 the tibiae, just below the joint, and, in order that he might see "with 

 his own eyes," I returned the example to him. However, it is before 

 me now, as I write, with a single hind leg and hair pencil intact, after 



