NORTH AMERICAN EUCOSMINAE. 271 



Paratype.—C2.i. No. 25623, U.S.N.M. 



Type locality. — Mineral King, Tulare County, California. 



Food plant. — Unknown. 



Described from type and male paratype both from the type local- 

 ity and labeled " Aug.. 1-7 " and " July 16-23." Nearest to roess- 

 leri Zeller; but distinguished from it by the lack of any white shad- 

 ing on basal costal area, by the distinguishable median fascia of 

 fore wing, the darker cilia of hind wings, and the fewer cornuti (10) 

 on penis. In our key it would fall between roessleri and a^phodetr 

 ana. From the latter it is distinguished by the contrasted pale 

 markings on fore wing near tornus. It also has fewer cornuti than 

 aspliodelana.^ which in this character agrees with roessleri. 



Genus HENDECANEURA Walsingham. 



(Figs. 429, 430.) 



Genotype. — Ilendecaneura impar Walsingham. 



In working up the Laspeyresiinae I find that one of the species 

 at present listed under Laspeyresia {shawiana Kearfott) is a true 

 Eucosmine and referable to Walsingham's Hendecaneura. This 

 genus, though somewhat incorrectly defined by its author, is easily 

 identified on venation. I have seen no males of the type species; 

 but there is in the national collection a female cotype of H. impar 

 and both males and females of shawiana. There can be no doubt 

 that the two species are congeneric. The following description is 

 based upon the male of shawia7ia and females of both shawiana and 

 impar: 



Fore wing smooth; termen very slightly concave between veins 

 3 and 6; male with 11 veins; 12 absent; 11 from cell near base; 7 

 and 8 separate; female with 12 veins, all separate; 11 from cell at 

 or a trifle before middle ; in both sexes, 3, 4, and 5 are but slightly 

 approximate at termen, 2 is straight and the upper internal vein 

 of cell is absent ; male with a short appressed costal fold. 



Hind wing with 8 veins ; 3 and 4 stalked ; 5 decidedly bent toward 

 base, approximate to 4 ; 6 and 7 stalked. 



Male genitalia as in Zeiraphera except that neck of harpe is longer 

 and neck incurvation more pronounced. 



Walsingham is obviously in error in interpreting the absent costal 

 vein in fore wing of the male as 9. Vein 12 is much reduced in a num- 

 ber of species of Epiblema and ^wcosma and is of ten entirely hidden 

 under the fold. This together with the fact that all the remaining 

 costal veins in Hendecaneura spring from cell shows that it must 

 be 12 which is absent. Walsingham is also wrong in stating that 6 

 and 7 of hind wing are " nearly coincident along their base." In the 



