70 
MEMOIES OF THE NATIO^TAL ACADEMY OF SOIBKCES. 
Fig. 29 represents the pupa of Tkyridopteryx ephetnerw/ormis, and its close resemblance to that 
of Oncopera intrieata (fig. 33) will be seen in the presence of the large piece between the base of 
the maxillary palpi. In (Eeetiats ahbotii (fig. 28) the maxillary palpi are separated by the second 
maxillary (labial) pali)i. The former {mx, p,) is subdivided 
into an inner and an outer small lobe. In the Psychidie the 
paraclypeal pieces, or tubercles, as we might call them, are 
always present. They are convex and very rugose. The 
labial or second maxillary piece in the Austi alian Enmctopa 
ignohUis is of the same shape and sculpturing as in l*syclte 
graminelhty but the large, round, rugose pieces on each side, 
or first maxillary palpi, are single, not divided into two 
parts, unless the irregularly trapezoidal pieces between the 
maxillary ])alpi and the eyepiece be the liomologue of the 
outer i^ortion. 
In the Australian Meiwa elongata (fig. 30) the short 
reduced labial palpi are much as 
in Psyche gramineUaj but are more 
deeply divided. The two divisions 
I am inclined to consider as the 
second maxillary (labial) i)alpi. In 
this genus the first maxillary palpi 
are also as in Psyche gramineUa, 
It will then be seen that in the 
pupa of this family the first and 
second maxillary palpi vary very 
much in form, as they i)robabiy do 
in the iinagiues, being more or less 
atroi)hied in the latter, where they 
need to be carefully examined. On 
the other hand, the maxilhe them- 
selves (for in their juipal condition 
inhaustellateLepido])tera they have 
^ opener. 
retained the separated condition of 
those of the laciuiate Lei^idoptera), though short, are fpiite persistent in 
form. 
The pupa of Platmceticus glocerii differs from that of (Eceticus ahhotii 
in the undivided first maxillary palpus (eyepiece) and the elongated 
second maxilhe, as well as the narrower clypeal region, and the lack of 
a cocoon or case-opener. 
By an examination of the figures it will be seen that 
the outer division of the eyepiece varies much in size. 
This is due to the varying Avidth of the male antennae, 
which, when wide, as in Pinara (Entometa), Metrua, Thy- 
ridopteryx, and Pysche overlap and nearly conceal it, 
while it is entirely hidden in Platmceticus. On the other 
hand, in male pupie of Hepialus and Oncopera, Avhere the 
antennae are small, narrow, and not pectinated, these 
pieces ai’e large. The end of the body has no cremaster, 
but, Avhat is unique, a hook arising from each vestigial 
anal leg. 
Finally, it will be readily seen that from an examination 
of the pupai the views of Speyer, of Chapman, and of Comstock, as to the position of the Psychidae 
is fully confirmed, while I should go a little further and place them still nearer the Hepialidte. 
They are, however, still more modified than this last-named group, since the females are wingless 
