60 



MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 



ami tiatteiied, the .seyineiits very short in proportion to their width, tlie prothoracie sej;'iiieiit, 

 however, very long in proportion to the others, but the surlaee rou^h and cunugatcd, not with a 

 hard smooth dorsal plate, as in many Tineida-, Tortrieida-, Oossida-, etc., since it is not a boring 

 insect. The eight pairs of abdominal prop-like tubercles, which we should hardly regard as 

 homolognes of the abdominal legs, are, like those of the Panorpidie, simple tubercles armed 

 with a spine. Tlie tenth or last abdominal segment is armed witli a pair of dorsal spines, each 

 arising from a tubercle. The singular flattened and fluted set;e represented by Chapman are 

 imniue in lepidopterous larviv. He also describes a trefoil shaped sucker on the under side of 

 the innth and tenth abdominal segments, "very unusual," though as it api)ears to be paired it 

 does not seem to me, as Cliapman thinks, to indicate " a further jioint of relationship to Limacodids." 

 Dr. Chapman states tliat " tlie liead is retractile so far that it may occupy the interior of tlie 

 second thoracic segment," and ho says that " the antenniu are remarkably long for a lepidopterous 

 larva." He remarlcs that ''there are two strong mandibles, with four brown teeth," and adds: 



Two pairs of palpi are also visible — two and three-jointed — apparently those usual in Icpidopteious lar\M', hut 

 I have not defined their relations. There is also a central point (spinneret). 



I add rough sketches of the mouth parts, as far as I could draw them with the camera from 

 specimens mounted in balsam by Dr. Chapman. The labrnm (tig. 4, D Ibr.) is less divided than 



Fig. 4.— Head 111' larvii ol' Eriucephala calthella. A, anterior region enlarged; wd, mandible; 

 mx. niaxill:!; nul, ;intennii- ; sp. apiuncret .'; B. lat inaxilto ami 2d maxilla- Ip; C, the same; 

 D. lalirum Ulir). 



usual 111 lepidopterous larva', but is not, except in this respect, mucii uiilii<e that of Tineids eg. 

 Gracilaria (see Dimmock's fig. li, ]). 100, Psyche, iii). The four-jointed antenna' (tig. 4, ant.), 

 ending in two uneiiual seta', are of very unusual size and length, and so are tlie maxillary palpi 

 (fig. 4, m.v. }).), which are mucli larger tlian in any caterpilhir known to me, and are greatly 

 in disproportion to tlie maxillary lobes; the maxilla itself differs notably from that of other 

 caterpillars; what appears to be the lacinia is palpiform and two jointed. Tlie labium and its 

 palpi are much as in Oracilaria, but the palpi appear to be tliree-Joiiited, with a terminal bristle 

 (it is possible that there are but two joints). Unlike the larva of Micropteryx, that of Eriocephala 

 does not appear to possess a well-marked spinneret, while it is easy to see it in the former genus. 

 In Eriocephala I can only detect a lobe, whicii appears to be simply the rudiment (Anlage) of a 

 spinneret (unless the latter is in my specimens bent under the head); but this organ needs 

 further examination on fresh specimens. It would be interesting if it should be found that the 

 spinneret is in a generalized condition, as compared with that of Micropteryx, 



