! 
62 TRANSACTIONS OF THE [Nov. 12, 
in the rest of the Noctuina, the Sphingina, Rhopalocera and 
Saturnina. Evidently there is no more than a general corres- 
pondence here, and the Saturnina are again the worst stumbling 
block. It is possible that the consolidation of tubercles iv and 
vy in the Saturnina has occurred independently of the same 
process in the two lowest superfamilies ; and this would seem to 
be indicated by the entirely different method employed in get- 
ting rid of tubercle ii. But, if this is so, we have again to con- 
tend with the contradiction furnished by the Lacosomide, and 
to suppose that the process of modification of these moths has 
been likewise entirely independent, while so closely parallel to 
the Saturnina. This supposition I was obliged to make in my 
former paper. 
I am inclined to the opinion that the veins of the wings alone 
are not adequate to give a natural classification of the Lepidop- 
tera.* That is, certain lines of specialization give the same 
ultimate structure, though acting on phylogenetically dissimilar 
groups, and that the true relationships may be thus obscured. 
As far as I have gone the arrangement of the tubercles of the 
larvee gives remarkably absolute “characters (except when the 
primitive first stage is lost). This is not the case with the 
presence of vein 1 ¢, the primary division according to venation. 
Vein 1e¢ is a more or less gradually evanescent character, 
generally tending to disappear as soon as specialization sets in. 
The position of vein 5 is probably constant after it has once 
taken up a positive direction of migration ; but it seems prob- 
able that it has remained neutral till late in the history of . 
several groups and subsequently produced several parallel lines 
of modification. This seems to me to be the explanation of the 
strange mixture of families found in Mr. Hampson’s last section. 
Prof. 8. F. Clark, “ On the breeding habits of the Alligator,” 
noting occurrence of nests, character of eggs, and collecting 
methods. 
Prof. H. F. Osborn exhibited and described the skull struc- 
ture of Titanotheres (specimens recently collected by Dr. Wort- 
man and Mr. Plummer), and commented on the mode of evolu- 
*Prof. Smith remarks: “‘....... I do not believe that the present basis for our classi- 
fication is a correct one ....... the entire external skeleton of the Lepidoptera has 
received practically no consideration ....... ” (Entom. News., V. 240; 1894). 
+I think the Pyralide illustrate the superiority of the larval tubercles as characters 
of classification. Mr. Hampson places the Pyralids in the Macrolepidoptera because 
vein 1 ¢ has disappeared on the fore wings, though it is still present on the hind wings. 
Dr. Chapman would have to place them part in the Macros, part in the Micros, 
because the crotchets on the larval prolegs form a complete circle in most, but only a 
part circle in others. From the larval tubercles, the Pyralids are all true Micros. 
