MACRO-PSYCHINA. 265 



the discoidal cell present whilst the Macro-Psychids never have it, 

 though they may have remains of the secondary cell formed by the 

 bifurcation of the median nervure (when it branches before leaving the 

 discoidal cell), i.e., the "cellula intrusa " of Heylaerts. The Macro- 

 Psychids form Hiibner's Canephorae-verae (Verzeichniss, pp. 399-400), 

 which he subdivides into : 



(1) Steeehopterices — with Sterrhopterix vestitella Fab. (graminella, Bork., 

 Hub.), and S. calvella, Ochs. (hirsutella, Hb.). 



(2) Leptopterices — with Leptopterix hirsutella, S.V. (viciella, Hb., fig. 3), 

 and L. viciella, S.V., Hb., fig. 280. 



(3) Phalaceopteeices — with Phalacropterix vitrella (alburnea, Esp.,), P. 

 fucella (apiformis, Eossi), and P. muscella, S.V., Hb. 



(4) Epichnopteeices — with Epichnoptcrix pennella, Hb., plumigerella, Hb., 

 plumella, S.V., pectinella, S.V., nitidella, Hb., and bombycella, S.V. 



It will be noticed that the Epichnopterices are peculiarly hetero- 

 generic, containing representatives of Heterogynis, Epiehnopterix, 

 Bijugis, Fumea, &c. Eoughly they form Herrich-Schaffer's Canephor- 

 idae, in which, however, the latter includes the Lypusids. We have 

 already pointed out (ante, pp. 118 et seq.), how, according to the views 

 of various authors, the two genera Epiehnopterix and Fumea have see- 

 sawed between the Tineids and the Bombyces, when such authors have 

 considered a subdivision of the superfamily into Tineid and Bombycid 

 sections necessary, even when they have had no doubt that the other 

 Macro-Psychids belonged to the more specialised Bombycid group. 

 We have also shown (loc. cit.) that some authors have separated the 

 Micro- and Macro-Psychid sections on grounds that they themselves 

 regarded as superficial, and some (e.g., Herrich-Schaffer) have stated 

 plainly that the genera they have removed to the Tineids " agree in 

 mode of life and form of ? almost exactly with Psyche," and that 

 " the wide separation made is only due to the artificial system of 

 classification and to the impossibility of a linear arrangement." How- 

 ever much may be said for the union, by these authors, of the Fumeids 

 with the Micro-Psychid group, owing to their araneiform females, one 

 is at a loss to understand how the Epichnopterygids, with their 

 vermiform females, have shared the same fate. 



Probably no author has had a better general grip of this super- 

 family than Hofmann, who in the Bed. Ent. Zeitsehrift, 1860, 

 published a really good account of a large number of the European 

 species, the part least satisfactorily dealt with, perhaps, being the 

 larger Psyehidae. Accepting the whole superfamily Psychides as a 

 natural group, he points out that the mode of life and the peculiar 

 structure of the females show that they cannot be really separated, and 

 that the great confusion in their classification has arisen from the 

 attempt to classify them from the males and cases, whilst the females 

 have the greatest value in exhibiting their relationships, this being 



as changes that have been attained because advantageous, although the general 

 evolutionary progress has gone no further, and the individuals are, except in these 

 particulars, somewhat generalised forms. Dissoctena appears to have obtained 

 specialised antennte very early, and also to have become in some measure 

 specialised as to neuration, whilst other genera that began by leaving the ? pupa 

 in the puparium, have not only afterwards and separately gained their particular 

 specialised features but have advanced beyond them. Its isolated specialisations 

 cannot be brought into line with the similar ones of the Macro-Psychids, unless we 

 postulate separate origins for ahuffia-Proutia-Epichnopteryx stem and a Dissoctena- 

 Fumea-Psyche stem low down in the Micro-Psychids. 



