NEW YORK STATE MUSEUM 



trt-es, the leaves of which they devour. This species, in conjunction with 

 X y 1 i n a laticinerea Grote and X. grotei Riley, was reported in 

 1896 by Professor Slint^erland of the Cornell Agricultural Experiment 

 Station, as quite injurious to fruits in the State, more specially in the 

 western jnirt. Extensive injuries to apples in Orleans county, N. Y., were 

 also reported to I)r Howard the same year. Previous to that, there had 

 been but one record of injuries in New York by this species and that was 

 in 1877. In other States there have been a few instances of these insects 

 attacking fruits. In 1870, I)r Riley received several complaints of injury 

 by the larvae of this insect to peaches and apples. In 1888, it was some- 

 what injurious to apples and a bulUttin by Prof. ¥. H. Hillman, of the 

 Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station, records serious injuries in 1890 

 to roses by th(; same insect. 



Description. The larvae of this species are stout, smooth, liglit green, 

 cutworm-like caterpillars measuring from i to i'< inches in length when 

 full grown. The head is pale yellowish green. There is a ratlier broad 

 yellowish white or wiiite dc^rsal stripe along tiie body, a narrower wliiie 

 subdorsal stripe, a broken, faint lateral stripe of the same color and an 

 irregular white stigmatal stripe. The tubercles are rather large and white, 

 and the skin is minutely spotted with the same color. Professor .Slinger- 

 land [see citation I states that in the larvae of X. grote i both edges of 

 the stigmatal stripe are well defined, while in those of X. a n t e n n a t a the 

 upper edge is much broken or indcnletl. He finds that the subdorsal stripe 

 is more continuous in the latter, it being composed of three or four irregular 

 spots on each segment in X. grotei. He separates the larvae of 

 X. laticinerea from those of X. antennata bv the position of the 

 stigmatal stripe, which is just above the spiracles, except the one at each 

 extremity, in the former species, while in the latter it is mostly below the 

 spiracles. 



The moth | pi. 43, fig. 6] is ashy gray with indistinct, rather variable 

 markings. Sometimes it resembles X. laticinerea so closely that only 

 an authority on the family can separate the species. So close is the resem- 



