﻿268 
  BRITISH 
  LEPIDOPTEKA. 
  

  

  characters. 
  The 
  Amblyptiliid 
  larva 
  has 
  the 
  depression 
  of 
  the 
  prothoracic 
  

   scutellum 
  black 
  ; 
  the 
  fairly 
  abundant 
  secondary 
  skin-hairs, 
  variable 
  in 
  

   size, 
  smooth, 
  and 
  swollen 
  at 
  the 
  tips, 
  are 
  very 
  similar 
  to 
  those 
  of 
  

   Eucnemidophorus 
  ; 
  some 
  of 
  these 
  secondary 
  hairs 
  being 
  very 
  large 
  ; 
  the 
  

   primary 
  setas 
  are 
  swollen 
  just 
  below 
  the 
  pointed 
  tip, 
  and 
  are 
  not 
  blunt, 
  as 
  

   in 
  the 
  Stenoptilias 
  proper; 
  the 
  tubercles 
  i 
  and 
  ii 
  on 
  either 
  side 
  of 
  themeso- 
  

   thorax 
  and 
  metathorax 
  are 
  conjoined, 
  as 
  also, 
  on 
  the 
  abdominals, 
  are 
  iv 
  

   and 
  v 
  (which 
  are 
  sev&mte 
  in 
  E 
  ucnem 
  id 
  ojihor 
  us), 
  whilst, 
  in 
  the 
  later 
  stadia, 
  

   these 
  tubercles, 
  as 
  well 
  as 
  vi, 
  assume 
  a 
  primitive 
  wart-like 
  structure 
  ; 
  both 
  

   the 
  accessory 
  postspiracular 
  tubercles 
  are 
  also 
  weakly 
  developed 
  as 
  warts, 
  

   the 
  lower 
  less 
  strong 
  than 
  the 
  upper" 
  ; 
  the 
  spiracles, 
  too, 
  are 
  well-raised 
  

   (in 
  this 
  particular 
  more 
  Stenoptiliid 
  than 
  Eucnemidophorid). 
  In 
  the 
  

   pupal 
  characters, 
  the 
  tribe 
  is 
  very 
  specialised 
  ; 
  the 
  dorsal 
  ridge, 
  

   strongly 
  marked 
  in 
  Platyptilia, 
  and 
  indicated 
  in 
  Eucnemidophorus, 
  is, 
  

   in 
  Amblyptilia, 
  well-developed. 
  The 
  trapezoidal 
  tubercles 
  are 
  carried 
  

   on 
  halbert- 
  shaped 
  processes, 
  the 
  first, 
  terminating 
  the 
  dorsal 
  ridge 
  

   on 
  the 
  3rd 
  abdominal 
  segment, 
  being 
  especially 
  large 
  ; 
  the 
  absence 
  of 
  

   the 
  nosehorn 
  is 
  markedly 
  Stenoptiliid, 
  and 
  the 
  well-developed 
  cremaster 
  

   indicates 
  a 
  similar 
  relationship. 
  The 
  imago 
  is, 
  in 
  its 
  general 
  facies, 
  

   entirely 
  Platyptiliid, 
  and 
  not 
  Stenoptiliid, 
  and, 
  in 
  this 
  respect, 
  agrees 
  

   with 
  Eucnemidophorus 
  and 
  not 
  Marasmarcha. 
  

  

  Genus 
  : 
  Amblyptilia 
  (Amplyptilia, 
  by 
  error), 
  Hiibner. 
  

   Synonymy. 
  — 
  Genus: 
  Amplyptilia 
  {by 
  error), 
  Hub., 
  "Verz.," 
  p. 
  430 
  (1825). 
  

   Amblyptilia, 
  Stphs., 
  "Illus. 
  Haust.," 
  iv., 
  p. 
  376; 
  app. 
  p. 
  424 
  (1834) 
  ; 
  Zell., 
  

   " 
  Isis," 
  p. 
  770 
  (1841) 
  ; 
  Staud. 
  and 
  Wocke, 
  " 
  Cat.," 
  2nd 
  ed., 
  p. 
  342 
  (1871) 
  ; 
  Hein. 
  

   and 
  Wocke, 
  " 
  Schmett. 
  Deutsch.," 
  iii.,pt. 
  2, 
  p. 
  787 
  (1877) 
  ; 
  Frey, 
  "Lep. 
  Schweiz," 
  

   p. 
  428 
  (1880); 
  Barrt., 
  " 
  Ent. 
  Mo. 
  Mag.," 
  xviii., 
  p. 
  177 
  (1882) 
  ; 
  Willms., 
  " 
  Ent. 
  

   Mo. 
  Mag.," 
  xviii., 
  pp. 
  212-213 
  (1882); 
  Sorhgn., 
  "Kleinschm. 
  Brandbg.," 
  p. 
  3 
  

   (1886) 
  ; 
  Leech, 
  " 
  Brit. 
  Pyr.," 
  p. 
  54, 
  pi. 
  xvi., 
  fig. 
  9 
  (1886) 
  ; 
  South, 
  " 
  Ent.," 
  xxii., 
  

   p. 
  31 
  (1889) 
  ; 
  Tutt, 
  "Young 
  Nat.," 
  x., 
  p. 
  164 
  (1889) 
  ; 
  "Brit. 
  Nat.," 
  i., 
  p. 
  37 
  

   (1891); 
  "Pter. 
  Brit.," 
  p. 
  51 
  (1895); 
  "Ent. 
  Rec," 
  xi., 
  p. 
  238 
  (1899) 
  ; 
  Hofmn., 
  

   "Deutsch. 
  Pter.," 
  p. 
  58(1895). 
  Pterophorus, 
  Pab., 
  "Mant. 
  Ins.," 
  p. 
  258(1787); 
  

   "Ent. 
  Syst.," 
  iii., 
  p. 
  346 
  (1793); 
  Sam., 
  "Ent. 
  Usef. 
  Comp.," 
  p. 
  409 
  (1819); 
  

   Curt., 
  " 
  Brit, 
  Ent.," 
  fo. 
  161 
  (1827) 
  ; 
  Dup., 
  " 
  Hist. 
  Nat.," 
  xi., 
  p. 
  650 
  (1838) 
  ; 
  Wood, 
  

   "Ind. 
  Ent.," 
  1st 
  ed., 
  p. 
  237 
  (1839) 
  ; 
  Zell., 
  "Isis," 
  p. 
  784 
  (1841); 
  pp.' 
  38, 
  902 
  

   (1847) 
  ; 
  Dup., 
  "Cat. 
  Meth.," 
  p. 
  383 
  (1845); 
  Tgstrm., 
  "Finl. 
  Fjar.," 
  p. 
  155(1847); 
  

   Zell., 
  "Linn. 
  Ent.,"vi.,p. 
  326 
  (1852); 
  Frey, 
  " 
  Tin. 
  Pter. 
  Schweiz," 
  p. 
  405 
  (1856); 
  

   Sta., 
  "Man.," 
  ii., 
  p. 
  441 
  (1859); 
  Porritt, 
  "Ent. 
  Mo. 
  Mag.," 
  xxi., 
  p. 
  208 
  (1885); 
  

   xxii., 
  p. 
  149 
  (1885) 
  ; 
  xxiii., 
  p. 
  132 
  (1886) 
  ; 
  " 
  Buckler's 
  Larvae," 
  ix., 
  p. 
  351 
  (1901). 
  

   Alucita, 
  de 
  Vill., 
  "Linn. 
  Ent. 
  Faun. 
  Suec," 
  iv., 
  p. 
  546(1789); 
  Haw., 
  "Lep. 
  

   Brit.," 
  478 
  (1811); 
  Hb., 
  "Raupen," 
  etc., 
  ix., 
  Aluc. 
  i., 
  pi. 
  c, 
  figs, 
  a-d 
  (circ. 
  1800); 
  

   "Schmett. 
  Eur.," 
  Aluc. 
  v., 
  figs. 
  23-24 
  {post 
  1811); 
  pi. 
  vii., 
  figs. 
  35-36 
  (1823); 
  

   Tr., 
  "Die 
  Schmett.," 
  ix., 
  p. 
  232 
  (1833); 
  Zett., 
  "Ins. 
  Lapp.," 
  p. 
  1012 
  (1840). 
  

   Platyptilia, 
  Stphs., 
  " 
  Illus. 
  Haust.," 
  p. 
  376; 
  app. 
  p. 
  424 
  (1835) 
  ; 
  Zell., 
  " 
  Linn. 
  

   Ent.," 
  vi., 
  p. 
  338 
  (1852); 
  Meyr., 
  "Trans. 
  Ent. 
  Soc. 
  Lond.," 
  p. 
  485 
  (1890); 
  

   "Handbook," 
  etc., 
  p. 
  433 
  (1895); 
  Walsm., 
  "Ent. 
  Mo. 
  Mag.," 
  xxxiv., 
  p. 
  192 
  

   (1898) 
  ; 
  Fern., 
  " 
  Pter. 
  Nth. 
  Amer.," 
  1st 
  ed., 
  p. 
  24; 
  2nd 
  ed., 
  p. 
  25 
  (1898); 
  Staud. 
  

  

  * 
  A 
  secondary 
  hair 
  takes 
  a 
  fixed 
  place 
  behind 
  spiracle, 
  in 
  the 
  position 
  of 
  the 
  upper 
  

   accessory 
  postspiracular 
  tubercle, 
  and 
  might 
  be 
  regarded 
  as 
  subprimary 
  ; 
  a 
  lower 
  

   accessory 
  postspiracular 
  is 
  not 
  constant, 
  and 
  one 
  that 
  often 
  looks 
  like 
  it 
  is 
  rather 
  

   accidental. 
  In 
  Marasmarcha 
  (lunaedactyla) 
  both 
  are 
  present, 
  and 
  have 
  much 
  more 
  

   the 
  character 
  of 
  primary 
  setae 
  than 
  of 
  secondary 
  hairs. 
  These 
  seta? 
  (in 
  these 
  two 
  

   genera) 
  look 
  like 
  secondary 
  skin-hairs, 
  that, 
  instead 
  of 
  varying 
  in 
  position 
  like 
  the 
  

   others, 
  were 
  selecting 
  positions 
  of 
  rest. 
  One 
  could, 
  of 
  course, 
  frame 
  the 
  opposite 
  

   hypothesis, 
  that 
  subprimary 
  hairs 
  ought 
  to 
  be 
  here, 
  and 
  were 
  just 
  beginning 
  to 
  

   assert 
  themselves, 
  but 
  if 
  so, 
  one 
  is 
  constrained 
  to 
  enquire 
  why 
  they 
  begin 
  as 
  

   ordinary 
  secondary 
  skin-hairs, 
  at 
  first 
  doubtful 
  as 
  to 
  whether 
  they 
  have 
  any 
  special 
  

   local 
  claims 
  (Chapman). 
  

  

  