6 AMERICAN LEPIDOPTERA, 



Diraorphjie, Ptilodontes, Andinse and Apatelse. Stephens, Herrich- 

 SchafFer, Walker, and recently Smith, Packard and Oihers, include 

 the group under the term Notodontidse, Duponchel calls them 

 Dicranuridse and Pygaerides, Boisduval Bombycini and Pseudo- 

 bombycini and Newman Phalseina Notodontites. We will apply 

 here only the earlier name, that of Hiibner's Tentamen.* 



Genus NORRA€A Moore. 

 1881.— Moore, Proc. Zool. Soc. Loud. 340. 

 1892.— Hampsou, Moths of India, i, 137. 



Adequately described by Hampson. Type and sole species, N. 

 loiigipennls Moore. " Larva sphingiform, with a horn on anal seg- 

 ment" (eighth abdominal ?) 



Genus TURKACA Walker. 

 1864:. — Turnaca Walker, Cat. Lep. Brit. Mus. xxxii, 454. 

 1887.— Ambadra Cotes and Swinhoe, Cat. Moths of India, 183. 

 1892. — Turnaca Hampson, Moths of India, i, 136. 



Type and sole species, T. acuta Walker. 



Genus RARADESA Moore. 

 1883.— Moore, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 16. 

 1892.— Hampson, Moths of India, i, 131. 



Type and sole species, B. plumosa Moore. 



Genus HOPL.ITIS Hubner. 

 1818.— Hiibner, Verz. bek. Schmett., 147. 

 1853. — Hi/bncnmpa Lederer, Verb, zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, ii, 78. 

 1892. — [| Pheoda Hampson (in part). Moths of India, i, 160. 

 Palpi short, or longer and upturned : antennge of % with stiff pectinations on 

 the basal three-fourths, the tip serrate; shorter pectinate in the 9 ; fore wings 



* Those who refuse to recognize the Tentamen names base their objection to 

 them on the ground that the names are unaccompanied by description. Now, 

 while the abstract proposition that a generic or family name should be accom- 

 panied by a description to receive recognition would seem to command assent, 

 yet the difference between an undescribed genus and one insufficiently described 

 is so slight that I see no advantage in drawing a line between them. In the Le- 

 pidoptera, especially in the " Bombyces," the majority of genera are so described 

 as to be of no use to the monographer, and it becomes a question of examining 

 the type of each. Under these conditions Hiibner's Tentamen genera and the 

 families founded on them, though not described, have a better standing than 

 many modern genera, for they contain but a single species, usually a well known 

 and easily obtainable one and the type is never in doubt. 



Those who reject Hiibner, and especially those who, like Mr. Hampson reject 

 Verzeichniss names, which are really accompanied by description, should also 

 reject all of Walker's names and many of those of several other authors, and 

 this has never beea seriously proposed. 



