—73- 



Note on the Genus Platythyris, 

 By a. R. Grote, A. M. 



In an article, Enlo, Am., Vol. IV, p. 27, speaking of the above 

 genus, Mr. J. B. Smith, the author, says, that this genus contradicts 

 nearly every family character of the Thyridce, to which Groie and Robin- 

 son referred it. Boisduval, I believe, figured a species of this genus as 

 Thyris vitrina. Dr. Clemens described the genus as l)elonging to the 

 Turtricidce. Since we figured the more common species I have stated in 

 print several times that the genus possihl}- belongs t<^) the Noc/uidce and 

 I found allied Asiatic forms in the British Museum (as far as 1 recollect 

 Felder figures one), recorded under the generic title Varnia. Consult 

 our paper in Trans. Am. Ento. Society u])on INIr. Walker's types. Dr. 

 Clemens describes the singular larva o'i PI ahihyr is {Dysodea is, I believe, 

 preoccupied), and his description (Proc. Acatl. N. S. Phil., i860, p. 350) 

 says that the larva is quite as peculiar as the perfect insect. The larva 

 has a disagreeable odor and makes a c^ne cm Eupatorium agcraloides. 

 This accords with Thyris larva in a vt-r\ strddng manner, as cited by Mr. 

 Smith in the article referred to above. We made a tribal or subfamily 

 division of the Thyrid<e on account of the contiadictory characters, viz: 

 Platythyrini ox PlcUythyrincs 2.QCOX^\\vj,'A.<. \\^ XAX\V the division. In my 

 opinion (I have no specimens at the moment) the moth may remain as 

 we placed it, until its full characters be compared with the NochndcP. It 

 is not a Toririx, as Clemens described it. In a letter to me Dr. Clemens 

 stated that he could not retnember his gnmnds for putting the moth in 

 the ToriricidcP. He recognized the moth from our figure in the Annals 

 of the N. Y. Lyceum and wrote that, widi our different estimate of its 

 structure, we were pardonable in not recognizing his description of it 

 previously under the Tortricid<£. I judged from his letter, that he was 

 satisfied he was wrong in his classification of the moth, and that the in- 

 sect belonged, if not to the T'-^tv/f/c?, at least to the Macrolepidoptera. 

 We afterwards made the synonymical reference and, on account oi Dy- 

 sodea being used, retained for our P. /asciaia the name Platythyris ocu- 

 latana, Clem. Staudinger credits Boisduval's species, described from 

 Spain, to North America. I think this is surmise, perhaps an erroneous 

 surmise. There is no reason why Platythyris should not be R)und in 

 Southern Europe. As far as I recollect, Boisduval's figure does not cor- 

 respond with our North American Phitytlyris uculatana. In any event 

 we have to do with a singular form but there is no reason, I think, for 

 separating it as a family. It agrees well enough as a subfamily of the 

 Thyridce, until we have more information, to which fainil) we were the 

 more disposed to refer it since Boisduval preceded us. 



