106 Dr. Chapman on some neglected points 
facts that would actually contradict an addition to the de- 
finition of Obtecte and Incomplete that would state the 
former to be without maxillary palpi, the latter to have 
them, or some trace of them at least, in the pupa state. 
The very simple maxillary palpi of Pyrales would 
appear to be an exception to this. They are less ap- 
parent in the pupa than in the imago. ‘Traces at least 
of jointed maxillary palpi always exist in a Micro pupa. 
The development of the maxillary palpi will deserve a 
special research. Lithocolletes is the only form of In- 
complete, except Pterophorus, and in some degree Zygena, 
in which the ‘‘ eye-collar” is difficult to detect in the 
pupa, whilst many families possess a largely-developed 
‘“ eye-collar,” whose imagines have no maxillary palpi. 
In these there exists, therefore, theoretically, a 5- or 
6-jointed maxillary palpi. In Obtecte no maxillary palpi 
are seen in the pupa, and in those Pyraloids that possess 
one it is small and simple, and does not reach the surface 
in the pupa. 
I have suggested that these characters probably have 
much value for purposes of classification. This idea 
arises from the circumstance that they are apparently 
very constant throughout each family, and thus suggest 
a classification that happens to be nearly identical with 
that now accepted; that they confirm certain more or 
less recent movements of groups or families to fresh 
positions; and that where they are at variance with 
accepted classification, it is usually with reference to 
small groups whose present position is already held to 
be open to much doubt. 
The true Macros are at once separable from the re- 
maining Obtecte by a larval character, but I have not 
succeeded in determining a corresponding character in 
the pupa. In the Macros proper the full-grown larva 
has the hooks of the abdominal (4 ventral pairs) prolegs 
developed only along their inner margin, whilst in the 
remainder (Pyraloids ?) the hooks form a complete circle 
on the four pairs in 7, 8, and 9, and 10 segments (8, 
4,5, and 6 abdominal). Iam not aware that any abso- 
lute diagnosis of Macro-Heterocera has hitherto been 
given, though every tyro believes in its existence. 
The structure of the prolegs has received too little 
attention, and I do not know that anyone has noted that 
it differs in different families. A.S. Packard, in a recent 
