MACRO-PSYCHINA. 267 



the Bombyces. He detects, in the neuration of the Heterogynids, 

 characters that he considers show that the family has great affinities 

 with the Psychids, and he suggests that the former is the group from 

 which the Macro-Psychids have sprung. He also finds in the neura- 

 tion of Orgyia, characters that lead him to state that the Liparids have 

 been derived directly from the Macro-Psychids. We must leave our 

 readers to study Heylaerts' argument (loc. cit., pp. 48-49) for them- 

 selves. We are quite willing to grant an affinity between the Hetero- 

 gynids and the Psychids {ante, p. 103), but what close affinity the 

 larvae and imagines of the Psychids have with those of the Liparids 

 we are at a loss to conceive, and the eggs, larvae, pupae and imagines 

 of Orgyia (and the Liparids generally) show that Heylaerts' suggested 

 alliance between these, based on the ground of (1) apterous females, 



(2) the presence of a single pair of spurs on the posterior tibiae, and 



(3) the bipectinated antennae, is entirely unsound and scientifically 

 unwarrantable. Heylaerts further objects to the subdivision of the 

 Psychids into their evident, natural, generic groupings. He writes 

 (loc. cit., p. 69) : " On peut tres bien negliger le nom des groupes ou 

 sousgenres. Je ne les ai nommes que pour ceux qui desirent une 

 division minutieuse. . . . En les negligeant, les Psychina seraient 

 done divises en: (1) Animula. (2) Acanthopsyche. (3) Oreopsyche. (4) 

 Psyche. (5) Apterona." Under this grouping we find opacella in the 

 same genus as the Cingalese doubledayi (the latter the type of Moore's 

 Chalia), villosella united with unicolor in Pachythelia, &c. 



Heylaerts calls his main divisions subfamilies, and names them — 

 Oiketicina, Psychina, Psycheoidina, and Canephoridae. These, under 

 our modern terminology, would be Oiketicinae, Psychinae, Psycheoidinae 

 and Canephorinae, and they are all united under the family name 

 Psychidae (loc. cit., pp. 43-4), the diagnosis of which is of a most com- 

 prehensive character. It reads as follows : 



Antennes des males bipectinees, rarement bicrenelees. Leurs tibias posterieurs 

 portent une ou deux paires d'eperons. Les males ne possedent ni palpes, ni ocelles, 

 ni spiritrompe. Leurs ailes anterieures ont deux nervures internes, dont la superi- 

 eure, qui est plus ou moins forte, s'anastomose quelquefois avec l'inferieure. Celle-ci 

 est bifurquee vers le bord exterieur, ou elle ne Test pas ; quelquefois, elle donne des 

 rameaux vers le bord interne. La cellule discoidale, toujours ferrnee, est divisee 

 par une nervure, qui est tantofc simple, tantot double, ou, en se bifurquant (vers le 

 bord externe), forme une cellule interposee. Les ailes inferieures sont pourvues 

 d'un crin (frein) assez fort et ont trois nervures internes. 



La femelle est aptere ; elle possede ou elle ne possede pas un oviducte et une 

 touffe anale ; elle a des antennes ou des pattes rudimentaires ou articulees. Elle 

 quitte ou non son fourreau et sa chrysalide ; cette derniere reste toujours en 

 dedans du premier. 



Les chenilles vivent et se changent en chrysalides dans des fourreaux construits 

 par elles-memes. 



Heylaerts congratulates himself that this definition allows him to 

 unite the Oiketicina, Animulina, Psychina, Canephoridae, H.-Sch., and 

 Apterona, Mill., and asserts that it proves that they form but one 

 family. So far as the term " family " has a real meaning, and is 

 not a mere matter of words, we accept it as comprising the whole of 

 the Macro-Psychina, but surely groups (Fumeidae, &c.) that have 

 females that " possess an oviduct and an anal tuft, that have articu- 

 lated antennae and legs, and which quit the case for copulation," &c, 

 are as distinct from those (Psychidae, &c.) that have females " without 

 an oviduct and anal tuft, that have aborted antennae and legs, and 



