RILEY REMARKS ON CANKER-WORMS, ETC. 273 



Remarks on Canker-worms and Description of a new 

 genus of PhalcBuidiB. 



By Chas. V. Riley. 

 [Read Oct. 18, 1875.] 



From the time when Wm. Dandridge Peck published (in 1795) 

 his essay on the Canker-worm, which received a prize from the 

 Massachusetts Society for Promoting Agriculture, up to the 

 year 1873, all writers on the subject spoke of the the Canker- 

 worm under the impression that there was but one species. Nev- 

 ertheless two very distinct species have been confounded under 

 this name. The first intimation we have of there being two spe- 

 cies is where Harris — after describing at length, as the Canker- 

 worm Moth, not the species first called the Canker-worm by Peck, 

 but the larger species {pometaria) here treated of — uses the fol- 

 lowing language : "Specimens of a rather smaller size are some- 

 times found, resembling the figure and description given by Prof. 

 Peck, in which the whitish bands and spots are wanting, and 

 there are three interrupted, dusky lines across the fore-wings, 

 with an oblique, blackish dash near the tip. Perhaps they con- 

 stitute a difterent species from that of the true Canker-zvorm 

 itioth. Should this be the case, the latter may be called Ani- 

 sopteryx pometaria."* The portions of this passage which I h.ave 

 italicized are well calculated to mislead, for the term "true Can- 

 ker-worm ]Moth," should only apply, in justice, to that described 

 as such by Prof. Peck, and not, as Harris here applies it, to the 

 other species. Indeed, most subsequent writers, including Fitch, 

 Packard, Mann, and myself,t were misled by the language, and 

 took it for granted that the name pometaria was proposed for 

 the smaller form — a mistake first clearly pointed out by Mr. H. 

 K. Morrison, of Cambridge.^ 



So long as the male moths only were carelessly compared, 

 there was always a question as to whether the differences were 

 varietal or specific — ist, because the general resemblance is 

 strong ; 2nd, because each species varies considerably both in 

 size and ornamentation ; 3rd, because the wing-scales, especially 



* Insects Injurious to Vegetation, 3rd ed. p. 462. 



t Vide Fitch, Rep. III. § 38; Packard's Guide, 3rd ed. p. 324; Mann, Proc. Bost. Soc. 

 Xat. Hist., -w. p. 3S2. 



\ Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist,, vol, xvi. p. 204. 



iii— 18 [^"^- S. >87S-] 



