me:\[oies of the national academy of sciences. 
155 
Loplwpievnx Staudinger, Cat. Lo.p, Eur., p. 73, 1871. 
Orote, New Check List N. Aiiier. Moths, p. 18, 1882. 
Smith, List Lex). Bor. Amcj’., p. 30,, 1891. 
Kirby, Syu. Cut. Lep. Hot., i, xi. 605, 1892. 
Xotodonta (in part) anti Lopltopfrvj/x ’Sanm. and Dyar, Trans. Aiuer. Ent. Soc., xxi, pp. 181, 196, Juno, 1894; 
Jouru. N. Y. Ent, Soc., ii, pji. 11.3, 11.5, Sept., 1891, 
2[oi]i. — Head moderately prominent; front moderately wide, the scales long and dense, 
projecting iiTCgulaiiy and forming a slight median crest (most marked in L. ainericana and the 
European L. camcJina)] vertex slightly crested or 5^ery moderately so (in the European cnciilJa 
and camelina)-, palpi varying in not extending bejmnd {elegans} or surpassing the front (cftmelina, 
American example), loosely hairy, not very distinct from the front (much larger iu mwdmrt than 
in elcgans) ; t Idl'd joint not very distinct in elegana^ but (juitc so in mmellna, Ej^es naked in elegans^ 
but in the European eameUna and the American example distinctly hairy. Antenum in ^ with 
short, stout, ciliated branches; in 9 thick, with more or less rudimentary branches (in they 
are slender, but distinct, acute, ciliated, but in the 9 of the two above-named European species 
the branches are undeveloped). 
Thorax either simple [elegans) or somewhat crested, or (as in the European species camellna 
and the Wisconsin example) with a high distinct crest, sloping backward and slightly inclined 
forward. Fore wings with the costa regularly hut slightly curved (elegans)^ or straight (in the 
Earoi»eaii species camel ina^ etc.); apex acute, square, outer edge a little bent and scalloped (less 
distinctly so in cmch//u); inner edge with a distinct or quite large {eamelina) tuft. Iliiid wings 
triangular, proiluced toward the apex; internal angle full and marked with a brown patch 
[elegana) or with two short parallel lines (in the European species camelina and cncuUa). Venation ; 
Fore wings with a short vscale; no triangular subcostal cell; autei’ior discal veuule very oblique, 
directed inward, the hiuder ones curved, not oblique; the costal region very narrow in both wings. 
Legs very hairy, rathet long, hiuder pair with a long stout tibia! spur ari.siug froui the basal 
third. 
Coloration: The siiecies are wood or reddish gray, with longitudinal streaks, especially 
toward the costa, and either with (European species) or without transverse scalloped lines. Hind 
wings clear whitish, with (in elegam) a dark black x)atch at the internal angle. 
The species differ from those of Xotodonta in tlie larger tuft on the internal edge of the fore 
wings, in the more pointed fore wings which are square at the apex, and in tlie presence of a 
subcostal cell, as well as in the distinctly scalloped outer edge of the wing. 
The genus is on the whole nearly allied to Pheosia, as seen in the venation, the shape of the 
wings, the anterior pair being i»ointed toward the apex, with the outer edge very oblique, and 
also in the inarkings, the fore wings in both having (in elegans) no cross lines, and being striped 
longitudinally with dark brown in the subcostal interspace, and (in elegans) with a conspicuous 
bent silvery white stripe extending from the base of the wing along the internal vein. In camelina 
there are two scalloimd cross lines on the fore wings, converging from tlie costa to the tuft on 
the inner edge; there are also no silvery white markings. 
While we unfortunately know nothing of the transformations of our American species, those 
of Europe have been ligured and described. The larva of the European L. camelina, which J owe 
to the kindness of Dr. Ileylaerts, of Breda, Holland, is characterized by two twin diverging high 
dorsal papillm or tubercles on the eiglith abdominal segment, a very interesting feature, since they 
probably represent what may have been the primitive double nature of the hump or horn of 
Pheosia and other larvm with a ^‘caudal horn.” The larva is not humped on any other segment, 
and the body increases in thickness toward the eighth abdominal segment, as in Pheosia. I 
should regard, therefore, Lophopteryx as the ihore ])rimitive genus, and standing below Pheosia 
and above Impliodonta, which has no hump at all. 
Mr. Ilellins says the larva ofL. camelina spins a cocoon of fine silk, covered with fine earth, 
etc. The pupa ends in a small straight spike, tipped with four diverging tiny shar]) points 
(Buckler’s Larva3 of British Butterflies and Moths, ii, p. 103). The hwva ot' L, cnculla lias on 
abdominal segments 3 to 7 slightly raised dorsal liumps, and on segment 8 “a more prominent and 
sharper hump, ending in twin points, which are set with six hairs. ‘^The larva of L. carmeliia is 
