1068 The American Naturalist. [December, 
setee quite different from those of the Frenate marked + in 
Fig. 2a (mesothoracic segment), and also the primary sete, 
which correspond to those of all other Lepidoptera. Thus 
Hepialus larva is not only a generalized form, but has pursued 
a line of development different from all Micros and Noctuids, 
the only larve in any way comparable with it in simplicity. 
With the three higher groups no one has recently thought of 
allying it, though formerly it was included among the “ Bom- 
byces.” This evidence seems to me to be best interpreted as 
supporting the view that Hepialus represents a group of Lepi- 
doptera (Jugate) as generalized as the lowest Micros and of 
subordinal rank. 
However, let us see hice favorable an interpretation to the 
other view can be put on the structures of Hepialus larve. 
That is to say, can the setee be homologized with the Tineide? 
We recognize at once that no Tineid or related family has 
such astructure. They are remarkably uniform, for, when 
not degenerate, the arrangement of Figure 5 obtains, gradually 
modified in the higher forms by the approximation of iv and 
v on abdomen, then of i and ii also; on thorax ia and ib, iia 
and iib, iv and v, respectively, approximate. Therefore, 
Hepialus is neither typical nor does it represent a high devel- 
opment in the normal line. Still, on the abdomen, the fourth 
primary seta above the spiracle may correspond to the seta in 
Cossus hereinafter mentioned, but we must suppose this seta 
in Cossus to be primary; iv is out of line with v, more as in 
the Noctuina. Of the secondary sete, the lower may corre- 
spond to vi, the upper is unexplained. On the thorax the 
upper anterior primary seta is unexplained; the two sub- 
primaries may correspond to iii and v but moved up out of 
all association with iv. Thus by some violent movements 
we have homologized a part of the subprimary sete of Hepi- 
alus with those of the Tineide. It is true that considerable 
movements may occur; I was deceived by such in my first 
explanation of the Psychide. Granting the possibility then, 
it could be argued that Hepialus may really belong with the 
' Tineidæ, were it not for the two unexplained sete; but the 
whole explanation is too forced to pursue further. 
