586 Dr. Thomas Algernon Chapman on the 



stage 1, with traces of the outer series of crochets in the 

 adult larva, prove that it cannot be closely associated 

 with any other Macro-heterocera,and whether we associate 

 it with the Bombyces or Geometrre, it must have 

 departed from the main stem very low down, probably so 

 low that it would hardly be correct to recognise the stem 

 so low down by its Macro name. 



Mr. Dyar associates the Drepanulids with the CTCometra?, 

 the fashion of the young larvas fastening leaves together 

 flatly (like Cymatophorids) is the only character that is 

 difficult to recognise, as, perchance, Bombycine. 



On submitting an outline of this classification, by ova, 

 to jNIr. Dyar, it appears from the short criticism with 

 which he favours me, that it substantially agrees with 

 his larval classification, except on one point — that is, the 

 position of the Lasiocawpidie, which he derives from the 

 Notodontidx. This, 1 find it extremely difficult to 

 agree with, I find a great many points in the Notodontid 

 pupa, in which it agrees with the Lasiocamps, so many 

 as to prevent my saying there may not be some way of 

 reconciling the differences. But I certainly do not see 

 any, and think the agreements are instances of parallel 

 variation or evolution, the two families being at very 

 nearly the same level on their respective stems. 



Mr. Dyar derives Lasiocampids from Notodonts. The 

 ^otodonts are higher in having les< mobile pup^e and 

 in having a vertical e^g. Since the flat egg is probably 

 the earlier form, it is improbable to a degree, for which 

 impossible might not be too strong a term, that it should 

 revert I'rom the upright form in Notodonts to a flat one 

 in Lasiocamps. 



The Noiodontai< are, therefore, claimed both by Mr. 

 Meyrick and Mr. Dyar as presenting an instance of a 

 jper solium transition from a flat to a vertical egg, or 

 vice versa, but with very different results as to the 

 positions in which they place it. Whilst admitting that 

 the conclusions I derive from egg structure will probably 

 have to be largely modified by the acquisition of wider 

 knowledge and a closer comparison with other structures, 

 I do not think they will be so far overturned as to justify 

 the position assigned to the Notodontids, beside Lasio- 

 campa by Mr. Dyar, or beside Geometras by Mr. Meyrick, 

 their results being as mutually incompatible as they are 

 "with mine. Mr. Meyrick placing Notodonta amongst 



