NORTH AMERICAN LASPEYRESIINAE AND OLETHREUTINAE 139 



8. EXARTEMA ELECTROFUSCUM Heiurich 



(Figs. 14, 75, 215) 



Exartema electrofusctcm Heinbich, Proc. Eut. Soc. Washington, vol. 25, 



1923, p. 110. 



Cymolomia elcctrofusca Forbes, Memoir, 68, Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta., 



1924, p. 464. 



Male and female genitalia figured from paratypes in National Col- 

 lection; male from Center Harbor, N. H. and female from Lake- 

 hurst N. J. 



Bursa of female without signum. 



Distribution. — New Jersey, New Hampshire, Massachusetts. 



Alar expanse. — 15-17 mm. 



Type. — In American Museum. 



Type locality. — Lakehurst, N. J. 



Food plant. — Sweet Fern. 



9. EXARTEMA RUSTICANUM McDunnough 



(Fig. 79) 



Exartema rtisticanum McDunnough, Can. Ent., vol. 54, 1922, p. 38. 

 Cymolomia rusticana Forbes, Memoir 68, Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta., 

 1924, p. 463 



Known only from the type and paratypes in the Canadian and 

 Barnes collections, all from the type locality. In the male genitalia 

 hardly to be distinguished from zeUerianum of which it may indeed 

 be a western race. It lacks, however, the decidedly ferruginous tint 

 in pale areas of the fore wing so characteristic of Zeller's species. 



Harpe of male genitalia figured from paratype in collection Barnes. 



Alar expanse.— 15-lQ mm. 



Type. — In Canadian National Collection. 



Type locality. — Onah, Manitoba. 



10. EXARTEMA ZELLERIANUM (Fernald) 



(Figs 63, 203) 



Exartema nitidanum Zeller (not Clemens), Verb. Zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, 



vol. 25, 1875. p. 270. 

 Eccopsis zelleriana Fernald, Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc, vol. 10, 1882, p. 29. 

 Exartema zellerianum Fernald, in Dyar List N. Amer. Lepid., no. 5014, 



1903, — Barnes and McDunnough, Check List Lepld. Bor. Amer., no. 



6797, 1917. 

 Cymolomia zelleriana Forbes, Memoir 68, Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta., 



1924, p. 465. 



What this name really stands for is doubtful. Zeller described 

 and figured what he took to be a specimen of nitidanum Clemens. 

 He evidently had not seen the type and was misled by Clemens' 

 faulty description; for what he figured under that name was not 



