24 



■UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 207 



a race of Hulst's species; but with our present knowl- 

 edge we must retain it as a distinct species. 



40. Acrobasis tumidulella (Ragonot), new combination 

 FiGTJBE 645 



Cateremna tumidulella Ragonot, N. Amer. Phycitidae, p. 13, 



1887. 

 Seneca tumidulella (Ragonot) Hulst, Phycitidae of N. Amer., p. 



178, 1890. 

 Hyphantidium tumidulellum (Ragonot) Hampson, in Ragonot, 



Monograph, pt. 2, p. 74, 1901. — McDunnough, Check list, 



No. 6321, 1939. 



This species was based on a single female with the 

 habitus and raised-scale ridge of an Acrobasis but with 

 vein 4 absent from hind wing. Bourgogne informs me 

 that the venation is alike on both hind wings. On the 

 strength of this venation the species was referred to 

 Group II of the Phycitinae and made the type of Hulst's 

 Seneea. However, I am firmly convinced that the speci- 

 men is nothing but an Acrobasis with abnormal venation, 

 another of those freaks that turn up all too frequently in 

 the Phycitidae. I have examined the female genitaUa of 

 the type (figured here) and can find nothing to distin- 

 guish them from those of caryimrella. I suspect that 

 tumidvlella is nothing more than an abnormal specimen 

 of caryivorella; but we shall have to await final disposi- 

 tion of the name imtil a similar freak male is recovered 

 from the type locahty. 



Type locality: Florida (type in Paris Mus.). 



Food plant: Unknown. 



3. Genus Rhodophaea Guenee 



Rhodophaea Gu§n6e, Ann. Soc. Ent. France, ser. 2, vol. 3, p. 312, 

 1845; Europaeorum Microlepidopterorum index methodi- 

 cus . . . , p. 74, 1845. — Ragonot, Ent. Monthly Mag., vol. 

 22, p. 19, 1885; Monograph, pt. 1, p. 63, 68, 1893. (Type 

 of genus; Phycis advenella Zincken; figs. 166, 649.) 



Characters of Acrobasis except: Male antenna simple, 

 basal segment cylindrical, no sinus in base of shaft; 

 forewing always smooth; vein 2 of forewing from ceU 

 before lower outer angle, but somewhat nearer the 

 angle than in Acrobasis; male genitaha with apical 

 process of gnathos an elongate hook (partially divided 

 on advenella) ; eighth abdominal segment of male simple 

 or (on advenella) with midventral hair tuft. 



This genus is distinguished from the smooth-winged 

 species of Acrobasis only by its simple male antenna. 

 Our two American species do not go any too well with 

 advenella, the European type of the genus, differing in 

 having an undivided apical projection from gnathos 

 and simple eighth abdominal segment. However, in 

 these characters they agree with other obviously con- 

 generic European species, marmorea (Haworth), lega- 

 teUa (Hiibner), suavella (Zincken). B. advenella has a 

 somewhat differently shaped transtilla from caliginella, 

 supposita, and the three aforementioned European 

 species. In all of these the terminal margin of trans- 

 tiUa is more or less indented (as in Acrobasis) while in 

 advenella it is rather deeply U-shaped. 



None of the American species that hitherto have been 



listed imder Rhodophaea belongs there. They have 

 entirely different genitaha. 



41. Rhodophaea caliginella (Hulet), new combination 



Figure 647 



Nephopteryx caliginella Hulst, Ent. Amer., vol. 3, p. 131, 1887; 



vol. 5, p. 156, 1889. 

 Mineola caliginella (Hulst), Phycitidae of N. Amer., p. 128, 



1890; U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 52, p. 419, 1902.— Barnes and 



McDunnough, Contributions, vol. 4, p. 174, 1918. — 



McDunnough, Check list. No. 6113, 1939. 

 Acrobasis caliginella (Hulst) Ragonot, Monograph, pt. 1, p. 115, 



1893. 

 Myelois caliginoidella Dyar, Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington, vol. 7, 



p. 33, 1905.— McDunnough, Check hst. No. 6072, 1939. 



(New synonymy.) 



Similar in color and markings to Acrobasis comptella 

 Kagonot except that the narrow black line outwardly 

 bordering the whitish basal area of forewing does not 

 extend all the way to inner margin. This slight dif- 

 ference in macidation seems to be constant and will 

 distinguish the females of the two species which, other- 

 wise, are difficult to tell apart. Alar expanse, 18-25 

 mm. 



Type localities: Arizona (caliginella, in AMNH, 

 ex Rutgers); Santa Clara, Calif, (caliginoidella, in 

 USNM). 



Food plant: Scrub oak. This host record from 

 reared specimens in National Collection received from 

 Commander Dammers, Riverside, Calif., June 1938. 



Distribution: California, Alma (Aug.), Atascadero 

 (July), Los Angeles County (July), Riverside (June), 

 San Diego (May, June, July, Aug.), Santa Clara; 

 Arizona. 



In addition to the female type in the Rutgers Col- 

 lection there is also a female from Arizona ("7810") in 

 the National Collection bearing Hulst's "type" label. 

 This specimen was originally in the Fernald Collection. 

 A female from Cahfornia donated by Hulst to the 

 Brookl3Ti Museum Collection and twice labeled "Acro- 

 basis comptella" in his and Ragonot's handwriting is 

 also in the National Museum. This specimen, except 

 that it lacks an abdomen, is in good condition. It is 

 certainly caliginella and presumably was responsible 

 for Hulst's sjTionymizing of caliginella and comptella. 

 The males of caliginella have hitherto been known as 

 caliginoidella Dyar. Hulst evidently never saw a male 

 of his species. 



42. Rhodophaea supposita (Heinrich), new combination 



FiQUEEs 167, 648 



Mineola supposita Heinrich, Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington, vol. 

 42, p. 33, 1940. 



Foreiving very dark grayish fuscous with a powder- 

 ing of white scales on basal and midcostal areas and 

 very faintly in the area bordering terman; antemedial 

 line narrow, slanting from inner third of costa to just 

 before middle of inner margin, sUghtly notched at 

 vein lb, pale ashy gray bordered inwardly from top of 

 cell to inner margin by a dull red triangular patch which 

 has an obscure, straight, blackish hue along its inner 



