300 



UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 207 



cent in both sexes. Labial palpus upturned, not reach- 

 ing vertex in male, extending slightly above in female. 

 Maxillary palpus minute, filiform. Forewing smooth; 

 9 veins; venation individually variable; vein 2 from 

 well before lower outer angle of cell; 4 absent; 3 and 5 

 from the lower angle of cell, normally closely approxi- 

 mate at base, occasionally connate or shortly stalked; 

 6 normally from below upper angle of cell and only 

 slightly curved towards base (nearly straight), occa- 

 sionally curved upward to the angle and closely approxi- 

 mate to 8; 8 and 9 united; 10 from the cell, separated 

 from 8 at base; male without costal fold. Hind wing 

 with vein 2 from well before lower outer angle of cell; 

 3 and 5 normally approximate at base, rarely connate 

 or very shortly stalked and, when so, usually on only 

 one hind wing of an individual specimen; 7 and 8 anasto- 

 mosed for most or all their lengths beyond cell; cell 

 about one-third the length of wing; discoceUular vein 

 curved. Abdomen of male with two pairs of short, sim- 

 ple, rather weak, dorsal hair tufts on eighth segment. 



Male genitalia with apical projection of gnathos a 

 very small, shortly bifm'cate hook. Transtilla incom- 

 plete, its elements long, slender, and widely separated 

 at their apices. Uncus long and moderately broad 

 (longer than tegumen), beyond its broad base slightly 

 tapering to rounded apical margin. Harpe elongate; 

 costa produced at apex into a short, free hook. Aedeagus 

 enlarged and ventrally cleft at apex. Vinculum stout, 

 but slightly longer than greatest width, tapering slightly 

 to broad terminal margin. 



Female genitalia with apophyses of ovipositor and 

 intersegmental area between ovipositor and eighth seg- 

 ment collar very long; ductus bursae membranous 

 throughout, strongly spined at junction with bursa; 

 genital opening simple and unsclerotized; signa present, 

 consisting of from one to four separate, more or less elon- 

 gate and angled discs; ductus seminalis from near 

 middle of bursa, approximate to signa. 



The generic separation of kuhniella from the other 

 stored-product insects of the Ephestia group requires 

 some justification in view of the close association of all 

 of them in habits, distribution, and indoor association; 

 but in any nice definition of Ephestia, kuhniella fits 

 very badly. On female genitalia it could squeeze into 

 Ephestia, even though its long extruded ovipositor sets 

 it apart; but on male characters it differs radically. It 

 has no trace of a costal fold, while this structure is 

 strongly developed in aU the true Ephestia. Its trans- 

 tiUa is not only incomplete but the elements are slender 

 and no wise enlarged, connected, or even approximate 

 at their apices, quite the opposite of the development of 

 that organ in Ephestia. Also its venation is erratic, 

 even for a phycitid. Veins 6 and 8 of forewing are 

 parallel from a short distance beyond cell as in Ephestia 

 as defined in this paper; but the condition of 3 and 5 of 

 fore and bind wings is variable to a degree not found in 

 the true Ephestias. In addition to its adult characters 

 kuhniella has the dorsum of the pupal thorax rugose. 

 In Ephestia the thorax of the pupa is smooth. Alto- 

 gether kuhniella is an aberrant species, probably of a 



different faunal origin from some, at least, of the 

 stored-product Ephestia species. Both they and kuh- 

 niella are obviously of Old World origin. From all 

 available evidence the true home of kuhniella seems to 

 be the Mediterranean region, probably Asia Minor, as 

 suggested in 1930 by both Lebedev and Klemm. 



622. Anagasta kuhniella (Zeller) 

 Figures 626, 1124 



Ephestia kuhniella Zeller, Stettiner, Ent. Zeit., vol. 40, p. 466, 

 1879.— Snellen, Tijds. voor Ent., vol. 28, p. 237, 1885.— 

 Barrett, Ent. Monthly Mag., vol. 23, p. 255, 1887.— Klein, 

 Proc. Ent. Soc. London, p. lii, 1887. — Omerod, Insect Life, 

 vol. 1, p. 314, 1889. — Fletcher, Ent. Soc. Ontario, Twentieth 

 Ann. Rept., p. 95, 1889. Insect Life, vol 2, p. 187, 1889; 

 Canadian Ent., vol. 22, p. 41, 1890.— Hulst, Phycitidae of 

 N. Amer., p. 198, 1890; U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 52, p. 435, 

 1903.— Riley, Insect Life, vol. 5, p. 276, 1892.— Danysz, 

 Mem. de Lab. Parasit. v§g. Bourse de Commerce, vol. 1, 

 pp. viii-58, 1893. — Howard, Insect Life, vol. 7, p. 416, 

 1895. — Johnson, in Forbes, Nineteenth report of the State 

 Entomologist on the noxious and beneficial insects of the 

 State of Illinois, 65 pp., 1895-1896. — Druce, Biologia-Cen- 

 trali Americana, Lepidoptera, Heterocera, vol. 2, p. 286, 

 1896.— Fuller, Agr. Gaz. New South Wales, vol. 7, pp. 444^453, 

 1896.— Lounsbury, Ent. News, vol. 10, p. 291, 1899.— 

 Hampson in Ragonot, Monograph, pt. 2, p. 279, 1901. — 

 Carpenter, Econ. Proc. Roy. Dublin Soc, vol. 1, p. 209, 

 1903. — Barrett, Lepidoptera of the British Islands, vol. 10, 

 p. 54, 1905. — Spuler, Die Schmetterlinge Europas, vol. 2, 

 p. 201, 1910.— Mosher, Bull. Illinois State Lab. Nat. Hist., 

 vol. 12, p. 24, fig. 74, 1916. — Durant and Beveridge, Journ. 

 Roy. Army Med. Corps., vol. 20, pp. 615-634, 1913; reprint 

 with notes, Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), London, 1918. — Burk- 

 hardt, Zeitschr. Angew. Ent., Berlin, vol. 6, pp. 25-60, 

 1919 (biology). — Whiting, Journ. Exp. Zool., vol. 28, pp. 

 413-441 (genetics).— Forbes, Cornell Mem. 68, p. 635, 

 1923.— Curran, Sci. Agr., vol. 6, p. 385, 1926.— Hering, Anz. 

 fiir Schadlingsk., vol. 2, p. 139, 1926. — Richardson, Journ. 

 Agr. Res., vol. 32, p. 895, 1926.— White, Proc. Ent. Soc. 

 Washington, vol. 29, p. 147, 1927.— Candura, Boll. Lab. 

 Zool. Portici, vol. 21, p. 149, 1928. — Hudson, Butterflies and 

 moths of New Zealand, p. 156, 1928. — Meyrick, Revised 

 handbook of British Lepidoptera, p. 389, 1928. — Ktihn and 

 Henke, Ges. Wiss. Gottingen, Math. Phys., Abh., new ser., 

 vol. 15, 121 pp., 1929 (physiology). — Brindley, Ent. Soc. 

 Amer. Ann., vol. 23, p. 740, 1930.— Klemm, Mitt. Ges. 

 Vorratsschutz, vol. 6, p. 26, 1930. — Lebedev, Zeitschr. 

 Angew. Ent., Berlin, vol. 6, pp. 697-605, 1930.— Noyes, Bull. 

 Ent. Res., vol. 21, p. 77, 1930. — Richards and Herford, Ann. 

 Appl. Biol., vol. 17, p. 380, 1930.— Clausen, U. S. Dep. Agr. 

 circ. 168, p. 92, 1931 (Japanese record). — Richards and 

 Thomson, Trans. Ent. Soc. London, vol. 80, p. 177, 1932.— 

 Norris, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, pp. 697-611, 1932; pp. 

 903-934, 1933; pp. 333-360, 1934.— Dickins, Trans. Ent. 

 Soc. London, vol. 85, p. 333, 1936. — Busnel, Rev. Path. 

 Veg. et Ent. Agr. France, pp. 137-162, Apr. 1937 flarval 

 anatomy and physiology). — Lehmensick and Liebers, Zeits. 

 angew. Ent., Berlin, vol. 24, p. 442, 1937 (egg). — Pierce and 

 Metcalf, Genitalia of the British Pyrales, p. 7, 1938. — Mc- 

 Dunnough, Check list. No. 6399, 1939.— Corbet and Tams, 

 Entomologist, vol. 78, p. 87, 1945. 



Ephestia fuscofasciella Ragonot, N. Amer. Phycitidae, p. 17, 

 1887.— Hulst, Phycitidae of N. Amer., p. 198, 1890.— 

 Hampson, in Ragonot, Monograph, pt. 2, p. 278, 1901. 



Ephestia gitonella Druce, Biologia Centrali-Americana, Lepi- 

 doptera, Heterocera, vol. 2, p. 286, 1896. 



Ephestia sericaria Authors (not Scott), Ragonot, Bull. Soc. Ent. 

 France, vol. 61, p. cclxxiv, 1892. — Richards and Thomson, 



