﻿HISTORICAL 
  ACCOUNT 
  OF 
  THE 
  ALUCITIDES. 
  85 
  

  

  rhododactylus, 
  S. 
  V., 
  ochrodactylus, 
  Hb., 
  gonodactylus, 
  S. 
  V., 
  zetterstedtii, 
  Zell., 
  

   bollii, 
  Frey 
  , 
  fischeri, 
  Zell., 
  acanthodactylus, 
  Hb., 
  cosmodactylus,Wo.,distans, 
  Zell., 
  

   pilosellae, 
  Zell., 
  hieracii, 
  Zell., 
  ericetorum, 
  Zell., 
  obscurus, 
  Zell., 
  phaeodactylus, 
  

   Hb., 
  serotinus, 
  Zell., 
  coprodactylus, 
  Zell., 
  plagiodactylus, 
  F.v.R., 
  graphodactylus, 
  

   Tr., 
  fuscus, 
  Retz., 
  lithodactylus 
  , 
  Tr., 
  pterodactylus, 
  L., 
  scarodactylus, 
  Zell., 
  

   tephradactylus, 
  Hb., 
  carphodactylus, 
  Hb., 
  microdactylia, 
  Hb., 
  osteodactylus. 
  Zell., 
  

   brachydactylus, 
  Koll., 
  baliodactylus 
  , 
  F.v.R., 
  tetradactylus, 
  L., 
  pentad 
  actylus, 
  L. 
  

  

  In 
  1859, 
  Doubleday 
  issued 
  the 
  2nd 
  ed. 
  of 
  his 
  Synonymic 
  List, 
  which 
  

   has 
  no 
  real 
  value 
  to 
  us 
  except 
  so 
  far 
  as 
  his 
  settlement 
  of 
  certain 
  points 
  

   of 
  nomenclature, 
  #.#., 
  the 
  reference 
  of 
  pallidactyla, 
  Haw., 
  to 
  ochrodactyla, 
  

   Hb., 
  of 
  monodactyla, 
  Haw., 
  doubtfully 
  to 
  isodactylus, 
  Zell., 
  of 
  calodac- 
  

   tylus, 
  Stphs., 
  to 
  acanthodactyla, 
  Hb., 
  of 
  cosmodactylus, 
  H.-Sch. 
  to 
  

   punctidactylus, 
  Stphs., 
  of 
  heterodactyla, 
  Haw., 
  doubtfully 
  to 
  hieracii 
  

   (=teucrii)j 
  Sta., 
  of 
  similidactylus, 
  Dale, 
  to 
  lithodactyla, 
  Tr., 
  etc. 
  With 
  

   regard 
  to 
  the 
  specially 
  British 
  species, 
  he 
  possibly 
  knew 
  some 
  of 
  the 
  

   original 
  types, 
  and, 
  of 
  the 
  others, 
  he 
  would 
  at 
  least 
  know 
  what 
  names 
  

   were 
  in 
  common 
  use 
  in 
  British 
  cabinets 
  for 
  certain 
  species. 
  Stainton's 
  

   grouping 
  {Manual, 
  ii., 
  pp. 
  439 
  et 
  spq.) 
  is, 
  in 
  every 
  sense, 
  unsatisfactory. 
  

   With 
  a 
  full 
  knowledge 
  of 
  the 
  work 
  done 
  by 
  Hiibner, 
  Zeller, 
  and 
  

   Herrich-Schaffer 
  he 
  could 
  give 
  us 
  nothing 
  better 
  than 
  the 
  following 
  : 
  — 
  

  

  1. 
  With 
  undivided 
  wings 
  — 
  Adactyla 
  — 
  -A. 
  bennetii. 
  

  

  2. 
  Forewings 
  with 
  the 
  hind 
  margin 
  more 
  or 
  less 
  deeply 
  cleft 
  ; 
  hindwings 
  almost 
  

   divided 
  into 
  three 
  — 
  Pterophorus 
  — 
  P. 
  rhododactylus, 
  ochrodactylus, 
  isodactylus, 
  

   trigonodactylus, 
  zetterstedtii, 
  acanthodactylus, 
  punctidactylus, 
  parvidactylus, 
  hieracii 
  

   (teucrii), 
  pilosellae, 
  phaeodactylus, 
  bipunctidactylus 
  , 
  loeivii, 
  plagiodactylus, 
  fuscus, 
  

   lithodactylus, 
  pterodactylus 
  ( 
  — 
  monodactylus), 
  lienigianus, 
  tephradactylus, 
  osteodac- 
  

   tylus, 
  microdactylus, 
  brachydactylus, 
  galactodactylus, 
  spilodactylus, 
  baliodactylus, 
  

   tetradactylus, 
  pentadactylus, 
  pallidum. 
  

  

  In 
  1862, 
  Wallengren 
  published 
  (Kongliga 
  Svenska 
  Vetenskaps 
  

   Akademiens 
  Randlingar, 
  iii., 
  pp. 
  1-25) 
  his 
  well-known 
  paper 
  in 
  which 
  

   he 
  still 
  divided 
  all 
  the 
  plumes 
  into 
  two 
  family 
  groups 
  : 
  — 
  

  

  1. 
  Pterophorid^ 
  — 
  Forewings 
  with 
  merely 
  indicated 
  cleft, 
  or 
  divided 
  into 
  2 
  

  

  or 
  3 
  lobes. 
  

  

  2. 
  Alucitina— 
  All 
  the 
  wings 
  six-lobed. 
  

  

  He 
  gives 
  a 
  very 
  good 
  summary 
  of 
  the 
  Scandinavian 
  species, 
  dealing 
  

   with 
  the 
  synonymy 
  of 
  the 
  Linnean 
  species 
  and 
  adding 
  the 
  following 
  

   generic 
  tabulation 
  : 
  — 
  

  

  I. 
  The 
  lobes 
  of 
  the 
  wings 
  dissimilar, 
  the 
  anterior 
  ones 
  broader 
  than 
  the 
  hind 
  

   ones. 
  

  

  A. 
  Forewings 
  at 
  rest 
  entirely 
  concealing 
  the 
  hindwings, 
  the 
  dorsum 
  being 
  

  

  rolled 
  under 
  and 
  receiving 
  them 
  throughout 
  its 
  length, 
  sometimes 
  

   even 
  the 
  costa 
  similarly 
  incurved. 
  

  

  1. 
  All 
  the 
  tibiae 
  slender. 
  

  

  a. 
  The 
  £ 
  antennae 
  finely 
  dentate; 
  those 
  

  

  of 
  2 
  indistinctly 
  ciliated. 
  The 
  cilia 
  

   of 
  the 
  last 
  (i.e. 
  dorsal) 
  lobe 
  of 
  the 
  

   hindwing 
  unusually 
  long. 
  The 
  

   spurs 
  of 
  the 
  hind 
  tibia 
  1 
  of 
  distinctly 
  

   different 
  length 
  Pterophorus. 
  

  

  b. 
  Antenna; 
  shortly 
  ciliated, 
  at 
  least 
  in 
  

  

  S 
  . 
  The 
  cilia 
  on 
  last, 
  i.e., 
  dorsal, 
  

   lobe 
  of 
  the 
  hindwings 
  normal, 
  rather 
  

   short. 
  The 
  spurs 
  of 
  hind 
  tibiae 
  of 
  

   equal 
  length 
  Leioptilis. 
  

  

  2. 
  AH 
  the 
  tibia) 
  at 
  apex, 
  and 
  all 
  the 
  tarsi 
  in 
  

  

  middle, 
  thickened. 
  The 
  antennas 
  of 
  

  

  both 
  sexes 
  ciliate 
  Oip/kmatofhokus. 
  

  

  B. 
  Forewings 
  at 
  rest 
  covering 
  the 
  hindwings 
  flatly, 
  

  

  sometimes 
  enfolding 
  them 
  by 
  the 
  margin 
  of 
  the 
  

   inner 
  (i.e. 
  dorsal) 
  edge 
  being 
  bent 
  down. 
  

  

  