60 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIO^^AL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
anti flattened, tlie segments very short in x)roportion to their width, the prothoracic segment, 
however, A^ery long in proportion to the others, but the surface rough and corrugated, not with a 
hard smooth dorsal plate, as in many Tineidie, Tortrickhe, Gossidm, etc., since it is not a boring 
insect. The eight pairs of abdominal prop-like tubercles, which \yg should hardly regard as 
homolognes of the abdominal legs, are, like those of the Panorpidie, simple tubercles armed 
with a spine. The tenth or last abdominal segment is armed with a pair of doi'sal spines, each 
arising from a tubercle. The singular flattened and fluted setie represented by Chapman are 
unique in lepidopterous larvae. He also describes a trefoil-shaped sucker on the under side of 
the ninth and tenth abdominal segments, <«vcry unusual,” though as it appears to be paused it 
does not seem to me, as Chapman thinks, to indicate a further point of relationship to Limacodids.” 
Dr. Chapman states that “the head is retractile so far that it may occupy the interior of the 
second thoracic segment,” and he says that “the antenum are remarkably long for a lepidopterous 
larva.” He remarks that “there are two strong mandibles, with four brown teeth,” and adds: 
Two pairs of palpi are also visible — two and tUree-jointed — apparently those usual in lepidopterous larvie, but 
I have not defined their relations. There is also a central point (spinneret). 
I add rough sketches of the mouth parts, as far as I could draw them with the camera from 
specimens mounted in balsam by Dr. Chapman. The labriim (fig. 4, D Ibr.) is less divided than 
Fig. 4, — Head of larva of EHocephala calthella. A, anterior region enlarged; md, mandible; 
mx, maxilla; ant, antennie; sp, spinneret?; B, 1st maxilbn and 2d maxillro Ip; C, the same; 
D, labrnm (Ibr). 
usual ill lepidopterous larvm, but is not, except in this respect, much unlike that of Tineids eg. 
Gracilaria (see Dimmock’s fig. 2, p. 100, Psyche, iii). The four-jointed anteiime (fig. 4, ant)^ 
ending in two unequal setfe, are of very unusual size and length, and so are the maxillary palpi 
(fig. 4, ji.), which are much larger than in any caterpillar kuoAVu to me, and are greatly 
in disproportion to the maxillary lobes; tlie maxilla itself differs notably from that of other 
cateri»illars; what appears to be the lacinia is palpiform and two-jointed. The labium aud its 
palpi are much as in Gracilaria, but the palpi appear to be three-jointed, with a terminal bristle 
(it is possible that there are hut two joints). Unlike the larva of Micropteryx, that of Eriocepliala 
does not appear to possess a well-marked spinneret, while it is easy to see it in the former genus. 
In Eriocephala I can only detect a lobe, which appears to be sirnffly tbe rudiment (Aulage) of a 
spinneret (unless the latter is in my sfiecimens bent under the head); but this organ needs 
further examination on fresh specimens. It would be interesting if it should be found that the- 
spinneret is in a generalized condition, as compared with that of Micropteryx. 
