266 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA. 



most clearly shown in the Fumeids (our Epichnopterygids and Biju- 

 gids) which exhibit a natural transition from the Tineiform to the 

 Bombyciform Psychids. He subdivides the Macro-Psychids into two 

 groups: (1) Psychina. (2) Canephorina. He follows Herrieh-Schaffer in 

 dividing the latter into the genera Fumea and Epichnopteryx. The 

 males of both genera he notes as having the hind tibiae double-spurred, 

 the females differing considerably, those of Fumea (which corresponds 

 with our Epichnopteryx) forming transitions between the true Psyche 2 

 and that of Epichnopteryx (which corresponds with our Fumed). In his 

 Fumea, he includes* — (1) F. helix (provisionally) with vermiform, naked 

 2 , having three pairs of leg-stumps, imperfect eyes, and no antennae, 

 and, therefore, less developed! than the females of Psyche. (2) F. sieboldii, 

 the 2 of which has distinct black eyes, short peg-like antennae, short 

 blunt terminal point to abdomen, at the base of which in freshly 

 emerged specimens there is some whitish wool (a primary indication of 

 ovipositor and anal tuft) . (3) F. \mlla which from blown examples appear 

 to be similar to sieboldii. (4) F. plumella (=nudella), the 2 with a dis- 

 tinct ovipositor and anal wool, distinct eyes, but from its elongate 

 shape and rudimentary antennae and legs very similar to Psyche 2 . 

 The 2 suriens (one of Keutti's species) agrees with this. (5) F. bombycella 

 with the build of ? Psyche, having distinct prominent eyes, articulated 

 antennae and legs, distinct ovipositor with anal tuft, yet the female 

 never leaves the case, copulation taking place by insertion of $ abdo- 

 men into the puparium. Hofmann's Epichnopteryx, as we have noted, 

 corresponds with our Fumea, and contains the species that have a $ 

 with six fully developed legs, segmented antennae and distinctly faceted 

 eyes, abdomen ending in a retractile ovipositor, the base of which is 

 surrounded by an anal tuft. The female comes out of the case. Hof- 

 mann does not subdivide his Psychina, but includes all the species in 

 the genus Psyche. The males, he says, have the hind tibiae with only 

 two terminal spurs, generally so short as to appear as if wanting, the 

 abdomen capable of being stretched lengthwise. The females he 

 describes as vermiform, naked, without trace of wings, the three pairs 

 of legs, antennae, and mouth-parts extremely rudimentary, eyes imper- 

 fectly developed, ovipositor wanting ; the female never entirely leaves 

 the larval case or even the pupal shell, but merely presses herself to 

 the entrance of the silken tube, copulation taking place by the insertion 

 of the abdomen of the male within the case. Hofmann's Psyche, 

 therefore, includes our three subfamilies Acanthopsychinae, Empedo- 

 psychinae and Oreopsychinae. 



Heylaert's work on the Macro-Psychids (Ann. Soc. Ent. Bely., xxv., 

 pp. 29 et seq.), has recently been accepted as forming a basis for their 

 classification, but whether his knowledge of their structure, based 

 almost absolutely on neuration, is sound, is open to question. Although 

 he had evidently studied Bacotia sepium and pointed out (loc. cit., p. 54) 

 the peculiar Taleporiid details of its pupal structure, he failed entirely 

 to detect its Taleporiid affinities and classed it as a Fumea. He 

 criticises adversely the inclusion of the Micro-Psychids (even the 

 Taleporiids) in the superfamily, and places the Macro-Psychids among 



* Of these species bombycella belong to Bijugis, nudella to Psychidea, sieboldii 

 and pulld to Epichnopteryx, helix to Apterona. 



f Hofmann evidently considered the most modified of the Psychid females to 

 be the least developed. 



