i 4 8 THE YOUNG NATURALIST. 



[JULY 



species under the new sub-divisions was given. Dr. Jordan himself, 

 and Lord Walsingham, in his " Pterophori of North America," closely 

 followed this arrangement throughout their work on the group, and 

 it was supported, and the necessity of the corrections made, recog- 

 nised by Mr. C. G. Barrett in the " Entomologist's Monthly Maga- 

 zine," Vol. XVIII, p. 177, since which time the advantages of this 

 arrangement have never been seriously questioned, although one lepi- 

 dopterist objected on other grounds (but this was scarcely worth the 

 notice of scientific men), when Mr. South made use of Dr. Jordan's 

 work, and transferred Herr Wallengren's sub-divisions bodily into 

 " The Entomologist " list. According to the Doubleday arrangement, 

 there were only three genera, Agdistis, Pterophorus, and Alucita. 

 Agdistis contained only one species, bennettii ; Alucita only one, poly - 

 dactyla, all the rest were huddled into the genus Pterophorus. In the 

 Wallengren arrangement the old genus Pterophorus is sub-divided into 

 nine genera, five of these genera being Wallengren's ; three, Hiibner's ; 

 and one, Zeller's. These genera have now been generally accepted 

 on the Continent for many years, and there are few scientific British 

 lepidopterists who have not themselves, long ago, seen the necessity 

 of accepting them. But Wallengren removed the genus Chrysocorys 

 from the Tineina into this group, and in retaining this genus in our 

 British classification, Dr. Jordan was not only guided by his own 

 opinion, but also by that of our greatest living lepidopterist, Mr. 

 Stainton, who supported him in this view. We have, therefore, in 

 our British Pterophori, representatives of three groups Chrysocoridce, 

 Pterophoridce, and Alncitidce, of which the first contains one genus, the 

 second contains nine genera, and the last, one. With regard to these 

 generic divisions I propose to give their special characters afterwards, 

 when dealing with the species. 



We have now to consider their position with regard to the other 

 species of the British fauna. Dr. Jordan first suggested that their 

 affinities were with the Pyralidce, and " that they were rather an aber- 

 rant group of the Pyralidce than of the Tineina (that is, taking the term 

 Pyralidce in its widest meaning), and of these, that the genus Chilo was 

 their nearest ally " ; but he adds " there is so much that is anomalous 

 in the whole group that this is said rather with the view of opening a 

 difficult question than of giving a positive opinion" (" Entomologist's 

 Monthly Magazine," Vol. VI., p. 152). Whether any one has ever 

 attempted to work out the exact position of this group I do not 

 know, but Mr. South, acting presumably on the suggestion contained 

 in the above paragraph, removed the Pterophori in the " Entomologist" 



