2 BULLETIN 1273, TJ. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGEICTJLTTJEE 



In 1856 Fitch (7, p. 343-346) mentioned it under the name 

 Spilonota oculana and stated that it was probably identical with 

 ocellana D. & S., luscana Fab., and comitana Htibner, Stephens, and 

 others. In 1860 Clemens (5) described the species under the name 

 Hedya pyrifoliana. In 1869 (#), in reply to a Pennsylvania corre- 

 spondent of the American Entomologist, it was stated that larvse 

 which had been sent in for determination were probably Spilonota 

 oculana (Harris), and that the species did not occur in the West. 

 In 1871 the bud moth was reported in Ontario, and in mention of 

 the species in 1885 Fletcher {12) expressed the opinion that hiberna- 

 tion occurred in the larval stage in tiny silken nests on the branches 

 of the apple trees. This observation was verified by others during 

 the course of the next few years. In 1888 Fernald {13) recom- 

 mended the use of Paris green for the control of the pest, and 

 in a bulletin published in 1891 {15) gave considerable historical 

 information and added to our knowledge of the biology of the 

 species. About this time the bud moth was reported from numerous 

 additional localities in the New England States, New York, Ohio, 

 and Michigan. 



In 1893 Slingerland {16) published an extensive and accurate 

 account of the bud moth, and, since the publication of his work, 

 increasingly frequent mention has been made of the species in 

 experiment station bulletins and other entomological literature. 



About 1895 {17) the bud moth was reported from Genesee, Idaho, 

 from St. Elmo, British Columbia, and within the next few years 

 from numerous localities in the adjoining States of Montana, Wash- 

 ington, and Oregon, and from new localities in British Columbia. 



In connection with experimental work carried on by the Bureau 

 of Entomology in Michigan in 1913, Scott and Paine {18) undertook 

 a study of a species of larva working in apple buds, assumed at that 

 time to be the only bud moth. Before the investigation had pro- 

 gressed very far, however, the discovery was made that the insect 

 under observation was not Spilonota ocellana, but an entirely dis- 

 tinct species, which was later identified as Recurvaria nanella 

 (Hbn.) to which was given the name " the lesser bud moth." This 

 species has been reported from numerous localities from Maryland 

 to Nova Scotia, and westward to Michigan. The life history of the 

 lesser bud moth parallels rather closely that of the true bud moth 

 during the winter and early spring. In early spring the work in 

 the foliage is most noticeable, and without doubt more or less of the 

 injury attributed to Spilonota ocellana in the eastern portion of its 

 range has in reality been the work of the lesser bud moth. 



In 1919 Sanders and Dustan {2%) published an account of the 

 bud moths in Nova Scotia, and added two more species, Cacoecia 

 rosaceana (Harris) and OletJireutes consanguinana Wlsm., to the 

 two already known to winter as larvae in silken hibernacula and to 

 feed in the unfolding buds in the spring. 



SYNONYMY 



The following list of synonyms does not include all of the nu- 

 merous genera to which the species has been referred from time to 

 time. In recent years the species for the most part has been incor- 



