52 Journal New York Entomological Society, t^oi. xxv. 



25. Abdomen with small dorsal tufts, usually black, front more or less extended 

 below, often into a triangular point ; wings similarly marked, with fine 

 wave-lines Eupithecia, Eucymatoge and Orthonama (36). 



25. Abdomen smooth scaled, without mid-dorsal black dots, though sometimes 



with subdorsal ones ; clypeus not pointed 26 



26. Wings tawny orange; a single small accessory cell Loxofidonia (34). 



26. Wings not tawny, usually two ace. cells 27 



27. Hind wings slightly angulate at M3 and excavate above. .Percnoptilota (35). 

 27. Hind wings with evenly wavy or rounded margin. 



Hydriomena (series II) (37) and Lobophora in part (12). 



Notes. 



1. Diastichtis julia is very closely related to loricaria of Europe, 

 which has a female with very stiort wings; if ours is similar it will 

 run out here. D. hicolorata, which is extremely close to it, however, 

 has nearly fully developed wings. 



2. Alsophila, Paleacrita and Erannis in this country. Both larval 

 and adult characters associate Paleacrita with the Ennominae rather 

 than the CEnochrorfiinae (Monocteniinae). 



3. The South American genus Coronidia, which appears in Kirby's 

 list as a Uraniid is undoubtedly a geometer, as shown by both venation 

 and tympanum. The clubbed antennae and lack of a frenulum would 

 associate it with the Hydriomeninae, which it also resembles in mark- 

 ings, and from which it is undoubtedly derived; as the costal venation 

 of both wings is aberrant, I let it stand by itself. All the species I 

 have seen have the hind wings lobed or tailed on M3. 



4. The name Acidaliinse cannot stand, as Acidalia is preoccupied 

 in the butterflies. Sterrhina: is unsatisfactory, as Sterrha has lately 

 been restricted to the sacraria group which violate the definition of the 

 subfamily and only very doubtfully belong to it ; but it seems to have 

 priority. 



The Cyllopodidae, as sometimes used, is a composite of yellow 

 species of this subfamily and Dioptidae: the latter are easily distin- 

 guished by the lack of tympanum and differently shaped abdomen, the 

 straight Sc of hind wing not connected with R, and fully developed 

 male hind legs, besides the usually longer upturned palpi and frequent 

 preservation of part of ist A in the fore wing. In a similar way the 

 more typical Dioptidae have often been confused with translucent- 

 winged Ennominae. 



5. In Paleacrita Sc and R of the hind wing are often more or 



